Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jamaica

[Morpheous]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: St_Bess</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Lawd have mercy - dema peepes caan trace </div></div>How you know dem a man? action speak lowder than words. </div></div>
LOL wind up the cheap old toy robot and bingo... watch IT go.

She trace so much it must a took some effort typing all that trash of hot air in response. Mi skip ovah and didn't even baddah read all dat longilala sittin.

[Dyoll_73]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MGee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">wouldn't the jamaican ppl have had to vote on any constitutional change - outside and apart from the representative vote in parliament? </div></div> Not all some only need a 2/3rd majority in both house. As it is as long as ther are 2 political parties in thehouse you cannot get a 2/3rd majority unless you can influence at least one senator to cross the house. It was designed to make sure that the majority under no circumstance can change the constitution without either a referandom or opposition controbution. </div></div>

There was the presumption on the part of those who wrote the constitution that senators would act in the best interests of the country without regard for partisan consideration. They would put aside differences and work together. As such, they are appointed not elected. The idea behind this provision was high-minded, but I don't have much confidence in bi-partisanship in the current political environment. If I were a member of the committee drafting the Jamaican Constitution, I would push to have the party which has the majority in parliament be given a 2/3 majority in the Senate.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Manley in his first hold on power was unable to get the people behind his somewhat radical changes....</div></div>

Like what?

[Wahalla]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MGee</div><div class="ubbcode-body">wouldn't the jamaican ppl have had to vote on any constitutional change - outside and apart from the representative vote in parliament? </div></div> Not all some only need a 2/3rd majority in both house. As it is as long as ther are 2 political parties in thehouse you cannot get a 2/3rd majority unless you can influence at least one senator to cross the house. It was designed to make sure that the majority under no circumstance can change the constitution without either a referandom or opposition controbution. </div></div>

There was the presumption on the part of those who wrote the constitution that senators would act in the best interests of the country without regard for partisan consideration. They would put aside differences and work together. As such, they are appointed not elected. The idea behind this provision was high-minded, but I don't have much confidence in bi-partisanship in the current political environment. If I were a member of the committee drafting the Jamaican Constitution, I would push to have the party which has the majority in parliament be given a 2/3 majority in the Senate.

</div></div>

Even though they have a popular mandate of say 52 %????.. I would do the opposite..Senetors should be based on proportional of the popular vote. and possibly introduce minority parties to the poltical process... This would force more compromises in laws or grid lock.. Govererment would have to listen more to the oppostion. That is my opnion and I am respecting yours.. not starting a bun fight...

You seem to have a very good grasp of the history of our constitution... And yes these guys were idealists not a fault considering the time... As for the call for excluding MPS with commonweath ties, it strikes me as Xenophobic..this ould have exclude a great seneator a black nationalist, an interlectual giant, a great leader and the greatest Cricket Captain the West Indies ever had Frank Worrel.. So he was a Trini.

[johnnycakes]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=johnnycakes]Manley in his first hold on power was unable to get the people behind his somewhat radical changes....</div></div>

Like what?

/quote]


TG,
Like upping the share of the bauxite returns that the Jamaican government/people would get from the big foreign corporations.
This would be much like that &quot;radical extremist&quot; Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela fairly recently.


Oh and in case you think I have forgotten, would you now answer my question? I did another 25 minutes of Googling things like the &quot;Coard trial records/Jamaican involvement in Coard Grenada coup&quot; and have still found no link to the PNP or anyone or group from Jamaica so I have to depend on your historical memory to come up with something on this fascinating thought.

The question:

&quot;... can you or can you not provide a reliable (or otherwise) source that says that the PNP was involved in the Grenada coup ?&quot;

Thanks

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=johnnycakes]Manley in his first hold on power was unable to get the people behind his somewhat radical changes....</div></div>

Like what?

/quote]


TG,
Like upping the share of the bauxite returns that the Jamaican government/people would get from the big foreign corporations.
This would be much like that &quot;radical extremist&quot; Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela fairly recently.</div></div>

That was it?
Well the citizen of Jamaica did not bar him from instituting a Bauxite Levy. He had his way with that and it was very popular.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">Fail</span>!
Next one!

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=johnnycakes]Manley in his first hold on power was unable to get the people behind his somewhat radical changes....</div></div>

Like what?

/quote]


TG,
Like upping the share of the bauxite returns that the Jamaican government/people would get from the big foreign corporations.
This would be much like that &quot;radical extremist&quot; Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela fairly recently.


Oh and in case you think I have forgotten, would you now answer my question? I did another 25 minutes of Googling things like the &quot;Coard trial records/Jamaican involvement in Coard Grenada coup&quot; and have still found no link to the PNP or anyone or group from Jamaica so I have to depend on your historical memory to come up with something on this fascinating thought.</div></div>

<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">Good work</span> I accept the <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">new bar</span> if we cannot find it on google search we are not going to go with it....

<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">Win</span>
for you!

[johnnycakes]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

Well, TG how about it.
You claimed that the PNP was involved in the coup in Grenada, failed to produce a shred of evidence to support that claim and are now poo-pooing my attempts to find corroborating evidence for something YOU claimed to be true.

As for Manley, the fact that the United States actively worked to get rid of him and replace him with the Reagan-like Seaga speaks to his leftist leanings.

He would not have had his government subverted had he been a run-of-the -mill Third World leader in thrall to the Empire.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well, TG how about it.
You claimed that the PNP was involved in the coup in Grenada, failed to produce a shred of evidence to support that claim and are now poo-pooing my attempts to find corroborating evidence for something YOU claimed to be true.</div></div>I am not <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">pooh-poohing</span> it I say you win did you read it?
I will not withdraw my statement but you win and I am happy at the precedent you set, how much clearer can I make it?

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for Manley, the fact that the United States actively worked to get rid of him and replace him with the Reagan-like Seaga speaks to his leftist leanings.</div></div>
Can you prove that, no you can't, but it does not stop you from claiming it is a fact.

Menlie was not replaced by anyone.
His use of terror, corruption and his inept attempt at governance ensured that he was voted out when an election was called, same as every Government in the History of Jamaica since Self Rule.

[johnnycakes]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

Saying that Michael Manley was somehow exempt from the U.S global war on socialism (the Cold War) when it took down governments in Chile, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Grenada, Haiti and others that were considered leftist is just not reasonable or likely.

Michael Manley was close to both bete noire Fidel Castro and brought in Cuban doctors and military (I think) and with Maurice Bishop in Grenada both in the gunsights of the United States.

Cuba was the only country to withstand the desires of the Empire and the Empire could not, was not going to repeat that mistake

It is most certainly true that the U.S. waged the same economic and destabilization that was so successful in Chile on Jamaica.

Occam's Razor applies here. The most likely explanation is the most likely explanation.

It is unlikely to a probability of near zero that the U.S. did not do what they needed to do to get Manley out of power and the very pro-Empire Seaga in.

We've been through this several times.

Your thinking on this is not corroborated by the many things I've read about U.S. foreign policy and I've read a lot about U.S. foreign policy in the 40 years I've been doing that. To the contrary, it is nearly universally believed that Manley was removed as a leftist threat and model for other countries in the area very close to the United States.

Another Cuba in the form of a a socialist Jamaica would have been a disaster for the Empire.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jama

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Saying that Michael Manley was somehow exempt from the U.S global war on socialism (the Cold War) when it took down governments in Chile, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Grenada, Haiti and others that were considered leftist is just not reasonable or likely. </div></div>

My friend provide the proof. You are lying and don't know what you are talking about. Since you have made the same assertions in the other posts I will just copy and paste my reply too.

[Panajar]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jamaica

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The constitution does open the possibility that a foreign born individual can aspire to the highest elected office in Jamaica, and I think that was very forward-looking, progressive, and generally a good thing </div></div>

You must be one of the most <span style="font-weight: bold">naive</span> individuals on the planet.You have no knowledge of human nature. A foreign born person will undoubtedly have split loyalties Between the two countries that they are a citizens of.In the past there have been a rash of cases in the USA involving naturalized citizens, spying for the county of their birth.With that in mind why would you want them to hold the highest office in the land.Where was CIAGA BORN ...BOSTON, that explains a lot.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jamaica

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Panajar</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The constitution does open the possibility that a foreign born individual can aspire to the highest elected office in Jamaica, and I think that was very forward-looking, progressive, and generally a good thing </div></div>

You must be one of the most <span style="font-weight: bold">naive</span> individuals on the planet.You have no knowledge of human nature. A foreign born person will undoubtedly have split loyalties Between the two countries that they are a citizens of.In the past there have been a rash of cases in the USA involving naturalized citizens, spying for the county of their birth.With that in mind why would you want them to hold the highest office in the land.Where was CIAGA BORN ...BOSTON, that explains a lot. </div></div> In Jamaica ther are many Jamaican born people who hold British and other coitozenship that has allegience to and take orders from abroad. They simply are contracted to do so.

[Dyoll_73]

Re: Michael Manley was the only dirty Prime Minister of Jamaica

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Panajar</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The constitution does open the possibility that a foreign born individual can aspire to the highest elected office in Jamaica, and I think that was very forward-looking, progressive, and generally a good thing </div></div>

You must be one of the most naive individuals on the planet.You have no knowledge of human nature. A foreign born person will <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">undoubtedly</span></span> have split loyalties Between the two countries that they are a citizens of.In the past there have been a rash of cases in the USA involving naturalized citizens, spying for the county of their birth.With that in mind why would you want them to hold the highest office in the land.Where was CIAGA BORN ...BOSTON, that explains a lot. </div></div>

&quot;Undoubtedly&quot;????

Remember I told you, in another thread, that I would put away a dollar for every asinine statement you made? Well, from the above, I will put away at least $8.

I hope people of your mentality are not put in charge of public policy in any country, anywhere, except in <span style="font-weight: bold">Sangala</span>, of course.

What you're doing is trying to make an argument, not just for why foreign-born nationals shouldn't be allowed to run for office in any country (even president of the US, for that matter), but also why they shouldn't even be allowed to become citizens. What you are saying has all the markings of xenophobia. But I'm not surprised; it's all you can come with.

When the framers of the US Constitution stipulated that only natural-born citizens may run for president, they were doing so in view of the current political environment (the 1780s). They were concerned that foreign born individuals would be under the influence of some foreign power, and they had Britain in mind, mostly. Today, that concern is hardly given serious consideration as no reasonable person believes that only foreign born individuals are agents of foreign powers. As such, there have been numerous resolutions in Congress to amend the Constitution in that regard to simply allow any <span style="font-weight: bold">citizen</span> the opportunity to run for president. The votes are not there yet, but support is growing. Today, if you ask the average American why it is that they object to foreign-born <span style="font-weight: bold">citizens</span> running for president, they can't offer a plausible explanation. Note that foreign-born citizens can run for local, state and federal offices in the US - mayor, city council, house, senate, state governor, and they can even be appointed to high level cabinet positions in the federal government.

You spoke of a &quot;rash of cases in the USA involving naturalized citizens, spying for the county of their birth.&quot; Ok, apart from Wen Ho Lee, please provide a list of these foreign-born citizens who spied for the country of their birth. BTW, the Feds, with all its resources, failed to prove Lee's guilt on the charge of espionage; on a plea agreement, he pleaded to a significantly lesser charge of mishandling classified data which could be brought against any scientist at Los Alamos, BTW, and was just an attempt by then-Energy Secretary Bill Richardson to save face. Lee subsequently won a lawsuit for $1.6 million for damage to his reputation.

Now, I can tell you about a number of people who are natural-born citizens who spied for foreign powers, from the Rosenbergs, to Jonathon Pollard, to Robert Hansen. Just two weeks ago, a high-level state department official (a natural born citizen) was charged with spying for Cuba.

I make no pretense to know what the framers of the Jamaican Constitution were thinking when they put that document together; I can only go on the public utterings of the two surviving members - David Coore (PNP) and Edward Seaga (JLP). In this regard, (the business of the birthplace of someone seeking Jamaica's highest elected office) I think the Jamaican constitution is more progressive than the US Constitution.

BTW, Sangala is a fictional country.