Tecia Henry found dead

I heard it on the radio today and saw it later on the 7 o' clock news.
Really sad state of affairs.

Now the news report mentioned that the mother of the deceased child is on some pending drug related charges. It's strange how the dead body of the child was found not far from where she lived.

Is this some sort of message that is being sent?

When asked if there will be reprisal killings, the father of the deceased child stated on camera that others will cry just like he and his family are doing now. So basically he said in a technical way that there will be reprisal killings and yet this man is allowed to walk freely.

I was reading some responses to this topic on a Trini Forum and it seems that some people believe that the PNM is to be blamed for this child's death. Others on this forum firmly disagree with this view and are of the belief that no politician can be blamed for the murders and that it is the citizenry that should be blamed. They believe that corporal punishment and other such measures is what will straighten out our society. What baffles me is that some of them firmly believe that the ruling PNM is not to be blamed at all.

Last I checked, the ruling PNM has been in charge of this country and its resources for the past seven years or so. Shouldn't they be held accountable for the sad state of affairs we are in today?

The hubris syndrome

Selwyn Ryan Sunday, June 14th 2009

For reasons of space, last week's column (Sunday Express, June 7), The Root of the Problem, ended without my indicating what I saw to be the root of our contemporary discontents. My view was that the basic problem was not the absence of due diligence on the part of the President, misbehaviour on the part of the Attorney General, the Minister of Finance or some other minister, the Chairman of UDECOTT etc, but 'maximum leadership' which has seriously undermined the integrity of some of the key institutions in our political system. The leader is not, however, the singular cause of our problem. We, the Prime Minister included, have all become trapped in a political system in which institutions are separated in theory but have become fused in practice. Things fall apart because the centre has become too strong. Absent mindedly, we are slouching towards dictatorship, even if the symptoms are of the soft and benign variety. In retrospect, Ken Valley was correct, but we have all contributed towards the making of the "coup" that has quietly taken place. We have empowered a hubristic leader. Some of the characteristics of this hubris syndrome are analysed in a brilliant book by Dr David Owen, In Sickness-and in Power. Owen is a neurologist who gave up his practice to become an MP for the British Labour Party and the leader of the breakaway Social Democratic Party. One of Owen's basic complaints is that political analysts too often ignore the impact which the mental unbalance of leaders have on how political institutions function. Owen's generalisations are based on a study of political leaders over the past 100 years. One of the central concepts of the book is hubris. The Greeks used the term to define behaviour that is characterised by vaingloriousness and "excess". The hubristic person is one who achieves greatness and glory but who thereupon behaves in a way that suggests that he believes he is a child of God, God himself, or a secular instrument of History, and is thus invincible, indestructible, or irreplaceable. Greek Gods do not favour "heroes" who are presumptuous, and have them self-destruct. The instrument of this fate in Greek mythology is nemesis, the goddess of retribution. Owen regards hubris as an "occupational hazard" of all leaders. The "hubris syndrome" is, however, not an illness as such and is difficult to diagnose, but those who are perceptive can recognise it in leaders when they get up close. According to Owen, hubris is more commonly found in heads of government, whether democratic or not, than is often realised. The leader may not even be aware of his affliction and invariably considers himself to be as great as his flatterers tell him/her he/she is. He becomes delusionary and an addict to power with which he becomes intoxicated. As Lord Melody said in his calypso about Jonah and the stolen bake, "power fly up in the old man head". The key question to determine is whether the leader's behaviour is driven by factors "outside" of him or from factors "within", and if neither, how are the factors dialectically linked. Of concern too, is whether the affliction goes into remission when the leader loses office or is constructively "bereaved", or whether he remains consumed by an incurable political tabanca that might lead him to contemplate suicide as a "Greek necessity". Owen's case studies suggest that the origins of the syndrome are often mixed. Some of the behaviours suggest that the environment in which the leader operates is the major predisposing factor. The key external factors would be "overwhelming success in achieving and holding power, a political context in which there is minimal constraint on the leader's exercise of personal authority, and the length of time he stays in power". Incidence of the God syndrome is greater when the leader remains in power for a long period and when there is no credible opposition to him. Some leaders, however, have personalities and belief systems which facilitate the acquisition of the syndrome. They feel that they have been selected or called to serve as an instrument of the divine, and are contemptuous of those who do not recognise their heroic mission. When they look in the mirror, they can virtually see the halos dancing over their brows. According to Owen, Bush, Thatcher, and Blair all believed that they were called by God and History. As Blair himself explained, "if you have faith about these things (religion), then you realise that judgement is made by other people. If you believe in God, it's made by God himself". Accountability is not to the electorate, but to God or a prophetic personage who serves as medium and intermediary. If, however, he is already convinced of his own goodness, that accountability is not constraining, as it would be to the believer aware of his own capacity to sin. The belief in God becomes a spur to hubris rather than a constraint on it. Stubbornness, arrogance and self righteousness come to typify behaviour. Leaders who have dysfunctional personalities, and who also overstay their welcome in their pursuit of legacy agendas, are dangerous, perhaps without intending to be so. The dangers which they pose are obvious in despotic or totalitarian societies, but they also exist in democratic societies which have established institutions which are informed by the assumption that men and women are not angels and are corruptible even by the smell of power. As we have seen in our own case, these institutions do not always work effectively. As we have also seen in the case of Gordon Brown, removing a hubristic leader in a mature democratic society such as we have in the UK, is difficult even when the society has prophylactics such as votes of no confidence and free and fair elections to help constrain leaders. What then are some of the characteristics of hubristic leaders? They are, inter alia, - A narcissistic propensity to see the world primarily as an arena in which they can exercise power and seek glory rather than as a place with problems that need approaching in a pragmatic manner. - A disproportionate concern with image and presentation. - A messianic manner of talking about what they are doing and a tendency to identify themselves with the state to the extent that they regard the outlook and interests of the two as identical. - A tendency to talk of themselves in the third person or using the royal "we". - Excessive confidence in their own judgement and contempt for the advice or criticism of others. - Exaggerated self-belief, bordering on a sense of omnipotence, in what they personally can achieve. - A belief that rather than being accountable to the mundane court of colleagues or public opinion, the real court to which they answer is much greater: History or God. - An unshakeable belief that in that court they will be vindicated. - A tendency to allow their "broad vision", especially their conviction about the moral rectitude of a proposed course of action, to obviate the need to consider other aspects of it, such as its practicality, cost and the possibility of unwanted outcomes: a wooden-headed refusal to change course: - A consequent type of incompetence in carrying out a policy, which could be called hubristic incompetence. -To be continued Source: Trinidad Express To sum it up...Manning is displaying the classic qualities of a budding dictator.

The root of the problem

Selwyn Ryan

Sunday, June 7th 2009

Institutions are the sites within which conflicts in society are negotiated and resolved. Often, however, the problems require more than the proverbial nine days of the policy cycle for resolution. The key economic, political and social institutions which regulate our behaviour as citizens are now overloaded, and in danger of collapsing.

The Presidency, the Prime Ministership, the Cabinet, Parliament, the Judiciary, the bureaucracy, the statutary agencies, and the police are all undergoing stress tests, and might not long survive in ways that are recognisable. The country is in deep trouble and we all need to do some serious stocktaking and thinking outside conventional political boxes.

It cannot be business as usual. One does not want to be melodramatic, but our politicians are leading us down paths that can result in institutional failure. Little wonder that few people trust many of them to do what is right. One is reminded of the sharp that controls three card games.

One can illustrate the process of decomposition by reference to the offices of the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions which have recently come on stage. Under the 1962 independence constitution, the Attorney General was the official who had the power to institute criminal proceedings.

The Attorney General was, however, a member of Cabinet and like any other minister, was answerable to and dismissible by the Prime Minister. Observers felt that responsibility for criminal proceedings should lie with a public official who was not directly responsible to the Prime Minister since it was important to ensure that justice was not only done but also seen to be done.

The Wooding Constitution Commission advised that the functions performed by the Attorney General should be split between two separate ministries. Responsibility for advising the Government should be performed by a politically appointed Minister of Legal Affairs and that the functions of a Director of Public Prosecutions should continue to be performed by the Attorney General.

The latter would, however, also perform other advisory functions such as legal adviser to the President, the Service Commissions, the Election and Boundaries Commission, the Auditor General, the Ombudsman and such other officials as Parliament may prescribe.

Unfortunately, Dr Williams did not accept Wooding's proposed division and left the AG's office with responsibility for advising the Government in respect of civil proceedings for and against the state, and the Director of Public Prosecutions in charge of criminal proceedings.

Quite apart from what was said in the 1976 Constitution, the two office holders have over the years chosen to interpret the provisions of the Constitution in accordance with their own political agendas and their dispositions towards the use of power.

Both claimed to have powers that were exclusive to them. In the extant case, Jeremie claims that the Republican Constitution makes the AG responsible for the administration of legal affairs, and that this responsibility entitled him to enquire about ongoing anti-corruption investigations.

As a "strong" Attorney General he was merely doing what he was authorised to do by the Constitution to ensure that actions which needed to be taken in the public interest were in fact being taken.

What he was doing was asking the DPP to advise him what was being done in respect of matters which the state had spent a great deal of money to investigate since he was accountable to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate.

The DPP felt that the actual terms of the constitution supported his interpretation of the division of responsibility, and that his view was supported by the High Court per Justice Bereaux. The latter ruled that "it could never have been the intention to permit the Office of DPP to be subject to any form of direction on the part of the Attorney General".

Jeremie countered that "certain constitutional powers are subject to "[his]" section 76 powers. The power is mine, he argued. One question of course is that no one knows what was in the minds of the persons who framed the constitution. These are invented when necessary to argue and clinch a case.

What we have here is a classic"clash of powers" and also a "clash of power brokers." The powers given to both overlap, and what we in fact have is a case of a mutual power grab that is rationalised in two competing versions of what constitutes the public good. Jeremie believes that crime and corruption were critical issues, and a responsible AG had to act. "In the midst of a crime wave, the political directorate cannot tell the people of Trinidad and Tobago that an acquittal was due to a learning exercise. Perhaps, it is time for less talk and greater action in the public interest".

Henderson cited other imperatives, viz, the right of the individual to the protection of the law until evidence is adduced that prosecution is warranted. He therefore refused to prosecute Panday and Duprey at the instance of the AG when his investigations were incomplete and he was still uncertain as to whether charges could be properly laid.

Henderson advised Jeremie that he was not "subject to his directions," and that his continued efforts to have him initiate charges against persons were highly improper, "and should they continue, could imperil the successful prosecution of a charge initiated in the matters under investigation".

Henderson warned Jeremie that it was important to ensure that decisions to prosecute were not politically driven. The fact that one had spent large sums of money to investigate a matter should not dictate whether charges should be laid against citizens.

Henderson feared that Jeremie, acting at the behest of the Prime Minister, wanted to lay charges against Panday and Duprey which would have been politically disabling for the former. Keith Rowley has also claimed that the AG was after him as well for reasons which have to do with political competition.

The question as to how the power should be best shared between the two officials was addressed by the Ellis Clarke draft constitution and the Round Table exercise which considered that draft. Clarke proposed that the AG should have general superintendence of the DPP.

The proposal which is currently on the table for public consideration after much debate is that the DPP shall exercise his powers in consultation with and with the prior approval of the AG in matters directly involving official state secrets, terrorism, and state to state relations.

The DPP must also consult with the AG if the latter requests such consultation Similarly, the AG must consult with the DPP if the latter requests such a consultation. In sum, neither official can operate in splendid isolation. Both share responsibility for some aspects of the administration of the law.

The document, however, makes clear what was not so clear in the 1976 constitution, viz that the DPP is under no obligation or duty to accept any direction given or proposal made by the AG following the consultations which he has had with him. It also provides that subject to what was said above in respect of official secrets and state to state relations (etc) "the DPP shall exercise his powers and discharge his functions under the constitution independently of the control and direction of any other person or authority, and shall be free and independent from political, executive and any other form of interference."

Source: Trinidad Express

See article above for continuation...

Laventilleans join in search for 10-year-old girl

Heavily-armed soldiers and police, dressed in tactical uniforms, gather at the bottom of John John Road in Laventille, yesterday, as angry residents called for greater efficiency in the search of missing 10-year-old Tecia Henry. Photo: KEITH MATTHEWS

Geisha Kowlessar

Published: 15 Jun 2009

The desperate search for a missing ten-year-old girl turned to near violence in the Laventille community yesterday, when scores of irate residents clashed with heavily-armed police and soldiers. In their bid to locate Tecia Henry, a pupil of St Rose’s Girls’ Primary School, angry residents blocked the major roads with burning debris, demanding swift and more efficient action by law enforcement officials. Tecia went missing after leaving her mother’s home on Essex Street, John John, around 7.30 am on Saturday. The child was sent to K and G Mini-mart, at the lower end of John John, to purchase a phone card and other items. She never made it to the shop.

How exactly does clashing with police and soldiers and blocking roadways with burning debris increase the efficiency of law enforcement officials? Can someone explain this to me?

Sitting in front of the parlour, which was closed yesterday, the child’s mother Diane was visibly distraught. She tried to comfort her 12-year-old twin daughters, Tia and Tamara, who sat at their mother’s feet shedding tears for their missing sister. According to Diane, the walk from her home to the mini-mart is a mere three minutes. “When I saw a certain time I sent one of her sisters to check on her. The owner of the shop said he glimpsed her going up Crook Street,” Diane said.

Believing the mini-mart might have been closed, Diana said she thought her daughter might have gone to another shop on St Paul Street, not too far from where the child’s grandmother lived. “I called the aunt, but they said she not around. I call everybody and they say she not around.” Diane said her daughter never ran away from home. “It was school and home; nothing else.” Tecia Henry was last seen wearing a pink and grey jacket, a denim skirt, a shower cap and slippers.

Rapist on the prowl

Her disappearance has stirred fears that a rapist may be on the prowl in the Laventille district. One resident said last week a girl making her way home from St Phillip’s Primary School was snatched by a man who appeared to be in his 40s. The man dragged the screaming child at the back of the school and attempted to molest her. The child’s screams, however, alerted a teacher and other residents, causing the man to release the child.

Another resident on his way to work the morning Henry disappeared, said he, too, spotted a gunman lurking behind a house. According to the resident, as Henry was making her way to the shop she stopped to fix her slipper. The resident was adamant, however, that no “stranger” could have been responsible for Henry’s disappearance.
“Nobody would come in Laventille so, especially at Crook Street. Is somebody from right in here responsible.”

Well at least some residents are smart enough to realise that the criminals are from within their village so again I ask the question, how does blocking roadways help in finding the child? Are they protecting the alleged kidnapper?

Joint effort

Henry’s disappearance has united the Laventille community, as warring factions have joined in the search. Gangs from Beverly Hills, Picton, Canada and Africa combed the hills up to late yesterday looking for the child. Describing the police response as “sickening,” residents said they had no choice but to take matters in their own hands. “Is a poor, black child from a poor community. That is why the police doing nothing.

HUH? So are these "Lavantilleans" inferring that the police "doing nothing" only because it is a "poor, black child"? Don't they realise that is the normal response of any Government agency, whether police or clerical worker, when the PNM is in power? Then again, these "Lavantilleans" not to smart anyway, because they always vote PNM, even if it means more gang violence and even starvation.

She was part of group of other parents who gathered at the bottom of John John Road expressing their disgust by what they claimed was poor police response. “When we went to Besson Street Station to make the report, a Const Francis was abusing us, cursing us and trying to put us out the station and say he not taking the report,” the resident claimed.

Did Naail Ali get any better treatment when he went to a Police Station, wounded and bleeding, after escaping his kidnappers?

Source: Trinidad Guardian

Time To Free Africa

Black Power activist praises Mugabe:
Saturday, June 13th 2009



TRIBUTE: Mukasa Dada (Brother Willie Ricks) addresses the audience during the Kwame Ture Memorial Lecture Series on Thursday at Lions Centre in Woodbrook. -Photo: ANISTO ALVES

As Mukasa Dada (Brother Willie Ricks) launched the annual Kwame Ture Memorial Lecture Series put on by the Emancipation Support Committee at Lions Cultural Centre in Woodrook on Thursday, he called on Africa to be free.

"Africa was raped for 300 years by colonialism and we are going to fight to get it for you. We are confused, we don't know our history, we look in the mirror and we don't like what we see," he said.

But he added that the new enemy was now the "Uncle Tom neo-colonialists", causing confusion in their own countries. And he paid tribute to Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe.

"Long live Mugabe. Ain't y'all proud of Mugabe, he's still standing strong and running the white people out of Africa."

Speaking on the topic "Seize the Time: Black Power and Pan Africanism as Forces of Change", Dada, who was known as Trinidad-born Stokley Carmichael's (Kwame Ture) right-hand man, spoke of the turbulent days they shared in the civil rights and Black Power movements of the 60s and 70s.

"I loved that boy, anything he told me to do I did it well. If I tell you what he told me to do Homeland Security would be in here tonight, so I'm going to be cool."

He was anything but, however, as he analysed Carmichael's chairmanship of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) from 1966 to his formation, one year later, of the militant Black Panther Party.

"Stokley started the first Black Panther Party in Lowndes County, Alabama, and he organised it with guns...he was the one who said after James Meredith was shot...what we need is Black Power."

Dada made it clear that while Carmichael and Martin Luther King Jnr did not always see eye to eye, "Stokley loved Martin and Martin loved Stokley. We fought but loved him. When King was killed it was Stokley who said 'burn down America'. He then asked the audience...'what y'all think I did?...I did the best I could".

Above everything else, however, Dada said Carmichael, who died in 1998, took Black Power out to the world.

"He identified with every liberation movement of the world. Stokley Carmichael was an international freedom fighter," Dada said.

Source: Trinidad Express

Long live Mugabe!!! Ain't y'all proud of him? Running the white people out of Africa...All hail Mugabe!!!
This man, Mukasa Dada, should be shot for being such an idiot. He is singing praises to Mugabe for running the "white people" out of Africa, and yet it's the same "white people" who are bringing aid to other African nations that are suffering from famine and disease.
I admit, the Europeans did plunder Africa, but they also did the same to South America and the Indian sub-continent.

Mukasa Dada should set an example to all Afro-Trinis by packing up and heading to Zimbabwe, and while he's at it, he should take Patrick Manning (the dictator in training) and the PNM along with him.

RAMJACK

Just for a little humour...

The Trini Outlaw V2/ Short recap incl.

Well it seems that we have to get this site back up and running again.

First of all let me say that with the recession, I have to spend a lot more time working to pay my bills. One job just isn't enough any more, unless you don't want to live comfortably.

For 2009, we have recorded over 100 murders before the end of February.
It seems that the "children in the container on the port in Port-of-Spain" hoax was just to get attention away from the massive corruption that took place with Calder Hart and UDECOTT.
T&T has fallen into a deficit for the present fiscal year as the budget was based on an oil price that is far greater than what it is currently trading for in the world market.
The PNM has won another general election much to the dismay of the majority of the people that came out to vote. The PNM won the election with a minority vote. Such is the great, archaic British Electoral System that our Banana Republic still uses.
Hundreds (maybe thousands by now) of workers are being retrenched/laid off/put on the bread line but the PNM claims that we have full employment in Trinidad and Tobago.

What can we do?
Not a damn thing...except mobilise and protest, as is our right under a democracy.
Let the voice of the people be heard!