Two of Granger's very first acts as President are the awarding of the second highest Guyanese award to Green and the release of 60 criminals into society without seeming evaluations. The egregious release of the child killer by Ramoutar should not be used to gloss over these two ill-advised acts.

I agree. We have to move away from this nonsense of "if he did something terrible, then its OK if I do something terrible, so blame him not me". The PPP is not in Office anymore, this government has to set the standards for future behavior. Stop beating up on the PPP and using them as scapegoats. Shoiw us what you can do coalition members...so far we are not impressed.

not a single credible source has come forward to show that David Granger released even one dangerous criminal "into society" . . . yet scampman like u insist on crafting nasty racist messages predicated on this FICTION

The message, crime does pay!!

Good ting PPP lost..good good ting.

aren't u supposed to be late for your fitting of a fresh set of kneepads in preparation for your next 'meeting' with Jagdeo?

I didn't classify whether they were dangerous or not. I just pointed to the fact that of all the things that he could have done as early acts in his governmental tenure, he chose these two. I don't know how that amounts to scampish or racist.

I'd more release sixty small time hoods than one child killer anyday.

I do not give a crap about Green. I remember I had a falling out with Sir John Carter because I said I was allergic to Green and find him odious ( we used to talk frequently on the phone when he was alive per my interest in his experience of Guyanese history). When he would talk to me again we never mentioned green. Seems Green had his cheering section for some reason that misses me.

 

The 60 criminals you folks rant over is a mystery to me as it is to you also. We do not know who they are and that should be made public. We do not know the criteria for their selection and that should also be made public. We are told they are kids on non violent charges. That data should be released. In Guyana we treat kids horribly and that is to be corrected so if Granger had a gripe as I do about kids in prison then he had an obligation to do something about it. Again, we do not know who were released an on what conditions. None of us can speak to this except to complain about the secrecy of it since we do not need that anymore. We had enough of that with the PPP.

 

 

How can anybody say anything when the names, crimes, selection criteria are being kept secret?  Were any of the released in the gang that killed the businessman and robbed and tortured the judge and her husband????  We will never know.  This was another major slip up by Granger...not releasing these people but keeping the details secret.  The auntiman media in Guyana did nothing to investigate this issue.

mealy-mouthed bullshit! . . . you juxtaposed it with Ramotar's release of a dangerous child killer

 

u think people are fools?

 

g'wan dahside with yuh tribal 'cleverness'

Might be a blessing in disguise.  BJ believes the party will reconstitute with new blood and get rid of the hang-arounds.

like Blow Job

 

uh huh

Maybe I was wrong to include the Ramoutar release of the child killer but I thought that someone would bring it up to excuse Granger's two early acts as President and I wanted to get that out of the way. I still stand by my position that there were many other more notable and beneficial things that he could have done than these two.

You seem obsessed with such.  Look, to each his own, but no need to wear on your sleeve.

well . . . is nah me boasting about regula, intimate 'meetings' wid de man

 

uh huh

Would that be your priority over things like fixing the economy, bringing corruption charges against the former government, moving the Constitution reform process forward, etc?

what a stupidass point!

 

all those three things are being done

No doubt. But only after the two mentioned earlier.

Dumbass question. next.

It took no more than a flick of a pen for this release, nothing more.

If indeed these were minor youth infractions why wait another few years to act?

Nahhh, is not Cobra asking questions here, he's king of dumbass ones.

you are still tap dancing and being ignorant

 

the "two" mentioned earlier are command decisions that require signing a few papers

 

the three u approve of are subject to legislative and juridical process

 

so, what exactly is your argument klown?

So all that was required to release these inmates back into society was a flick of a pen? Cain bai, it seems like you are also not sure if they were minor youth infractions either.

Cobra has certainly lost it of late.

So you wait until your first acts as President are notable ones. Unless you think that awarding Green the nation's second highest honor and releasing 60 inmates back into society are notable.

       
       

The media is being controlled by the PNC. During the PPP time, they were busy exposing Jagdeo bedroom story. Concern citizens must pressure the media to be independent from government interference.

i am not interested in red herrings about Hamilton Green . . . start another thread about that and i will contribute

 

the Freedom House tactic of 'conflation' to mask retreat is one i am quite familiar with

 

let's stick with the noose u crafted for yourself with the fake 'dangerousness' of Granger's amnesty

We do not know the percentage of recidivism (the incarcerated persons released into the general populace committing fresh crimes); but the larger point is the tone set from the get-go.

 

Hoyte was the anti-Burnham regarding the kick-down-the-door banditry. He ordered the TSU (the famed Black Clothes police/para-military) to shoot on sight (okay not de jure but de facto).

 

The Interior Minister (Ramjattan) is responsible for the larger law and order situation and is an important cog in the anti-crime efforts. Even if measures are being taken to strengthen security, the message has to be loud and clear. (Oh gaddo-laaad here comes Nehru with his house slaves nonsense).

were i David Granger, i would not have done what he did at the time

 

much of what this man does, when he does it, and what he does not do, still puzzles me

 

however, let me be clear . . . there is no evidence - NONE - that any of those released had been or currently are a danger to society

 

David Granger is well known as a disciplined Law and Order military man

 

please be clear what exactly is this (implied) bad "tone" you are talking about

I edited "site" to sight, though "site" is not entirely misplaced - they got shot in-place, on-site and on-sight.

 

Redux, you're fighting the wrong fight. Who knows what's a bad tone and a good tone, and thank you for introducing the qualifier "bad" to tone as you grapple with how to respond to the general tenor (there's tone again rearing its head) of the crime situation. As a thinking person I would expect you to abstract from the PPP/C's history and the APNU/AFC's performance in the first 3 months (100 days are fast approaching), and critically examine what steps are being taken. The thing about tone is a historic perspective - Hoyte did his thing "by any means necessary". The crime situation was hurting the economy and he did what he has to do. Granger is a historian and more importantly a military man and I give him the benefit of doubt in handling this most serious of matters on his agenda. Maybe he has initiated steps to deal with it, but you should see this as a non-partisan issue, and one that is most pressing.

 

look Kari, the only "tone" we should be concerned with is, as you say, what steps are being taken by the coalition to rein in the crime surge such as it exists

 

this business about the release of 60 non-violent prisoners setting a "tone" is facile, opportunistic and fake

Once again, you seem infatuated on this "intimate man to man" thing.  Not judging, just saying.

Actually my comments are perfectly relevant to the topic at hand. Green is generally regarded as a criminal under the old PNC regime and the 60 released inmates are regarded as being inmates because they committed some kind of crime. Granger's actions favoring both sets of them is indeed concerning especially as very first acts as President. Nothing irrelevant to this topic and no need to start a new one. Add to that the increased criminal activities of late. You don't have to care about these but you cannot demand that others shouldn't.

I don't see how this is different from what I am saying.

so . . . this is the obtuse level of argumentation you expect me to waste time on

 

uh huh

But the message was wrong to the criminal enterprise as a whole.  Those individuals may not represent a mortal risk but unconditional release sends a wrong message in general.

 

Baseman was one who was in favor of some leniency for youthful petty criminals however, I was clear, any amnesty must be conditional with specific obligations and strict monitoring for compliance over a set period.

nonsense!

 

you can make your sensible latter points without resort to this petty foolishness

Prove me wrong!