Difficult Conversations – Of the Highest Order

Returning to my parked car, I noticed a broken licence plate on my windshield. It looked oddly familiar. Viewing the front of my car confirmed that it was mine.

Every collision I had with that car was while it was parked in a parking lot. The damage was always minor, so I never called my insurance company. Actually, in my 30 years of driving, I have never made a claim – so why continue to pay for car insurance?

UNAFFORDABLE RISKS.

I asked that question to provoke you to think. You would be reckless to knowingly be a passenger in an uninsured bus. You would be depraved to encourage others to join you. Only an idiot of the highest order would drive one after cancelling the insurance.

You should insure against likely risks that you cannot afford to pay if they occurred. Regardless of how careful a driver you may be, if you drop in a pothole, you can lose control of your vehicle. You may be able to afford the repair costs of your vehicle, but not the medical expenses of your injured passengers.

CANCELLING INSURANCE.

An insurance policy is a contract that states what both parties are obligated to do. If you want the insurance, then drivers must agree to the restrictions that are designed to protect passengers. For example, all new drivers must be approved by the insurance company. Minors will not be approved regardless of how competent they are, or how much you want them added to the policy.

If you think that the insurance company’s conditions are infringing on your rights, then you may cancel the insurance policy at any time. But you must still humble yourself and get insured with another company, that may have more onerous requirements. What is not an option is to drive passengers while your vehicle is uninsured.

INDEPENDENT AUDITS.

Every 5 years, we elect drivers to drive our national bus. When our bus needs maintenance, we pay additional taxes to buy the parts, so that all passengers may remain safe. A driver who suggests that we could save money by cancelling our insurance, should not be trusted to drive our bus.

One of the insurance conditions that our drivers hate, is the independent audits. Every year, an independent auditor must tell passengers the actual cost of the bus parts, that our drivers claimed were needed. Every year, the auditor tells us that we were overcharged for the bus parts. But we are so politically divided that we no longer care.

HEARTLESS BARBADIANS.

Barbados has changed much since our Independence. We are no longer guardians of our heritage for our children. Once we can afford to pay the excessive taxes to pay for the overcharged parts, we do not care about the suffering of our neighbours who cannot afford to pay.

We defend and encourage the corruption of our drivers, and willingly wear their red and yellow shirts every 5 years to get them elected. Once we have taken what we can from this country, we are willing to recklessly damage it for our children. How did we become so heartless?

BARBADOS INSURANCE.

Barbados is insured against torrential rainfall, hurricanes and earthquakes, through the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Financing Facility (CCRIF). Despite not being impacted by a major hurricane or earthquake since our Independence, only enemies of Barbados would encourage our leaders to cancel that insurance.

Barbados is also insured against aggressor nations – our enemies. Commercial insurance is paid out in money. Defence insurance is paid out in blood and military equipment, as soldiers, whom we do not know, will be ordered to defend us. We have taken for granted the deterrent effect of our defence insurance.

WE ARE ALREADY FREE.

Our defence insurance costs Barbadians very little. The Queen commands the British Military, so we simply need to maintain a Governor-General. The Governor-General protects our armed forced from being politicised, and ensures that the annual independent audits are done. Our drivers hate that accountability, and have devised a way to get rid of it.

Our drivers retell the myth that they have told since our Independence – that we need to throw off the remnants of colonialism to be free. We are already Independent and free, but we have chosen to maintain insurance against natural disasters and foreign aggressors. We also want to know when we have overpaid eight times for bus parts.

CANCELLING OUR INSURANCE.

To get their own way, our drivers plan to cancel our defence insurance, without our consent, on 30 November 2021. On 1 December 2021, we will be forced to be uninsured passengers, and they will become drivers – of the highest order.

The BLP, DLP and other political parties, want uninsured passengers – for their own purposes. Our established media do not allow any balanced discussion on the Republic issue. Our drivers’ actions appear unlawful, but not one of the over 900 lawyers on this bus has challenged it in the Courts. Solutions Barbados stands alone.

GENERAL ELECTION.

Our drivers have no mandate, from us, to cancel our insurance. The Bs and Ds are out canvassing, so it seems that they will call an early General Election. It seems that they believe that passengers are so politically abused and economically desperate, that they will vote for their own destruction in exchange for a few trinkets.

Solutions Barbados stands alone in advocating for passengers to remain insured, until they choose not to be. We have 15 Candidates, but Barbadians in every constituency should be given a choice. If you love and fear God, hate corruption, and feel a burning desire to give the people of Barbados a competent alternative, then you may contact us.

Grenville Phillips II is a Chartered Structural Engineer. He can be reached at NextParty246@gmail.com

184 comments

  • ArtaxNovember 7, 2021 8:08 AM

    As you continue, it becomes clearer and clearer that thine ignorance hath no boundaries.

    Xxxx
    It is so.much fun watching u trying to clear and run over every word of what I say
    Spectacular performance
    Unbelievable

    Like

  • angela cox November 7, 2021 8:29 AM

    My friend, I posted a comment WITHOUT INCLUDING the NAME of whom I REFERRING to.

    Yet, you presumptuously took upon yourself to RESPOND……. perhaps ASSUMING the comments were MEANT for you.

    Hence, “It is so.much fun watching YOU trying to clear and run over EVERY WORD of what I say. Spectacular performance.”

    “Unbelievable…….. but true!!!!!”

    Like

  • This is what is called Ethics and morals in business

    Featured Image
    BLOG
    Health Insurance Providers Respond To Coronavirus (COVID-19)
    posted by AHIP

    on August 27, 2021

    SHARE
    The health and well-being of millions of Americans remains our highest priority. Our member health insurance providers are committed to help prevent the spread of COVID-19. We continue to take action to ensure that Americans have access to the prevention, testing, and treatment needed to handle the current situation.

    Health insurance providers are also focused on improving COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and access. Learn more about health insurance providers actions on COVID-19 vaccines here.

    Here are some ways our member health insurance providers are taking action:

    Aetna

    Aetna, a CVS Health company, is waiving member cost-sharing related to the COVID-19 vaccination for Commercial and Medicaid members. For Medicare, CMS has indicated it will cover the full cost of the vaccine for all Medicare beneficiaries, including those in a Medicare Advantage plan, in 2020 and 2021.

    Additionally, Aetna is extending a number of cost-sharing waivers, including:

    Waiving member cost-sharing for inpatient admissions for treatment of COVID-19 or health complications associated with COVID-19 for Commercial insured and Medicare Advantage plan members, through January 31, 2021.
    Waiving member cost-sharing for covered in-network telemedicine visits for outpatient behavioral and mental health counseling services for Commercial insured plan members, through January 31, 2021.

    Xxxx
    Only in Barbados bull sh.iit is accepted as a normal reality
    Chew and chew very hard in order to digest
    But knowing some of u would chew and spit out
    Seems like some couldn’t care about self fatherless others in spite of the numerous challenges this 166 Sq encounters

    Like

  • This article explains why AETNA is not a good example to explain your point.

    Aetna buys reinsurance coverage for group health |

    https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/00010101/STORY/301169993/Aetna-buys-reinsurance-coverage-for-group-health

    Like

  • J

    AARP Answers: Your Insurance Coverage and the Coronavirus
    The latest on auto, home, life and health policies during the outbreak
    by Andy Markowitz, September 7, 2021
    Business woman examining insurance policy
    ETERNALCREATIVE/GETTY IMAGES, ISTOCKPHOTO
    En español
    Will my life insurance policy cover COVID-19?
    Yes. As long you have an active life insurance policy in good standing, your beneficiary or beneficiaries will get a death benefit should you die of coronavirus-related complications.

    In addition, your insurer cannot change your premiums or your health classification because you have or had COVID-19 or are at higher risk of exposure due to your job or recent travel to a virus hot spot.

    Claims on social media that life insurance companies will not pay off on a policy if the customer received a COVID-19 vaccine are “entirely false,” according to the American Council of Life Insurers.

    “Life insurers do not consider whether or not a policyholder has received a COVID vaccine when deciding whether to pay a claim,” the trade group said in a statement on its website. “Nothing has changed in the claims-paying process as a result of COVID-19 vaccinations.”

    Like

  • Those examples of what is and can be permitted by way of ethical.standards if insurance companies chooses to.do so
    Not just a simple case of who write the the changes which all.must abide
    These companies make billions of dollars annully a once in a lifetime pandemic not going to send them to the poor house
    One armed bandits running footloose and fancy free must be hauled in and be held answerable and accountable by any means necessary

    Like

  • Well.placed sermon executed by self
    Enough to chew on
    Remember U are your brother and sister keepers
    Don’t forget that ethics and morals are the only guidelines that would get us out of the quadmire we find our self

    Liked by 1 person

  • Sigh! It is so tiresome when people think that because they say something, it is true.

    I said I found the article difficult to fully understand but the one thing I did understand was the fact that the policy came down from the reinsurers and would make its way everywhere.

    Before we sound off we should wait and see if this is the case.

    Just last week I admitted that even though I did A level chemistry, I am one who cannot even pronounce and spell the all the names of the medications that Mia referred to.

    I have called myself a Bible semi- literate, admitted that GP was not entirely wrong in calling me a medical illiterate. I admitted to knowing nothing about the value of the new tourism boss’ network. I have admitted to knowing nothing about Barbados’ underground water or the distribution network. I could go on and on and on but it would make no difference. People like to frame a narrative that suits them. Apart from GP, who claims to know only what interests him and TheOgazzerts who delights in declaring that he is “unable to contribute” no-one is as comfortable with not knowing all than I am.

    Back to the topic!

    Like

  • Since I am spewing let me tell u.ofan issue of concern of a policy implemented in Amex customer balances which I found to be untidy when it came to late fees
    The issue stood on the companies procedure to have a standard rate of a late fee on all customer balance
    I wrote to them and contested the fee was unfair to those whose balances were very low in comparison to those with high balances
    Amex took note and changed the rate to accomodate.the balance
    Now the difference between myself and others
    Others sit back and believes nothing can be done
    I look across the table stare others in the faces and say
    Not going to happen

    Liked by 1 person

  • RE Apart from GP, who claims to know only what interests him and TheOgazzerts who delights in declaring that he is “unable to contribute” no-one is as comfortable with not knowing all than I am.

    DDD
    I TRY VERY HARD NOT TO SAY MUCH OR ANYTHING ABOUT STUFF OF WHICH I KNOW NOTHING.
    THERE IS NO WAY THAT I AM GOING TO ARGUE WITH ARTAZ ABOUT ECONOMICS AND ACCOUNTING

    IF YOU WERE IN CLASS WITH ME AND YOU ASKED ME A QUESTION, IF I KNEW IT VERY WELL, I WOULD TEACH IT TO YOU, WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY REINFORCING MY KNOWLEDGE THEREOF

    IF MY KNOWLEDGE OF THE TOPIC WAS ONLY 70 -90 % SPOT ON, I WOULD SEND YOU TO THE SOURCES THAT I WAS READING AS I STRUGGLED TO MASTER THE TOPIC

    IF I KNEW LESS THAN THAT—I WOULD NOT COMMENT JUST LIKE THEO SAYS he is “unable to contribute”
    BUT WHEN I KNEW SOMETHING WELL, IF YOU CONTRADICT ME, I WILL LET YOU HAVE BOTH BARELLS, AND WITHOUT APOLOGY

    I DONT CARE WHO LIKE ME OR WHO DONT– I TRY TO SPEAK AND TEACH THE TRUTH

    Liked by 1 person

  • angela cox November 7, 2021 9:40 AM

    I’m sure everyone understands the points you’re attempting to make. However, you’re ‘comparing apples with oranges.’
    To understand the issue better, you need to look at insurance companies and reinsurers separately.

    Whereas the increase or decrease of fees and when they are applied falls under the control of the insurance company, as in your case, AMEX…… decisions made by reinsurer do not.

    And, it doesn’t have anything to do with morals or ethics of the insurance companies.

    In other words, insurance companies in Barbados did not arbitrarily make a decision to include a Communicable Diseases Exclusion Clause in clients’ insurance policies. Apparently, there was always an exclusion clause in insurance policies for infectious diseases. The clause was extended by the reinsurers to include COVID-19.

    Those are the significant facts you’re continually missing.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Critical, of course the man is intelligent (not sure what ‘too intelligent’ really means there) … but so are many others here and about de place.

    I find nothing untoward or
    [talking] over my head in what Phillips says … not one iota. In fact he often presents rather complex issues in such a simplistic absurd way that it belies the obvious intelligence of which you speak.

    This matter of the Queen’s role and our ‘defense insurance’ is one and the impractical system of fines and incarceration he championed in his ‘Solutions’ was another!

    That type of “running far in front the pack” in such a wayward and incomprehensible fashion will surely get him ‘picked off’, indeed!

    @Donna, a hearty 😆 LOLLL to you. I have been given enough accolades on my prose that I can take your (and GPs) lambasting with much mirth!

    One can never please all de people all de time, fah sure!

    And @Artax (and indirectly to the author @GP) … you are as pellucid as ever bro. The man engages when he likes but deliberately avoids folks who go after his commentary with REASONED AND RESPECTFULLY FORCEFUL DISAGREEMENT!

    You took apart his argument well above … and as you noted he avoided the key query with an aside about reading the constitution.

    Where does the monarchy of England have any meaningful EXECUTIVE function in Bajan governance… no where!

    That is the fundamental point … thus as I said I was less ‘grasping’ for the logical connection in his piece and then ‘gasping’ that such an intelligent person could offer such tortured reasoning.

    One does NOT have to agree with another’s views but in reasoned discourse the opposing view MUST offer rational logic to the summary … his did NOT.

    Peace out.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Dee Word

    The executive function is activated if there is insurrection in the country a la Grenada.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Accolades from whom-the Charles Dicken’s Club or the Society of Russian Translators.

    I love Charles Dickens but sometimes I had to read him twice. Russian speakers are stilted in their translation.

    I do get the gist of what you write but some of it I have to leave alone.

    And I read War and Peace by Tolsoy at age 17.

    Those who love your prose love unnecessary complications.

    Still, I find you to be a reasonable man with whom I often agree.

    It is just the prose that irritates.

    Like

  • DPD,

    That was meant for you.

    GP,

    Anyone who tries to know everything about everything is a fool. There simply isn’t enough time.

    Like

  • @ David

    As I mentioned previously, Barbados is currently an independent sovereign state within the British Commonwealth of Nations. And, I haven’t heard anything to suggests that, upon becoming a Republic, the Barbados government plans to discontinue its membership with that association.

    Member countries share a common commitment to values outlined in the ‘Commonwealth Charter.’

    Bear in mind the British monarch is the ‘symbolic head’ of the Commonwealth.

    My question is, assuming a member state comes under military threat, would the other member states be obligated to offer military assistance?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Artax

    Agreed.

    We must be confident as a nation to fearlessly pursue self determination. We live in an interconnected world, we must rely on our relationships, bilateral and bloc to assist with this pursuit.

    Like

  • Beg and BORROW

    Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley revealed on Monday that the island was “on the verge of signing” a US$115 million loan agreement with China for rehabilitation of roads in the Scotland District.

    https://www.nationnews.com/2021/11/07/china-loan-road-repairs/

    Liked by 1 person

  • Artax:

    As usual, you distort the truth – for apparent political reasons.

    I have engaged everyone on BU. But when persons stop discussing the issues, and start childish insults, then I do not waste my time – whenever I see the name of the one who does not want to discuss an issue, but insult, I scroll past.

    As the BU Archives prove, you are one who fills your comments with insults, rather than engage in an adult discussion. So, I told you I will ignore your posts.

    Every once in a while, I try to engage you to see if you have matured. Your typical responses reveal the answer.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Donna, you are funny! ….
    I know a few Russians but my prose doth not they peruse 😇 …

    And I long ago terminated my membership of the Charles Dickens Club so none a dem does read me again! 🙈

    Anyhow, enough a dat … decipher what u can of my too cryptic or irritating verbiage and leff de rest … dat always works I imagine.

    @Grenville, NONSENSE at 6:21 … @Artax does not ‘insult’ bloggers beyond the normal give and take ripostes to which one must be accustomed and able to deftly battle.

    You also scroll past my remarks since the days I engaged you on what I considered school ‘daze’ term paper prattle (I clearly explained why I said that then) … oh but of course that was a grievous insult.

    Come on guy, get real.

    Some bloggers here are indeed very tart with their posts so you can make that claim readily about them but when your point is repetively non-persuasive and the opponent’s more reasoned you step-off.

    No serious commentator in public life will run from a few raucous ad hominems.

    I respect your dedication and can-do determination but please don’t come with your ridiculous platitudes suggesting you have been so abused by unmannerly bloggers who are not irrational and illogical…. that CANNOT be said of the blogger who calls himself Artax… I don’t always agree with the brother and have had tussels with him in this space but he represents his education admirably with accurate and impressive archival detail … focus on THAT and not any casual brickbats.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Correction of course:
    “…so abused by unmannerly bloggers who ARE irrational and illogical…”

    Like

  • nextparty246 November 7, 2021 6:21 PM

    RE: “As usual, you distort the truth – for apparent political reasons.”

    Please indicate to BU where in any of my contributions I distorted the truth – for apparent political reasons?”

    RE: “As the BU Archives prove, you are one who fills your comments with insults, rather than engage in an adult discussion. So, I told you I will ignore your posts.”

    I’ll refer you to your article, “The Grenville Phillips Column – Berries for the Boys – Posted on May 31, 2017.”

    Our exchange began with me asking you, “Is Solutions Barbados suggesting that the awarding of government contracts “to persons and companies who fund political campaigns” became prevalent and widespread specifically in 1997?”……. which you interpreted to mean I’m a BLP supporter.

    You not only went on to accuse me of being a BLP sympathizer, but implied my family was threatened with something.

    Grenville June 1, 2017 6:02 PM #: “Artax: I thought so. I have repeatedly stated that both the BLP and the DLP have grossly mismanaged Barbados’ economy and are both incompetent to take the required action to stabilize this economy. However, you are only critical of the DLP and praise the BLP. I wanted to give you the opportunity to show that you are non-partisan, but you just could not do it.”

    “Who are you so afraid of Artax? What have you and your family been threatened with? Why are you so afraid to reveal your identity, especially since those whom you fear already know who you are? Don’t worry. Keep on attacking those who you perceive to be critical of the BLP. I understand your predicament. Every time you insult me, you are protecting your family – so keep the insults coming.”

    This was the LOW LEVEL Grenville Phillips took a simple conversation. My questions were directed to YOU. But, you decided to INVOLVE my “family” and confidently state, “those whom (I) fear already know who (I am).”

    By doing so, were YOU “ENGAGING in an ADULT DISCUSSION?”

    Artaxerxes June 1, 2017 7:48 PM #: “How do “fear,” “me and my family being threatened” and my identity come into a discussion in which I asked you to indicate where in the Moody’s 2009 report mentioned was made of the “corrupt political economy?”
    “Your comments are indicative of an IMMATURE INDIVIDUAL.”
    “If you believe people are insulting you by asking pertinent questions about your political party and its policies, then you are too CHILDISH and THIN SKINNED to become involved in politics.”

    I’ll invite BU contributors to read it by clicking on the below link and judge for yourself.

    https://barbadosunderground.net/2017/05/31/the-grenville-phillips-column-berries-for-the-boys/comment-page-1/#comments

    Like

  • nextparty246 November 7, 2021 6:21 PM

    RE: “As the BU Archives prove, you are one who fills your comments with insults, rather than engage in an adult discussion. So, I told you I will ignore your posts.”

    As it relates to the “insults,” according to ‘Rambo,’ “you drew first blood.”

    Since you included me among those contributors you described as “BLP worshipers,” I decided to use your comments to indicate how one could reasonably assume you’re a “DLP worshiper.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Artaxerxes June 2, 2017 7:13 AM

    And Grenville Phillips II has clearly indicated that he is a DLP sympathizer.

    On Tuesday night during VOB’s post Budget discussion David Ellis asked Phillips to give an assessment of the Budget. I was appalled to hear Phillips say he did not have a chance to listen to the presentation.

    Since the Budget date was announced weeks ago, any SERIOUS political leader or the party’s spokesperson on economic issues would have made every effort to listen and represent the party’s perspective at any post Budget discussion.

    Instead, Grenville Phillips II went on some IRRELEVANT RANT about the BLP not advancing policies because of their fear of a “snap election” similarly to 2013, PROVING to all and sundry he and SB were UNPREPARED for this important discussion. Ellis reminded Phillips that this was “shiite talk.”

    Under these circumstances, Grenville Phillips II was clearly an EMBARRASSMENT to himself and SB.

    Against the background of economists, the trade unions, manufacturers, special interest groups, ordinary Barbadians etc., saying the Budget measures would increase the cost of living, I heard Grenville Phillips II on VOB’s 12:30pm news saying Sinckler was “refreshingly honest,” but went on to give an analysis of Mottley’s response.

    Ironically, Grenville Phillips II boasts that SB is made up of business men & women. This was the perfect opportunity for him to bring his candidates together to give their perspective on how the Budget measures, especially the increase in taxes, would affect their businesses and employees (as the business community said it would) or refute their claims. But he preferred to talk about Mia Mottley.

    I asked Grenville Phillips II rather than APPORTION blame for Barbados’ “economic ills” to a SPECIFIC political party, he should PRESENT SOME MEASURE of BALANCE to the discussion. And the IMMATURE POLITICAL JOKER accused me of being a “BLP worshiper.”

    I would rather be a “BLP or DLP worshiper” than a Solutions Barbados worshiper, because Grenville Phillips II has proven he is an IMMATURE POLITICAL JOKER leading an UNPREPARED political party.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Grenville June 2, 2017 11:18 AM #: “Artax: I know you. Your pseudo-name, writing style, and lying about your qualification exposed you. Your refusal to be critical of the worst BLP policies confirmed it. You would never be so insulting to any person to their face. But here, in the shadows of anonymity, you release these insults as if it were natural. It is not natural for you.”

    “You are not a paid troll. Therefore, why do it. The only logical answer is that they have threatened you, because you have too much public and personal integrity to behave this way willingly. Leave the dark side. You can remain a BLP supporter, but leave the dark side of infantile insults. Now onto your salient point – which is a useful point and a fair criticism, but tainted with insults that does not befit a man of your stature, experience or profession, so stop doing all three a disservice.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Artaxerxes June 4, 2017 12:29 AM

    Grenville June 2, 2017 at 11:18 AM #: “Artax: I know you. Your pseudo-name, writing style, and lying about your qualification exposed you. Your refusal to be critical of the worst BLP policies confirmed it. You would never be so insulting to any person to their face. But here, in the shadows of anonymity, you release these insults as if it were natural. It is not natural for you.”

    @ Grenville Phillips II

    Stop trying to create straw men to knock them down or moving the goal post in an attempt to achieve your personal agenda.

    Firstly, Grenville Phillips II, you DO NOT KNOW ME, and I have NEVER MET YOU IN MY LIFE or had a conversation with you directly or even through a third party.

    Secondly, perhaps you may want to present any substantiating evidence to prove I lied about my qualifications, especially against the background of me mentioning in this forum on a previous occasion that I have a DOUBLE MAJOR in Accounting & Economics and MSc in Accounting. Hence, I am not incorrect to mention I have a BSc in Economics because it is a theoretically truthful statement.

    Thirdly, I am known, in this forum, to be CRITICAL of BOTH BLP & DLP and have EXPRESSED my CONTEMPT for politicians on NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. So what exactly is your salient point?

    Fourthly, individuals such as you, Hal Austin and Carl Moore are harshly critical of contributors to BU using pseudonyms. Anonymous contributors are also human beings, who sometimes make more worthwhile contributions than those of you who use your “real names.”

    Yet, despite your CONTEMPT for the “anonymice”, why do you lot BOTHER to RESPOND, and in many instances, USING INSULTING LANGUAGE to describe them as lurking “in the shadows of anonymity” or as “people debating in the shadows (that) lack overall principles.”

    And you lot BECOME UPSET when they RESPOND likewise.

    Are you suggesting to BU that your INSULTS and ATTACKS are JUSTIFIED because you use your “real names?”

    You, Hal Austin & Carl Moore could make life so easy for yourselves….. BY REFUSING TO RESPOND TO ANONYMOUS CONTRIBUTORS…. It’s that simple!!!

    However, (and hypocritically so), you are quick to embrace individuals using pseudonyms and contributing anonymously that AGREE with your POSITIONS.

    And under circumstances where I described your behavior as childish when you decided to become “slutty” and mention my relatives in a discussion about a Moody’s report, can you indicate to me where in any of my contributions or responses to you I “released these insults as if it were natural?”

    Fifthly, I could similarly conclude that “your refusal to be critical of the worst (DLP) policies confirms” you are a DLP supporter.

    Attacking anonymous contributors is a poor attempt to protect your fragile egos.

    Like

  • nextparty246 November 7, 2021 6:21 PM

    RE: “As the BU Archives prove, you are one who fills your comments with insults, rather than engage in an adult discussion. So, I told you I will ignore your posts.”

    Grenville June 4, 2017 8:17 PM

    Artax: I do know you, and I know that you would never speak with such insolence to another person. This anonymous posting has harmed you. You are not degenerating to infantile rudeness, because your parents would not have tolerated it. This is something new for you. You have just embraced the dark side as an adult and it has changed you.

    You know that I have detailed harsh criticisms at both established political parties. The evidence is incontrovertible, yet you would turn from what you know to be true and inexplicably deny it. What is wrong with you? On the other hand, I have only read you to detail criticisms at the DLP, while covering yourself by simply stating that you disagree with both parties. Can you not recognise your bias?

    Nevertheless, I can see that my responses to you have caused you to become unhinged. You seem careless with your reputation – which is a symptom of reckless anonymous posting. Not wanting to enable, or be accused by our mutual friends of enabling your further decline, I will refrain from reading or responding to any more of your anonymous posts.

    Farewell,
    Grenville
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Artaxerxes June 4, 2017 10:07 PM

    @ Grenville Phillips II

    I must once again reiterate that I HAVE NEVER, EVER MET YOU IN MY LIFE, nor do I share any mutual acquaintances with you and I’m sure you do not know my parents as well. I do not know you and do not care about you, but if you want to continue in your belief…. be my guest……. “knock yourself out.”

    You persist in mentioning that I insulted you, but after repeatedly asking you to INDICATE to me where in any of my responses to your comments I used INSULTING LANGUAGE, yet you FAILED to COMPLY.

    And I would further CHALLENGE you (if you are man enough) to REVEAL MY IDENTITY to BU.

    However, your attempt at “reverse psychology” is perhaps your way of conceding defeat because I aroused your self-awareness into ACCEPTING that your TEMPERAMENT makes you UNFIT to be a politician. Hence, the only way you could react is to combine a concocted story that you know me, with my posting under anonymity to give you an excuse not to respond or to prevent me from offering further comments on your posts because I do not want to disclose my identity.

    Grenville Phillips II, who the hell do you think you are?

    Mentioning you “will refrain from reading or responding to any more of your anonymous posts,” not only REINFORCES my ASSESSMENT of you as being an IMMATURE INDIVIDUAL to be correct, but also proves you are ACTUALLY the one who “became unhinged.”

    I could imagine you canvassing and are challenged by someone who you may think is familiar, you would walk away in anger, while promising not interact with them ever again. My friend, that is definitely a sure SIGN of IMMATURITY.

    Quite frankly, I don’t give a shiite if you respond to my post or not. But UNFORTUNATELY for you, you have INCREASED my zeal to be PASSIONATE in COMMENTING and CRITIQUING your articles and contributions, that you may also bid BU “farewell” as well.

    Human beings are curious creatures, and obviously your colleagues will be eager to read my contributions and “tell you wuh I wrote.”

    https://barbadosunderground.net/2017/05/31/the-grenville-phillips-column-berries-for-the-boys/comment-page-1/#comments

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler November 7, 2021 7:11 PM #: “@Grenville, NONSENSE at 6:21 … @Artax does not ‘insult’ bloggers beyond the normal give and take ripostes to which one must be accustomed and able to deftly battle.”

    @ dpD

    Grenville Phillips II is too ‘thin skinned.’ He views criticisms of his proposals as insults, yet, he responds with insults as well.
    I wonder how he would fear in Parliament against the likes of tough opponents with ‘combative style personalities’ such as that of Chris Sinckler, David Estwick, Mia Mottley, Denis Lowe, Richard Sealy or Caswell Franklyn?

    The guy ‘said,’ “as usual, (I) distort the truth – for political reasons.”

    I’ll refer you to his May 24, 2017 post, entitled, “The Grenville Phillips Column – Does He Also Care?”

    https://barbadosunderground.net/2017/05/24/the-grenville-phillips-column-does-he-also-care/#comments

    I posted the following contribution in response to Vincent Haynes>

    Artax May 28, 2017 8:45 AM #: “@ Vincent – I found the “article” very interesting as well.”
    “But, IF the story is true and is descriptive of SB, then it seems that the new party is operating within the defined status quo of soliciting support from and mingling with the “rich and famous” in SECRET, while trying to force their policies down the throats of the less fortunate at voting time.”
    “Under these circumstances and taking into consideration that their core methods of soliciting support and votes are similar, I’m convinced there aren’t any fundamental differences between BLP, DLP & SB.”

    Phillips II responded as follows:

    Grenville May 28, 2017 10:12 PM #: “Vincent, Well Well, Angela, Enuff, and Artax: I confirm that we have not sought any campaign financing from any person or company. We certainly do not charge anyone to hear any of our candidates. That dinner event had nothing to do with us.”
    “Please stop spreading rumours. If you want any information, why not simply ask like normal adults?”

    Artax May 29, 2017 1:26 AM #: “@ Mr. Phillips – Could you please indicate where in any of my contributions I SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED Solutions Barbados was THE political party that SPONSORED or HOSTED the dinner event as reported by the Nation’s article, or any statement therein that is indicative of spreading rumours?”
    “Mr. Phillips, I believe politics definitely not your forte at this time, because you are a bit too thin skinned to be a politician. Not everyone will agree with you or appease you by massaging your fragile ego.”
    “You are behaving similarly to DLP politicians who believe they are above criticism, as is evidenced by their hostility towards their critics. Rather than display true leadership qualities and ignore certain criticisms to your suggestions, you respond by describing your critics “sick,” “addicts,” or they “need help.” And based on the construct of your replies you are “coming over” like a bully and a snob.”

    de pedantic Dribbler May 29, 2017 10:22 AM #: “@Artax at 1:26 AM…well stated. I also could not understand how this individual who presents himself as an aspiring leader of people would be so unsavory and petty to call ANYONE who criticizes one of his solutions as ‘paid trolls’, ‘addicts’, ‘persons needing help’ and so on.”

    Grenville May 29, 2017 4:29 PM #: “Vincent, Well Well, Angela, Enuff & Artax: As I mentioned earlier, I was trying to have a rational discussion with many of you for years, and I have been submitting letters here for perhaps a decade. I would carefully research and craft a response to our rude comments, only to receive an insult laden reply with unfounded accusations.”
    “Then Artax jumped in and concluded: “Under these circumstances and taking into consideration that their core methods of soliciting support and votes are similar, I’m convinced there aren’t any fundamental differences between BLP, DLP & SB.” Artax, our core methods of soliciting support are not similar to the BLP and DLP. That is called a lie. And you are requesting an apology???”

    Artax May 29, 2017 8:37 PM #: “@ Grenville Phillips – Sir, I began my comment with: “But IF the story is TRUE and is descriptive of SB…..” By using the word IF as a conjunction, I’m making an ASSUMPTION, NOT a CONCLUSION.”
    “As such, any person who is versed in the art of comprehension would never conclude that what I wrote was specifically stating the story was “FACTUALLY ATTRIBUTED” to SB. Additionally, could you please indicate to me where in any of my responses to your articles I REQUESTED an APOLOGY?”
    “That (my friend) is CALLED a LIE. Don’t you think your rebuttal time could be best utilized articulating your policies?”

    Like

  • The ongoing conservation is so f..ingk petty
    All.at some time sling mud kick and punch at each other waiting for a knock punch
    Mostly the ones who cry foul and hangs out in the corridor and roam through the archives looking for a defense are the very ones who can’t help selves from being the architect of arguments ..criticisms..insults and ridiculous arguments and for what!
    Now go ahead rummage through the BU archives and throw the next punch I don’t care or give a rats a.sss
    Those without sin cast the first stone

    Signed
    Ditto

    Like

  • @ nextparty 246November 7, 2021 6:21 PM

    So surprised you have allowed Artax the artful polemicist to so easily boxed you into a corner from which, like a wounded dog, you are now trying to bark your way out.

    You were standing, ‘Supremely’, on solid legal/Constitutional grounds.

    Why did you back ‘away’ from your argument that Monarch (the de jure Head of State of Barbados) has an ultimate ‘Constitutional’ responsibility to protect the citizens from any foreign threats to the safety and security of the State; even outside the ‘realm’ or remit of the Commonwealth of Nations?

    “Her Majesty” represents One of the three prongs of the country’s system of Parliamentary governance and is ‘ultimately empowered’ to appoint and (remove aka dis-appoint) those ‘selected’ to make up the executive arm of HER government.

    Composition of Parliament
    “There shall be a Parliament of Barbados which shall consist of Her Majesty, a Senate and a House of Assembly.”

    Her Majesty therefore, Constitutionally speaking, is more than just a mere ceremonial figure head.

    That’s why the positions like those of the DPP, CoP and Auditor General are insulated from the ‘elected partisan’ political administration and fall squarely within the ambit of the GG (Her Majesty’s local representative).

    Oath for the due execution of the office of Director of Public Prosecutions.

    “I,_________________, do swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Her Heirs and Successors, in the office of Director of Public Prosecutions. So help me God.”

    Like

  • People will need to follow their chosen path unconditionally instead of conditionally with negativity and just being opposite

    Like

  • “……. the very ones who can’t help selves from being the architect of arguments ..criticisms..insults and ridiculous arguments and for what!”

    Confession is good for the soul.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Miller, who wrote (surely with a wry smile): “That’s why the positions like those of the DPP, CoP and Auditor General are insulated from the ‘elected partisan’ political administration and fall squarely within the ambit of the GG (Her Majesty’s local representative).”

    All I can say is: the legalized theory is jettisoned at reality’s door EVERY day.

    Do you SERIOUSLY opine DESPITE the ample evidence of various CofP being ‘handcuffed’ by their political masters of the day … as far back as Durant we can speak to that ‘reality.

    The REALITY with the Auditor General is the complete inaction on his damning reports … please guide us on how the supposed ‘executive’ role of the GG (the Queen’s awesome local rep) has ever improved that situation.

    Are you NOT conveniently omitting the part that says something like : the Queen after CONSULATATION with the PM … that TOO is de jure the constitution… you cannot take one aspect without the other.

    @Artax, that is a no win debate with Phillips… I remember laughing uproariously when I read one of his original comments that he would dismiss/not respond to anyone saying anything negative about his family.

    That was reasonably understandable re minor family members being off limits but adult members who may do (or did) things contrary to what you are proselytizing …. real duplictious.

    Enough of personalities of double-talk tho!

    I gone.

    Like

  • ArtaxNovember 8, 2021 9:30 AM

    “……. the very ones who can’t help selves from being the architect of arguments ..criticisms..insults and ridiculous arguments and for what!”

    Confession is good for the soul

    Xxxx
    Be that as it may I have more to confess
    You are the biggest mud racker on BU as close to having a sniper mentality one can get using BU archives as a reminder to those u disagree
    Most of time some comments are taken out of the context from the originality of the contents
    U want to know more u.have a childish attitude unlike any others that comment here
    U need professional therapy which can help you to resolve those internal problems which have giving u a reason or cause to snip at comments u disagree
    Better yet u ought to scroll by

    Signed
    Pedigree

    Like

  • Artax:

    As I explained to you before – I do not have time to waste with those who do not want to discuss issues – but instead consistently chose the way of insults.

    You would know – by rummaging through BUs archives – that I have a lot of time for those who want to discuss issues. You can go back to 2007 when I first started discussing issues here on BU for confirmation.

    Just letting you know that I will be scrolling past most of your comments for the next year or so – because I do not want to waste my limited time.

    Like

  • Miller:

    The Queen’s status is obvious to anyone who would simply read the Constitution. But it seems that the BU community has accepted Artax as their constitutional expert – despite that a brief reading of the Constitution consistently proves him wrong. I do not think that he has ever been correct on a single Constitutional dispute on BU.

    The shepherd should protect the sheep from the wolf in sheep’s clothing. David should consider putting a warning label on blatantly false posts made by political operatives.

    Like

  • The blogmaster is reluctant to use censure except in those rare cases. Over the years the BU community has done a reasonable job of quality checking. The best way to learn oftentimes arises from conflict and disagreement.

    Like

  • Some here will recall the respected Justice Jeff Cumberbatch penned an informative article on the subject of Barbados going republic. His scholarship is sorely missed in the public space.

    https://barbadosunderground.net/2016/01/17/the-jeff-cumberbatch-column-the-new-republic/

    Like

  • @ de pedantic Dribbler November 8, 2021 10:20 AM
    (Quote):
    All I can say is: the legalized theory is jettisoned at reality’s door EVERY day.
    Do you SERIOUSLY opine DESPITE the ample evidence of various CofP being ‘handcuffed’ by their political masters of the day … as far back as Durant we can speak to that ‘reality. (Unquote).
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Who is ‘arguing’ to the contrary?

    Doesn’t the same ‘daily reality’ apply to the country’s judicial system when the citizens’ Constitutionally-enshrined right to ‘a timely trial in a competent court of law’ is honoured more in the breach than the observance?

    Can it therefore be argued that Barbados-in reality or de facto speaking- is more of a failing state than its former mother country; a reality which was constantly posited by a former contributor and who has seen both systems in action?

    It would be interesting for us to cogitate on the probable chances of a coalition of Commonwealth nations coming to the rescue of poor Barbados from any invasion by China to take possession of those fields and hills once beyond recall should ‘Sovereign’ Barbados change from a ‘client state’ to become a beggar state and defaults on loans long overdue to its modern-day ‘royal’ Master.

    Like

  • Atherley: Take politics out of awards
    AS BARBADOS MOVES closer to becoming a republic, Leader of the Opposition Bishop Joseph Atherley says it’s time to remove politics from the awarding of national honours.
    Speaking with the DAILY NATION
    yesterday, he said the same goes for appointments to commissions, committees, and various boards in Government’s remit.
    With the deadline for nominations for this year’s national awards, which include new honours closing tomorrow, the leader of the People’s Party for Democracy and Development (PdP) said that in the context of things Barbados is still “a young and maturing democracy” and although he does not “think we’ve got it all together” it is getting there. “More and more we need to make sure that the institutional mechanisms that we put in place are insulated from political influence. More and more where critical choices with respect to positioning people on boards or commissions or committees or what have you, more and more we need to see that the political hand is not as heavy and as strong in that.
    “We need to be moving more towards the issue, the arena of people’s governance, people’s governance mechanisms, to the extent that when we have things like national honours, a maturity would suggest that a national honour is a national honour. We can’t continue to use these things to reward party faithful. That has too often been the case in the past on either side of the political divide in Barbados.
    National honours
    “With these new national honours in the context of a republic, I hope we can move away from that,” Atherley said.
    The Opposition Leader initially commented on the issue during recent debate in Parliament on the National Honours and Decorations Bill, 2021, which was passed.
    He said then: “We honour people, we award people, because it embodies the values that we cherish. They reflect the actions that we hail. The young people today would say big up…. They embody the qualities and exhibit these qualities that we salute as being ideally Barbadian, ideally what it means to be Barbadian, and they distinguish themselves with reference to attributes which we would like to see emulated in the generations which follow after us…”.
    He also said establishing the legislation “represents a desire to depart from the politicisation of
    a process which really is signal in terms of how we conduct ourselves”.
    “None of the values and virtues cited as being the bases for the receipt of any of these honours wears a political label or makes its appearance in political colours. Therefore, whether you’re B, D, or P or U or S or whatever, … we really should rid the process of the semblance of political partisanship being a part of the selection of persons.
    He has an issue with the appointments to the five-member National Honours and Decorations Advisory Council. He proposed the President should appoint a nonexecutive chairman, an independent person, to head the council instead of the Prime Minister who “has the ability to appoint the chairman of the commission who is a minister”.
    “The head of the Public Service is there by ex officio position, but then [the Prime Minister] is going to be able to nominate three other people in her discretion. I objected to that. I would not have voted for that as it was. She could have the two but the Leader of the Opposition, whoever that happens to be at the time, should have the power to nominate one and that nominee should stand without reference to the Prime Minister,” the PdP leader said. ( GBM)


    Source: Nation

    Like

  • A constitution fit for changed status
    by TYRIQUE WILSON AS BARBADOS draws nearer to dispensing with the current political structure in favour of a democratic republic, the unabated discussions that have sought to answer the question of a “best route to republicanism” are gradually being subsumed by those endeavouring to delineate the constitutional changes.
    Previous constitutional commissions have made recommendations in this regard. However, it must be recognised that these recommendations, or any other recommendations if employed, should not merely be subject to the whim of the political directorate. They should not be isolated nor arbitrary. Constitutional amendments made pursuant to republicanism should, first and foremost, seek to embody the personality of all Barbadian As we approach 55 years of Independence, our Constitution reflects no significant departure from when it was first expatriated from the European Colonial office. Sporadic and tenuous post-independence constitutional amendments have not corrected the substantive deficiencies which plague the development of constitutional jurisprudence.
    Perennial political myopia was the “thorn in our sides” when we consider the modernisation of our Constitution, and this transition from a constitutional monarchy provides a unique opportunity to make up for lost time.
    Following in order of appearance, it’d be most appropriate to start at the preamble. Preambles contain compendious expressions of the principles and values that are believed to underpin a society. They often outline a society’s fundamental goals which usually pertain to the advancement of justice and fraternity; recognition of human rights; the maintenance of peace and union; and economic aspiration. It states certain inalienable rights. At its core, it describes the way in which we envisage ourselves as citizens.
    However, when we look to the Preamble of the Barbados Constitution, we see an acerbic, hedonistic value articulation of the British plantocracy.
    With pervasive reference to the Charter of Barbados and the numerous British high officials who governed the territory during the colonial era, it appears as if the freedoms we enjoy today are mere gifts from the metropole. It appears as if any prospect of forming a national identity is circumscribed where we attempt to escape our colonial past – our navel strings, seemingly, buried in Westminster.
    Surely, Barbadians no longer envisage themselves as mere by-products of Great Britain. Yet the Preamble has received scant attention in previous attempts at constitutional reform.
    Conventional Caribbean bills of rights devolve civil and political rights. Usually enshrined are the right to life; right to liberty; security of the person and the protection of the law; freedom of conscience; freedom of expression; freedom of assembly and association and protection for the privacy of the home.
    Remained static
    The Bill of Rights found in our Constitution has no exception when we seek to characterise those that are “conventional”. However, it has remained static; limiting the extent to which our citizens ought to be constitutionally protected.
    It is axiomatic: bills of rights are purposely couched in broad language. This vagueness allows the courts more liberal interpretations of its provisions. It is against this backdrop that the judicature is regarded
    as the “guardian of the Constitution”. It protects constitutionally enshrined rights; it strikes laws that are deemed infringing on the provisions in the Bill of Rights and it implies rights where our Bill of Rights has not explicitly provided.
    Despite such far-reaching jurisdiction as “guardian of the Constitution”, there is certainly room for our Bill of Rights to be bolstered. Certain rights reminiscent of modern societies such as the right to vote and right to earn a living, although implied, have not yet found place in our supreme ordinance. The right to privacy of the individual is another notable exclusion. Inclusion thereof will deepen the extent to which our Bill of Rights embodies social and economic rights. After all, this is what the Bill of Rights is supposed to be, an embodiment of social and economic rights.
    Even if we were to fully leave a task of implication in the hands of the judicature, provisions which protect against government infringement of unenumerated rights – that is, rights that aren’t explicitly mentioned in the Bill of Rights but are devolved by the Judicature – may still be necessary.
    Constitutional challenge
    In some Commonwealth Caribbean constitutions, Savings Law Clauses were included to promote “continuity of the law”. The General Savings Law Clause found in our Constitution meant that laws which were in force prior to Barbados’ Independence in 1966 were immune from constitutional challenge. This was the case even where such laws infringed on the freedoms and liberties guaranteed by that same Constitution.
    Although the Caribbean Court of Justice has practically erased the Savings Law Clause, a more resolute response is imperative by repealing it and replacing it with a modification clause. This would allow pre-independence laws which conflict with the provisions of the Bill of Rights to be brought into its harmony.
    In embodying the personality of all Barbadians, new life must be breathed into our Constitution. Constitutionally unrecognised interests of the electorate must be advanced, expanding rights, freedoms and liberties guaranteed to our citizens. Our Constitution must evolve, giving adequate and compelling representation of who we are as a people. Rather than being a legislative expression of the British Parliament, it must become an authoritative expression of our collective voice.

    Tyrique Wilson, 19, is a secondyear law student at the University of the West Indies’ Cave Hill Campus.

    Source: Nation

    Like

  • @ angela cox

    It has been proven time and time again that you’re an idiotic, political yard-fowl.

    Perhaps you should have “scrolled by,” rather than MALICIOUSLY involving yourself in a discussion that did not concern you.

    Members of both BLP and DLP are seen socializing with each other, yet, you come to BU to display your ignorance by giving the impression they are enemies and significant differences exist between both political parties.

    The problem is, people such as you abhor the ‘BU archives’ because it holds a PERMANENT RECORD of your appalling ignorance.

    It has been proven on SEVERAL occasions that you are an appallingly ignorant, semi literate buffoon, who DOES NOT READ or THINK before posting comments. In other words, you are the BIGGEST IDIOT in this forum.

    If you weren’t an appallingly ignorant, semi literate buffoon, you would’ve KNOWN:

    …….. BARVEN is the vendors’ ASSOCIATION and NOT a MAN.

    …….. it is impossible for the Auditor General to ask questions about a project that began in September 2020, in his report for the financial year ended March 31, 2020.

    …….. the difference between an insurance company and reinsurers. You ignored those persons who were trying to ‘steer you in the right direction,’ preferring instead to argue shiite.

    Rather than IGNORING what people ‘say,’ you find it NECESSARY to continually respond to comments because you’re not satisfied until you ‘have the last word.’ And, the more you respond, the more you exhibit your buffoonery.

    That, my friend, is a CHILDISH ATTITUDE.

    All someone has to do is mention Mia Mottley or BLP and the “mud racking” begins. As long as you read any information that’s critical of Mia Mottley, you immediately post it to BU, WITHOUT first VERIFYING its ACCURACY or CREDIBILITY of the source.

    Angela Cox, Angela Skeete, Mariposa, ac or whatever you choose to call yourself, “you need professional therapy which can help you to resolve those internal problems which have giving u a reason or cause to snip at comments u disagree.”

    Like

  • nextparty246 November 8, 2021 2:10 PM #: “The Queen’s status is obvious to anyone who would simply read the Constitution. But it seems that the BU community has accepted Artax as their constitutional expert – despite that a brief reading of the Constitution consistently proves him wrong. I do not think that he has ever been correct on a single Constitutional dispute on BU.”

    Grenville Phillips II

    You are a LIAR.

    I’ve NEVER engaged in ANY discussion on BU about the CONSTITUTION.

    But, then again, politicians are know to be liars….. and, you’re an aspiring politician.

    I know I’m correct in any dispute that argues you and Solutions Barbados will NEVER assume political office in Barbados.

    You need to GROW UP and act like a MAN, instead of behaving like a LITTLE GIRL who resorts to temper tantrums when she does ‘get her own way.’

    Like

  • @ Artax
    On the lighter side : Don’t little boys throw temper tantrums ? Suggest you say little child.
    You are lucky BU is short of militant feminists!!!
    Like I said just commenting on the lighter side.

    Like

  • @ Mr. Skinner

    You are correct

    I’ll rephrase my comment to:

    Grenville Phillips II needs to GROW UP and act like a MAN, instead of behaving like a LITTLE CHILD who resorts to temper tantrums when he/she doesn’t ‘get her own way.’

    Like

  • ArtaxNovember 9, 2021 8:06 AM

    @ angela cox

    It has been proven time and time again that you’re an idiotic, political yard-fowl.

    Perhaps you should have “scrolled by,” rather than MALICIOUSLY involving yourself in a discussion that did not concern you
    Xxxx.

    What an arrogant SOB
    Wasnt. u who spend more than three days taking up another blogger fire rage
    Using little sniper tactics to defame and destroy another blogger character
    Hell.then u did placed yourself in the same category as being malicious
    Who de RH u think u are standing inthe BU corridors acting as a sniper police to engage others in warlike confrontation
    And when u are placed under the same scrutiny use missile defense as a way of undermining comments that u believe are not in your infantile mind trustworthy
    In reality don’t give two hoots about what u think
    But this I know u have shown plenty disrespect and in some case exemplify characteristics in addition to being a sniper one of being a cyberbully hiding behind an anonymous name and to.which I dare u to reveal who u are
    I dare u to reveal yourself

    Signed
    Confessed

    Like

  • nextparty246 November 8, 2021 1:56 PM

    Artax:

    As I explained to you before – I do not have time to waste with those who do not want to discuss issues – but instead consistently chose the way of insults.

    You would know – by rummaging through BUs archives – that I have a lot of time for those who want to discuss issues. You can go back to 2007 when I first started discussing issues here on BU for confirmation.

    Just letting you know that I will be scrolling past most of your comments for the next year or so – because I do not want to waste my limited time.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I guess I won’t be eating or earning a living “for the next year or so.”

    “Your ignorance has no boundaries.”

    I’ve read comments on BU in which the authors called you ‘bedroom police,’ ‘ISO taliban,’ ‘dictator’ and used pejorative statements to describe you. The records would indicate I’ve NEVER ENGAGED in that activity, preferring instead to question or CRITICIZE or QUESTION your policies, while PRESENTING REASONS for doing so. In other words, ‘I play the ball and not the man.’

    Unfortunately, you believe to question or criticize what you ‘say,’ is insulting you. Rather than asking for explanations, you drifted off into being sarcastic. I asked you a simple question, you responded by ‘saying’ you know me, I worship politicians and my “family was threatened.”

    That’s a sign of IMMATURITY.

    You seem to believe saying people insult you and counteracting with sarcasm, will always get you out of any difficult situation in which you may find yourself. I’m familiar with the ‘play book’…….. it’s one of Combermere’s ‘undocumented rules.’
    It’s about time you realize you’re an ADULT and school days are over.

    However, I pity you because, fundamentally, sarcasm is a cover. People used it to hide their anger, embarrassment, awkwardness, envy, hostility, or inadequacy. I’m sure they are characteristics with which you could identify.

    According to you, you engaged in discussing issues as far back as 2007, yet, you were UNABLE to CONVINCE a majority, neither here on BU nor the general Barbadian population.
    Although the few relatives and friends that voted for you, you still LOST YOUR DEPOSIT.

    Surely that’s a WASTE of YOUR “LIMITED TIME.”

    Perhaps, your sarcastic, arrogant and condescending attitude, which you often exhibit in this forum, was mainly responsible for creating the rift in your political party and members ‘running away’ from you.

    Your decision to discuss ALL issues on SB’s behalf, from the economy to health to the environment, was reckless and selfish, especially when one considers there were members of the party who were qualified to do so. Your comments clearly indicated your ignorance of those issues. You deemed this to be AN INSULT when it was drawn to your attention…… another OBVIOUS sign of IMMATURITY.

    Here endeth the lesson.

    Like

  • ‘Imagine that.’ A man attacked me, accused me of distorting the truth, among other things…… I defended myself, while presenting proof to counter what was mentioned……. and I’m accused of “Using little sniper tactics to defame and destroy another blogger’s character.”

    A perfect example of semi literacy.

    Okay, my name is EMEKA EJIKE ENYIOCHA. Now, I’ve accepted your ‘dare’ and revealed myself, what are you going to do? But, then again, how do you know that’s actually my ‘real name’ or EVEN any OTHER NAME I give?

    If you actually and “in reality DID NOT give two hoots about what I think,” you would’ve IGNORED my comments, rather than CHOOSING to RESPOND to them.
    But, you’ve responded just as I anticipated. You can’t help but doing so, because you’re not satisfied until you have the last word.

    See how you’ve once again exposed your immaturity and appalling ignorance?

    The reality is, you are the BIGGEST IDIOT on BU. I’ve SUCCESSFULLY EXPOSED your LIES on SEVERAL OCCASIONS and that you’re an APPALLINGLY IGNORANT SEMI-LITERATE BUFFOON.

    You cannot engage in any discussion without confining it into a BLP versus DLP scenario.

    You referring to BARVEN, the vendors association, as a MAN……. is more than enough proof that you’re an APPALLINGLY IGNORANT SEMI-LITERATE BUFFOON.

    You could become overly angry and call me “sniper police, cyberbully”…… or whatever you choose to….. does not NEGATE that reality.

    That REMAINS a FACT that CANNOT be REFUTED or DISPUTED.

    Like

  • the boys at it again. fight, fight, fight. lol

    Meanwhile politicians an mark ma jerkham laughing at we.

    Like

  • ArtaxNovember 9, 2021 10:50 AM

    ‘Imagine that.’ A man attacked me, accused me of distorting the truth, among other things…… I defended myself, while presenting proof to counter what was mentioned……. and I’m accused of “Using little sniper tactics to defame and destroy another blogger’s

    Okay, my name is EMEKA EJIKE ENYIOCHA. Now, I’ve accepted your ‘dare’ and revealed myself, what are you going to do? But, then again, how do you know that’s actually my ‘real name’ or EVEN any OTHER NAME I give

    Xxxxxccxxx

    A perfect example of a Liar
    And u got the mitigated gall to call people liars
    Go check unself knucklehead

    Here endeth story

    Like

  • Emeka Ejike Enyiocha

    angela cox November 9, 2021 11:20 AM

    You responded just as I anticipated. You cannot help but do so, because you’re not satisfied until you ‘have the last word.’ It is an obsession.

    I gave my name and you DO NOT KNOW WHO I AM, yet, you accused me of being a liar.

    ANOTHER EXAMPLE of your APPALLING IGNORANCE.

    You argued that the Auditor General raised concerns about the new Fairchild Street market project, which began in September 2020……. in his annual report for the financial year ended March 31, 2020……

    …….. or believing that BARVEN, the acronym for the vendors’ association, is a MAN.

    That is not only “A perfect example of a Liar,” but an appallingly ignorant, semi literate buffoon as well. You are an EMBARRASSMENT to BU.

    “And u got the mitigated gall to call people liars? Go check yuhself knucklehead.”

    ac, angela cox, Coxable, Angela Skeete, Mariposa, or what other name you choose to call yourself, I’ll REPEAT once again.

    The reality is, you are the BIGGEST IMBECILE on BU. I’ve SUCCESSFULLY EXPOSED your LIES on SEVERAL OCCASIONS and that you’re an APPALLINGLY IGNORANT SEMI-LITERATE BUFFOON.

    Calling me “sniper police, cyberbully, liar”…… or whatever else you choose to….. does not NEGATE that REALITY.

    It REMAINS a FACT that CANNOT be REFUTED or DISPUTED.

    Like

  • Emeka Ejike EnyiochaNovember 9, 2021 1:09 PM
    Xxxxxxc
    Time for the rubber room knucklehead

    Like

  • ac, angela cox, Coxable, Angela Skeete, Mariposa, or what other name you choose to call yourself, I’ll REPEAT once again.

    The reality is, you are the BIGGEST IMBECILE on BU. I’ve SUCCESSFULLY EXPOSED your LIES on SEVERAL OCCASIONS and that you’re an APPALLINGLY IGNORANT SEMI-LITERATE BUFFOON.

    Calling me “sniper police, cyberbully, liar”…… or whatever else you choose to….. does not NEGATE that REALITY.

    It REMAINS a FACT that CANNOT be REFUTED or DISPUTED.

    Like

  • EmekaNovember 9, 2021 6:21 PM

    ac, angela cox, Coxable, Angela Skeete, Mariposa, or what other name you choose to call yourself, I’ll REPEAT once again.
    Xxxx
    I think u left out a few more knucklehead
    The BU archives awaits u

    Like

  • This is too easy.

    ac, angela cox, Coxable, Angela Skeete, Mariposa, or what other name you choose to call yourself, I’ll REPEAT once again.

    The reality is, you are the BIGGEST IMBECILE on BU. I’ve SUCCESSFULLY EXPOSED your LIES on SEVERAL OCCASIONS and that you’re an APPALLINGLY IGNORANT SEMI-LITERATE BUFFOON.

    Calling me “sniper police, cyberbully, liar, knucklehead”…… or whatever else you choose to….. does not NEGATE that REALITY.

    It REMAINS a FACT that CANNOT be REFUTED or DISPUTED.

    Like

  • Thanks.

    Sometimes you set off on what you know is a wild goose chase and you find a little golden nugget.

    Unlike my mom and sister I have never really watched Nollywood movies, but will try this over the weekend (even if I have to pay for it).

    https://jaguda.com/movies-2/nollywood-2/movie-viewing-a-million-madness-part-1-2/

    Like

  • Thanks.

    Sometimes you set off on what you know is a wild goose chase and you find a little golden nugget.

    Unlike my mom and sister I have never really watched Nollywood movies, but will try this over the weekend (even if I have to pay for it).

    https://jaguda.com/movies-2/nollywood-2/movie-viewing-a-million-madness-part-1-2/

    Like

  • Recommendations will be accepted.

    Thanks.

    Like

  • EmekaNovember 9, 2021 6:48 PM

    This is too easy.

    ac, angela cox, Coxable, Angela Skeete, Mariposa, or what other name you choose to call yourself, I’ll REPEAT once again.

    Xxxxxxx
    Laughing my a.sss off watching me mek.a fool of u

    That is so easy

    Run up and come again
    Await uh response kuncklehead

    Like

  • Let it be clear.
    Not picking-up fire rage.

    Like

  • I have a friend whose name is James Adams. He is affectionately as ‘Jimmy.’

    You would say he is a liar, because when you Googled that name you saw:

    Jimmy Adams
    James Clive Adams is a former Jamaican cricketer, who represented the West Indies as player and captain during his career. He was a steady left-handed batsman, useful left-arm orthodox spin bowler and good fielder, especially in the gully position. He was also an occasional wicketkeeper when required.Wikipedia

    Then you would come to BU and ‘say,’ “Unlike my mom and sister I have never really watched cricket, but will try this over the weekend (even if I have to pay for it).”

    How ridiculous can one be?

    Thanks.

    Like

  • Yes, you are correct.

    This is too easy.

    I’m definitely laughing my ass off watching me mek a fool of u.

    Run up and come again. Await uh response kuncklehead.

    YOU CAN’T HELP IT.

    Like

  • Last word.
    Am I dense? When I Google the name I saw an African actor and a film that may be worth looking at over the weekend. I saw no reference to cricket.

    Not getting between you and AC.

    Like

  • I have found good music googling some of the names 555 mentioned.

    Learning comes from all inputs.

    Like

  • Exactly

    A picture is worth a thousand words
    Nothing more to say

    Like

  • Republic challenge
    by COLVILLE MOUNSEY
    colvillemounsey@nationnews. com
    THE MIA AMOR MOTTLEY ADMINISTRATION’S push to make Barbados a republic later this month is being challenged in court.
    Grenville Phillips II, head of the political party Solutions Barbados, is seeking an injunction, claiming that the legislative arrangement recently passed into law in Parliament in relation to the transition to republic status, is unconstitutional.
    The matter was filed in the High Court on October 7.
    However, Attorney General Dale Marshall said he is confident Phillips’ claims will not prevail and that the move to a republic will continue as planned.
    Phillips told the
    MIDWEEK NATION he was not going to speak about his legal submissions to the court as he did not want to run afoul of any legal procedures.
    Acknowledging it was essentially the eleventh hour as it relates to the transition, he described his action as “Barbados’ last chance” to reverse course.
    Too late
    “I went to almost all of the lawyers in Barbados and they all told me that it was too late, that the train has already left. So this is in essence Barbados’ last chance and I can’t afford to have this thrown out on some technicality and neither can Barbados. You have to understand that I do not know these technicalities and I don’t want to go to court and lose on a technicality,” he explained.
    Government announced the plan to move to republic status in September last year. It said then that the time had come to “fully leave our colonial past behind”, although the nation will remain a member of the Commonwealth.
    The transition to republic status is due to take place on November 30 – the 55th anniversary of Independence from Britain.
    Governor General Dame Sandra Mason is set to be sworn in as President then.
    Several opposition parties have raised concerns about the process on constitutional grounds.
    However, Marshall said yesterday that while he applauded Phillips’ activism, the actions of the Government would hold up to the scrutiny of the court. He added his office was preparing a strong defence, and that plans for the republic move would continue without a hitch.
    “I am aware that Grenville Phillips, the leader of Solutions Barbados, has filed a claim in the High Court which alleges in essence that the new legislative arrangements that were recently passed into law by Parliament are themselves unconstitutional. I have also just been informed that he has also sought injunctive relief to prevent the move towards Barbados becoming a republic.
    “I do not believe that Mr Phillips’ claim will prevail in the courts, but I do welcome every instance where a citizen seeks to hold up the actions of the Government to the scrutiny of the courts. That is what our courts are there for, and no matter my views of the merits of a particular claim, actions such as this promote a desirable activism among Barbadians, and they can help to enrich our jurisprudence,” Marshall said.
    He added: “My staff are preparing a very robust defence to Mr Phillips’ claims, and I fully anticipate that our steps towards making a Barbadian our head of state will continue without hindrance.”

    Source: Nation

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, applause, applause for social activism!

    Merits:
    1Firmly establishes Mr Phillips in the minds and hearts of like minded Bajans who believed that the Govt’s “process” toward Republicanism was flawed.

    Determination and can-do attitude. Excellent.

    2Ostensibly offers a legal transparent look at the recent actions and would help set a legal precedent!

    3Gives Phillips greater visibility and acceptance as a warrior for justice!!

    Demerits.
    1Amazingly flawed last minute action … distressing to read “I went to almost all of the lawyers in Barbados and they all told me that it was too late”.

    This is the SAME man who REMARKABLY argued in these pages that he would not have a lawyer as part of his team (even for his AG matters), and pushed back abaurdly on a now sitting Justice (and others) on that point.

    To then read the above is to beggar disbelief how ridiculously the gentleman dismisses PRACTICALITY and reality at his altar of arrogance.

    2Some will see his admirable actions as those of a one man band who lacks strategic focus.

    Either this action is deliberately last minute to produce the noise (as defeat seems certain) … considerung that he has written extensively on the matter over many weeks to ONLY NOW decide on legal recourse is either remarkably wayward thinking or indeed STRATEGIC!

    Of all those who question the “process”, how many DO NOT want the break with the Monarchy ???

    Mr Phillips appears to be one of the dyed-in-blue royalist minority… but maybe I have misinterpreted his remarks on this subject … so leaving his motivations aside again applaud him as the AG so sweetly said:
    “[we] welcome every instance where a citizen seeks to hold up the actions of the Government to the scrutiny of the courts. […] actions such as this promote a desirable activism among Barbadians, and they can help to enrich our jurisprudence,” 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿

    Like

  • The action was filed on Oct.7; when is it scheduled to be heard? If the Courts are consistent, it would be sometime after November 30 by that time it would be a fait accompli.

    Long live the Republic.

    Like

  • @Sargeant

    He can shell out a few dollars to have the matter be heard on an urgent basis.

    Like

  • de pedantic DribblerNovember 10, 2021 9:27 AM
    @David, applause, applause for social activism
    Xccc

    Then the rest of the commentary was such jobby
    Why on earth couldn’t Dribbler just read and let the process takes course
    Early or late GP.stood on a principle as to what he believes is a ramming and a rushed hastened approach by this govt to make Barbados a Republic which gives merit to being challenged on Constitutional grounds
    If the court favors govt approach on technicality it does not remove the taint and a smell of an undemocratic and unconstitutional process many believes to be wrong and a wrong which will make its way into the history books
    Hail to Democracy
    Let freedom ring

    Like

  • @Dee Word

    On the flip side the DLP is filled with lawyers and they have not seen the need to challenge. Go figure.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @David, one would have to see the filings to understand on what exact basis Phillips is making his case … but at this lay level I would suggest that BECAUSE the “DLP is filled with lawyers” It didn’t see that a challenge had merit!

    @AC… thank you for your words of ‘wisdom’. Clearly as one the DLP legal brains you didn’t see merit in a challenge but can sit here and write such ‘wonderful stuff’ about another paedry leader’s conviction… 🤦🏾‍♂️!

    As others have noted: the more you write, the more your brilliant representative abilities and sound political sense shines!

    Continue to display such … it serves us well on why we should elect you as our favorite ><=#%^÷🙈🙉🙊🐴

    😇 I gone.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    another PARTY leader’s conviction…

    That should read.

    I am all typos this morn … what’s up with auto type thingy!

    Like

  • Dribbler
    As others have noted: the more you write, the more your brilliant representative abilities and sound political sense shines

    Xxxxx
    Continue with your stupid insults and brilliant commentary which represents jobby

    Like

  • Meanwhile n the court of public opinion the AG gives his opinion on a legal matter that is in the hands of the court
    So fking disrespectful of a legal process which has to be resolved by legal proceedings within in the court
    His intent to sway public and court opinion is obvious
    What a diffus

    Like

  • The AG here is a person while in opposition made bold statements about crime in Barbados
    Now under his watch bandits are robbing banks shooting customers and employees
    Lol really giving his opinion on the Constitution as Barbados heads towards becoming a Republic
    If he cannot figure how to.put a handle on crime
    Don’t see how he can figure the nuts and bolts in the Constitution tied to Barbados becoming a Republic
    Yet displays an arrogance in a timely manner which should benefit his public opinion

    Like

  • “I am aware that Grenville Phillips, the leader of Solutions Barbados, has filed a claim in the High Court which alleges in essence that the new legislative arrangements that were recently passed into law by Parliament are themselves unconstitutional. I have also just been informed that he has also sought injunctive relief to prevent the move towards Barbados becoming a republic.”

    “I do not believe that Mr Phillips’ claim will prevail in the courts, but I do welcome every instance where a citizen seeks to hold up the actions of the Government to the scrutiny of the courts. That is what our courts are there for, and no matter my views of the merits of a particular claim, actions such as this promote a desirable activism among Barbadians, and they can help to enrich our jurisprudence,” Marshall said.
    He added: “My staff are preparing a very robust defence to Mr Phillips’ claims, and I fully anticipate that our steps towards making a Barbadian our head of state will continue without hindrance.”

    Like

  • The miller is neither playing the role of the devil’s ‘advocate’ or even that of amicus curiae in sympathy with GP No.2.

    But GP 11 has always held the position that despite his personal preference of retaining the British monarch as the Bajan Head of State (as a form of insurance against possible invasion) he would go along with the decision to go republic should the majority of voters expressed this wish by way of referendum or in general elections if included in the manifesto of the winning political party or grouping.

    The voice (vote) of the people is seen as the voice of their ‘God’.
    Isn’t the British monarch seen as the representative of their God on Earth and merely echoes the voice of the same People?

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Miller, ok I accept your non amicus post as Phillip’s position thus it seems he should be comfortable with this govt position.

    For these simply reasons …

    1.Every administration since 2000 (the Forde republicanism report; and before that too, really) has said they do want to move this nation away from the Monarchy to a republic form of native HofS.

    2.Polls have consistently shown a majority of Bajans in favor of such a move.

    1 and 2 coalesce to reflect Bajans supporting the parties REPEATEDLY to govern this nation as a reflection of the citizens’ desires and intent. … and being that there is NO stipulation for ANY referenda as a public approval in our Constitution I say to you that ;

    “The voice (vote) of the people is seen as the voice of their ‘God’….. Isn’t the [local Govt] seen as the representative of their God on Earth and merely echoes the voice of the same People?”

    Why should Mr Phillips be troubled!

    Like

  • @Dee Word

    All agree we function as a republic today. So what is the point?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ de pedantic Dribbler November 10, 2021 4:31 PM

    You would make a royally outstanding Queen’s Counsel (QC) even in your own republic!

    The AG should consider engaging your ‘lawyering’ skills (and as one of the many nepotistic consultants to this fait accompli) to ‘prove’ Grenville’s case as merely frivolous and vexatious (to the very GG) and a waste of the Court’s time and taxpayers’ money.

    You must admit that GP 11’s dogged determination would put to shame even EWB’s “fight” for ‘Independence’ even though the senior bureaucrats at Whitehall, 56 years ago, just wanted to see the back of those administrative parasites.

    The modern Royal aides at Buckingham must be finally relieved to see the end of the task of arranging for the distribution of meaningless titles like KCMG and DCMG and so-called official royal visits to the former plantation.

    We shall see very soon how loyally republic Barbados will be when the new president and sidekicks are ‘addressed’ in public after November 30th.

    Hope you would not take offence when the same ‘Sir’ Grenville No.2 refers to you lot as a republic of ‘royal’ apes.

    Like

  • Potential Prime Minister ?

    Government’s senior economic advisor Dr Kevin Greenidge sees no need for a Budget speech this year.

    https://www.nationnews.com/2021/11/11/economist-no-budget-no-problem/

    Like

  • @Hants

    Bought some of that mahi-mahi from costco yesterday. cost $23 for a kilo, skinned boned and individually wrapped. Having a filet for dinner today.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Bought 2 packs from Costco. Aso Rainbow trout. Buy Salmon from Walmart.

    I am a Pescatarian.

    Like

  • “Grenville Phillips II, head of the political party Solutions Barbados, is seeking an injunction, claiming that the legislative arrangement recently passed into law in Parliament in relation to the transition to republic status, is unconstitutional.”

    Grenville Phillips is blatantly playing a political game grandstanding party posturing to be in the news
    legally he has no locus standi
    which means has not got a leg to stand on
    as he cannot prove personal damage

    Like