EYEWITNESS: NO…

0

…review of Exxon Contract

President Granger has announced that there’s no prospect for a “review” of the Exxon contract…but it’s “before Cabinet and it depends on what determination Cabinet arrives at”!! Now, what the heck does that mean? If Cabinet is going to make a “determination” on the contract…how can it do so without ‘reviewing” the said contract?? Or is Cabinet now possessed of the powers of divination??

From where your Eyewitness sits, its members are ‘possessed” all right – but with hubris, which actually not only precludes divination, but in seeing what’s right in front of them!! The President then demonstrated that his Attorney General had briefed him on Contract Law 101 on the nature of a contract. He pointed out: “The contract is an agreement between two parties, and these things have to be approached very carefully.”

Well, golly wiz, Mr President! Didn’t Williams think to brief your fair-haired boy, Raphael “Nassau” Trotman, BEFORE he jetted off to the Texas prairies to “re-negotiate” the contract? You bet your last medal, Mr President, that changing the terms of a contract after it’s been signed, sealed and delivered isn’t something you can do on a whim. You might just end up in a worse “plimla bush” than the one that snagged Nassau’s pants!!

But your Eyewitness is a nationalistic Guyanese, and he’ll suggest an argument you can toss out at Cabinet as they try to conjure up some ways to “relook” at the contract. Notice, dear readers, we did NOT say “review”. Even though a “contract is an agreement between two parties”, the contract is VOID if one of the parties “was not of sound mind while signing the agreement”. Now, Mr President, you know — and we all know — that “Nassau” Trotman took his future wife-to-be to COP 25 in Gay Paris when she was a mere assistant…and was immediately smitten! That Eiffel Tower will do that to you!!

Anyhow, when he later faced the Texas legal squad six months later, in June 2016, to hammer out the contract, the poor slob was already hammered by love!! Even though it’s been a while, you surely remember what Cupid’s arrow can do to you!! So let’s put it to the Texans: your chief “re-negotiator” was “not of sound mind”. Why would he then take his wife-to-be on that later all-expenses-paid to Texas last year?? She wasn’t even a member of his Ministry any more. “Not of sound mind,” due to being besotted!!

Now, we know, Mr President, you’re a man of honour, and you gave your word to Trotman at Nassau. You’re loath to break your promise. But look at it this way: It’s not only the right thing for the country, but for “Nassau” as well.

…witness for Lindo

Ah…what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!! And we don’t only have to quote the Bard…our own old folks warn us that “all smart fly does get caught on cow’s backside!!” And look at how big a pile of cow’s manure the Government found itself in with the Lindo Creek CoI!!

Remember the fear you’ll throw a party and no one’d come? Well, the Government threw a CoI, and not a solitary soul turned up!

It’s clear that whatever witnesses there might be, they were downwind and caught more than a whiff of the “BS”!! Look at this from the perspective of anyone who may have info on that tragedy.

Since the Government had all those massacres that occurred BEFORE Lindo Creek, isn’t it fishy they’re started at the end? Even the village idiot would suspect something “na regulah”!! The word on the street is the Government wants to continue degutting the Disciplined Forces to ensure only the diehard faithful remains for what lies ahead.
Dictatorship!!

…factory; no sugar

So the SPU now wants to have Skeldon and Enmore as “going concerns”!!? The question your Eyewitness has is: How come producing sugar at Skeldon at four times the selling price now shows it’s a “going” concern?

LEAVE A REPLY

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.