By Caswell Franklyn, Head of Unity Workers Union
All Members of Parliament are styled “Honourable”; however, the reported behaviour of the eleven that were featured in the Nation, as attempting to oust the Prime Minister, is anything other than honourable. I do not want to see them hiding behind semantics: I want them to come out, like the Honourable Denis Kellman, and say unequivocally that I had no part to play in this sordid mess so help me God. If they fail to publicly disassociate themselves from this reported act of treachery, they would forever stand condemn, in my mind as being worse than Judas.
I am not saying that there should never be any disagreement among party leaders and their fellow Members of Parliament. I am making bold to say that everyone of the persons that are reported to be associated with this bloodless coup attempt look extremely bad in my eyes right now. I heard is said once that anytime two people sit and always agree at least one is an idiot, so I would expect that there would be disagreement in any group of twenty-one people. However, the way that the dissent is handled speak volumes about the character of those involved, and quite frankly, their characters have taken a bashing by the force of category five public opinion.
I have heard the denials from persons who have taken the point that they did not place their signatures on any document. I dare say that is not good enough for the public: it might be good enough for a court of law, but the court of public opinion where you are guilty until proven innocent does not follow any legal rules. Politicians must always remember that they are not elected by the courts, and could very well achieve a pyrrhic victory there. Those who are denying any association with the document must realise that it is more than the document. They must come out and disavow any knowledge of the alleged clandestine move to oust Freundel Stuart. I believe that all right thinking persons in this country expect no less. The country does not want to hear any legal double speak: we want to hear an unambiguous statement to the effect that the story has no basis in fact. Failing that they would have signalled to their constituents that they are unsuited for the confidence that has been reposed in them.
The Barbadian public is very forgiving, even in the short term, of most things but I don’t think that such forgiveness extends to treachery. If you have any doubt cast your minds back to Clyde Mascoll’s crossing the floor. He is perceived as a traitor to the DLP: no one appears to trust him anymore, and now needs Owen Arthur to clear the way for his rehabilitation. He is a trained economist but, as part of his punishment for the perception of treachery, his economic pronouncements are now called into question. I believe he is sound but remember the court of public opinion still prefers Barabbas.
Now finally to Freundel Stuart, I can only sympathise with you. I cannot say that I know how you feel because I never had friends like yours.
Barbados Underground 
If Roy Morris scooped Kaynmar Jordan’s scoop and that’s the authentic letter then its a letdown after the palace coup overtones portrayed by the Nation, in fact the Ministers suing have conrete reasons to sue.. The letter is full of respect, deference even reverence for the Prime Minister. The Nation took Barbadians on a wild and unecessary journey to a point where we believed our beloved island had become a cesspool of political plotting like Guyana, Trinidad even Haiti. The Nation has a case to answer and a case they could lose. Writing a letter of that tone to a PM is not uncommon nor is it treachery although it wouldve been preferable they discuss such matters at cabinet or the various DLP parliamentary and council meetings. The Nation get huff we’ll see if the lawsuits come. The Nation better have good lawyers because right now its Earth to Houston the Nationpace ship has a problem.
@George Brathwaite:
Is this similar to the plot in the BLP to remove Mia?
I read in an earlier post ‘request to meet is not plot to destabilize or remove the head.’ I believe this regardless of how a team word its document. However, GB you are confident that there was a ‘plot’ I am confident that the polls by Wickham caused some to panic and desired an urgent meeting. I am also confident that the group knew the PM having worked with him for over a year and know that he does not respond to ‘urgent’ unless he deems it urgent.
When Jesus was asked to hurry to Lazarus he took His cool time and when he got there His friend was dead. He confidently said ‘I am the resurrection and the life …’
PM Stuart is not Jesus but I believe that He has read this scripture and is guided thereby. He is the Prime Minister steadfast, real and poised to respond to adversity, joy, thrill, destruction, apparent destabilization, disgruntled public, colleagues, friends and family. His style according to his principles and beliefs.
This does not change the fact that there are members who feel rushed to do something because of pockets of public concern. Nor does it change the poor, misleading, misrepresentation, coyly approach of the Nation Publishing.
I wondered if only the Nation could get their hands on the letter. I now wonder if they have a different letter than what the Barbados Today published. My only question is did the PM receive the letter? If he did not was this a draft awaiting approval by names that may be attached on a list?
And George, another thing, an implication is not a fact – you have shared that – Kaymar has to bring facts that the eleven intended to destabilize the party by joining together including the then Acting PM to remove the PM as its leader. Not you George – Kaymar Jordan has to report to the public. Otherwise the Nation ain’ getting nutten fuh Xmas – john and jenny public are ‘Mad’ ’cause the Nation ain’ been nutten but ‘bad’ in its reporting.
@Brief
If you want to fool yourself, that is fine with me. That so-called poll was done months ago, why was it leaked at this time? You guys also failed to recognise that Parliament went on recess; this morning the fist thing to be done was to outline the necessity for the urgent calling out of the MPs only to debate something that had no urgency written into it. The plan was foiled since Sunday and the motion to have Parliament meet was already in place. But I shall let all of you have the last word. Like you, I must wait until Sunday to see what comes about.
Do you know, I was stupid enough to go back to Barbados Today and read the letter. Do you know what jumped out at me? The last paragraph is a cut and paste (reason why the wording and spacing no longer mesh). So maybe David is right and there are at least two pages. If so many invectives and subtle use of words and phrases are contained in the first couple of paragraphs, I am curious to know the full extent. There is more than what we have seen or heard, I am sure of it, but I am not sure how much of the facts and truth we will get.
Did the faces in Parliament today seem a bit melancholy given the festive season of the year? Where was Chris’ usual exuberance and some say arrogance? The DEMS looked and sounded tired and overworked; I doubt they were doing the peoples’ business because things are just as hard as they were yesterday and the days before.
@BU and off topic.
If as is reported in the news that natural gas usage has declined significantly over the years because many more Bajans are eating out, is it still feasible to be working on a pipeline between Barbados and Trinidad? Just curious.
I know whose signature ent on dat letter….BONNY PEPPPA wun. BONNY WHERE ARE YOU? yuh comforting de PM?
Dey say dat yuh gots tah play ded fuh yuh tah ketch cobeau….FS is smart ….(I hope)
George:
I read that letter and notice the first paragraph went straight to the intent and purpose of writing. I noticed the paragraph and looked long at the pinching-shears design at the top and bottom. I looked to verify the authenticity of the copy. I ask is there another letter? BT published copy ends with ‘Respectfully’ but signatories were not shown.
Fine – I await the Nation’s story. Kaymar has to print facts not intention, implication, supposition, could be that, should be this. Also, an apology will not help her nor the Nation. A discussion to meet does not imply a letter to be prepared to meet.
George:
I agree Sinckler had no jokes for himself today and the others were not amused at all. I thought it was the seriousness of the Tax bill being discussed. Boy Chris looked heavy hearted – I agree with that. Is his family well? A man is still innocent until prove guilty. I like ‘you’ await proof.
I hold no brief for the Nation but al the salacious talk has been the talk of the bloggers. The emotive words in this missive have been spoken by contributors to the posts. The Nation to its credit has not spun anything. It has laid out the letters in part and said the men were disgruntled. I believe that some people are so bold faced that they are capable of anything to suit their purposes and are trying to impute all the improper motives to a simple statement. We will publish on Sunday. Barbados Today should be ashamed of its conduct.The slipshod way in which both the interview and the cutting off of the persons names who signed shows that Barbados Today has no balls.The men who believe that they are off the hook are so simplistic. asnd are behaving like little boys. I think they have let themselves down and they have shown themnselves to be selfish and self centred. They believe that they can throw their colleagues to the wolves and benefit from that dastardly deed. But I say the truth will out and when their caolleagues confront them they would be no place to hide and no assanine excuse will be able to cover their tails. I am ashamed of them, They are unworthy of the term honourable. Think on these things
Bajans you should keep track of how your power company is spending the profits.
HALIFAX, Dec. 13, 2011 /CNW/ – Today, Halifax Regional Municipality approved Emera’s investment in the Halifax Skating Oval.
Aint Barbados Today owned by Peter Harris and Bizzy Williams amd Roy Morris? So you still wondering if BT is part of the spin on this DLP story?
To reiterate, what is happening with this story is serious business. Now the specter of collusion has raised its head. We have to dismiss this angle to the story because it would been the PM is aware and most people believe Stuart would never be party to such.
As I wrote some time ago about this letter and the subtlety of The Nation’s article, who is the “Eager” one, that was in the sub-text of the Nation’s piece.
Perhaps his name will be there – will he fall on his sword – that is the key to open this Pandora’s box, the Nation will not go down alone.
However you slice it the DLP has been damaged was that the intention?
Through it all “The Master Tactician” (Owen Arthur) quietly waits.
mr franklyn i see nothing mischievous or clandestine with members of an organisation seeking by way of letter an audience with their leader about the way things are being done vand their impact on the success of the organisation unless in this case you are privy to other valid information which casts doubts on the motives of the concerned members,\. the advocate printed a story and all and sundry including the purported concerned members themselves judging from mr stephen lashley’s rambling and nonswensical comment seem to take the issue out of context.
ac the story published by the nation was not sinister in my humble view and i was further of the opinion that the nation should hang their heads in shame if indeed there was no lett which from all reports there seems to be. you were quite emphatic that there was no letter and the story was concoted for sinister ends which now appears to be a figment of your imagination. attack mt arthur all you want, i was better off when he was managing the purse strings. was drinking a rum in the shop last night and happened to hear your boy mr sinckler quarrelling as usual and saying a lot from which no sense can be gathered.
It appears that on realising the Nation remained adamant about publishing the letter and became feisty even after denial by some MPs, the DLP thought it best to deflate the story as much as possible.
The barbadostoday article is therefore an attempt by the DLP to preempt the Nation’s Sunday Sun story, and in so doing hopefully lessen its impact.
The barbadostoday story however has, in my opinion, made the situation even worse. Why wait five days to admit a letter exists and be semantical about its contents?
Unless I am an idiot, when the leadership of a country, especially within our Westminster system of government, is being questioned it is a direct attack on the performance of the Prime Minister. What is even more revealing is the fact that the words written in the letter have been often used by the Opposition primarily OSA to describe PM Stuart’s leadership. It is also interesting to note the word ‘leadership’ rather than ‘management’, which would have implicated the entire Cabinet including Minister Sinckler.
Therefore a Cabinet minister trying to play word games with ‘our’ and ‘your’ is simply infantile and face saving. Again I ask why only eleven out of nineteen members of the Parliamentary Group were privy to this letter and agreed to its contents and intent?
This story has run its course. All that is left are the smoldering timbers left to be effortless tossed and turn in the wind by by hit men within the BLP. THe public has seen a pure and unadulterated heavy handiness unleashed upon them by those in the media with the effervescent so called reporting of the facts. AS the days and weeks go by the attention would be focus on the evildoers those who would have submitted this letter to Nation one does not have to look too far for just around the corner their is an election and the LOSERS will do whatever it takes to win even if it means the destabilising of a country. let me add a word of caution to the zealots “Those who sow the wind will reap the whirlwind”
@ ac
Is that why the DLP is now reaping the whirlwind?
If some people are to be believed when the PM got knowledge of the request for a meeting he refused and met one one on instead.
Remember Stuart is a student of history and philosophy as well as a deep thinker.
By possibly taking a countermeasure with the assistance of the Press the cat might have been released among the pigeons.
PM Stuart holds the upper hand and to bring closure there must be a little blood letting which will realign the perception Stuart is the man in charge heading into an election.
balance you need to check your facts for Yes in deed i did say that there was a letter but not one of a Sinister Plot as suggested in the Nation Article! you can reread my comment which has been recently been edited on this thread.
@TRUE TO FORM.
” All the salacious talk is the talk of the bloggers….”
In case you do not understand it, let me point out to you that that is the purpose of dropping innuendo. The punch does not come from what you said but what you have led persons to believe that you said . Innuendo is a most powerful, yet DANGEROUS TOOL. If you were to go into any group of person NOW and ask what they think of the Nation articles, I am sure 99% would reply that the Nation has exposed the 11 DLP persons trying to get rid of Stuart.
You should therefore look at the total narrative since the Nation’s expose’ started. As I understand it, that is the nature of the complaint made by Dr Estwick, Mr Ronald Jones and Mrs Thompson ..they are alleging that the Nation newspaper, through INNUENDO has implicated them in a sinister plot to get rid of / replace Prime Minister Stuart.
That being the case, they are entitled to protect themelves against the innuendo; this whole saga is not about the innocuous letter appearing in Barbados Today but all that has been associated with it..the report of a meeting at Saffire Drive, the contemporaneous publication of a Wickham “poll”, the analysis of Dr George Belle reported by Timothy Slinger, the denials by various Parliamentarians, the analysis of Pro. Duncan….we will see how far it goes, as the Nation promises to take its efforts up to Sunday.
I invite you to reflect on these things and try to see the trees from the forest; right now you are in danger of loosing your way; YOU MIGHT GET LOST.
@ DAVID.
Your analysis could not have been more incisive.
My fellow bloggers
If you are in search of a good brand of toilet paper stop using the one which is manufactured on Fontabelle . . You can get a good quality ‘Harbor Bay Bathroom 2-ply Tissue” . It is retailed at 1.58 a roll i.e 36 cents more expensive than the Fontabelle brand but the roll carries 500 sheets instead of the 50 sheets which the Fontabelle manufacturers boast of being the #1 brand of toilet paper. Believe you me, the Fontabelle brand is a pain in the arse whereas ‘Haborbay’ is soft and tender on the butt.
What to do with the men who signed? You know where you stand with them. You know your friends . It is your enemies who you have to take care of . I would dismiss all those who are saying not me I could not trust them. They are the backstabbers and would go into a clandestine meeting and if they are caught out would run. I could not and would not trust them. I would say to the ones who want me go and signed bring my successor to me and I would take a vote among all the members and if that person has lost the vote I would then dismiss all challenges Think on these things
@Eagle eyed
I want to assure you that I understnd the use and abuse of innuendo and I want to say words like plotters and traitors and such are not used by the newspaper. These words were used by us and when we colour our contributions with these nouns and adjective please do not blame the Nation .Eagle dont you think that the Nation interviewed asource and got the direct information from that source and that source was credible?
Think on these things
@David – 7:43
precisely. Historian, philosopher, linguist, educator, thinker. Heads and shoulders above most in Barbados, probably the region. Not the most charismatic, nor “politically savvy” but as intelligent, thoughtful and precise as they come.
The Barbados Today article was clearly purposely done to “ease” some of the pressure to come from the Nation tomorrow. The pigeons are scrambling since the now have a lot to lose and most things are out in the open. Some head(s) need to roll. A few questions to end…
1. If 11 names were printed, but only four signed what does that infer, both about the signatories and and non-signatories? Why only 11 and not the entire Parliamentary or Cabinet group?
2. If cabinet/MPs wanted to meet the PM, why a letter? Why the wording?
3. If the PM never (supposedly) got the letter, where and for what “purpose” did the Nation get it beforehand? By the way, note that he was able to respond quite comfortably though not smoothly to the allegations at Friday’s press conference.
4. If this disgruntlement started approx. 3 weeks ago, who’s really the master puppeteer here.
5. Why haven’t we heard word one from the “alleged go between and letter deliverer” for the group?
Lastly, methinks Stephen Lashely and Chris Sinckler have the worst responses to the issue so far. .
As one man said “time longer than twine.”
@TRUE TO FORM.
You are still missing the point..they did not use the words, BUT THE NARRATIVE HAS BEEN SKILLFULLY USED TO GET THE READERS and listeners TO USE THOSE WORDS. An innuendo is successful when this happens..You must look beyond the superficial. Innuendo does NOT deal with the superficial. THINK ON THESE THINGS..
Has anyone heard or Carson Cadogan lately? I truly hope he is not ill.
@ DAVID.
You have done your good turn for the day..I know for a fact that our Prime Minister has made a deep study of that little red book “The Prince”. That is another reason why i consider your earlier post so incisive. The days ahead will demonstrate once and for all how shrewd a person Prime Minister Stuart is . In actual fact, that same shrewdness which has caused him to ditch Hartley Henry and Wickham might very well be the reason for this flare-up we are experiencing.
If I were to have the opportunity to advise Mr Sinckler, I would try to get him to consider that he would derive infinitely greater benefit from sitting at the feet of a scholar like Freundel Stuart than to dwell in the ungodly tents of a Hartley Henry or a Peter Wickham. Even though I doubt the opportunity for offering such advice will ever arise, I hope one of his close allies would make the suggestion to him. He would however have to clothe himself in the ROBE OF HUMILITY to derive any such benefit.
@David
As a student of politics, I can only tell you that to be Machiavellian does not necessarily mean that you employ the type of politics that are grounded in manipulation for personal gain. Machiavelli spoke quite a bit about virtue and its importance; he spoke about having balance and effectiveness. Perhaps, these are the things that Stuart ought to employ rather than the other choice of the sword because as we know, if one lives by the sword, they too are likely to meet their fate by the sword.
@ GEORGE BRATHWAITE.
The word which best describes Mr Stuart appears in my post above – “SHREWD”. Shrewdness allows him to weigh the consequences of apparent conflicting actions. Why do you think he has studiously refrained from jumping-into the fray at the drop of every hat ? Some of you have misunderstood that quality ;you have jumped ahead and called THOUGHTFULNESS ,indecisiveness . Add to that the qualities referred to by The LOWDOWN in yesterday’s Nation.”.QUIET DIGNITY and DECENCY” and you should AT LEAST start to appreciate how fortunate Barbados is, ESPECIALLY AT THIS TIME, to have a Prime Minister like Freundel Stuart.
@Eagle-eyed
I do not for one second underestimate FS. In fact, I believe that he has already acted in a way that has the group very very uncertain and are more likely to fall into line at least for the time being. No underestimation on my part.
It would be unwise for PM Stuart to act with haste in this matter.
He will wait for the NATION (Kaymar Jordan) to declare her hand.
He will adjudge the impact.
All the while the process of waiting will sieve out the issues which he must respond to.
Bear in mind his response must take onboard the fact an election is on the horizon.
A dark horse in this matter when the dust settles is Richard Sealy.
@GEORGE BRATHWAITE.
You drew David’s attention to the fact that you are a student of political science and hence are well qualified to analyse Machiavelli. May I suggest that a fuller appreciation of Machiavelli requires a grounding in Literature ; Stuart possesses that grounding
I however did not think you were underestimating him; you are too intelligent a person to be guilty of any such aberration.
@ David
And Richard Sealy is part of the DLP royalty. Imagine him, and the two Depeiza siblings.
It is difficult to imagine a DLP leadership without Stuart playing a leadership role given the current stock.
There is no government in the world with the exception of a few which are not struggling in the uncertain times.
The DLP whipper snappers should think on these things.
@enuff
The PM has to play the hand he was dealt.
Many of the DLP MPs are Thompson appointees, Sealy appears to be quietly pragmatic if not as flamboyant.
@Eagle-eyed
I truly find BU to be a place wherein persons have the intimate details of another. Nonetheless, I have no more right than you or anyone else to assess the merits or demerits of Machiavelli. I have read The Prince (a few times), and I have read Discourses (at least twice). I am not however an expert on Machiavelli nor would I claim to be.
In terms of grasping the fuller appreciation, may I ask what is my background in literature? May I ask what do I NOT possess that Stuart possesses in being able to have the greater appreciation for Machiavelli? Maybe I am not a politician, is that it? Maybe I am not well read in several disciplines and subjects, do you think so?
Anyway, I thank you though for perhaps giving me more kudos than you should and at least we agree that it is highly unlikely I would underestimate Stuart or most if not all persons of the political class.
I share GB thoughts about the PM and firmly beleive it was the PM who had the letter pass to the Nation Newspaper. He will let the the majority of return to the fold very contrite and then he will deal with the ring leaders. This a a brillant move on the PM part.
Shame on Barbados Today for not publishing those signatures. What an arrogant lot the media in this place has become. You nor the politicians you represent have no respect. Does no one have the capital to create a truly independent newspaper? You Sons of Bs. You know not your place nor your mission. You lousy excuses for journalists and editors. You stinking, rotten pieces of crap. You musty dirty rats. When high wind blow all the pooh in Barbados must be land on all of you. Who train wunna? Nothing that comes tomorrow can ever redeem you dirty journalists in my eyesight. And the BAJ has nothing to say? all o wunna want drowning.
What bothers me and I see some of the level headed bloggers are also asking ( I have ask this already) why was it even necessary to write a letter?
It therefore begs the question: Is there any communication between these people governing our nation? To me it seems as if they do not speak to each other judging from the fact that the MP for Christ Church South was the go between.
Certainly the simple thing was to say to the PM after the parliamentary group meeting, PM we need to speak to you or could not whatever was bothering them be raised under the “any other business” item on the agenda?
One can only conclude that the MPs and the PM only discuss what is on the agenda and nothing else. For example, Donville Inniss announcing building a new hospital when nothing, nada, zilch has been done, no place to build it, no surveys done, no drawings, nothing, it is a figment of his imagination to take the focus away from the BLP conference. And dont tell me this is not true, I know.
Then the Chris Sinckler waiting until the PM was away to call a press conference the same Sunday of the BLP conference at 2 pm to grab the headlines from the Opposition Leader. This press conference said nothing new. Could it not have been held at any of the many places the government owns, no It was held at a known DLP supporter’s place…… those who stayed the course are still feeding at the trough.
Certainly the PM must have felt a way that this man could play he so powerful as to call a press conference addressing the nation, mind you as it was put. Chris Sinckler was not even in charge!
Having Fruendel Stuart as PM of Barbados is no prize. If he is so good how comes FS has never retained a seat he held and chances are he could loose again. FS is no genius, just being able to call words dont make you a genius. In my humble opinion, dead wood drifted to the top, if Thompson had not drank so much vodka, he’d be alive today and Fruendel would never have become PM of Barbados. He is the epitomizes Sandi. Give me a break!!!
GC Brathwaite attempts to deconstruct the letter and comes to the following conclusion
“The letter carries within it a challenge to authority, an ultimatum, and a sinister chord for which desperation seems to be at its apex.”
By George!! You have some clarity and insight that is beyond the scope of many of us that has enabled to grasp the core intent of the letter. Are you sure you don’t have another letter somewhere?
To my simple mind (not a concept that you can grasp) the letter is a warning that if the Govt/DLP doesn’t get cracking on the perceptions that exist among members of the public about the government the Party will lose the next election.
BTW David can you produce the letter that the Parliamentary group of the BLP wrote to Mia? It would make for an interesting comparison.
In 2009 at the DLP’s annual conference, PM David Thompson warned the constituents of the DLP, “do not take silence for ignorance.” I believe his words are apt in relation to FS. Thanks to the poll, the pollster, the kingmaker and schemer, the letter and the words contained therein, FS is in a position to clearly demonstrate that silence is most definitely not ignorance (in its literal sense); he knew of the letter and ensured that he would not be caught wanting in light of written signatures or verbal denials. Well done PM Stuart! Should you successfully ward off this challenge because I think there are none in your camp with the level of acumen desirous of the people from their Prime Minister, then the majority of people in Barbados will join hands with a much forward-thinking and progressive BLP to help you give the DLP the rest from governance that it has earned for sleeping on the JOB of managing both economy and society.
@ Sargeant
Thanks! You would be, if you want to be supportive of the DLP, better advised not to highlight what I concluded. Many persons, whether in agreement with how the Nation has handled or mishandled the matter, have come to a similar conclusion. You do the DLP no favours by placing that upfront because many will read what I say or what comes at me if only to lend their part in criticising me.
I shall repeat for your benefit though: “The letter carries within it a challenge to authority, an ultimatum, and a sinister chord for which desperation seems to be at its apex.”
@ Sargeant
It is the leaking of a 3-month old poll, press conferences, statements by the pollster etc that magnifies what is contained in the letter.
Then there was the letter seeking permission to have a meeting with the PM and what we have here are avbunch of BLP “talking heads” spinning out of control with ridiculous conspiracy theories led or misled by master of cermonies GB Brathwaite.
Who stole the cookie from the Cookie Jar? Was me? not you.. Who leaked the info the the Nation?. Did The Nation and BT get the same printed copy?. I am assuming there was only one original letter. It would be madness to have more than one letter . All the members should have to sign the same letter and no copies would be given to the signing members. Barbados is too small and remember Guy Fawkes. He wanted to alert a family member that he was going to blow up Parliament and that that member should not attend but that member ratted on him. So one letter which was to be given to the PM. Who leaked the letter? or under whose authority was the letter leaked? The person who leaked the letter has to have a direct interest in the outcome and has the political savvy to under stnd how to gain from this leak. Also that person wanted to put a distance between the 11 or 4 and himself . The leaker knew if if he played it right the ones wanting to remove the PM would be seen as trecherous and hasty and would be reduced in the eyes of the public. A student of Literature, History and Politics would be somewhere near to the centre to advise the leaker and could under the nuances and let the chips fall where they may. A political strategist and pragmatist would have to be close to the leaker and advise him that Barbados is an unsophisticated political playground and rumour has a very importnat part in the success of every thing. The leaker knew that the people of Barbados on both sides of the political fence woudl find it abhorent and dispicable on the part of those who pick the captain whom they knew and now they want to change him. These people have no heart and the leaker wanted to ensure that these are seen as such. So the DlLP is now saddled with Stuart and we know that each man must now come back and accept what he did not want. I challenge each and every one of them who feels that the PM is unworthy to resign and walk away for you have come to the conclusion that you cannot win with Stuart. Show yourself to be men and stand on principle and dare to be a Daniel and stand for what you believe in. As it goes you cannot endorse Stuart . People would not believe and a politican has only his word .Your word is your bond. For sure Stuart cannot endorse you. He cannot endorse a traitor to the cause and ones who have no balls. The people would laugh at him. Any which way it is difficult .I have looked at the politics from both sides now from win and lose and still somehow it life illusions I recall I really dont know politics at all Think on these things
@Sargeant
Here are both letters i.e. Mia’s to the BLP and the other way:
@ true to form
Quite deductive! I am impressed.
@GCB
It serves your interest as a proud member of the BLP ( I think you’ve used that phrase or words to that effect) to beat the drums of a potential plot in the making. It is also self serving to think that your analysis is of great importance to anyone else or that others will come to the same conclusion as you have.
Your opinion is one of many it carries no great significance, all it does by way of hyperbole is reveal an over arching reach for a result that is beneficial to the BLP.
@ Sargeant
You may be right or you may be wrong. Who knows? What I do know is that David has obliged you and posted the letters that you speak of. Do you wish now to draw the similarities? Or would you prefer to acknowledge that this current deceitful fiasco in the DEMS is of an entirely different piece of cloth?
@David
Thanks, however I meant the one referred to here
Sargeant; Yes. Thanks, that Mia Mottley statement is fairly pivotal to understanding this current imbroglio and putting it into a local political perspective.
Extrapolating from it, I would not be surprised if the current request for a meeting with FS by the 4 or eleven or however many members of the DLP parliamentary group were involved, did not have an undertone, recognized by all of them, including FS, that it was crunch time and that an ultimatum would be put to FS despite the diplomatic wording of the letter. The parliamentary group must routinely discuss such matters, therefore sending a formal letter to the PM for a meeting to discuss the not insignificant matters referred to in the letter must be an aberration from the norm for such meetings. The matter has again highlighted a certain aloofness with which the PM treats with his colleagues and also runs the affairs of state.
All the fallout thereafter were the result of big foot moves that appear to have stemmed any action that would have furthered the written objectives of the proposed meeting. The leaking of the letter, with names, was one such move. The eliciting of denials, one by one, without any effort being made for coordination was another and the further re-leaking of the letter to Barbados Today along with self serving elucidatory statements by unnamed Ministers is the current move for Today.
It would appear that FS is now in the ascendancy, given the backing-back of some of the key players and their comforting and perhaps cowardly words of allegiance to him. But the problem is still there. It is still real. It is not going away. FS is not going to change his style and modus operandi and if he leads them into elections their main objective for calling the meeting will not have been met. They know this full well. I suspect that in the near future we can look for very strained relations and inertia in many sectors over the period until an election is called.
George,
Talk your talk and ignore the Dems. They are so ashamed that once again their party is falling apart right before their very eyes and are saying ………..oh no, not again. I asked a friend of mine who is a Dem, what’s going on in your party, he said same as always, nothing unusual. So I think if truth be told, they half expected this house fire. They want you to shut up and dont talk but a few months ago they were lambasting the BLP and the gang of five as they called them. They dont want to hear now about the gang of 11. Wuhloss!!!
The Dems knew what they were getting when they elected Fruendel so why the fuss now. Freundel’s claim to fame is his rhetoric. I dont even hear or know if he is an outstanding lawyer. He cannot govern Barbados by his rhetoric alone, all this talk about him being so shrewd is a joke. We need someone to govern this country, the ship is sinking and not a man who plays he is the deepest thinker believing that no one can read him. Give me a break!!!!
Do we remember this:- Sir Philip’s response to story carried by the Nation newspaper on Wednesday December 14, 2011:
Open script: ‘I did not hold myself out to help’
I hasten to correct a report in Monday’s Daily Nation attributed to me and headlined Sir Philip: Let Me Help. I have not made any offer either directly or indirectly through the Press or otherwise to “help” the DLP [Democratic Labour Party] with any “problems”.
I made it clear to Mr Tony Best when he called me on Sunday, as he put it, acting on the direction of the Nation, that I was not aware of any problem.
I was not prepared, I added, to accept such from any newspaper. I also said that if there was a problem, and the leadership of the party or Government confirmed it and sought any help from me, I would always be prepared to help my party.
It takes a special kind of intelligence to understand the contradictory statements of a denial of an existing problem and then making an offer to resolve the same problem.
The fact is that I did not hold myself out to help in the resolution of any problem.
Close script.
WHO WILL RUSH TO BUY THE NATION NEWSPAPER ON SUNDAY OR ANY OTHER DAY AFTER THIS FIASCO.
@Prodigal Son
No one is trying to stop George from airing his views; I am just saying that he is basing his argument and conclusions on incomplete data, not a good position for an academic.
George wear his politics on his sleeve and is prone to injecting that partisan flair into every situation; a recent example was when he came to the rescue of a squatter on these pages and took umbrage at the Minister who said he would remove her from the NHC unit.
I have his best interests at heart I want to ensure that the acronym GIGO does not take on a new meaning “George in garbage out”. 🙂
@Sargeant
Why don’t you leave George alone?
It’s what the Dems do best, tear down people even thier own!