SVG

Anesia Baptiste’s NDP candidacy revoked

Chair of the New Democratic Party’s West St. George Constituency Division, Louis Thompson told I-Witness News Thursday morning that his group had voted to revoke ex-senator Anesia Baptiste’s (pictured) nomination as the candidate for the next election in that district (File photo by Oris Robinson).

KINGSTOWN, St. Vincent – The opposition New Democratic Party’s (NDP) West St. George (WSG) Constituency Division voted Wednesday night to revoke the election candidacy nomination of Anesia Baptiste, who party leader Arnhim Eustace fired from the senate last month.

Chair of the constituency division, Louis Thompson, confirmed this to I-Witness News Thursday morning.

The confirmation came after a man, who identified himself as the deputy-chair of the constituency division, spoke of the decision on a radio programme, on which NDP chair Dr. Linton Lewis makes a weekly appearance.

Edwin Charles is deputy chair of the NDP’s West St. George Constituency Division but I-Witness News was unable to independently verify whether it was he who made the announcement.

But Thompson told I-Witness News that while he did not invite Baptiste to the meeting Wednesday night nor did not know if she was invited, “the topic was what is happening in West St. George at this particular time … because of what is happening to Mrs. Baptiste”.

Baptiste was fired from the senate after writing an 11-page letter to Eustace in which she refused to obey an NDP policy forbidding the party’s candidates or prospective candidates from making adverse statements about religion.

“We sat there and we chatted and everyone had their part to play. At the end of it, there was a resolution and the majority voted not for her to be any candidate in any upcoming elections for West St. George on an NDP ticket,” Thompson said.

Asked whether the decision was unanimous — in light of the caller’s comments on radio — Thompson said: “Oh yes. That’s true. It was unanimous.”

He further said that the meeting was in keeping with the constitution of the 37-year-old NDP.

Thompson said that the meeting was advertised on radio and two vans were hired to provide transpiration for constituents.

“This was a meeting for the West St. George Constituency Division and … she (Baptiste) lives in West St. George. It is obvious that we are looking forward because we put it forward,” Thompson said, noting radio announcements of the meeting.

Thompson said that the meeting discussed “different things but zeroed in on the action and the … 11-page letter that [Baptiste] wrote to president [of the NDP Arnhim Eustace]”.

He said that at the time of the interview shortly before 10 a.m. Thursday, Baptiste had not been informed of the decision to revoke her nomination.

“[The meeting] was last night … But, officially, she will be notified by letter or by email or something.”

Asked if the committee approves announcements like the one purportedly made by the deputy-chair on radio, Thompson said:

“He is the deputy chair and the thing is, apparently, he wanted to get it out. But she will be notified.”

Meanwhile, the caller who identified himself as the deputy-chair said that a resolution calling for the revocation of Baptiste’s candidacy was passed and seconded at the meeting.

“After the motion was moved and seconded, there was much debate. Persons expressed the view that the letter she had written to the honourable Opposition Leader — the Honourable Arnhim Eustace — was out of place, rude, disrespectful and furthermore, she used words like ‘I will not follow, I will not obey, I will not recant, that’s who I am, so help me God’, which left no room for further discussion”.

The caller said that the meeting then voted unanimously to revoke Baptiste’s candidacy nomination “albeit that her candidacy was never ratified by the central executive or the central committee of the NDP.

“Without that, it was appropriate that we follow the constitution of the NDP and have her removed in as much as we had voted for her unanimously to be a candidate,” the caller said.

Baptiste informed by a journalist

Meanwhile, Baptiste told I-Witness News that she

“first found out about the decision … from a journalist, as I found it from the media about Arnhim Eustace’s revocation of my senatorial appointment”.

“I had to call one of the members on the division to confirm what I had heard. They didn’t have the courtesy to inform me of their decision,” she said in written answers to questions from I-Witness News.

Asked if she had considered withdrawing her candidacy in light of the NDP policy regarding religion and your objection to it, Baptiste said:

“… The policy of the opposition leader basically removed me as candidate. To that I say, let them remove me because I stand for religious freedom. Let it reveal the nature of that party. They are not good for the governance of SVG.”

Baptiste, however, said that her candidacy was never ratified.

She said that according to the constitution of the NDP, the party’s president is supposed to submit the name of someone who receives “the support of at least three-fourths of the members of the constituency division”.

“However, I received 100 per cent support from members present at the selection meeting. … So since Nov. 17, 2011 when I was selected by more than three-fourths, it was up to the president to call for a central committee meeting for my ratification,” Baptiste said.

Follow our FeedFollow on FacebookFollow on Twitter

Advertisements

Discussion

25 thoughts on “Anesia Baptiste’s NDP candidacy revoked

  1. What a way to conduct business..Exposing the dirty laundry whilst it is still being worn?

    Posted by Joshua Richardson | May 10, 2012, 12:34
  2. I really dont like the way Anesia Babtiste is being treated by all those who hugged her you know. I am not necessarily one of her fans but right is right. You want to tell me the folks in West St george could not have called the lady and informed her?..That is really not good enough. I know they did not agree with her strong words but for her to hear that her candidacy was revoked by a journalist simply was not good enough.

    Posted by AB | May 10, 2012, 12:40
  3. I agree with the decision to remove Anesia Baptiste from being a candidate for the constituency. However why wasn’t she allowed to attend the meeting to face the same people who previously supported her? Why wasn’t she informed of the decision before it was given to the media.
    It appears that people are eager to have their 15 minutes of fame on radio shows. This is turning out to be a circus. The entire political environment is becoming a commess pit, where “he say, she say” is becoming rampant. There is very little integrity in the entire process.

    Posted by Vere | May 10, 2012, 13:16
  4. What is all this fuss about? Come on, don’t you all see our sister Mrs. Baptise wants us to believe that she is a victim here: Listen to this: “let them remove me because I stand for religious freedom!” This is share bullsh*t. What the party remove her for is rudeness, arrogance, disrespect and pigheadness… Not for religious freedom.

    How could that be? The party’s policy is that no member or aspiring member should make any public statement which is adverse to any religion. To me that is supporting the view that all religion has a right to its view and must not be chastise for its belief by any politician of the NDP.What is worng with this? That supports religious freedom. Doesn’t it?

    For Mrs. Baptise to spin this around to try to fed us this “bulltootoo” that this policy is against religious freedom is down right dishonest. She is using this thing as a pawn to promote her idiosyncratic religious radicalism and that is share dishonesty. The NDP party by this policy never deny anyone from practicing, promoting or voicing the doctrine of their religion. The party is simply setting the guidlines for the public conduct of it public officials. If this is in conflict with Mrs. Baptise’s religious freedom and right to critize other religion other than her own, then she had the right to respectfully dis-agree and perhaps withdraw her membership of the party. But to try to beat the party into submission so that it adopts her way is not only dictotorial but is share madness.

    If Mrs Baptise religion is one of passing negative judgement on other people’s religion and that is freedom of religion then it is a dangerous freedom. No political party should have as a core value the freedom of its public member to publicly critercize peoples religion. This is not only wrong its is dangerous. If this is Mrs. Baptise’s idea of freedom then we might as well abolish all the laws, rules, principles, policies and values that keep our society in check and promotes peace and everyone following the dictates of their misguided consciences and freely do whatsoever their conscience dictates.

    The NDP is a political not a religious organization. Its function is to promote the welfare of all its members. When there is conflict, especially religious conflict, then the party is correct to make policies for nutural peace. The principle is simple.. seek peace and pursue it. Even though I HAVE THE RIGHT to say anything I feel I need TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT. So if I love someone I will not say things to hurt them even though I have the right to so do. LOVE Superceded RIGHTS any day. That is What Jesus told us in his words.
    So this crap that Mrs. Baptise want to feed us about her being thrown out of the NDP because of her stand is pandering to the victim mentality.It is a hoax.

    Posted by roinuj | May 10, 2012, 14:50
  5. This does not reflect very well on the NDP. This is no way to conduct business in any organisation and reflects the lack of decorum and professionalism on their part.

    Posted by Eric Williams | May 10, 2012, 15:26
  6. Where does “Has” Samuels of We-lectricity live?Where does Jules Ferdinand live? It’s time to begin running serious candidates,not the joke candidates run by both the ULP and NDP,it’s time to run candidates who can make SVG competitive…10 years of hearing Ralph master the art of talking fart..and Arnhim carrying on like Eyore from winnie the pooh is bad…St.Vincent is more than this we deserve better..Anesia s a lightweight as are Ralph and Arnhim..it’s tme to bring on serious heavy hitters

    Posted by Joe | May 10, 2012, 15:52
  7. Two wrongs don’t make a right but, Anesia is clearly looking for sympathy. Didn’t she expect that? It was providential that her candidacy was never ratified

    Posted by justice | May 10, 2012, 16:12
  8. Murdeeeeeer, is this the way these people want to conduct business on behalf of St. Vincent and the Grenadines with foreign countries. Eustace and yo party, alyo should go and get a degree in business administration. Murdeeeeer vincy gone wild if NDP ever form Government…..

    Posted by D.G.A.F | May 10, 2012, 16:26
    • What Vincy you talking bout?? Vincy is already gone.

      Posted by blane | May 10, 2012, 22:12
    • Yea. Just like how ULP bin deal with Stalky John. When all’yo go get white people to set up the man and then broadcast it on public TV. You … ULP hypocrites

      Posted by wehha | May 11, 2012, 07:54
    • Blane yo right! What the hell is D.G.A.F talking about Vincy gone wild if NDP win? This “Ask” has gotta be high on coke, pepsi or something? He na live ya! SVG dun mash-up and is Ralph to blame. We NCB…gone! Bananas.. gone! Tourism..gone! Marketting ..gone! NIS…going! +ve economic growth fo SVG.. gone! Money to pay we national bill…gone..we borrowing now. Morality and integrity..gone( PM charge fo rape). Honesty in government.. gone! Plenty ULP thiefs in public office.. that dey plenty. So Vincy dun gone through. It is time these askes try to take the 12×12 plank outta ULP’s eyes, before trying to blow the speck ah dirt outtat NDP’s eyes. Don’t these political askes want to make a dog puke?

      Posted by AHA | May 11, 2012, 15:35
  9. I agree with Eric Williams. The NDP need to act in a proper manner and do things right and not like they are a newly formed party. If they refuse to do so they will never see victory or if they do see it, it will be only one term.

    Posted by Viewer | May 10, 2012, 20:46
    • ULP HYPOCRITES!

      Eric Williams and Viewer, you hypocrites makes the Scribes and Pharasees look in Angles. Lack of decorum and professionalism? WTF are you talking about? I have said it before, let me say it again. The ULP and its supporters do not have the moral authority to speak on anything that has to do with right or wrong. The ULP over the past 15 years have desecrated everything that is moral and right in this country. Pick something, anything and tell me where the ULP have not committed sin in its regards. From the rape charges, victimization, nepotism, curruption in government, arrogance, violence, threats, thiefery, Skullduggery , law breaking, Patronizing, lying to the public, greed, bigtory, bribery and so fourth and so fifth. You name it and I can bring you evidence where th ULP have fallen on the negative side of these. In all of these sins you people stand up cheered, defended and made all sort of dogfart excuses. So Yo’all wanna come and lecture us about decorum and professionalism? WTF is wrong with you?
      The ULP offering advice to the NDP on this Batpise matter? AHH! AHH! HA! HA! HA! HA!. You … joking right? Let me jog your pea brain a little. Do you remembered what happened to Stalky John in 2001? Do you remember what the ULP did? Do you remember how it did it? Do you remember how Ralph and the ULP throw Stalky John out of the party? Let me remind you then. ULP paid some white crooks in England to set up and tape a conversation with Stalky. Of course, I am not condoning what Stalky did. That is not the issue here. What is at issue here is the evil that is characteristic of the ULP party. So the ULP caught Stalky doing something which was clearly against the interest of the party. So what did it do? DID IT USED DECORUM AND PROFESSIONALISM? No sh*t! Did the party secretly called Stralky to a meeting, confronted him with the evidence and gave him a chance to respond or resign from the party. No Fart? What did ULP do? They assemble the public at Unity Square, set up a huge TV and showed the tape in public. All yo’all clapped and cheered. Except for Boyea, Frank and a few others.. None ah you saw anything wrong with that. Eric Williams… Viewer… did you guys condem the ULP for lack of decorum and professionalism? NAH! That is yo’ party. Yo’ party can’t do wrong. So now you wanna come on this blog and want to educate us about decorum and professionalism? You F88ing hypocrites
      make me wanna puke.

      Posted by Wehha | May 11, 2012, 10:45
    • Viewer are you stupid? Seem so to me. We catching we backside outya trying to pay we light bill, water bill , buy food and send we picknie to school.. all at the hands ah this dogfart government and you think we gwine to forget that, and continue to keep ULP in power because NDP throw Baptise ouuta they party? What the fleep is worng with ya? Seem like you had you head up the Comarde’s backside for too long.

      Posted by AHA | May 11, 2012, 15:02
  10. her removal is logical – they were just endorsing her self removal. nothing more!

    Posted by Observer | May 11, 2012, 08:33
  11. STALKY JOHN and the LUBBEN REPORT: Who will bell the under-hand cat?

    WEHHA, you remember that?
    What happen to the famous LUBBEN REPORT?
    Now the ULP in power, then why after over eleven years they haven’t even attempted to INVESTIGATE the LUBBEN REPORT, in order to see WHO WAS/ WERE THE NASTY CREATURES WHO SET UP
    Mr. STANLEY,”Stalky” JOHN, and plotted, SCHEMED and conspired to WUTLISSLY DISCREDIT HIM — a prominent leader in the ST. VINCENT LABOUR PARTY — indeed the duly elected POLITICAL LEADER.
    Well, all unfair games WILL certainly BE PLAYED AGAIN.
    Since yuh dey pan earth — Look what we got instead.
    “Heaven HELP SVG !” Ah hope we nah dun’ totally garn thru.

    Posted by STEVE_HUGGINS | May 11, 2012, 18:14
  12. Hey Peter where are you?. Surely all this bad luck happening to Anesia must be the fault of the Marxist government right…Please tell us how the Comerade is responsible for this…are all waiting

    Posted by Pater's clone | May 11, 2012, 19:27
  13. ANESIA GET THE TREATMENT SHE DESERVES, SHE DID DOCTOR GONSALVES AND THE ULP THE SAME, DO SO DONT LIKE SO.

    Posted by UNITY FOR SVG | May 11, 2012, 19:43
  14. I am quite sure that she already thought she had been automatically removed, such an action can be no surprise to anyone.

    I find that like the original sacking that its grossly unprofessional and politically indecent to notify the World be notifying the person.

    Badly handled and damaging once again for the NDP, not what they did, but the way that they did it.

    Posted by Peter | May 12, 2012, 08:26
  15. Anesia you need to do some deep thinking you know, You are on the TV every night talking about freedom of religion for the people. Who people Anesia?..the same people who voted for you to represent them also voted 100% to NEVER have YOU represent them. Is that not telling you something? They all sided with Mr Eustace who you think wants to take away religious liberty. What you fail to realise is the most every one in SVg thinks that what mr eustace asks his representatives to do was REASONABLE… As a representative of the people, not saying anyting averse to any religion in PUBLIC is just common sense. A wise man gives up his right for peace. You may have book sense but girl you lack wisdom….

    Posted by proud vincy | May 12, 2012, 16:57
    • IS IT O.K., then, to say things averse to a religion, or any religion, IN PRIVATE ?
      WOULD IT BE ALRIGHT to say things averse to other religions IN CHURCH, or CHURCH SERVICES – – – as these may be considered as being said NOT IN PUBLIC, but IN PRIVATE ?

      Are church or church services considered PUBLIC or PRIVATE ??

      If PUBLIC, then you or your priest/minister MAY NOT say ANYTHING there AVERSE to ANY other religion ? Right ?

      What are INALIENABLE RIGHTS ? Or, UN-ALIENABLE RIGHTS ? Is it POSSIBLE, PRINCIPLED, or MORAL, to “GIVE UP” your “Natural Right” – – – for a somewhat ethereal ‘peace’ ?

      WHAT RIGHTS may you GIVE UP ‘for peace’ ? WHICH of these rights ?

      The charming, but now controversial, SENATOR ANESIA BAPTISTE, her affiliated Institute, or even her adopted religion, may be wrong about many things, I grant you, even without any thorough study into these, BUT, all HAIROUNIANS need to pay keen attention to the vital issue of NATURAL HUMAN RIGHTS that she has highlighted in this current situation. Our very lives may depend on it.

      WHEN may we give up our inalienable rights, inclusive of Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Conscience, and Freedom of Assembly – – – for peace ? How OFTEN may we do so ?

      Are there any rights which we MAY NOT, or CANNOT, “Give Up” for supposed peace ?
      WHERE do you STOP Giving Up your natural rights ? WHEN do you desist from giving it up ?

      Is it O.K. to COMPROMISE your PRINCIPLES, or rights, politically ? What has been the history of political compromise in SVG, and elsewhere in the Eastern Caribbean ?

      Has compromising politically ever solved our problems or natonal difficulties ? What has been the actual results of past political compromises ? Isn’t political compromise a sort of political prostitution ?

      WHAT ARE THESE INALIENABLE, unalienable, “Natural” Rights ?

      These rights are IN-ALIENABLE because they CANNOT BE ALIENATED from the human being. Humans are IN-SEPARATED from them.

      THIS IDEA is based on the understanding that man(kind) was created by a Higher Supreme POWER, an Almighty Being. In creating us, the Supreme Creator endowed us with certain in-alienable rights as human beings. The first human beings/parents were thus brought into existencee by supernatural fiat.

      At conception and birth this creative cycle, or process of “creation”, is re-plicated in us since the original creation of humankind. Therefore, we are BORN WITH THESE INALIENABLE RIGHTS. These rights are GIVEN TO US by the Creator. They do NOT derive from any “government”, or any other body or group of men.

      Governments DO NOT GIVE and CANNOT TAKE AWAY these natural, God-given rights.

      Since we are all, each and every one, CREATED by God, then each man is BORN EQUAL to the other. No man
      is ‘more equal’ than, or greater than, the other. We are ALL EQUAL before God. Thus, no man has the inherent right , power, or authority to rule over another. Our local civic and politica leaders of a few years ago used to speak in terms of “The Fatherhood of God, and the Brotherhood of Man.”

      So, when we decide to live together in a group or larger community, we freely choose to allow another person, or group, or committee, to “govern” on our behalf, FOR A LIMITED TIME PERIOD, and with LIMITED POWERS of authority.

      This is what we really do when we “select” a person from our POLITICAL CONSTITUENCY to REPRESENT us. The PEOPLE are SOVEREIGN, and we tentatively rest some of that sovereignty, temporarily with the ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE to our parliament, viz. the HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY.

      Our MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT thereby represent our wishes, for a limited period, usually up to five years, covering certain ennumerated areas/items. THEY MAY NOT OVER-STEP THESE LIMITS/ CONSTRAINTS – – – or they will be ceremonially or unceremoniously removed from office, or RE-CALLED. We may or may not decide to give them a repeat term in office, or more.

      We therefore establish a legal or moral CONTRACT whereby we AGREE to GIVE CONSENT to those governmental representatives to govern certain aspect of our affairs for a set, limited, period – – – among other cautious constraints.

      Those governmental representatives, however, MUST NOT EVER ABROGATE THESE boiler-plate “NATURAL RIGHTS”. These inalienable rights are God-given ones, given to us by Nature’s God. They cannot be properly, legally, ALIENATED (or, separated) from us – – – they are UN-ALIENABLE.

      BASIC among these rights are the freedoms of thought, conscience, expression, and assembly. Freedom to expose or follow your own religious preferences are integral to these natural human rights.

      FOREMOST among these inalienable rights are LIFE, LIBERTY, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS [i.e., health and prosperity].

      The founders of our SVG Independence CONSTITUTION, 1979, ennumerated several of these “natural” human rights very early in this our BASIC SVG LAW. This national foundational document forms our SVG SOCIAL CONTRACT with these temporary, transient, politico-governmental representatives.

      WHENEVER the incumbent Government attempts to, in any way, CANCEL, ABROGATE, ELIMINATE, or otherwise VIOLATE these inalienable rights, then, they lose their legal and/or moral authority to govern, or raison-de-etre.

      SO. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. We have true EQUALITY; no man is more than another. We have EQUAL standing before the Courts of Law. We are EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. At Creation, and subsequently at conception and birth, all mankind are endowed with these inalienable rights – – – given to us by “Nature’s God”.

      Legitimate governments may only derive their just powers from our contractual CONSENT – – – from the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. But, with the PROVISO that THEY MAY NOT JUSTLY VIOLATE OUR IN-LIENABLE, un-alienable, “Natural” God-given rights.

      THESE IDEAS were also held and purposefully taught by several ancient, and modern, thinkers.

      Marcus Tully CICERO, maintained that the very MEANING AND IMPORTANCE OF NATURE establishes a STANDARD OF RIGHT AND WRONG. He argues that THE intrinsic CHARACTERISTIC OF TRUE LAW is IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATURE.

      Tell that, please, to the offended parties in the politically frustrated, disallowed, rape cases and post-election petitions. Is there HOPE for PAX ET JUSTITIA, yet ?

      ARISTOTLE, the famed TUTOR of ALEXANDER THE GREAT, taught that GOOD and BEING are INTER-CHANGEABLE TERMS. He insists that HAPPINESS is AN ACTIVITY OF THE SOUL, in accordance with VIRTUE.

      There has been some deriding of the SENATOR BAPTISTE pertaining to her stance, or insistence, on VIRTUE IN VINCENTIAN POLITICS.

      ABRAHAM LINCOLN, who broke with the progressive LIBERALS in THE US DEMOCRATIC PARTY in order to end ENSLAVEMENT leading ultimately to the formation of the US REPUBLICAN PARTY, proclaimed that
      LIBERTY TO ALL was THE CENTRAL PRINCIPLE of THE American CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER.

      CALVIN COOLIDGE uncannily identified the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED as all-important and transcendental, as ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL, by a Creator GOD, with certain inalienable God-given “natural rights”.

      DO YOU see now WHY assorted DESPOTS, DEMAGOGUES, and MEGALOMANIACS, absolutely FEAR and HATE the natural rights of mankind ?

      CAN YOU recognize now WHY the Marxist-Leninist COPYCAT tried to OUTLAW, RE-VOKE, and DESTROY, our SVG Independence CONSTITUTION, 1979 ?

      These regional communists and their mendicant hangers-on have since the 2009 SVG REFERENDUM embarked on a relentless, vitriolic, campaign of BESMIRCHING, CONDEMNING, AND CURSING, the SVG PEOPLE for our supremely wise, historic, vote – – – EXERCISE OF THE FRANCHISE – – – in that shamefully one-sided election. THEY TOTAL DISRESPECT OUR FREE MORAL AGENCY AND OUR GOD-GIVEN RIGHT OR PREROGATIVE TO CHOOSE AND VOTE AS WE INDEPENDENTLY WISH. Just imagine that : a woefully corrupt political regime PUBLICLY CURSING the electorate for making their democratic choice.

      It seems that they really thought that we were THAT STUPID. We proved them wrong.

      THANK YOU, most kindly, my fellow VINCENTIANS, for voting so WISELY, INTELLIGENTLY, AND KNOWLEDGEABLY in that pivotal 2009 SVG REFERENDUM – – – despite the nasty political tricks, corruption, and gimmicks of the foreign-backed Communist left. Milton Cato WAS correct : these pro-soviet communists are nothing but mere POLITICAL NINCOMPOOPS. They tried it in the pre-Independence time, now they hijacked and KIDNAPPED THE SVLP in order to foolishly try it again with the SVG people. SVG, you were great !

      The founders of our SVG CONSTITUTION, 1979, super-ceding the 1969 SVG STATEHOOD Constitution, comprising, inter-alia, the British technical and representative personnel, Mr. ARTHUR WILLIAMS, Mr. GRAFTON ISAACS, Mr. HUDSON K. TANNIS, and Mr. ROBERT MILTON CATO, were superbly WISE, INSPIRED, and VISIONARY, in embedding these inalienable, unalienable, “natural” rights of mankind in this BASIC LAW, our SOCIAL CONTRACT.

      Indeed, they marvelously, encouragingly, hopefully, provided us with a beautific summation of these God-given natural rights, and of the larger Constitution, in their inclusion of a most crucial “REAMBLE”

      Long live, SVG. Long live, the NATION of SVG. Long live, the formal STATE of SVG.
      Long live, the People of SVG. Beloved HAIROUNA.

      FIGHT for the eternal preservation of these God-given inalienable natural human rights.
      GIVE ME LIBERTY, OR GIVE ME DEATH.

      My brethren, these are OUR NATURAL RIGHTS – – – IF WE KEEP THEM.

      YOU, the PRICE of our INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM and NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE is DEPENDENT on OUR ETERNAL VIGILANCE.

      Make your freedoms and INDEPENDENCE sure, SVG – – – and Eastern Caribbean – – – people.

      farward, SVG, hairouna.

      Posted by STEVE_ HUGGINS | May 13, 2012, 18:37
  16. Politics is politics wherever you go. Nevertheless, there are times when one finds some very diligent and respectful politicians, full of wisdom and a genuine concern for people and country. But, conversely, you find some who are as selfish and greedy to the seemingly limitless extent to which the ego allows them. They will ‘rape’ the country of everything possible as they provide safe havens for themselves and their families. This, nonetheless, will continue as long as such persons can get away with impunity. Unless we have leaders with a sound moral (not necessarily religious) compass, we should expect more of the same. Having degrees only means that you have spent a number of years at colleges or universities collecting knowledge and information, which to too many never translate into wisdom. DOn’t we realize that wisdom (common sense) precedes books and institutions of learning? Don’t they realize that it is wisdom that gives us these institutions, not vice versa?

    Which of these men, full of letters behind their given names (that they call degrees) possess as much wisdom as the deceased Honorable E. T. Joshua, whose goal was to uplift the lives of fellow vincentians without much concern for personal wealth? Which of them? Today’s politicians should be standing on the shoulders of such a leader rather than throwing them under the cherry picker (bus) which they use to line their pockets with the nation’s already meagre and limited wealth while the people perish.

    It is said that a PhD means only: Piled High and Deep; an MS means More of the Same. And there I don’t need to tell you what a BS means. You can figure that out all by yourselves.

    What we need is reformed hearts or new blood or both (definitely not the Anesia type) to enter politics. There are quite a few guys on this blog, judging from their comments, that seem to qualify. Steve you might very well be one of them. I may name a few, but I beg to be reserved at this moment.

    In parting I dare say, given the current economic state of our nation and the lack of moral fortitude a recall is eminent. May the Lord bless our nation.

    Posted by DWells | May 13, 2012, 02:18
  17. Peter I am so much agree with you, it is not what they doing it is how they doing it, total unprofessional in the eyes of the world… how can you vote them in office to represent svg when their actions or so unprofessional for leaders. I am not a supporter to any party, I don’t even vote but no matter what happen you still need to act in a professional manner.

    SVG gone crazy if all these unprofessional and unethical people ever to form government.

    Steve Huggins and Peter you guys need to start a class room and teach NDP leaders some professionalism and ethical ways to conduct business.

    Posted by D.G.A.F | May 13, 2012, 10:04
  18. DGAF, what ever NDP do, they can never catch up with the disgusting actions of this Marxist regime led by Gonsalves. The country is broke and the people that do not support ULP abused. ULP are a wicked and evil regime who either do not know right from wrong, or just don’t care about doing wrong at every opportunity.

    How those in the Diaspora can keep giving them money is beyond me, the US$ 1 million in cash show that ULP are having a share out among the top 17 and families of the cash, they are using it as personal fortune and windfall.

    No person or party can stoop lower than the ULP scum brigade, and in particular Gonsalves whom I consider to be the most disgusting man in the Caribbean.

    So DAGF, whilst you may consider NDP unsuitable, they are a million dollars in front in decency of the Gonsalves led ULP.

    ULP employees are robbing and plundering the ministries and state owned companies etc.

    Posted by Peter | May 15, 2012, 09:35
  19. DWELLS, another well considered piece. And, thanks for your kind sentiments; you know, this is one of the finest things someone had said about me or my scribblings. Let’s focus on the serious messages here. The future of SVG is being drastically determine at these crucial times. My fraternal appreciation, again.

    Posted by STEVE_ HUGGINS | May 16, 2012, 23:59

Archives

%d bloggers like this: