EYEWITNESS: Why spunks…


…towards the US?

Well…well…well! Guyana voted against the US (and Trump) on that country’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. In case you’d imbibed too much in the Christmas party, dear reader, and missed the dust-up at the UN…here’s the scoop. Trump, being Trump, decided to jettison decades of US policy not to go along with Israel’s insistence that Jerusalem was the capital of the state of Israel, which they’d created after driving out half of the Palestinian population.

Jerusalem, however, remained with a Palestinian majority, and in recent proposals to bring peace to the Middle East, the UN-sponsored “two-state solution” (divvying up  the state of Israel into Palestinian and Jewish parts) was acceptable to 165 countries, except the US and Israel. The Palestinians would make East Jerusalem into their capital.

While the US is only one country, it’s the lone superpower standing, so all of this was turned on its head by Trump’s decision to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem!

The matter was brought to the 15-member Security Council, where even close ally Britain joined the 14-1 vote against the US decision. The latter, of course, used its veto to prevent a resolution being moved against it. Trump wasn’t moved – his stock rose in the domestic gallery he was playing to – he was sticking it to the UN, full of “furriners”! The counter resolution in the General Assembly, which Guyana and the other 127 countries voted for, doesn’t have any legal effect; it’s just sending a message to Trump.

So the question arises: Why did Granger have his Government go along? Principle? Well, the book on Granger’s hero, mentor and model – Burnham — was written by Tyrone Ferguson. The title he gave it was “To survive sensibly or to court heroic death”! The point he made, of course, is that unlike Jagan, Burnham had no desire to “court certain death” by taking on the US so in the beginning.

Once ensconced in power, it was a different story!
In the matter at hand, US UN Representative Nikki Haley had warned countries – with individual notes – that the US was “taking names”! Of the 193 member countries, 8 voted with the US, 35 abstained (including TT and Jamaica) and 24 didn’t vote. The last two groups must’ve listened to Trump: “We’re watching those votes. Let them vote against us. We’ll save a lot. We don’t care.” They wanted to “survive”.
So, what gave Granger spunks? Well, Burnham got spunks after he got power, because the PPP was anathema to the US, and so the US had no choice but to put up with the PNC’s nose-thumbing.
Is the PPP once again beyond the (US) pale?

…against Opposition MPs

Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Issacs, sent out a missive defending the police invasion of the Parliament Chambers to eject Opposition PPP MPs. And what a strange defence it was – reminiscent of AG Basil Williams’s forays in the Courts of Law! He started out with:

“Referring to an incident in the United Kingdom’s House of Commons, the 24th edition of Erskine May Parliamentary Practice at page 457 states that the Speaker directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove a Member of Parliament who refused to comply with an instruction to withdraw. The Sergeant-at-Arms, “finding that force was necessary, brought in his officers… ” Well, excuse your possibly optically challenged Eyewitness, but didn’t that say the Sergeant at Arms “brought in his officers.” Issacs should check further and he’d find the Sergeant-at-Arms works with the “Office of the Parliamentary Security Director”.

Then he refers to ejections from the South African Parliament. Yes, that happened, but did Issacs not read, “CON-COURT RULES POLICE MAY NOT REMOVE MPS FROM PARLIAMENT”??

But why’s the Clerk suddenly so pro-active? Anything to do with mining concessions?

…on curfew

Who says the Public Security Minister has no power? He just relaxed the 2am curfew for the holidays!! Makes sense, doesn’t it?

Just when they’ll be the most drunks on the roads!!



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