I am not exactly why some people feel the need to refer to “woke” black people who have come to the realization that we are the true Israelites, God’s chosen people.
There is a serious conversation to be had about the false sense of security and brainwashing Jamaicans are lulled into. An anti-police mindset which creates the perception that an agency that was created to harass the police is in their best interest.
Just today threats were made by gangs that people in the once quiet town of Mandeville will be slaughtered one each day if a gangster arrested by the police is not released forthwith.
When the fake layers of peace and contentment are peeled away Jamaica has a very serious problem with criminals and it is not getting better.
When a case which is brought by the police gets dismissed by the courts for want of prosecution it is not the same as a case in which a police officer was charged for a crime and walked free because the prosecution cannot substantiate the case it brought.
The Jamaica Constabulary Force is tasked with investigating crimes which involve 2.8 million Jamaicans and every single foreigner who ever set foot not just on Jamaican soil but may have committed a crime against our country 12 miles away from our country’s shores.
As an oversight agency INDECOM is tasked with investigating a security apparatus of approximately 12,000 people not counting the Corrections Department.
Most allegations against the security forces were, and still, are forced by gang leaders, or as they were called (area leaders). Common lowlife scumbags, sanitized, packaged and sold to the Jamaican people by what passes for a media.
Fake mourners became the norm, wailing away at the supposed killings of their choirboy friends whom they watched getting murdered by the police as he slept in his bed at 3 in the morning.[sic]
Innocent community leaders, or as one anti-police agitator Horace Levy labeled them, (corner crews) not dangerous gangsters.
That is not to say that the breakdown in the nation’s social order and the neglect of the police over a period of several decades hasn’t resulted in many people who should never be police officers becoming police officers.
As a consequence, the poor quality of those candidates naturally ended up in outcomes which are antithetical to a good police department and the good of the country overall.
On the 7th of this month Detective Corporal Kevin Adams, Constable Carl Bucknor, and District Constable Howard Brown had their 8-year nightmare come to a spectacular end when Queen’s Counsel Caroline Hay told the court, the prosecution would be unable to negate the defense’s position of self-defense.
The three police officers were charged with the murder of Andrew Bisson in a police operation on September 5, 2011.
The Investigations were undertaken and conducted by INDECOM.
During the trial the judge, Chief Justice Byran Sykes spoke to the grave reservations he had about the case against the officers.
Justice Sykes observed (1) [ that it seemed that the accused officers were being targeted by the Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM)].
(2) Chief Justice Bryan Sykes, the trial judge expressed concern about whether the accused policemen were afforded an objective and fair investigation?
On Tuesday, January 22nd, 2019 Sergeant David Hutchinson and Constable Kenneth Daley were before the very same Judge Bryan Sykes. The two were charged with murder in a July 2013 incident following an investigation by INDECOM into the fatal shooting of a teenager, Derrick Bolton, and another man.
Like the case on January 7th, prosecutors told the court that they could not proceed against the accused as they could not produce the prosecution witnesses.
The officers were charged after 8 people were fatally shot in an area of Saint Catherine and the police responded and confronted the two, who were reportedly members of the notorious Klansman gang.
The common investigative thread in these two most recent cases in which officers who have been charged with murder and have spent years awaiting trial, in some cases while locked away like common criminals is INDECOM.
In response to charges by police officers that INDECOM was charge -happy and was charging officers then doing investigations, Terrence Williams the head of the agency in 2016 sought to debunk claims he and his agency were abusing the powers given to the agency.
He argued that the commission’s operations
“The INDECOM Act operates in a way that before anybody can be charged, it must come through the director of complaints and then be seen by me.
“The design of the INDECOM Act is to ensure that all investigations are supervised by somebody with senior legal qualification and experience. So the complaint that is being made is completely off the mark, based on systems. Further, it is not our practice to charge persons before the case is completed, Williams told the Gleaner at the time.
So much for adhering to the dictates of the law!
In 2016 Terrence Williams told the same newspaper that
“of the six cases that have been completed, meaning cases placed before the courts since the creation of the agency in 2008, only one person was acquitted, and there is one where the DPP felt the case should not go on. We have five cases where there have been convictions, including one case with eight people.”
Only that there was no truth to Terrence Williams’ statements.
In Manchester, INDECOM charged a police officer with using his helmet to hit a man.
Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) Jason Anderson, who is assigned to the Major Organised Crime and Anti-Corruption Agency (MOCA), has been charged with discharging a firearm within 40 yards of a public road, contrary to Section 23 of the Firearms Act and assault at common law. Charged by INDECOM.
There are other cases that have also resulted in dismissals all of which are cases brought against the police by INDECOM.
The average Jamaican has been raised, schooled and indoctrinated into hating law enforcement. Even some who have worked as police officers because they may have been unable to get jobs in the private economy has been known to be vehemently against the very discipline which puts food on their table.
The question of having cops opposed to the rule of law is certainly more pervasive now than it was before.
With so many people entering the department from the left-leaning University of the West Indies the problem is now a serious threat to the nation’s security.
Enemies of policing now doing policing.
It cannot be overemphasized that neither of the two major political parties wants a competent police department which is capable of doing the type of investigative work which would have ended in the arrest of politicians involved in the Petrojam scam, Outameani, the Iran sugar deal, the Cuban lightbulb scandal, and the host of other thefts in which billions of dollars simply disappeared.
That is why INDECOM serves the interest of both political parties.
That is the reason they do not care that Deputy Commissioner of INDECOM British transplant Hamish Campbell was alleged to have planted evidence on an innocent black man while he worked in his home country.
No matter how much you adore INDECOM and hate the police, it is pretty difficult to ignore the observations of the nations most senior jurist.
(1)That it seemed that the accused officers were being targeted by the Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM)].
(2) Concerned about whether the accused policemen were afforded an objective and fair investigation.
What is absent from this whole conversation is a fair and just appreciation for the fact that these case are being approached and prosecuted in a manner which is injurious to police officers and worse is dangerous to the nation’s security.
Furthermore, the duplicitous silence by what passes for an organized media, or worse the failure to put two and two together and report to the people the danger they are in by allowing for the continuation of INDECOM.
Because the status quo serves the interest of both political parties voices like mine will go unheeded.
Nevertheless, as the country bounces from one dangerous situation to another and as the gangs consolidate their power, the people like sheep, are led to believe that the number one problem they face is threats to their human rights.
In the meantime, Superintendent Wayne Cameron and his officers are on high alert in Manchester, despite the forces arrayed against them this officer and his men and women are determined and vigilantly out there protecting the lives of the citizens with their own lives.
Undeterred by threats from gangsters who would turn our beautiful Island into a Sub-Saharan wasteland, spilling innocent blood if their demands are not met.
LIKE AND SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Judge strikes down Scott Walker’s vote-suppression measure, but Republicans will fight on — at taxpayer expense
A federal judge ruled last week that Wisconsin Republicans violated a federal court order by approving restrictions on early voting and other election issues during a lame duck session before the new Democratic governor was sworn in.
U.S. District Judge James Peterson blocked a law signed by outgoing Republican Gov. Scott Walker that limited early voting to two weeks before the election and restricted in-person absentee voting and the forms of ID that can be used to vote.
Peterson wrote that the legislation violated a 2016 court order that blocked the state from making similar changes.“This is not a close question,” Peterson wrote. “The three challenged provisions are clearly inconsistent with the injunctions that the court has issued in this case.”In that case, Peterson ruled that the state’s voter ID and limits on in-person absentee voting were unconstitutional, the Wisconsin State Journal reported. The case was appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals which is yet to rule on the matter
“If the court accepted defendants’ argument, it would mean that a legislative body could evade an injunction simply by reenacting an identical law and giving it a new number,” he wrote.
The election restrictions were part of a larger set of bills passed by Wisconsin Republicans during last year’s lame duck session that
Evers said after the ruling that he as “glad to see that a federal [court] again struck down the GOP’s unconstitutional attacks on our right to vote.”
A second lawsuit filed by progressive groups, including the League of Women Voters, Disability Rights Wisconsin and Black Leaders Organizing for Communities, that was filed in the same court is seeking to have all the new laws passed by Republicans during the lame-duck session voided, arguing that the session was illegal. A judge is yet to rule on the case but experts told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Read more here:https://www.salon.com/2019/01/22/judge-blocks-wisconsin-gops-lame-duck-voter-suppression-not-a-close-question/
I got to thinking recently and I arrived at a couple of conclusions (1) The gangs doing the killings are still operating with impunity. (2) The number of gangs seems to be on the increase. And (3) just how easy it was for the people to be influenced that good no-nonsense policing attitude toward dangerous criminals was bad for them and the country. And so I want to have a little talk with you my readers, rather than just talk at you.
HOW DID WE GET HERE?
It is important to remember where we are coming from and where we are so that we may make informed decisions which will impact where we are going in the way we want to.
Because as the cliche goes, “if you don’t know where you are going you are already there”.
Now it is important to remember that Jamaica has always been a high crime country.
This is so because of the way political interference by the two political parties (a) cerated garrison communities, rendering them no go for law enforcement and havens for murderers and other criminals. (b)Lack of resources for law enforcement and lack of proper training also played a role. (c) The revolving door for criminals created by the courts resulted in apathy and in some cases criminal complicity by law enforcement.
I will attempt to show you the trajectory of murders over the years in order to demonstrate how certain factors both internally and externally have helped to shape the trajectory of the most serious crimes in our country.
Jamaica recorded the following number of homicides over the following years.
|Year||# of Murders|
In the year 2017, 1,616 murders were reported to the authorities. And 2018 resulted in around 1455 homicides, give or take a couple either way.
Now, though these homicide numbers are stark, I believe they are fundamentally flawed, because they only represent killings in which victims of gunshot wounds, stabbings, and other violent assaults die immediately.
Not all victims of violent attacks die immediately and so there may be another 10, 20, or even 30% more deaths which can reasonably be attached to those annual homicide numbers.
At the risk of making myself part of the narrative which is absolutely not my intent, I wish to point out that between the start of the statistics above and when I left the force in 1991 murders were far too many but not overly astronomical.
When we juxtapose the numbers which existed between 1982 when I joined the department (405) and 1989 (439) and the facts I laid out about political interference and lack of resources hamstringing the police you will also notice that homicides remained generally steady.
We may go back and look at the years 1980 to 1981, and we will notice that those years represented the election year 1980 and 1981 the year a new administration took office and so those numbers were anomalies as far as the homicide numbers went.
Older Jamaicans will recall the 1980 elections in which an estimated 899 Jamaicans lost their lives, largely as a result of political violence and 1981 although the numbers had dropped precipitously to 490, those 1981 numbers still represented a high, for a good seven (7) year period and never again reached or exceeded  until 1990 when the numbers jumped drastically considering the previous seven-year stability to 543 homicides.
By 1991 the year I exited the force all bets were off homicides had moved up to 561.
Gone were the good old days in which murderers knew that it was not their streets.
So what happened you ask, why is it that between the time you served and the time you left murders got out of control Mike?
Was it you keeping all those shottas under control?
I wish I could take credit for it (smile) but we have to seriously look at what happened in our country which caused basically (8) eight years of stable homicide numbers?
THE SEAGA ADMINISTRATION
I generally get killed(no not literally) laugh, for daring to write about politics or the way I see it through my own eyes growing up and living thirty (30) years of my life in my country.
Many people are offended they say talk only about law enforcement.
I generally laugh at that because right here in this article we see just how politics impacts every other area of our lives.
Edward Phillip George Seaga won the 1980 general elections on a platform of conservatism.
It was easy for Seaga’s message to resonate against the Manley message of self-sufficiency and national pride.
Any message that was opposite to Manley’s would have resonated, people were hungry, store shelves were empty, crime and violence were everywhere.
Seaga’s victory was a devastating blow to Michael Manley and the (PNP), his Conservative Jamaica Labor Party won 51 of the then 60 seats in the parliament. Many laborites suspected Manley lost his seat but was allowed to keep it.
No evidence of that ever surfaced but the whispering continued for years.
Many Jamaicans who grew up during my time which is the 70’s and really came of age in the ’80s will quickly argue that all politicians in Jamaica are corrupt, dishonest, monsters.
I have no facts to counter those assertions but I will say that even if not totally true, whatever Jamaicans say does have some truth in there somewhere.
Edward Seaga created the satellite community of Tivoli Gardens. Those who know a little about Jamaica’s history will recall that Tivoli Gardens rose out of the God forgotten slums previously known as (Back-o-wall).
Tivoli Gardens was a modern apartment complex with amenities like a park, community center, a state of the art clinic etc.
[Full disclosure], my first child was born at that clinic because it was rumored to be the very best in the Island at the time.
Seaga was mightily proud of what he created in that community as he ought to be.
However, like an over-doting parent, he failed to see that the child he gave life to was turning bad.
And that was an egregious error in judgment, that baby became a monster. When a child becomes that it reflects badly on the parents.
Because of Seaga’s failure to rein in Tivoli Gardens, he will forever and for the remainder of his days be saddled with the infamy that that community came to represent.
And that is all too sad because when it came to law and order Edward Seaga never stood in the way of the police doing their jobs, save and except for his delinquent baby Tivoli Gardens.
The data demonstrates that it was under Edward Seaga’s tenure that homicides leveled off and remained constant.
Edward Seaga demitted office in (1988) and Michael Manley was back at the helm of our government.
By 1990, just one year into Manley’s tenure, homicides jumped from (439) into the new territory of (543.
Homicides continued at a merry clip under Michael Manley and continued so after he ceded power to his inept deputy Percival Patterson.
By (2002) still with the PNP in power, homicides had reached (1045).
In just over twelve(12) years under PNP leadership, homicides in Jamaica had increased by (238.041%).
We can argue along the margins politically, what we cannot deny is the data.
A NEW NARRATIVE
In 2007 Orett Bruce Golding a former minister of construction under Seaga who had left the JLP and helped to form the then third party the National Democratic Movement or (NDM) had returned to the JLP and was able to eke out a slim majority for the JLP.
The JLP victory seemed at the time to be voter malaise and exhaustion from the PNP’s 141/2 unbroken years in office and the backward direction of the country.
By (2011) Golding was forced to resign from entanglements with the Christopher Coke matter.
Andrew Holness took over the leadership of the party and the Government and soon sought his own mandate against the Portia Simpson Miller-led (PNP).
Holness was defeated at the polls on the 5th of January 2012 and Miller served as the Prime Minister until fresh elections were called on the 3rd of March 2016.
Andrew Holness’ party won the elections, albeit by a razor-thin one seat majority which was later strengthened by two by/elections in which the ruling (JLP) prevailed.
The moral of the story surrounding the period which included Simpson Miller, Bruce Golding and Andrew Holness is simply this.
Both political parties are responsible for the events as they occurred in that time period and so we are left to analyze what event or series of events caused both parties to become complicit or incompetent, or both, in dealing with violent crimes.
If I pretended that the Jamaican police have not engaged in atrocious behavior I would be lying.
If I pretended that politicians, judges, lawyers, prosecutors, and parsons and people in every discipline haven’s as well I would be lying.
And if I pretended that people in literally every discipline, in every nation across the globe haven’t done the same thing….again I would be lying.
The reality of the foregone is that people, regardless of their jobs are only people who are prone to excesses and abusing their powers.
When that happens the societies in which they operate must take steps to remedy those transgressions and put in place safeguards to guard against recurrence.
So if you have bad Pastors you do not tear down the church.
With the multiple reports about Priest sexually assaulting little boys the powers that be hasn’t gotten rid of the Catholic Church, they are working to fix it.
When our police make mistakes we fix the problems and we support our police, we should not tear them down.
Unfortunately, that is not what we do in Jamaica, we tear down our police and that provides a wide opening to those who would benefit from the breakdown in the rule of law.
As ridiculous as the lack of support for the police is, the single greatest issue in my estimation is the influence the so-called human rights lobby has been able to wield in our country.
The faithful observance of and fidelity to human rights are fundamental templates of any democratic society.
Nevertheless, human rights and national security are two fundamentally different issues, neither of which are dispensable or mutually exclusive in a democratic society.
Given that human rights lobbies are not as visible or influential in the powerful democracies, and since there is a kind of default presumption that they are the template for good democratic societies, we tend to ignore the gross human rights transgressions which occur in these powerful nations.
Police abuse of people of color is the number one human rights issue which has affected people of color in the United States, Britain, and Canada today as it always has.
There is hardly any response or statements much less any meaningful steps taken on behalf of a single aggrieved party anywhere in any of the named powerful developed countries.
There has been zero advocacy on behalf of any killed or injured by police here in the United States to my knowledge.
SO WHY THE DEVELOPING WORLD?
The human rights lobby in the developing world in which Jamaica finds itself are generally funded by supporters or parent lobbies in the western power centers which are in turn funded by dark money.
A country which undermines its law-enforcement is a country with high crime statistics. Jamaica’s crime-fighting efforts are directed at its police officers, not at the violence producers.
Not that there cannot be an effective crime-fighting mechanism in place and vigilant police oversight simultaneously.
Why would larger countries want crime to increase in the developing world?
Larger western countries are lenders to poorer developing countries. They destabilize those nations because they need to keep them borrowing.
A country inundated with crime has next to zero chance of climbing its way out of poverty.
Jamaica has made many tactical mistakes, not the least of which has been allowing the international human rights lobbies to worm their influence into the body politic of the country.
It’s a veritable disaster at this point as literally every bit of legislation which is supposed to benefit the Jamaican people has to pass muster with human rights lobbies which take orders from either the United States, Canada, or Great Britain.
Why would either of these nations care about human-rights?
They understand full well that the question of human rights is something the general population will sign onto. What poor citizenry will not be enamored with the idea of a group of people who are protecting them from the power of the state?
Jamaica has long flirted with wannabe police watchdogs the likes of Flo O’Connor and others, but the country completely sold out to Carolyn Gomes and Jamaicans for Justice(JFJ).
If the safety and security of Jamaicans were attended to with the same diligence and fervor as the influence the criminal enhancement lobbies have had on the decision making of our country we would have a very good country.
THE END GAME
Ultimately, what will happen is that the state will completely lose control. We are not far from that point, we had a glimpse of that in 2010.
In Guatemala, Mexico, Colombia, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Brazil. and Venezuela, right here in our hemisphere we have seen the effects of their government’s complicity and cowardice in confronting the dangers posed by gangs which later metastasized into murderous drug cartels.
Unless the Jamaican people come out from the fog cast by the crime enhancement lobby Jamaica will see people leaving on old rickety rafts and old canoes trying to find safe harbor.
It can still be stopped but time is running out.
The body of 29-year-old Nordia Markland was found hanging from a beam at her
The family of the deceased are traumatized by the fact that a video showing miss Markland’s body dangling from the beam has been doing the rounds on social media.
They are also upset that people who have seen the video has characterized her as wicked and has created their own narrative as to the reason she allegedly took her own life.
Distraught relatives say miss Markland was depressed after the death of her father, she had to bury a cousin shortly after.
We have the video but have opted not to post it out of deference and respect to her and her family.
Mental illness and depression are real issues which affect untold numbers of people, many of whom suffer in silence.
The grief and deep depression which would cause someone to see no way out forcing them to ultimately take their own life cannot be reduced to someone’s opinion of the deceased.
It must be understood against the precious nature of life and the sheer hopelessness which the victim must have felt which caused him/her to end that one precious life.
There is something about some of us Jamaicans, not all I have to admit. But there is a kind of fire which burns in our bellies. A fire which would cause us rather die on our feet than
Maybe it is that west African Coromantee, blood which flows through our veins, that which heats up when we hear about incidents like the following.
Incidents which in most cases draws not even a bit of care much less anger from others.
Imagine someone harassing you to the point that you are forced to quit your job? Imagine that you have never bothered that person/s?
You see, it is hard for me to fathom because I was always of the opinion that no one, no man or woman, have a greater right to be on this planet than I do.
On that basis, I will not tread on your space but so help me God if you ever tread on my space.
After all, we all have just one life and what’s the point of living it if you cannot live it in peace?
At a press conference, Monday, Vermont’s chief law enforcement officer almost completed one of the greatest performances of whitesplaining in recent history as he announced that he wouldn’t file charges against a white nationalist who allegedly stalked, harassed and terrified one of the state’s only black lawmakers.
As Vermont Attorney General T.J. Donovan described the voluminous evidence, he pointed out that he didn’t have enough evidence. He explained how hate speech was a matter of free speech. He explained that the harassment against the black family was bad, but that it wasn’t a crime. All the while, the woman was the target of the incessant acts of hate stood beside him as he shucked and jived.
Then the racists showed up.
According to WNYT, On Monday, Vermont Attorney General T.J Donovan held a press conference at the Congregation Beth El synagogue in Bennington, Vt. to announce that, instead of filing charges, he would instead release a 10-page report on the racial harassment of former State Rep. Kiah Morris, the state’s only black woman state representative who resigned in September after allegedly being harangued by white supremacist Max Misch, who describes himself the man who “be representing dem white
Seven Days Vermont reports:
The press conference went off the rails when Bennington resident Max Misch entered the room as Morris answered a television reporter’s question about the AG’s probe. Misch had been subject to a yearlong protective order in 2016 prohibiting him from contacting Morris over a series of racist tweets, messages and online comments he aimed at her.
Misch wore a black long-sleeve shirt bearing the image of alt-right icon Pepe the Frog. Many in the room began shouting “No, no, no!” and “Out!” when he arrived.
“This is not safe,” one person shouted. “Why is this asshole allowed to come in here?” someone else in the crowd said.
“Because it’s America,” another attendee replied. “We have to listen to everyone, whether we like it or not. But we don’t have to put up with it.”
Also in attendance was Kevin Hoyt, a failed Republican candidate who has accused Morris and her husband of inciting others to paint him as a Nazi. Hoyt says he is a victim of reverse racism after his request for a stalking order of protection against Morris’ husband was rejected by a judge. The hunting expert and gun advocate has repeatedly insinuated that Morris and her husband were fabricating their claims to make Vermont look like a state that tolerates racism.
“I call bullshit on Ms. Morris!” yelled Hoyt. “As a political opponent who was accused of being a Nazi, I think we’re hearing one side of the story … I was called a Nazi, I was called a white supremacist. Obviously, racism exists in Vermont … I question to what degree, though.”
After winning a House seat in the state legislature, Morris gave up her re-election bid before resigning in September, citing her husband’s open-heart surgery combined with Hoyt and Misch’s continued online campaign of harassment. Citing tweets that told her to “Go back to Africa, it’s the only place you’ll ever be safe,” The Attorney general’s report listed forty-eight separate racial incidents where Morris had been threatened and attacked, including:
- A message to Morris’ husband informing him that he should put his wife “in her place,” or the messenger would do it for him;
- A tweet that read: “You will never silence me. Every time you attend a political rally at the Four Corners or another local venue and I’m aware of the event, I will troll the hell out of you and the other subversives there. Maybe I’ll bring a friend or three with me too;”
- Someone paintballing Morris’ car and spray painting a swastika on a tree near Morris’ home;
- Another tweet said, “Stop pushing ‘social justice’ on your nearly entirely White constituency in Bennington, VT. Go back to Chicago if you want to engage in SJW [Social Justice Warrior] bullshit. We will continue to fight against your efforts to make our town/state look more like your mongrel son;”
- Multiple reports to police of strange men and suspicious vehicles in the cemetery behind Morris’ home;
- A break-in at the Morris home where Morris’ husband’s neckties were stolen and found in the cemetery (Police did not fingerprint or swab the crime scene);
- Morris’ child care provider reporting a man sitting in a car outside the home filming the Morris residence;
Donovan concluded that there was not enough evidence to charge Misch with any crimes, noting that there was a lack of evidence. “No Vermont court has specifically considered whether communications like those sent to Ms. Morris could be construed as ‘true threats,’” Donovan’s findings read, adding:
In this case, the online communications that were sent to Ms. Morris by Max Misch and others were clearly racist and extremely offensive However, the First Amendment does not make speech sanctionable merely because its content is objectionable. The question here is whether the messages, in context, were communicating a serious expression of an intent to harm Ms. Morris or her family. The fact that a number of messages were directed at her role as an elected official raises the issue of whether they were intended to express political opposition through the use of hyperbole and insult, as noted in the case law above. Therefore, there appears to be insufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges under Vermont law.
“Kiah Morris was a victim of racial harassment. Relatively few Vermonters have had any of these experiences, and very few have had these experiences in the context of vicious racial harassment,” Donovan said, according to the Washington Post. But, he added, “the Constitution does not permit us to prosecute racist speech because we find it offensive.”
Meanwhile, Morris stood in the face of her harassers and the attorney general, noting that law enforcement officers had shrugged off her claims.“For two years, we lived in my husband’s childhood home, feeling unsafe, never sleeping peacefully because we had to be vigilant,” said Morris, “We did everything we were told to do. We reported as we should, held nothing back and trusted in a system that was insufficient and inept at addressing and repairing the harm done.” So there you have it. It was just political expression and free speech, which is aptly expressed in the Vermont state motto:
Freedom and Unity.
Finding themselves in the unenviable position if the minority party in the House, Republicans now have a chance to lick their wounds over the monumental loss they suffered in the last elections. Maybe now its time for some introspection about where they went wrong.
The stalemate in which the country finds itself with no plausible end in sight to a manufactured crisis is only one of the many issues which are plaguing the GOP and hurting the country.
It has become evident that Republicans cannot be trusted with power.
When in opposition they engineer strategies which at best are reactionary and subversive.
When voted into office they demonstrate that the actions they take are not in the interest of the wider society, but are tailored toward a rather tiny sliver of the society.
That tiny sliver is usually the whitest and richest people at the top.
The inability of the Congress to get anything done was not created by the hapless Democrats. Truth is, the Democrats are too beholden, to too many different interests to stick to any policy position as a matter of principle for long and Republicans have always cashed in on that.
Traditionally Democrats generally end up folding like a cheap tent at the slightest pushback by Republicans.
Newt Gingrich was able to work with Bill Clinton, despite the reactionary nature of his so-called “contract with America” insurgency .
Democrats for their part, basically gave away the house to George W Bush after 9/11 out of fear he would label them against America.
You will recall Bush’s mantra, “either you are with us or you are against us”?
That scared the hell out of the Democrats, so they gave him more than he demanded and the Patriot Act was born.
The consequences of the Bush Presidency and the damage done to individual freedoms is incalculable.
The logjam in the Congress came about because Barack Obama a (black man) ascended to the Presidency.
Republicans at the Congressional and Gubernatorial levels decided they would do everything in their power to make sure that the policies the newly elected president ran on did not become law.
The T-Party was born, not as some generic grassroots opposition to Obama’s so-called Socialists Policies as some would have you believe. But as a consequence of a strategic well-funded campaign by uber-billionaires the likes of the Koch brothers, gambling magnate Sheldon Adelson, the Mercers, and others.
Now there is a sorta-kind Republican in the white house and of course, Congressional Republicans are more than willing to have you believe that Democrats have a responsibility and indeed a duty to engage in bipartisanship.
Of course, why not? The Democrats have always been like a filler party which takes office when people are tired of Republican betrayal and the destruction of the economy.
Republican contributions are to start some wars, decimate the economy and back goes the electorate to the Democrats. Yup, even a black Democrat, something which never happened before.
And what do you know, it worked.
Then, it’s back to anything which calls itself Republican, and the cycle continues.
The problem this time for the treasonous Republicans, is that the Democratic majority is made up of some not so old people, some not so white people, and some not so timid people.
Many of them ran on exactly not conforming to previous Democratic orthodoxy.
As an Opinion writer, I have for the last couple of years written that Democratic voters want a decisive Democratic party, not a Republican-lite Democratic party. I pointed to the rise of Vermont Socialist, Bernie Sanders as proof that Democratic voters want clear lines of demarcation between their party and the Republicans.
Like the cleansing which went on in the Republican party which removed the so-called (Republicans in name only)[RINO’s]sic, progressive Democratic voters are tired of electing Democrats who are Republican-lite.
This time they voted for Democratic candidates who are Democrats, candidates who are Black, Hispanic, Muslims, Native-Americans- Gays, Transgenders and others, and all of those groups are tired of the Democratic party taking their votes and pushing a white male agenda
So now that Paul Ryan, the fake golden boy genius, has taken his marbles and gone home leaving Kevin McCarthy to be minority leader, yes the same Kevin McCarthy who should have been the speaker before Ryan, he’s now settling into the minority spot, one of a dying breed of California Republicans.
And what do you know, unlike Mitch McConnell and his band of Putin supporters in the Senate Kevin McCarthy and his now chastened House Republicans have decided to blow some smoke up the nations rear end by throwing their racist point man Steven King overboard.
Paul Ryan pretended to care but stuck it to the average Joe while enacting the agenda of the 1%. He is now gone, a distant memory and a bad taste in the nations collective pallet.
He left without doing anything positive for the nation for which he will be remembered.
It’s not like Steve King hasn’t been a vile rancid racist scumbag all his political life, everyone knows King and many, many others in the Republican Party are not just racist but dumb nationalists.
There are so many more vile creatures like Steve King in both the Republican and Democratic parties. Some worse than others.
So I gotta ask why now, why have Republicans, at least those in the house finally decided to strip Steve King of his committee assignments?
I mean the voters in Iowa’s 4th District knew who Steve King was all along and despite the outcry against him they again sent him to Washington?
If Steve King is an ignoble racist what does it make them?
If Republicans had control of the house would they have done anything about their colleague from Iowa’s 4th district?
Absolutely not, they have now done this so that they can change the conversation. So the next time Republicans are accused of racism they can point to Steve King and say here is how we treat Racists in our party when we see it.
Now here is the thing I cannot wrap my mind around, King has always been this way, so it seems to me that lamenting in a New York Times interview as to the reason “white supremacy” and “white nationalism” have become offensive may have been the straw which broke the Camel’s back.
McCarthy said King’s remarks were “beneath the dignity of the Party of Lincoln and the United States of America” and “call into question whether he will treat all Americans equally, without regard for race and ethnicity”.”House Republicans are clear: We are all in this together, as fellow citizens equal before God and the law,” McCarthy said according to [Huffpost.com].
What baloney, this idea of a Trump wall is exactly because America is becoming a multicultural, multi-ethnic county. Steve King knew and said it, and so does all who support the Republican party.
The immigration fights are about the browning of America and so is all of the voter suppression laws and strategies Republicans have initiated.
Barack Obama mused after winning a second term that maybe the fever would break, in reference to the Republican unitary opposition to him on every issue.
That did not happen, Republicans maintained their abnormal opposition to him even as it regarded his constitutional right and responsibility to appoint a justice to the Supreme court, upon which the Senate is then required to advise and consent.
Republicans did neither!
Mitch McConnell ensured that not only would Judge Merrick Garland not get a hearing to be an associate justice, but Republicans would not even meet with him, and so they didn’t.
Through that process of blatant political obstructionism, Neil M. Gorsuch now sits in the seat which should have been Merrick Garland’s.
The Republican attempt to jettison Steve King so as to save face when accused of racism will fool no one.
The Party of Lincoln was never an anti-racist party as some would have you believe. Racism in America was never a party issue, it has always been a people issue and it still is.
The mythology about Lincoln and his party is just that, a myth and so too is the nonsense that Steve King’s racism flies in the face of the party of Lincoln.
Furthermore, this Republican party is now the party of Trump and it’s primary characteristic is Racism.
A CURSORY LOOK AT SOME OF THE CASUALTIES
At the risk of oversimplification, it seems to me that men will simply have to have what they say to women looked over by their lawyers before saying them.
Let me hasten to say that women have been on the wrong end of sexual deviancy by some men who simply do not know how to act and some who don’t care about acting right.
Even as we contemplate how to be better examples of ourselves it is important to ensure that we do not throw out the baby with the bath water.
It is nevertheless important that even with the glee of (#metoo) innocent lives are not destroyed by false accusations and fake equivalences to make up for past transgressions.
We have a real proclivity to tilting too far to the other side to compensate for past errors that we overturn the whole thing.
Over the last couple of years, many powerful men have been brought down on allegations of sexual abuse, sexual assaults, and even sexual harassment.
Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, are only a few to have been reduced to negative caricatures of their former selves.
Bill Cosby is serving a lengthy prison sentence for sexual assaults allegedly committed many years ago outside the statute of limitations.
The man who prosecuted him ran for the office solely on his desire to bring Bill Cosby down. So much for blind justice.
Now Cosby may very well be a monster who is deserving of where he finds himself but it is important to remember that the phalanx of over 50 women who made allegations about incidents of abuse spanned a wide swath of Cosby’s career, from Kristina Ruehli (1965) to Chloe Goins (2008).
Whether we are talking about allegations of improper conduct between grownups, or the sordid indefensible allegations against R Kelly the R&b artiste who is alleged to have had a decades-long affinity for sexually assaulting underage girls, or even a man making improper sexual comments to a co-worker, it is all viewed in the same light.
And therein lies the problem because what is happening now it seems, is an escalating fight and a growing chasm between the sexes, made worse daily by individual occurrences of misconduct which are processed as part of a larger conspiracy by the evil male[sic].
In the days since the lifetime docuseries “surviving R Kelly” aired in which music Journalist “Toure” appeared and condemned R Kelly for the allegations against him by a long list of teenage girls including one to which he was married, Toure is himself facing allegations of sexual harassment.
In the allegations, a woman identified only as “Dani” a makeup artist accused Touré of sexually harassing her when she worked with him on a Time Inc. show.
“He couldn’t stop asking me to do anal, how I looked naked, if I had sex over the weekend, what it would be like to fuck me …” Dani wrote in the comments. “I had to have the crew stay in the room with me while I got him ready.”
Nothing in these allegations can be condoned or supported. Simply put, men have to be better stewards of their sexual urges.
As men, we have to reassess how we respond to women and not do to them what we would not want anyone doing to our daughters, mothers, sisters, and friends.
As men, we also know that sexual harassment is hardly a male problem, but men look at sexual harassment and even sexual assaults in a purely different light.
For the most part, even when a man is a victim of unwanted sexual attention/assault, he generally wears it as a badge of honor. And so we do not have a correct representative sampling of data in which men are the victims.
Far too often we fail to process information properly. We have a predisposition to always having to compartmentalize the information to which we are exposed and place it into neat little boxes.
This type of desire to always label and tuck away information neatly in the recesses of our minds does not always lend itself to understanding the context in which things happen and the way we receive information today versus just two decades ago.
The loads of data to which we are now exposed as a result of social media and 24/7 cable news can sometimes make it seem like the sky is falling.
We get overwhelmed into thinking that everything we once held dear, has been uprooted and we are sliding into an abyss.
But is this kind of thinking really true?
I don’t think so. Fewer people are dying from wars, diseases, and crime overall, than say 50 years ago.
Many issues which were once dirty little secrets, pedophilia, sex-trafficking, sexual assaults, and sexual harassment are now out in the open.
Technology has brought everything into sharper focus and as a consequence what we may be dealing with is a little bit of information overload.
Excessive Internet and social media use can impact your mental health? While it’s a helpful tool for education, work, social interaction, and entertainment, overuse can take a toll on your health, says Saju Mathew, M.D., a primary care physician at Piedmont.
Reading too much negative news and too much computer time can increase your anxiety.
Is that causing this anxiety between the sexes?
Are the anxiety and anger justified at a time when women are appearing in larger numbers in the workforce and once covered up secrets are now out in the open?
Or is there a larger push to drive a wedge between the genders and our former way of life?
We are now being told that we should not refer to young children as girls and boys because they are too young to decide what they want to be.
Businesses are being required to provide separate ablution areas for trans people and marriage between same-sex couples is now the law of the land.
Does that play into the sense of anger around how the issues of sexual harassment and sexual assaults are viewed?
In the world of hyper-political correctness and gender equality, there are seemingly no longer any
Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the wife of newly minted California Governor Gavin Newsom has decided that in the name of gender equality she will not take on the title of “first lady” of California but instead will go with “first-partner.
“The work I do really parallels and complements Gavin’s work because it’s about awakening people’s consciousness, shifting hearts and minds, attitudes and behaviors,” Siebel Newsom said in a Los Angeles Times profile published in November.
The governor has been an advocate for gender issues, including women’s and LGBTQ rights.”https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jennifer-siebel-newsom-gavin-newson_us_5c375286e4b0c469d76b99a7
There should be zero tolerance for sexual assaults, sexual harassment or even sexual discrimination. Yet I wonder whether we are doing ourselves any favors when we lump sexual assaults and or harassment into the same category as a man telling a co-worker she looks great?
Because if we are, I sense that the workplace will become a place where neither gender will want to be.
A while back I wrote an article speaking to faith and the LGBT, (Queer and Trans community ). I argued then that as far as those communities are concerned, it was not just a matter of getting the straight community to see their community as equals.
There is a far more sinister motive behind their push . The idea seems to be designed to bend the straight community’s way of thinking and yes it’s about awakening people’s consciousness, shifting hearts and minds, attitudes and behaviors.
Not in the way you are thinking. Not toward equality and justice but toward subjugation and total fealty to their way of thinking.
Much of the #metoo movement is justifiable comeuppance for too many men who believe/d that women are disposable creatures created only for their pleasure and convenience.
Nevertheless, there is much lumping of individual cases designed to create the impression that men are on a sexual tear against women.
It is a strategy which is resulting in even more devastating consequences for men, many of whom are innocent.
People will use whatever weapons they have to inflict harm. Allegations of sexual misconduct have real and far-reaching consequences against those they are leveled against.
Unfortunately, some women are no more less inclined to using sexual allegations as a weapon against men than some men are inclined to abuse women.
The question then becomes ,who benefits from a discordant divide between the sexes?
If you ever raised your voice in objection to homosexuality, understand that you may very well be the potential target of an evil smear campaign.
If they cannot find something on which to discredit you they will find a way to dredge up something that sounds believable.
Over the years as the debate raged about the need for greater societal acceptance of homosexuality I argued that there was no societal refusal to accepting homosexuality/Lesbianism.
Potential employers were not in the business of asking whether one was gay or straight.
People lived their lives the way they chose to. It was the gay community which insisted that the way we looked at marriage across the globe was outdated, discriminatory and was like lava which needed to undergo a metamorphosis.
The way they see it is that we are living in a horrible patriarchal world which needs dismantling.
For some reason or other, some black women seem to think that feminism is their fight to wage, their hill to die on.
My question to them, including the black intellectuals who subscribe to the feminist ideology, is this, where is the feminist community as you struggle to understand why police just shot and killed your black son?
Lesbian black women seem to go to exceptional lengths to demonstrate that they have larger testicles than men.
They dress and try to look harder than the toughest thug on the streets and their hatred of men seem to take on a particularly insidious tinge.
The website ( everydayfeminism.com) while begging for money to stay on the
*Boys can seem insulated from the harm done by the patriarchy, and that makes it easier to neglect sharing our feminism with our sons. After all, they have an advantage in this crappy patriarchal system. It seems like they’ll, more or less, be okay.
I’m a working-class mom struggling to make ends meet while bringing up a toddler, so I get how hard this stuff is.
I beg your pardon, I would wager that you were not a feminist before you had that toddler.
I would also wager that feminism was not a thought when you were deciding on the man with whom you made that toddler.
Now all of a sudden you are a rabid feminist because you are left to raise a kid on your own, most likely because of your crappy decision making?
The writer went on.
*The truth is, you don’t and can’t know the gender of a baby, or even most young toddlers. No matter how we parents feel about it, there is always a chance that our kids won’t turn out to identify with the genders assigned to them at birth.
I’m cisgender (meaning that I identify with the gender that was assigned to me at birth) but not everyone is, and there is no guarantee that any one particular child will be.
Any child born could turn out to be transgender, and you (and the kid) might not know right away! It’s also a reality that some children are born intersex and doctors may or may not notice this upon birth.
The fact is that when we say a newborn baby is a boy or a girl, what we’re really doing is predicting their gender, and while sometimes our predictions are right, they’re also sometimes very wrong.
And if your child turns out to be transgender, you also have no way of knowing when your child will know that about themselves and feel ready to talk to you about it.
Although you may find the foregone laughable, it is certainly not a parody. This is the kind of information which is dominating the internet and cable television, eventually shaping how people see themselves and others.
They are literally questioning even biological facts, by that standard, a baby boy is not a baby boy until the boy decides it wants to be a boy.
And oh by the way, an apple is not an apple unless the apple decides it is an apple.
If you sometimes wonder how come so many people in the Evangelical movement could move so far afield that they would support a candidate like Donald Trump a serial philanderer for President, you may have just happened upon some of those answers here.
That is not to say that Trump was a moral alternative to the dystopian realities we are being asked to embrace, but at least he believes fundamentally in the same things in which they believe.
He shares some of the broader ideas they share.
Even though he is inherently flawed, in their eyes he is not a revolutionary departure from the values they have held all their lives.
My college sophomore son jokingly used the term “Toxic masculinity” in a light family conversation recently.
We all laughed and jokingly chided him that college was turning him against men as the characterization (“toxic”) used in any context to define men was a pejorative label designed to create anger, mistrust, and even hatred of all things male
Toxic masculinity enforces the societal ideology that males must attain control in relationships, the household, and in most public situations. This attitude promotes aversion towards expressing emotions that would be deemed as feminine for fear of emasculation. This is directly linked to the misogynistic mentality that male qualities are superior to feminine qualities.
So if a man ever believed in a social order in which he is the head of the household. And if he is supposed to lead in love, and provide for , and protect his family as God commands him to ,he is indulging in poisonous male behavior.
It is important to note that this philosophical position is a 180 degree divergence from the structures on which Christian societies are built.
If the new principles are antithetical and diametrically opposed to our foundational Christian principles, whose philosophical perspectives do they advance?
The Government has a duty and a responsibility to secure the nation. It has zero duty or responsibility to acquiesce to any demands made by the political opposition as long as it is carrying out its mandate within the confines of the constitution.
Elections have consequences, the (PNP) failed at securing the nation and that explains why the party is on the outside looking in and screaming for relevance on every issue.
There is nothing wrong with an opposition party voicing its concern on an issue.
What I do not understand is the reason behind the administration having to fight with the political opposition about the way it wants to implement strategies to secure the nation.
Why does the Government need to have meetings with the political opposition and others to forge consensus on national security and crime?
Why is there a need for the government and opposition to
What good can come out of trial lawyers (literally all with the same leftist world view, from the same schools, with the same
According to a release issued from the meeting last Monday between Andrew Holness and Peter Phillips a range of issues were discussed.
Heading this raft of issues on dealing with crime was … human rights.
How the fuck can a country devise strategies for dealing with a raging murder epidemic with the central theme being human rights?
Every strategy dealing with crime should be discussed, formulated and executed with human rights as a foregone conclusion.
Human rights cannot be a discussion in crime strategies.
It is already built in that the duty of law enforcement is to protect and serve and in that is a built-in understanding that one should not and cannot abuse the people they are sworn to protect.
With that understood, planners must get on with the business of securing the country without the incessant bullshit about human rights.
The reality is that the trial lawyers, the political opposition, some in the government and their many proxies in the broader society are all making a killing[no pun intended] from the crime and murder epidemic in the country.
Security Companies, Mortuaries, Bands, wholesale liquor establishments, bars, and a wide array of other parasite industries have sprung up and are flourishing around the murders to the point there is no real interest in stamping out the monster.
Why fix the problem if there is the possibility of making tons of cash from it?
What better way to tie the hands of law-enforcement than to constantly bring up the question of human rights?
What cop or well thinking member of the society is going to be opposed to human rights being a central theme without risking the wrath of the intelligentsia and even the hangers-on who do not understand shit about anything?
What’s really happening is that there is a delicate balance being maintained between keeping the killings under wraps so that the tourists are not scared away and appearing to fight crime without doing too much to seriously disrupt the networks which are doing the killings.
Far too many people are making real money from the status quo.
As long as they can keep convincing the gullible population that looking after their human rights is preserving and ensuring their safety they will get away with the scam.
Unfortunately for those Jamaicans who cannot afford gated communities with 24/7 security, those who cannot have licensed firearms [usually the same group] they will just have to continue to live the existence of potential statistics every single day they wake up.
Those who readily accept the canard that ensuring their human rights and their security are mutually exclusive endeavors will eventually, given enough time, be dead right.
In securing a community, a state or a country you do one thing.
You go after the bad guys!
There is no conflict, contrary to the bullshit that Jamaica’s opposition Party, (the PNP) is selling, between getting the bad guys and observing human rights.
In fact, where the fuck is the opposition party’s loyalty?
Is it to the criminal networks or is it to the Jamaican people?
The average cop who does not have his head up the ass of one of the two political parties, is so browbeaten into observing human rights he is incapable of making an arrest.
In some cases, he is not even sure if he should make an arrest even when the offenses are occurring right in front of him.
The rules are too vague, the lines too blurred for them to do their jobs without risking prison and financial ruin.
Such is the environment in which law -enforcement operate and murderers thrive.
It is time that the people wake up to the reality that they are being taken for a ride, the country is far too small, the solutions far too simple for our country to have such an intransigent and entrenched crime problem.
Someone wants it that way…………………..
LIKE AND SHARE
Imagine being ravenously hungry yet you are close to an Ocean filled with fish but you have nothing with which to catch the fish. No net, no hook, no device or material one could use to create a snare.
Chances are you could die from hunger right there, or you can flail away if you are able to swim and hope to catch something to satisfy the hunger.
Until of course the hunger pangs begin to gnaw at your gut again.
How about being thirsty at an Oasis and you have to cross the desert, you can drink all you want from the brook but you have no container to carry any of the lifegiving liquid with you?
Oh, by the way, you can’t tarry too long by the brook because there are some thirsty travelers who will be coming soon to refresh themselves and they are carnivores.
Difficult decisions and near impossible task if you have nothing with which to carry the water right?
Now that I have gotten your attention, I would like you to think about those two metaphors as it relates to the scourge of violent crimes in our country.
The moral of my contention is that if you do not have the tools it is almost difficult to complete a task, no matter how simple or urgent the need.
The average law-abiding Jamaican living in the Zones Of Special Operations and subjected to the limited State of Emergency would like to see those initiatives continue.
Of course, those zones of operations, or (ZOSO’s), as they are affectionately known, (we Jamaicans are enamored with acronyms) requires plenty of human resources and money.
ZOSO’s and the State of Emergency are a great strain on the officers who make them possible. A fact which eludes both the planners and the residents who are rightly clamoring for some respite from the daily bloodletting.
Now as you all know there is one little problem with ZOSO’s and the Limited State of Emergency declared in specific areas.
They cannot go on forever because they strain constitutional limits in some cases and exhaust financial and human resources in others.
Additionally, when those measures are instituted in specific areas the producers of violence simply move to other areas and we end up inexorably looking like we are in a whack-a-mole situation which does no good.
Since pulling up ZOSO’s and getting approval for instituting a State of Emergency takes time, and since there are people in positions of power who value the letter of the archaic constitution over the lives of our citizens, it is clear that we have to find other ways to deal with this crisis of violent crimes.
There is no silver bullet with which to eliminate violent crimes from our midst. Dealing effectively with crime will have to be approached methodically and strategically.
There is no scenario in which placing huge amounts of security personnel in specific locations will effectively reduce crime for the long term, even if we could afford it.
Which brings us to some actual solutions which the governing party is too timid to effectuate and the political opposition is too complicit in its associations with criminals and their lobbies to support.
This is not to say that the governing party does not have members who are knee deep in criminal complicity and collusion as well.
Since it is clear that the solution to this problem is not adding more police,(even though more police officers does not hurt), and since it is clear that placing huge amounts of resources in one area results in a conflagration of violent crimes in
Reading through this site will provide plenty of solutions for addressing our country’s crime dilemma.
The problem is that one party is too scared to use them and the other is too complicit to support real and meaningful crime reduction initiatives.
The Jamaican people are crying out for leadership, that much we know. It is not as if Jamaicans cannot abide by rules or laws when those rules and or laws are followed up with strong consequences for breaking them.
The hundreds of thousands, (millions perhaps) of Jamaicans living in the diaspora follow rules. When they decide to not, they pay the price.
Jamaicans at home do the things they do because they are allowed to do them.
Steve McGregor an Assistant Commissioner of police spoke to a group at a Stonebrook Vista returning residents’ meeting in Falmouth, Trelawny, last Sunday.
McGregor noted: “We have to drive some fear into these youngsters, who are responsible for 95 percent of the murders. This is so because, at this time, we have the worst set of parents ever in Jamaica.”
“Older parents were less educated, but they paid attention to youngsters of the day. Older people have to become involved to keep the youngsters on the right track.”
That fear of which he speaks must be fear of the consequences of breaking the laws.
The legislation the lawmakers propose focuses on the protection of criminals rather than focusing on the pain of their victims.
Legislations are held up to get the input of the very people the laws would bring to heel.
This is the dystopian hell in which law-abiding people find themselves.
The rights of killers trumps their basic right to life and the ability to live their lives in peace.
Both political parties have been willing and continual enablers of this tragic position in which the country finds itself.
Every day the crisis deepens because both political parties are beholden to overly influential lobbies which are hampering effective policing of the nation.
No country in western Europe or North America let alone in other regions of the world allow rights lobby to dictate to them how they secure their populations.
Jamaica is the only country I know of which fashions its laws in accordance with the wishes of those who advocate for criminals instead of with the interest of the innocent law abiding population front and center.
Those who break the laws know they have the law abiding people by the balls and over a barrel.
Their political representatives are either criminals themselves or are beholden to the criminal lobby.
Either way, the people are ………I won’t say it.
LIKE AND SHARE THIS ARTICLE
If the ultimate no case submission against the three police officers charged with the murder of Andrew Bisson recently does nothing, it demonstrates that the resources being wasted on INDECOM would be better utilized upgrading the office of Director of Public Prosecution(DPP).
The three officers, Detective Corporal Kevin Adams, District Constable Howard Brown and Constable Carl Bucknor were arrested and charged for the killing of Andrew Bisson in a police operation on September 5, 2011.
As the Prosecution’s case ground to a screeching halt like a creaky old automobile whose engine had completed its final revolution, the lead prosecutor, Queen’s Counsel Caroline Hay told the court, the prosecution would be unable to negate the defense’s position of self-defense.
If the prosecution was unable, after 8 years to negate the defendant’s claims, [as police officers carrying out their duties], why were they charged and held in custody and subjected to all the attendant negative ramifications which accompany a criminal trial?
Why the case was brought in the first place must be the question, and that question should now be the center of any position forward for the Police Federation, [if for no-one else]?
It is imperative that the system of justice be fair to all JAMAICANS, not just the privileged few who dwell in ivory towers above Cross-Roads.
In that regard, Jamaicans can least afford to have the voices of those privileged few dominate policy positions as they are the least and last to be negatively impacted by violent crimes.
Already there have been some preemptive salvos launched about what should happen to police officers who plant evidence in order to gain convictions.
None of those voices have said a single word about how Terrence Williams, Hamish Campbell and INDECOM manipulated a disgruntled constable [Chucky Brown], not only to confess and criminally implicate himself in murders, but to lie on his colleagues.
It was clear during the trial that not only was the evidence before the court shaky but it appeared that the investigating agency INDECOM, produced expert witnesses who were………… let’s just say, less than experts.
During the trial, Chief Justice Bryan Sykes the trial judge expressed concern about whether the accused policemen were afforded an objective and fair investigation? Mind you, not a fair trial, but a fair investigation, that ought to give everyone pause.
What I haven’t heard is a single peep from any of the self-righteous criminal defense lawyers who have an opinion on everything speak to this comment from the chief justice.
The Judge further added critically,[ that it seemed that the accused were being targeted by the Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM)].
Again, its crickets from the usually vociferous self-proclaimed authorities on the law and morality in our tiny ticky-ticky pond.
Is justice for everyone but members of the police force?
According to sources in the courtroom, the Defense presented a document which indicated that the error rate for a properly/trained examiner with the required competence is between 3.4% – 6. 5%.
Additionally, those who were of substandard training, the error rate is between 15-25%.
Witnesses who testified on behalf of INDECOM disagreed with terminologies and set standards used by renowned experts.
One witness, in particular, was unable to agree with clear inconsistencies which were clear even to the untrained eye.
Justice Sykes told the Home Circuit Court, in the absence of the jury, that he first became concerned when accused Detective Corporal Kevin Adams and District Constable Howard Brown were identified as ‘Gaza Man’ and ‘Chucky’, respectively, by a Crown witness.
That same witness the next day admitted that he made a mistake.
It is important to understand that the experts used by INDECOM were indeed substandard.
And that the reason that the prosecution could not even meet the most basic prosecutorial standards which would have forced the three officers to mount a defense, was the incompetence of INDECOM’s own expert witnesses and the weakness of the evidence presented to the court.
On these fault lines in the system, the lives and liberty of members of the JCF are being decided by the very testimony given by these individuals on behalf of INDECOM.
On these types
From the beginning of the process, which brought INDECOM into existence I argued that before a body like INDECOM is created appropriate levels of resources, (as was economically possible), should be appropriated to bring the Justice system up to credible standards.
Which meant, upgrading the police and courts so that delivery of the justice product can be timely and fair, critical requirements for reducing crime.
I argued then, despite protestations to the contrary, that creating INDECOM would cause crime to escalate as people would be emboldened to be disrespectful not just to individual police officers but to the collective we refer to as the rule of law.
On that alone, I have been vindicated ten times over as INDECOM is turning out to be an out of control
Oversight of the Police is a foregone conclusion. however, there were effective oversight of the police, (several layers) which had greater measurable success beyond anything INDECOM has achieved since it came into existence.
The arguments proffered by enemies of the police and those clamoring for INDECOM was that the police cannot police the police.
Those catchy buzz terms sounded rather good to those detractors but they never bothered to think about the several civilian complaint bodies which existed pre INDECOM.
The narrative was far too juicy, it sounded far too rational, even for some ex-members who clamored for more oversight without understanding the delicate balance which ought to exist between oversight and qualified immunity.
What those layers of oversight lacked were agendas antithetical to the good of the nation.
INDECOM has no loyalty to the nation, it has no commitment to nation-building, as the JCF has done, giving blood and tears throughout its existence.
INDECOM is dedicated to the ego of an egomaniacal narcissist, its mission is geared toward deconstructing the JCF to the delight of those who argued for its creation.
As an aside, what exactly has Antony Anderson done differently, (no scratch that ) done better than the previous two commissioners of police who preceded him?
There is no one clamoring for a change of the commissioner of police.
Could that be because he was never a police officer?
I believe the nation’s dirty drawers is showing on this and the odor is rather obnoxious.
As the manhunt for the white man suspected of killing 7-year-old Jazmine Barnes continues, the Harris County Sheriff’s Office has released a composite sketch of the alleged killer.
As a new year begins to take shape the very same issues which dominated the news last year largely remain unsolved still.
And true to form in my native Jamaica the big fish are all jockeying to get their names in the local newspapers to continue their relevance as big fish in a tiny ticky-ticky pool.
Now there is a raft of issues on the front burner, not the least of which is the Opposition leader, Peter Phillips grandstanding about not being able to meet with the country’s Prime minister until January 7th to discuss his party’s disquiet with the continuation of the states of emergencies(SOE), and then quietly meeting with the Prime Minister to discuss the issue.
As I wrote yesterday Peter Phillips seems to think that he is the Prime Minister based on the way he has been behaving in exerting leverage he clearly does not have.
Now it appears someone told him “take the damn meeting” and so he did.
THE RULE OF LAW
Then there are other issues of import in the country, like the rule of law.
This brings into focus the regular pigs who eat constantly at the slop trough of deception and lies.
Speaking to local media one such pig, well known criminal lawyer Bert Samuels opined:
That lawmakers enact special sanctions for law-enforcement personnel proven to have “planted” evidence on an accused person to secure a conviction. For Bert Samuels, the maximum penalty for such action should be twice the sentence prescribed for the criminal charge against the accused person.
As a further deterrent, Samuels wants law-enforcement personnel found to have planted evidence to secure a conviction to share the financial burden where their actions result in a successful lawsuit against the State.
“In any successful civil suit arising from an acquittal where evidence was planted, the officer should be compelled to pay one-half of the damages awarded,” he suggested in a letter to The Gleaner.
Here’s the thing, in principle I do not disagree with anything that Bert Samuels said in his statements.
As a staunch supporter of the rule of law, I categorically support these ideas without equivocation.
We cannot have a democratic society if our laws are not applied fairly across the board.
What I take issue with is the messenger Bert Samuels.
Bert Samuels is a product of the ghetto.
He is from the other side of the Cassava Piece gully which is Glen Drive in Kingston 8.
Bert Samuels has represented criminals from all spectrums of the society as is his right and duty.
What I never heard, is Bert Samuels speaking out on the wanton bloodshed that those he has represented have visited on our country.
The fact that one is a criminal defense lawyer does not strip one of his responsibility to be a good citizen.
Criminal defense lawyers, are officers of the courts. They have a moral responsibility to speak out against criminal conduct.
The fact that one defends criminals should not preclude one from speaking out against crime and criminals.
Yet on these moral perspectives Bert Samuels, the well-known defense lawyer has been eerily silent.
When it comes to doing the right thing Bert Samuels is unable to walk and chew gum at the same time and that renders his opinions inconsequential.
Three officers who were on trial in the case dubbed the death squad trial” (by the dirty media houses) were freed yesterday without having to defend themselves against the charges of murder leveled against them by INDECOM.
Detective Corporal Kevin Adams, District Constable Howard Brown, and Constable Carl Bucknor had the case against them tossed for want of prosecution by the judge.
The officers were charged with the murder of Andrew Bisson who was killed on September 5, 2011, during a police operation.
Why do I even bother to mention this?
An acquittal means you face trial and is found not guilty.
In this case, the judge moved to end the trial because the prosecution could not meet its own prosecutorial threshold.
Why is this important?
This is important because, in the very same case, former cop Chucky Brown implicated himself to INDECOM investigators who were hell-bent on criminalizing the death of Bisson and these officers were going to be made to pay one way or the other.
Brown was led astray by INDECOM, not only was Brown not offered immunity to lie to convict his colleagues, he will most likely be spending the greater part of the remainder of his life in prison.
And for what?
To satisfy the blood-lust of Terrence Williams and Hamish Campbell.
I hope these officers get to the business of suing the Government for every penny to which they are entitled.
The People’s National Party in Jamaica, the Opposition party to the Governing Jamaica Labor Party took the position over the last couple of weeks that it would pull its support from the State’s Of Emergency declared in Saint James and parts of Saint Catherine.
The explanation given by the PNP is that the security forces, are simply scraping up large numbers of young men and locking them up and not enough of these young people are being charged with crimes.
Now, I can tell you personally that that has been one of the Achilles heels of the security forces when they are given additional powers to clamp down on criminal conduct, as someone who spent a decade in law enforcement between 1982 and 1992.
There are two intertwined facts though in that reality which I would like to quickly point to and they are (1) when the security forces deploy these huge dragnets they do scrape up some of the violence producers as well as some others.
Some are innocent and some not so innocent, if you understand Jamaica’s criminal networks.
(2) This is a matter which the political opposition could have approached the administration on with a view to finding a solution to that particular sore point the party says it is bothered by.
Doing so would render other peripheral issues moot if the primary issue of over detention was addressed.
Those other points pertained to (a)the length of time in detention and(b) the treatment of detainees while in detention.
Remarkably, the source of the data on which the opposition claimed to have formulated it’s decision largely came from the Public Defender and an antagonistic anti-police lobby called Jamaican’s For Justice.
Now, there are several issues with these two sources, (a) the information presented to a select committee of the nation’s parliament by the Public Defender Arlene Harrison-Henry has been widely discredited as inaccurate and vastly exaggerated by the police, the very source from which the PD stated she received the data.
To date that critical issue has not been settled, except for a statement put out by the PD which stated that she “stands by her statements to the committee“.
But how can that simply be the end of that? Can a public official, paid by tax dollars, give an erroneous accounting to the people’s parliament and simply say that she stands by what she said and that’s it?
Can she simply say “I said what I said” without giving clarification or correcting the record and it is simply left at that?
She has done neither to date, yet the Opposition’s claims that people are being improperly treated are built on the statements of a public official who have been caught lying, and who refuses to retract those lies.
(b) The word of JFJ has no value, it is one-sided biased, anti-law enforcement criminal supporting lobby run by ignorant demagogues and therefore JFJ is undeserving
There may very well be a case to be made about Prime Minister Andrew Holness’ politics, I will leave that to the hyper-partisans but I do find that as far as Jamaican politics goes, he does try to seek consensus in governance.
This is a concept completely alien to the opposition PNP’s track record, which seems to be, my way or the highway.
And shockingly it seems to me, that the leader of the PNP, Peter Phillips believes that he is the Prime Minister, or that he has the same degree of leverage as the PM even as an unpopular opposition leader.
First of all, given the position of the Opposition on this issue, I would not be trying to bring them to the table but I’m not the PM and that is why Andrew Holness is the Prime Minister and I am not.
So the Prime Minister invited the Opposition leader to a sit down to have a discussion of the opposition’s concerns tomorrow.
As I thought would be the case, Phillips wrote to the Prime Minister stating the following.
“Given the very short notice, it is not possible for our team to meet tomorrow. The earliest the team can be assembled is January 7, 2019.”
Now because I don’t have any idea what the opposition leader’s schedule looks like, maybe someone can educate me on what exactly Peter Phillips may have to do which renders him unable to meet with the nation’s chief executive until January 7th?
In the meantime, I’m going to assume that he is grandstanding and leveraging power that he does not have.
As I said in a previous article, the PNP of today is no more interested in working to solve this existential crime problem than the PNP under Portia Simpson Miller wanted to walk the garrisons with Andrew Holness.
The SOE’s cannot be the administration’s crime strategy, but for want of a better way forward it has saved numerous lives last year and that is not up for debate.
The Jamaican people have to decide for themselves whether they want the PNP to continue to use a toxic and dangerous anti-police outside lobby (JFJ) and partisan moles like the Public Defender to help them to sabotage the government’s progress on crime?
People are walking away from their homes in places like Mandeville, parishes like Hanover once considered havens of peace and quiet.
This Opposition party seems quite content for this to continue until the Chinese buy up all of these properties and Jamaicans are left as subservient slaves to foreigners in their own country.
That is the country the PNP wants to govern, a broken dysfunctional, poverty-stricken dystopian hell hole.
In fact, that is the modus operandi of the party. A party which loves squalor, crime and abject poverty. A time tested strategy the party has used to attract the worst elements in our country to look to them for leadership.
In other words, people looking for freeness across the board.
Free houses, free electricity, free water and free money to live on. That is not the way to build a country and we have already seen this playbook before.
A woman was caught on video screaming the N-word and pulling a knife on a black family in an Oregon parking lot, perfectly encapsulating white America’s shenanigans in 2018.
On December 24, 20-year-old Emora Roberson captured rare footage of what is either an irate racist albino ferret or a quickly decomposing white woman in the early stages of turning into a White Walker. Roberson was in a car with her 15-month-old daughter, her boyfriend and an aunt doing some last-minute Christmas shopping when the stage 1 zombie pulled up next to the family at a McMinnville, Ore. Dominos pizza.
Clad in a camouflage jacket, track pants with two stripes, wraparound sunglasses and dingy white shoes only worn by nursing assistants, church ushers and senior citizens who exercise by walking laps at the mall—the official uniform of people who want to make America great—the soggy saltine woman pulled up next to the family in a handicapped parking spot, obviously qualified by a tooth count that appeared to be in the low-to-mid teens.
According to Roberson, the enraged woman slapped and spit on her boyfriend, Keysuan Goodyear. Goodyear grew angry and warned the woman about her behavior and language.
The woman responded by whipping out a knife.
That’s when Roberson said she began filming the incident on her phone.
“This bitch is really trying to stab him,” Roberson comments as the enraged meerkat holds a knife in clear view. “It’s called self-defense, you stupid nigger butch” Tammy Two-Teeth responds before slamming the car door on Roberson.
Roberson’s boyfriend tells Debbie No-Dentist, who looks like a french fry at the bottom of the McDonalds bag, to stay away but his girlfriend warns him that they are in McMinnville. I don’t know where McMinnville is, exactly. But from the name alone, it sounds like a place where the sheriff wears a cowboy hat and black people know to “stay in their place.”
“It’s not worth it today,” she warns her boyfriend. “We’re in a white-ass town.”“We eventually drove off. We still had Christmas shopping to do,” Roberson told Oregon Live. “My daughter woke up and was crying her head off.” Roberson said she contacted the local police department and alerted them that either Kellyanne Conway had left the Trump administration for a career on the lucrative meth-smoking circuit, or there was a racist woman on the loose who had possibly bankrupted the Tooth Fairy.
On Saturday, KPTV announced that they arrested 39-year-old Amber Rocco for the incident and charged her with intimidation, unlawful use of a weapon, harassment and menacing. Her bail was set at $55,000 but I’m not sure if they have the right person. There’s no way the woman in that video is 39 unless they are counting in possum years.
I really hope they catch the real offender before she actually stabs a victim or bites someone and turns more people into Zorro-zombies. I don’t want to tell the cops how to do their job but I’m betting they could catch the actual suspect tomorrow if they just staked out convenience stores that sell Pall Mall cigarettes.I also don’t like to stereotype but I’m betting the woman’s in the video’s name is not Amber. Most Ambers have twenty-plus teeth. The woman in the video looks like a Gretchen. If not, I’m betting on a hybrid name like SueEllen or MaryLou. But probably Gretchen.
Free Amber Rocco.
She has a dental appointment tomorrow… I hope.
I had a delightful yet spirited conversation with my beautiful aunt Sandy who was visiting New York from Jamaica last Summer, which lasted all the way as we drove up from Brooklyn to Poughkeepsie.
Aunt Sandy is an educator who lives in Jamaica, she loves her “patios” dearly. To be referred to as (
Me I love my
That is not to suggest that my dear aunt doesn’t. She just believes that as far as
We are in winter now, and after much thinking and mental turmoil, I am still where I was on our discussion.
I still say
So I decided to look at the definitions of both “dialect” and “language“, so here goes.
Dialect: A regional variety of language distinguished by features of vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation from other regional varieties and constituting together with them a single language [Merriam Webster]
Makes sense to me since we learned that our beloved native
Language: (1a) The words, their pronunciation, and the methods of combining them used and understood by a community.
b(1): audible, articulate, meaningful sound as produced by the action of the vocal organs
(2): a systematic means of communicating ideas or feelings by the use of conventionalized signs, sounds, gestures, or marks having understood meanings
Okay, so I took the liberty to highlight a few of the defining words and terms which I believe are germane in differentiating between what is standard language and the less formal dialect.
My contention is not that
Now, I understand that emotionalism sometimes clouds our thinking and our sense of patriotism gets in the way of rational evaluation at times.
So I’m quite sure that my thoughts on this issue will run afoul of some patriots who are hell-bent on maintaining that it is what they say it is because it is patently Jamaican.
Of course, that was not the way my aunt Sandy and I discussed it, we were cordial and even jovial even as we disagreed vehemently.
I have to remind all as I reminded auntie Sandy, that
We who came from the peasantry were looked down on with scorn and derision because we spoke the way we did by the upper Saint Andrew Gentry.
Until of course many from the peasantry took advantage of educational opportunities and joined the gentry, or so they thought, smile.
By then the Gentry had become darker even if not any less offensive.
So, in other words,
Now, all of a sudden because
In other words, it is not fashionable and acceptable unless and until they say it is.
Despite all of that and the fact that I was royally pissed at the gentry during my public service years when they would ask me ” where were you trained“?
(Fake accents included)
That is not the reason I say our beloved
Sure we use it to communicate among ourselves, and yes, some foreigners are fascinated with it as they would with a cute little puppy.
Nevertheless, each and every person who writes it spells the words differently. The sentences are constructed at the whim and fancy of the writer and to a certain degree that is a part of the charm of our Jamaican lingo.
There is no consensus on how each word is to be spelled and documented and used universally.
Because we have not yet formalized those processes which are outlined in the definition of language and because no one but us, plus a few curious tourists understand what we are talking about and would not understand any of it, even if its written, by the new
Most importantly, it is when we have a standard way of writing, spelling, and understanding words and are able to be tested on them that we are best able to determine whether we are learning what is being taught us.
It is not about each person doing his or her own thing his or her own way.
Auntie Sandy and I will agree to disagree on this one.
June 2013, in a stunning and incomprehensible decision the US Supreme Court in a 5-4 ideological decision struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act in the case of Shelby vs Holder.
Holder being, Eric Holder the then sitting Attorney General of the United States.
The Ruling freed up nine states, mostly in the South, to change their election laws without advance federal approval.
“Our country has changed,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions..”
In layman’s language, [the law worked too well so it’s time for us to roll it back]. Never mind that there is an incessant assault against the voting rights of racial minorities today in different forms in different states.
December 2018 the People’s National Party announced it no longer supports the states of emergency in the Parish of Saint James because whatever the police are doing now they can proceed along the same path without the emergency powers which gives them the authority to lock up violent criminals for extended periods of time without charge.
Now here is the sobering reality. The state of emergency was declared in St James as a direct result of a violence level which was unprecedented.
The extent of the killings was such that it scared the rich hoteliers who were skittish about their bottom line.
Now, as I have said in a previous article there are only two or three reasons why violent crime would take a precipitous 72% drop in the parish of St James and those reasons are (a) the violence producers have taken flight (b) they are locked up by the police or (c) a combination of both (a&b).
We can have a debate about the constitutionality of locking up killers we have no evidence to charge criminally and I am prepared to debate the legitimacy of doing so.
Desperate time calls for desperate measures. If a state is to survive by taking drastic measures what better time to do so than send a message through how it treats its most violent criminals?
We may talk until we are blue in the face as the Nation’s Opposition party has done about not breaking the law to enforce the law. We may even pull out graphs and diagrams using graphs to make our point as to why we believe there is no need for a continuance of the measures.
Or we can talk to the people who are on the ground, the people who live in the communities and are terrified that if the powers are removed which gives the security forces the authority to hold violent criminals, their communities will in short order be awash in their blood and that of their loved ones.
What I find disgusting and indeed mind-numbingly ignorant is the argument being used by the PNP, that a drop in homicide in 2018 ought not be celebrated because on the Government’s watch last year 1616 homicides were reported to the police.
The contention being, since the JLP presided over the 1616 number in 2017, it should receive no credit for the fact that hundreds fewer have been murdered this year.
So if there was any doubt in anyone’s mind about the political nature of the PNP’s decision to pull its support, the latter contention ought to put those doubts to rest.
In the final analysis, the reduction in murders this year whatever the final count turns out to be should give no one comfort that the state had to flood the streets with the bodies of security personnel to realize fewer homicide numbers in specific geographical areas.
The takeaway from this is that sure, the criminals are running away from the security forces when they flood the streets in force, but as soon as they determine the movements of the security personnel they are right back at work killing and doing whatever else they do.
So clearly the solution is not in flooding the streets with bodies, even though that has an effect tantamount to that of cotton candy.
The problem is that a nation cannot survive on cotton candy but the country’s leaders are too heavily invested in the idea of fillers and fast food stopgap methods to take the time to prepare the right kind of diet which will give the nation sustenance for generations to come.
The problem here is that the nations uneducated are crying out for leadership and the educated which are supposed to give that leadership are self-centered moronic idiots who have their heads too far up their own asses to do anything about crime.
It behooves them to take a listen to Damion Crawford, but the self-important bourgeoisie
And so we get an echo chamber of nonsense from the very same dogs chasing their silly tails.