PM Not Happy....

[SmoothOperator]

Well duh...McMillan has apparently fallen asleep on the job. I have not heard a single pronouncement from him since he took the job. I still have high hopes for Golding, but the clock is ticking, step up man.
--

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/html/20090118T230000-0500_145011_OBS_PM_NOT_HAPPY.asp

---

PRIME Minister Bruce Golding yesterday expressed dissatisfaction that his administration has not done more to reduce Jamaica's nagging crime problem which has already claimed more than 70 lives 19 days into the new year.

Addressing stone-faced supporters of his ruling Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), who listened attentively to their leader at the party's Corporate Area constituencies (Area Council One) meeting at Kingston High School, Golding also admitted that the party had done a poor job of talking to its constituents, even as he vowed that 2009 will be his year.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: PM Not Happy....

PM not happy
Bruce Golding dissatisfied with Government's handling of crime
BY ERICA VIRTUE Observer writer [email protected]
Monday, January 19, 2009



PRIME Minister Bruce Golding yesterday expressed dissatisfaction that his administration has not done more to reduce Jamaica's nagging crime problem which has already claimed more than 70 lives 19 days into the new year.

Addressing stone-faced supporters of his ruling Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), who listened attentively to their leader at the party's Corporate Area constituencies (Area Council One) meeting at Kingston High School, Golding also admitted that the party had done a poor job of talking to its constituents, even as he vowed that 2009 will be his year.

"What I will say to you is that I am not satisfied that we are doing all that we can do or all that we must do to bring this crime under control. And therefore, there is more that has to be done and there are more steps that will have to be taken," Golding said.

His remarks were read by some Labourites as a mild warning to National Security Minister Colonel Trevor MacMillan who political analysts have given a failing grade since his appointment eight months ago.

Golding gave as one of the sources of his disappointment, the terror unleashed by gangsters on residents of Gravel Heights in St Catherine and the fact that it required his intervention to have some semblance of order returned to the community.

"We have problems in Gravel Heights that lasted for two months," said Golding. "We didn't bring that problem under control until I sent the army and said 'listen nuh, don't leave until yuh bring that problem under control. Camp out in there'. Why, because two bad man, who decide that they need an area to go subject to donmanship, because the areas where donmanship exists there is not enough space for them, they must now find an area that they can don for themselves and they must terrorise the daylights out of people in Gravel Heights - two a them," Golding said.

<span style="font-weight: bold">He said the two gunmen should have been in the courts, but the case faltered because witnesses remained unwilling to come forward.</span>

Golding said the police should have been able to go into the community, grab available intelligence, plan strategies and give assurance to the residents. Not being able to do so, he said, warranted his intervention as minister of defence.

Noting that the State could not react to every criminal outburst across the island, Golding reminded his audience that two anti-crime bills currently before Parliament needed bi-partisan consensus. However, the bills may have to be modified in order to achieve that consensus.

&quot;They cannot be passed into law unless the Opposition also agrees. That is what the Constitution says,&quot; he said.

Golding also told the Labourites that last week, in addition to the regular Monday morning meeting of the Cabinet, the executive met at a special retreat Thursday and Friday, and the JLP's Standing Committee met on Saturday in order to strategise ways to move the Government and party forward.


<span style="font-weight: bold"> Dudd : <span style="font-size: 11pt"> only allowing ordinary jamaicans to have licensed firearms. It is time jamaicatp break away from the restrictions put on it by countries that allow gun ownership as a constitutional right. theyir only ontrest is to keep blacks in the world,not just US, haiti and Africa,but Jamaica too. Only these restrictions comes in the form of agrements on arms. They assist and support Domonican Repibloc to have Arms factory,but restrict ordinary Jamaicans from gettind ledal fire arms to secure themsenves. No plice department is able to keep people safr. it is the right and responsibillity of the citizen to do so.
crime wull never reacg acceptable state as long as this policy is allowed to stand.</span> </span>

[barosa]

Re: PM Not Happy....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Noting that the State could not react to every criminal outburst across the island, Golding reminded his audience that two anti-crime bills currently before Parliament needed bi-partisan consensus. However, the bills may have to be modified in order to achieve that consensus.

<span style="font-weight: bold">&quot;They cannot be passed into law unless the Opposition also agrees. That is what the Constitution says,&quot; he said.</span></div></div>

What kinda Constitution is it that restrict the Govt from passing laws?; this is what I can't understand. Why can't the government pass its needed crime bills? Why have a government if they can't pass laws to GOVERN??? Does the Government has at least a simple majority? How can the govt function if the opposition has to agree before a law can be passed? and why would the opposition deliberately prevent the Govt from passing &quot;crime laws&quot; unless they are protecting the criminals? with criminals. Am I missing something because the constitution gives the opposition the power to block laws or is it only laws that relate to crime? Can someone explain it to me? It just does not make sense!!
_____________________________

Boy! Aren't we living in interesting times?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: PM Not Happy....

The oposition can block laws that infringes the constutional gurantees.
Any law yhat restritcs the limited constituional gurantees,will not permantly umprove the crime rate.
<span style="font-size: 11pt"> The only effective solution to the high murfer rate is to allow blacks to aquire legal fire arms, by removing the veto powers of police officer,if the person has no criminal recotds. Gun crimes will only be reduced, when the criminals realize that they are more than likely to be faced by an equally armed potential victim.

Isn't it obvious that whites are rarely attacked, because everybody knows that they are likely to be armed and abe to defend themselves?
Until that is done we will be simply losing the lives and treasure of the black demography of the country</span>

[barosa]

Re: PM Not Happy....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The oposition can block laws that infringes the constutional gurantees.
Any law yhat restritcs the limited constituional gurantees,will not permantly umprove the crime rate.
<span style="font-size: 11pt"> The only effective solution to the high murfer rate is to allow blacks to aquire legal fire arms, by removing the veto powers of police officer,if the person has no criminal recotds. Gun crimes will only be reduced, when the criminals realize that they are more than likely to be faced by an equally armed potential victim.

Isn't it obvious that whites are rarely attacked, because everybody knows that they are likely to be armed and abe to defend themselves?
Until that is done we will be simply losing the lives and treasure of the black demography of the country</span> </div></div>
Dr Dudd, I am aware that you strongly support the idea of allowing blacks in Jamaica to own legal firearms. Let's say that in the likelyhood of that happening, about what percentage of the black population do you think would be elligible to own legal guns and at what age would they become elligible? I asked these questions because, until we know how many guns legal and illegal are in black hands, we have no idea of the scope of what's needed to make up the difference. We may be halfway there without knowing it!

If our govt lifted the restrictions tomorrow, I doubt there would be a sudden rush by those unarmed citizens to aquire their own, which brings me to the next point. How do we know that many of those with clean records, aquiring weapons may not be doing so to join their fellowmen in a life of crime for the first time? I am sure you wouldn't expect the govt to be overtly encouraging black citizens to get guns to protect themselves and reduced crime at the same time. I am not too sure if allowing Jamaicans to arm themselves &quot;willy nilly&quot; is such a good idea in the hope it will reduce crime. I think you have &quot;wild west&quot; approach to gun ownership...
____________________________

Boy! Aren't we living in interesting times?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: PM Not Happy....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: barosa</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The oposition can block laws that infringes the constutional gurantees.
Any law yhat restritcs the limited constituional gurantees,will not permantly umprove the crime rate.
<span style="font-size: 11pt"> The only effective solution to the high murfer rate is to allow blacks to aquire legal fire arms, by removing the veto powers of police officer,if the person has no criminal recotds. Gun crimes will only be reduced, when the criminals realize that they are more than likely to be faced by an equally armed potential victim.

Isn't it obvious that whites are rarely attacked, because everybody knows that they are likely to be armed and abe to defend themselves?
Until that is done we will be simply losing the lives and treasure of the black demography of the country</span> </div></div>
Dr Dudd, I am aware that you strongly support the idea of allowing blacks in Jamaica to own legal firearms. Let's say that in the likelyhood of that happening, about what percentage of the black population do you think would be elligible to own legal guns and at what age would they become elligible? I asked these questions because, until we know how many guns legal and illegal are in black hands, we have no idea of the scope of what's needed to make up the difference. We may be halfway there without knowing it!

If our govt lifted the restrictions tomorrow, I doubt there would be a sudden rush by those unarmed citizens to aquire their own, which brings me to the next point. How do we know that many of those with clean records, aquiring weapons may not be doing so to join their fellowmen in a life of crime for the first time? I am sure you wouldn't expect the govt to be overtly encouraging black citizens to get guns to protect themselves and reduced crime at the same time. I am not too sure if allowing Jamaicans to arm themselves &quot;willy nilly&quot; is such a good idea in the hope it will reduce crime. I think you have &quot;wild west&quot; approach to gun ownership...
____________________________

Boy! Aren't we living in interesting times? </div></div>Why shouldn't the government encourage the blacks to get legal fire arms?
they legally arm 6,000 of them in police and 1'500 as military.They issue 35,000+ legal firearms to other races, but blacks are only allowed to legally own weapons as organized forces, either as police military or private security guards.

When that was done in South Africa,Jamaican government twas the first to oppose it in the UN.
Yet this form of apartheid is accepted by black Jamaicans without even a question.

As for the educated blacks... All i can say they were chosen to be educated on the basis that they would join in the oppression of the repressed masses.

[barosa]

Re: PM Not Happy....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why shouldn't the government encourage the blacks to get legal fire arms?
they legally arm 6,000 of them in police and 1'500 as military.They issue 35,000+ legal firearms to other races, but blacks are only allowed to legally own weapons as organized forces, either as police military or private security guards.

When that was done in South Africa,Jamaican government twas the first to oppose it in the UN.
Yet this form of apartheid is accepted by black Jamaicans without even a question.

<span style="font-weight: bold">As for the educated blacks... All i can say they were chosen to be educated on the basis that they would join in the oppression of the repressed masses.</span>
_________________________
Join me as members of the church of LOVE,and let us change the world, one good deed at a time. </div></div>

Nice try Dudd, Somehow, I get the feeling that your terse provocative comments are intended to invoke resposes you hope to get. I can't honestly believe that YOU believe many of your own viewpoints...

First off the mark, l disagree with your comment shown in bold. I for one, can't accept what you are ascribing to our educated blacks. I am aware of the Colonial and post colonial periods that gave rise to these beliefs and even if they were perceived to be so, it's an insult to those including yourself who were educated to serve and uplift many of the colonials during those periods... ~ We have no evidence on which to definetely say, that's why they were educated. I've heard it said many a times while growing up there but never accepted it and will say it's a stretch to say &quot;blacks were chosen to be educated to join in the oppression of the repressed masses. That sound like anti-colonial and revolutionary rhetoric which I dont buy...

It's obvious that your neglect to answer the questions posed to you was either one of &quot;neglect&quot; or could it be, it's too much of a challenge?... I would want to think it's the former and not the latter. Re-read my opening remarks!!

Fortunately, our founding fathers were wize enough to have included in Jamaica's constitution, our National Motto: &quot;OUT OF MANY ONE PEOPLE&quot;... This is our &quot;bedrock concept&quot; that guards us from any deviation away from who we really are as a people and reminds us that <span style="font-weight: bold">&quot;racial politics&quot; is No! No! in Jamaica.</span> That said, I find it difficult to understand how could you justify your comment as follows: &quot;Why shouldn't the government encouraged the <span style="font-weight: bold">blacks</span> to get legal fire arms?&quot;

<span style="font-weight: bold">Any such encouragement or promotion however well intentioned, would be perceived by members of our &quot;non-black&quot; population as a &quot;cause for concern&quot; resulting in a degree of consternation and anxiety which would be a natural outcome.</span> Hopefully, we will never see the development of such a situation in Jamaica. We Jamaicans should wake up! change the constitution where neccessary, confiscate all ILLEGAL guns after imposing an embargo against the entry of all firearms except for licensed dealers, the police and the military. We are our worst enemy, it is sad but true...
_________________________

Boy! Aren't we living in interesting times?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: PM Not Happy....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="font-style: italic">We are our worst enemy, it is sad but true... </span></div></div>.<span style="font-size: 11pt">
So true,....... especially the educated amongst us.

We readily accept the conditions that legally arms 99% of whites

and other races. Yet we see in as a consternation if blacks is equally armed.

Then you readily quote our national motto, &quot;out of many one people

as a bedrock guardian against racism, while not recognizing that

the US that has identical motto &quot;out of many one' for over 2 and

1/4 centuries practice anything but that ,until blacks risked life and future demanded otherwise.

The grudgingly accede to and still have <span style="font-weight: bold">no policy </span> of teaching equality of races.

they instead promote 'tolerance',which only confirm inferiority of the members to be tolerated.

Yet you believe that the same motto that is responsible for

Jamaica's racial harmony in 46 years,has the opposite effect on the US for over 200 years.

Now where is the objective reasoning behind such a claim?

As I state in my earlier posts, our education does very little to

improve the skills beneficial to the improvement of the race's self worth.
Without which we are doomed to the ever spiralling loop of generations of the mentally enslaved.

Unless we can really see the dire position where we are as the

most likely savior of the race,we will be on another century, be

in the position of the black Americans 1968 where they were

after,being in high political offices including the senate just 100 years before. </span>