Maudib Yuh Draw Mi Tounge!!! Suh Mi Haffi Drop Bomb!!!

[Comment]

What does it tell you about the situation that had to be confronted?

What does it tell you about the people's position on whether or not they were in agreement with the actions taken?

Did gun crimes not go on the decline in the immediate aftermath of the actions taken?

Ask and the vast majority, save and except a few JLP adherents who with their particular agenda would have loved the unabated barking of the guns, as you quoted DK as saying, endorsed the actions taken.

Is our system of government one where the will of the majority prevails? Is that system of government one we hold dear...and, one we desire to continue?

Perhaps, Maudib and his JLP friends would like to take us down another path?

Smoke this in your pipe - The greatest threat to our country was the introduction of the GARRISON and its GUN CRIMES! That was introduced by the JLP! ...some things once introduced take on a life of its own. It is easy to 'start'/introduce...but terrible hard to remove!

It is a fact the JLP introduced the GARRISON and its GUN WAVE...the JLP ruled this country after that introduction - There has been no elimination of the GARRISON and or its GUN WAVE...rather the JLP's GARRISON POLITICS has been aped by the PNP and more GARRISONS are the order of the day. The evil of the GARRISON once introduced is proving extremely difficult to 'wipe-out'.

The time is long past when all GARRISONS should have been eliminated. Action against that terrible 'institution of the garrison' must be taken NOW! That mother of repression and terror, the JLP introduced GARRISON, ALL GARRISONS MUST GO!

Karl, your post is littered with inaccuracies. What it told you about the peoples position is what I have intimated to before but you refuse to acknowledge. That is that you were lead over a cliff like the biblical swine beguiled and maddened by the demons of the PNP.

I quote for you:

"So it caused a lot of concern inside there, and we were told don't worry about it - it's unconstitutional, it abrogates every human right that there is, but there's a crisis, so let's go for it. It was very popular."

Do you understand the gravity of such an action. To abrogate EVERY HUMAN RIGHT THAT THERE IS!! Do you understand that when you harp on about upward mobility it sounds foolish when measured against the weight of such legislative action. Simply put, your feelings about the PNP are wrong! You were lied to, fooled and the stated objectives of the PNP were fraud.

I quote again to evidence this point:

"We were told things like we would have programmes for the youth and I could relate a number of other things which I won't go into because the time doesn't allow - but that there would be balance. It is not that we did not know that it was not right. That was known.

"We were told things like......." in other words we were appeased with various worthless lies, because they knew it was wrong, but sought to fool the weak minded with lies.

And all this was done to preserve the status quo. The most brutish piece of legislation in Jamaica's history, since legislation was enacted to legalize slavery, was rushed through the parliament to preserve the status and well being of the privileged few.

I quote again:

"But the thing started rising when two middle-class people got shot........the government responded, and now I want to make it very clear what I'm speaking about. The State responded, led by the government, with two legislations - The Gun Court Act and the Suppression of Crime Act."

As to your inaccurate supposition that the JLP was responsible for garrison politics, even if it were true (which it is not!), here is what D.K., a member of your government integrally involved in the framing of policies at the time had to say about it:

"It's one thing, for little groups out there - civil society groups, political groups - to be fighting one another, which is not good. But when the State institutionalizes repression and terrorism, it's another thing." In other words, it is worse, far worse. That pours cold water on your claim that, how did you put it, "The greatest threat to our country was the introduction of the GARRISON and its GUN CRIMES!" So put that in YOUR pipe and smoke it!

You are mouthing unverifiable myths and passing them off as fact when a Minister in the government of the day tells you from a public podium that the state "institutionalized repression and terrorism". That is not a myth or a feeling, that is a minister of government telling you verifiable government policy. And those terrible policies and brutish callous laws I believe were more inimical to the pride and spirit of the people of this nation since the laws that obtained during slavery.

[Muadib]

What does it tell you about the situation that had to be confronted?

What does it tell you about the people's position on whether or not they were in agreement with the actions taken?

Did gun crimes not go on the decline in the immediate aftermath of the actions taken?

Ask and the vast majority, save and except a few JLP adherents who with their particular agenda would have loved the unabated barking of the guns, as you quoted DK as saying, endorsed the actions taken.

Is our system of government one where the will of the majority prevails? Is that system of government one we hold dear...and, one we desire to continue?

Perhaps, Maudib and his JLP friends would like to take us down another path?

Smoke this in your pipe - The greatest threat to our country was the introduction of the GARRISON and its GUN CRIMES! That was introduced by the JLP! ...some things once introduced take on a life of its own. It is easy to 'start'/introduce...but terrible hard to remove!

It is a fact the JLP introduced the GARRISON and its GUN WAVE...the JLP ruled this country after that introduction - There has been no elimination of the GARRISON and or its GUN WAVE...rather the JLP's GARRISON POLITICS has been aped by the PNP and more GARRISONS are the order of the day. The evil of the GARRISON once introduced is proving extremely difficult to 'wipe-out'.

The time is long past when all GARRISONS should have been eliminated. Action against that terrible 'institution of the garrison' must be taken NOW! That mother of repression and terror, the JLP introduced GARRISON, ALL GARRISONS MUST GO!

Tek yuh head out of the PNP rear and do some reading.. here is a freebie:

"There are several studies that provide irrefutable evidence that a suppressed and disadvantaged people usually exhibit antisocial and reckless behaviour as a result of decades of built-up anger, hate, hopelessness and depravity. According to the highly respected Harvard Professor, Dr. Julius Wilson (1996), “high levels of serious crime is strongly associated with the high proportion of the population that does not (or is unable to) participate meaningfully in the society, and which consequently shares a disproportionately tiny fraction of the nation's wealth”. He further asserts that mass social and economic disfranchisement is the major source of much serious crime - from formation of warring urban gangs, to acts of wanton violence.” Miserable social and economic conditions make for miserable family life and, consequently, for neglectful parenting, which is the closest link to crime and delinquency in a sequence of other factors. These are the daily realities of garrison constituencies in Jamaica.

Since the PNP wont give away its advantage, albeit an unfair and counter-productive one, and the JLP will be devoid of viable options outside of state power, a meaningful change in the garrison phenomena may be with us for a while longer. However, the obvious questions should be: What will the JLP do to guarantee a fair playing field for future elections? How will they eliminate this disadvantage and ensure fair play? Will the JLP deliberately perpetuate the further “garrison-ization” of constituencies with a view to at least match the PNP’s six? Or will the party, with the support of the rest of the society, pressure the Electoral Advisory Committee (EAC) and the government to dismantle the current garrison constituencies on both sides? Will the JLP agitate for constitutional changes to reduce the cap on the number of electorates per constituency with a view to increase the number of constituencies? And importantly, how will the party induce and mobilize the uncommitted voters to support the JLP and hence nullify the impact of the garrison deficit that could provide enough swing to oust the PNP government?

From the foregoing, it seems quite clear that the JLP has a major challenge on its hands, the solution of which, though necessary, may lead to further internal party disruptions surrounding the method(s) of choice to address the garrison issue. The issue at stake here is quite huge; after all, it is about state power – the ultimate goal of most well intention political parties. This issue must therefore be publicly debated among the electorate, the Electoral Advisory Committee – who must play a critical role, and both political parties to find a workable solution to this garrison demon. The exorcise of which could give the JLP an opportunity to compete fairly for state leadership and therefore restore credibility to our manipulated electoral process."

This part is important:

SINCE THE PNP WONT GIVE AWAY ITS ADVANTAGE...

You see Karl we have to live in the world of REASON.. not your world of Fantasy..

D.K. words are quite applicable here for someone like you:

"So if you can't know by intelligence, by theory, you should know by practice"

D.K. is saying your lack of intelligence cannot be an excuse since you should know by PRACTISE that the PNP will not give away its advantage, it will have to be TAKEN away.

Yuh cyaan escape judgement and claim ignorance.. bout yuh haffi HOPE and PRAY bout Portia...

If yuh want to see a serious effort to dismantle garrisons, your worst nightmare will have to come true.. suh it guh sometimes...

[Muadib]

What does it tell you about the situation that had to be confronted?

What does it tell you about the people's position on whether or not they were in agreement with the actions taken?

Did gun crimes not go on the decline in the immediate aftermath of the actions taken?

Ask and the vast majority, save and except a few JLP adherents who with their particular agenda would have loved the unabated barking of the guns, as you quoted DK as saying, endorsed the actions taken.

Is our system of government one where the will of the majority prevails? Is that system of government one we hold dear...and, one we desire to continue?

Perhaps, Maudib and his JLP friends would like to take us down another path?

Smoke this in your pipe - The greatest threat to our country was the introduction of the GARRISON and its GUN CRIMES! That was introduced by the JLP! ...some things once introduced take on a life of its own. It is easy to 'start'/introduce...but terrible hard to remove!

It is a fact the JLP introduced the GARRISON and its GUN WAVE...the JLP ruled this country after that introduction - There has been no elimination of the GARRISON and or its GUN WAVE...rather the JLP's GARRISON POLITICS has been aped by the PNP and more GARRISONS are the order of the day. The evil of the GARRISON once introduced is proving extremely difficult to 'wipe-out'.

The time is long past when all GARRISONS should have been eliminated. Action against that terrible 'institution of the garrison' must be taken NOW! That mother of repression and terror, the JLP introduced GARRISON, ALL GARRISONS MUST GO!

Why would the PNP seek to reduce its power base ? They are rabbidly seeking a 5th Term.. that sounds like a power hungry entity to me.. yuh not mekking sense Karl.. another Fantasy of yours..

I almost feel sorry for you.

[Karl]

The following is a quote attributable to D. K. Duncan

"What is taking place in Jamaica today reminds me, not all of it, but to a great extent of what took place in 1974. In 1974, two very important citizens of our country were killed within a two-week period, a gentleman by the name of Mr. Leo Henry, and a gentleman by the name of Mr. Paul Fitz-Ritson. Incidents of criminal violence had begun to increase by 1973/74. The government had attempted to put in place an amnesty prior to that. They had put in place a situation where first offenders for having a spliff were let out of jail on parole, in an attempt, as from where I sat, to diminish some of the anger and frustration in the society.

But the thing started rising when two middle-class people got shot - I have every sympathy for every middle class person in the world, we are middle class, you know what I mean, and I'm proud of that and I now want to move up from the middle. I was down in the other and my mother and father said get some education and move out of where you were. My job was not to stay there, it was to move to where I am."

But the government responded, and now I want to make it very clear what I'm speaking about. The State responded, led by the government, with two legislations - The Gun Court Act and the Suppression of Crime Act. Now, it caused great concern within the People's National Party. There are a lot of lawyers in there, and I myself coming from the Civil Rights wing of the nation, through the Human Rights Council at the time, with people like Dennis Daley and those people; coming from the Black Power Movement where yuh mix up with "dutty neyga", forgive me. So you note some of the tribulations, like some Members of Parliament who have to do that because they are their constituents.

So it caused a lot of concern inside there, and we were told don't worry about it - it's unconstitutional, it abrogates every human right that there is, but there's a crisis, so let's go for it. It was very popular. There's a Stone Poll which showed 80 per cent, 70 per cent, 60 per cent across the country, because we who sit here in this room love short-term solutions. 'Lick off dem head!' When I say we, I don't mean everyone of us, I mean we as a group. When you go out there and people sey, "Bwoy, why unno challenging Reneto? The man is doing a good job. We have to just clean it out!"

I'm going over this little part of the history not to denigrate anybody, not the PNP, not Michael Manley, not anybody, but to recall aspects of our history which put us into part of the rut that we are in. It's one thing, for little groups out there - civil society groups, political groups - to be fighting one another, which is not good. But when the State institutionalizes repression and terrorism, it's another thing.

For whatever reason, because I'm willing to say to you now that at that time, and I still believe, at that time that all of us had pure hearts and wanted the best for the country - we would have liked to see the violence stop immediately. We were told things like we would have programmes for the youth and I could relate a number of other things which I won't go into because the time doesn't allow - but that there would be balance. It is not that we did not know that it was not right. That was known.

Let me read from page 137 of Michael Manley's 'Struggle in the Periphery':

"In 1974, we had introduced controversial legislation in which we made the illegal possession of a firearm a crime punishable by mandatory life sentence. We had even stopped bird shooting and asked the sportsmen to hand in their guns for safekeeping in the military armoury. Under the Gun Court Law, as it was called, we had made special arrangements to provide for the quick trial of those charged with offenses involving guns. Acting upon the advice of the team which included a sociologist and a psychiatrist, we had tried shock therapy in the hope that this would buy time for the society - buy time for the society - (Dr. Duncan emphasizes) and give us an opportunity to gain control over the situation through improved methods of detection - substitute 'intelligence' - (Dr. Duncan adds) and police activity generally. But as 1977 proceeded, in its anxious and tense way, crime was on the rise again and public concern increased with it."

I'm quoting it to let you know that these things were not done accidentally. So you knew that there was a risk. The point I'm trying to make here is that, all of those people who are now in the leadership of this country, were there then. So if you can't know by intelligence, by theory, you should know by practice."


I repeat for numskull Karl, try to fit it into your pea sized brain:

"It's one thing, for little groups out there - civil society groups, political groups - to be fighting one another, which is not good. But when the State institutionalizes repression and terrorism, it's another thing."

KARL YOU IMPOSSIBLY SILLY SPECIMEN, your sociopathic hero was DIRECTLY responsible for the greatest injustice ever meted out to the black man in Jamaica since slavery and you continue to posit phantom notions of upward mobility.


I repeat for dimwit Karl:

"THE POINT I AM TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE THERE NOW IN THE LEADERSHIP OF THIS COUNTRY WERE THERE THEN.
SO IF YOU CAN"T KNOW BY INTELLIGENCE, BY THEORY, YOU SHOULD KNOW BY PRACTICE."

KARL EVEN D.K. IS CALLING YOU UNINTELLIGENT.

who has ears to hear, let him hear.

What does it tell you about the situation that had to be confronted?

What does it tell you about the people's position on whether or not they were in agreement with the actions taken?

Did gun crimes not go on the decline in the immediate aftermath of the actions taken?

Ask and the vast majority, save and except a few JLP adherents who with their particular agenda would have loved the unabated barking of the guns, as you quoted DK as saying, endorsed the actions taken.

Is our system of government one where the will of the majority prevails? Is that system of government one we hold dear...and, one we desire to continue?

Perhaps, Maudib and his JLP friends would like to take us down another path?

Smoke this in your pipe - The greatest threat to our country was the introduction of the GARRISON and its GUN CRIMES! That was introduced by the JLP! ...some things once introduced take on a life of its own. It is easy to 'start'/introduce...but terrible hard to remove!

It is a fact the JLP introduced the GARRISON and its GUN WAVE...the JLP ruled this country after that introduction - There has been no elimination of the GARRISON and or its GUN WAVE...rather the JLP's GARRISON POLITICS has been aped by the PNP and more GARRISONS are the order of the day. The evil of the GARRISON once introduced is proving extremely difficult to 'wipe-out'.

The time is long past when all GARRISONS should have been eliminated. Action against that terrible 'institution of the garrison' must be taken NOW! That mother of repression and terror, the JLP introduced GARRISON, ALL GARRISONS MUST GO!

[Bricktop]

Wah yuh seh BJ a do to yuh tongue?

[Comment]

The following is a quote attributable to D. K. Duncan

"What is taking place in Jamaica today reminds me, not all of it, but to a great extent of what took place in 1974. In 1974, two very important citizens of our country were killed within a two-week period, a gentleman by the name of Mr. Leo Henry, and a gentleman by the name of Mr. Paul Fitz-Ritson. Incidents of criminal violence had begun to increase by 1973/74. The government had attempted to put in place an amnesty prior to that. They had put in place a situation where first offenders for having a spliff were let out of jail on parole, in an attempt, as from where I sat, to diminish some of the anger and frustration in the society.

But the thing started rising when two middle-class people got shot - I have every sympathy for every middle class person in the world, we are middle class, you know what I mean, and I'm proud of that and I now want to move up from the middle. I was down in the other and my mother and father said get some education and move out of where you were. My job was not to stay there, it was to move to where I am."

But the government responded, and now I want to make it very clear what I'm speaking about. The State responded, led by the government, with two legislations - The Gun Court Act and the Suppression of Crime Act. Now, it caused great concern within the People's National Party. There are a lot of lawyers in there, and I myself coming from the Civil Rights wing of the nation, through the Human Rights Council at the time, with people like Dennis Daley and those people; coming from the Black Power Movement where yuh mix up with "dutty neyga", forgive me. So you note some of the tribulations, like some Members of Parliament who have to do that because they are their constituents.

So it caused a lot of concern inside there, and we were told don't worry about it - it's unconstitutional, it abrogates every human right that there is, but there's a crisis, so let's go for it. It was very popular. There's a Stone Poll which showed 80 per cent, 70 per cent, 60 per cent across the country, because we who sit here in this room love short-term solutions. 'Lick off dem head!' When I say we, I don't mean everyone of us, I mean we as a group. When you go out there and people sey, "Bwoy, why unno challenging Reneto? The man is doing a good job. We have to just clean it out!"

I'm going over this little part of the history not to denigrate anybody, not the PNP, not Michael Manley, not anybody, but to recall aspects of our history which put us into part of the rut that we are in. It's one thing, for little groups out there - civil society groups, political groups - to be fighting one another, which is not good. But when the State institutionalizes repression and terrorism, it's another thing.

For whatever reason, because I'm willing to say to you now that at that time, and I still believe, at that time that all of us had pure hearts and wanted the best for the country - we would have liked to see the violence stop immediately. We were told things like we would have programmes for the youth and I could relate a number of other things which I won't go into because the time doesn't allow - but that there would be balance. It is not that we did not know that it was not right. That was known.

Let me read from page 137 of Michael Manley's 'Struggle in the Periphery':

"In 1974, we had introduced controversial legislation in which we made the illegal possession of a firearm a crime punishable by mandatory life sentence. We had even stopped bird shooting and asked the sportsmen to hand in their guns for safekeeping in the military armoury. Under the Gun Court Law, as it was called, we had made special arrangements to provide for the quick trial of those charged with offenses involving guns. Acting upon the advice of the team which included a sociologist and a psychiatrist, we had tried shock therapy in the hope that this would buy time for the society - buy time for the society - (Dr. Duncan emphasizes) and give us an opportunity to gain control over the situation through improved methods of detection - substitute 'intelligence' - (Dr. Duncan adds) and police activity generally. But as 1977 proceeded, in its anxious and tense way, crime was on the rise again and public concern increased with it."

I'm quoting it to let you know that these things were not done accidentally. So you knew that there was a risk. The point I'm trying to make here is that, all of those people who are now in the leadership of this country, were there then. So if you can't know by intelligence, by theory, you should know by practice."


I repeat for numskull Karl, try to fit it into your pea sized brain:

"It's one thing, for little groups out there - civil society groups, political groups - to be fighting one another, which is not good. But when the State institutionalizes repression and terrorism, it's another thing."

KARL YOU IMPOSSIBLY SILLY SPECIMEN, your sociopathic hero was DIRECTLY responsible for the greatest injustice ever meted out to the black man in Jamaica since slavery and you continue to posit phantom notions of upward mobility.


I repeat for dimwit Karl:

"THE POINT I AM TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE THERE NOW IN THE LEADERSHIP OF THIS COUNTRY WERE THERE THEN.
SO IF YOU CAN"T KNOW BY INTELLIGENCE, BY THEORY, YOU SHOULD KNOW BY PRACTICE."

KARL EVEN D.K. IS CALLING YOU UNINTELLIGENT.

who has ears to hear, let him hear.