TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:~Vēġó~ wrote:"no right to privacy" checking in
And there will be a disgusting apologist brigade who will certainly come here and defend this tyrannical, dictatorial nonsense.
Oh gosh you must not be so hard on yourself. Pp lost months ago. Don't chastise yourself now for being a disgusting apologist for the last few years.
. Your predictability is only matched by your gullibility. How can you be comforted by the Big Brother AG's reassurance that there will be no nefarious use of the spying technology when they have already abused it. Even Scarfman with his duncey self was spied on, yet he is using his lapdog AG to foist this dotishness on people, conveniently again while he is away. De Dragon wrote:Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:~Vēġó~ wrote:"no right to privacy" checking in
And there will be a disgusting apologist brigade who will certainly come here and defend this tyrannical, dictatorial nonsense.
Oh gosh you must not be so hard on yourself. Pp lost months ago. Don't chastise yourself now for being a disgusting apologist for the last few years.
Right on time like Amalgamated
Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:~Vēġó~ wrote:"no right to privacy" checking in
And there will be a disgusting apologist brigade who will certainly come here and defend this tyrannical, dictatorial nonsense.
Oh gosh you must not be so hard on yourself. Pp lost months ago. Don't chastise yourself now for being a disgusting apologist for the last few years.
Right on time like Amalgamated
Nowhere did I say I was comforted. As per usual you put words in people mouth. Doesn't change the fact that the same thing you accuse people of you basically do yourself. It's why people don't take you seriously
De Dragon wrote:Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:~Vēġó~ wrote:"no right to privacy" checking in
And there will be a disgusting apologist brigade who will certainly come here and defend this tyrannical, dictatorial nonsense.
Oh gosh you must not be so hard on yourself. Pp lost months ago. Don't chastise yourself now for being a disgusting apologist for the last few years.
Right on time like Amalgamated
Nowhere did I say I was comforted. As per usual you put words in people mouth. Doesn't change the fact that the same thing you accuse people of you basically do yourself. It's why people don't take you seriously
Goddamn!, now that I know that you don't take me seriously, is life worth living anymore?
UDFR with yuh insignificant self!
Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:Allergic2BunnyEars wrote:De Dragon wrote:~Vēġó~ wrote:"no right to privacy" checking in
And there will be a disgusting apologist brigade who will certainly come here and defend this tyrannical, dictatorial nonsense.
Oh gosh you must not be so hard on yourself. Pp lost months ago. Don't chastise yourself now for being a disgusting apologist for the last few years.
Right on time like Amalgamated
Nowhere did I say I was comforted. As per usual you put words in people mouth. Doesn't change the fact that the same thing you accuse people of you basically do yourself. It's why people don't take you seriously
Goddamn!, now that I know that you don't take me seriously, is life worth living anymore?
UDFR with yuh insignificant self!
Murdered relatives UDFR too.
Habit7 wrote:mrtrini45 wrote:desifemlove wrote:mrtrini45 wrote:Race
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/20160415 ... eaten-suit
Axed SSA directors threaten suit *
Claims of unfair dismissal, ‘racist’ request...
Published on Apr 15, 2016, 1:00 am AST
By Anna Ramdass
anna.ramdass@trinidadexpress.com
Former high-ranking directors of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA) have commenced legal action against the State for unfair dismissal, with one ex-director claiming he was asked to identify Indians in the agency to fire.
The ex-employees are former director of the agency Bisnath Maharaj, former deputy director Keron Ganpat, former director of intelligence Carlton Dennie, former assistant director of information and communication technology Alonzo Flemming, and former assistant director of administration Seukeran Singh, who were all fired by National Security Minister Edmund Dillon.
The men have retained the services of former attorney general Anand Ramlogan, and five pre-action letters were sent to the Office of the Attorney General on Wednesday with a 21-day deadline to respond before legal action is taken.
The claims total in excess of $6 million.
In the letters, the former directors stated their termination was unjust, claiming they were targets of political victimisation, unfair treatment and discrimination.
Former intelligence director Dennie stated in his letter he was summoned to a meeting by then director Matthew Andrews and asked to assist in weeding out the Indians in the agency.
and none of this ever happened under a UNC govt., eh?
dunno what you PNM and UNCs get out of this hypocrisy,, but cool, allyuh funny to watch.
Talk you have a ched on kamla every move , but cool always love to see how you turn a ched into race and religion and play so innocent
But arent you posting this article in 2 threads which has nothing to do with race, in which one can accuse you of turning a ched into race and religion and play so innocent?
Nevertheless, it doesn't surprise me that after the madness that occurred in SIA/SSA and ensuing firing of those responsible, those who stand accused will lash out with something scurrilous like race and bias. I dont blame them though because when Nigel Clement and Brig. Joseph got fired and sued the state for millions and won, they didn't have their word against the govt, they had documents like below to prove their case.
Morpheus wrote:LoL. Back with the ethnic head count.....
zoom rader wrote:Morpheus wrote:LoL. Back with the ethnic head count.....
It's blatant to see that not one injun employed in that unsigned document that Habit7 posted.
Same way they got rid of the injuns in the present SSA
De Dragon wrote:zoom rader wrote:Morpheus wrote:LoL. Back with the ethnic head count.....
It's blatant to see that not one injun employed in that unsigned document that Habit7 posted.
Same way they got rid of the injuns in the present SSA
From the emailgate Government are you surprised? Yet they are asking for the power to monitor/intercept people's communications when they run thing by dead of night mailbox drops, hearsay and rumour.
zoom rader wrote:Morpheus wrote:LoL. Back with the ethnic head count.....
It's blatant to see that not one injun employed in that unsigned document that Habit7 posted.
Same way they got rid of the injuns in the present SSA
eliteauto wrote:zoom rader wrote:Morpheus wrote:LoL. Back with the ethnic head count.....
It's blatant to see that not one injun employed in that unsigned document that Habit7 posted.
Same way they got rid of the injuns in the present SSA
Wasn't that a list of the people to be fired, not a list of all the employees?
zoom rader wrote:Great story Habit7 .
Only PNM people will believe an unsigned document. Even if true not one injun name employed under PNM In th SSA
zoom rader wrote:PNM ppl don't understand that under the PNM SSA Bill it means that the head of the SSA is hired by the Prime minister and reports to him only. He's at the command of the whims and fancies of the PM
So it's basically a PNM Police agency
Habit7 wrote:zoom rader wrote:Great story Habit7 .
Only PNM people will believe an unsigned document. Even if true not one injun name employed under PNM In th SSA
Well if it's not true then Kamla could bring a motion of privilege against Al Rawi for reading from the letter., but she didnt. Nevertheless it was enough for Nigel Clement to sue the state and be awarded untold millions. Furthermore, I dont know the ethnicity of ppl employed at SSA and I dont care, once they do their job.
The days of hiring the telephone operator as the director, reading a fake resume in parliament and calling anyone who criticise her appointment racist and sexist is over.
Habit7 wrote:zoom rader wrote:PNM ppl don't understand that under the PNM SSA Bill it means that the head of the SSA is hired by the Prime minister and reports to him only. He's at the command of the whims and fancies of the PM
So it's basically a PNM Police agency
The PNM's amendments to the SSA bill doesn't allow for that. It always existed.
That is why Reshmi Ramnarine was appointed as head of SSA by direct involvement of Kamla Persad Bissessar.
(as if i wasnt clear in the prior post)
zoom rader wrote:Habit7 wrote:zoom rader wrote:PNM ppl don't understand that under the PNM SSA Bill it means that the head of the SSA is hired by the Prime minister and reports to him only. He's at the command of the whims and fancies of the PM
So it's basically a PNM Police agency
The PNM's amendments to the SSA bill doesn't allow for that. It always existed.
That is why Reshmi Ramnarine was appointed as head of SSA by direct involvement of Kamla Persad Bissessar.
(as if i wasnt clear in the prior post)
We cannot allow the PNM Prime Minister to pick and choose at his whims and fancies of a yes man to run SSA.
The SSA is being widen to include more crimes which infringe on our right to privacy.
We will resemble North Korea, Jah forbid if one of the independent Senators votes for it.
SSA AMENDMENT BILL CRITICAL TO INTELLIGENCE GATHERING
Published: Friday, May 6, 2016
As a previous Minister of National Security, with a certain knowledge in National Security systems, and not from the political party presently in office, I can provide an assessment of this claim without fear or favour, or any type of political bias to either side, with my sole mission being to give impartial advice based on what is best for the country.
One of the major avenues to improve our detection rate is via improved Intelligence gathering.
Our National Intelligence Agency is the SSA, yet we are one of the few nations in the world that has a Centralized Intelligence Agency that is earmarked solely to gather Intelligence from one specific serious crime, that being drug related offences.
The National Operations Centre (NOC) has the capacity to coordinate several Intelligence systems of serious crime, inclusive of terrorism, homicides and kidnappings, and being placed under SSA, with the sole purpose of only dealing with drug-related offences, would defeat the value of this system, which equates with what is known as COBR in UK (Cabinet Operations Briefing Room])The concept of a National intelligence Unit in other countries, allows Intelligence for ALL serious crimes, which can be found in CIA and MI6 as examples, and in these times with gang related activities, which includes homicides, as well as terrorism, it is mandatory that our main Intelligence Agency must be allowed the scope to be the central point for Intelligence for all serious crimes and not only drug related offences.
Hence by ascertaining our present security threats and best practice worldwide, it should be agreed by all that this expansion of the scope of SSA cannot be disputed, if we do intend to put the safety of our nation as priority over anything else.
That being the case, the next avenue is the perceived concern by a few that this expansion can be an opportunity for any sitting Administration to abuse this process for political gain rather than interception being made based on a concern of National Security.
However, this accusation is totally unfounded, as the Intercept of Communications Act trumps the operational directions of the SSA, prior to and after the Amendment being made. This Act was enacted based on what indeed could have taken place prior to this Act being drafted, as SIA was accused of doing just that, and intercepting persons who were not suspects to drug related offences. If such actions were committed prior to the Intercept of Communication Act in 2010, then it may have been unethical, but it was not illegal.
However, because of the Intercept of Communications Act being legislated, it has now prevented SSA from committing such actions.
This Amendment does not in any way increase the authority or powers of the SSA to intercept, but simply expands the scope of what is being intercepted.
Additionally, if there are concerns now with the Amendment because it would incorporate Intelligence of other serious crimes, then there would be equal merit for a similar concern prior to the Amendment, as the fear is being pumped that because of the Amendment being to incorporate all serious crimes, then an opposition member or a journalist can be targeted with false accusations of being involved in other serious crimes to have their devices intercepted. Based on this illogical presumption, then the same can be done prior to the SSA Amendment , by falsely accusing Opposition members or journalists of being involved in drug related offence, as an avenue to intercept their devices.
However, neither of these perceptions can be a reality based on the very Intercept of Communications Act, prior to, or after the proposed SSA Amendment.
There is the present misinformation being passed that if this SSA Amendment is made, then persons in SSA, can use this as an excuse to intercept anyone, based on justifying this interception using the rationale of intercepting because of the expansion of all serious crimes. This is totally untrue.
No one in SSA, before the Amendment or after, can do so, as to intercept, there must be a warrant that can only be made based on the request from the Chief of Defence Staff, Commissioner of Police or Director of SSA. This warrant would only be approved by a judge, after ensuring that enough information is given to confirm that the suspect is a person of interest based on a serious crime, and interception is required to assist in monitoring that individual, be it his/her involvement in homicides, kidnapping or even terrorist activities.
SSA then takes this warrant and it is used to intercept through one of the telecommunication providers, who would not allow interception unless they are provided with a warrant, so it is indeed a misconception that SSA can easily trigger off this interception on its own.
By this process alone, the clever red herring being used by some to state that journalists can be targeted due to this Amendment if they are “collecting information” or “researching issues’, is totally impossible, as such issues can never trigger a judge to issue a warrant to grant Interception. The triggering of a warrant is based on hard data to show that the person is involved in serious criminal activity, and not reporting or investigating a crime
I hope that this brings fact to the rumours being hurled about in relation to this Amendment, which can do nothing other than improve our Intelligence gathering capabilities, and the only ones who should fear this, are those who do have cocoa in the sun and are fearful that this window would now afford the Law Enforcement Agencies with the evidence to bring perpetrators of serious crime, such as homicides, planned terrorism, rape, and kidnapping to justice.
Gary Griffith,
Former Minister of National Security
http://www.guardian.co.tt/letters/2016- ... -gathering
Habit7 wrote:zoom rader wrote:Great story Habit7 .
Only PNM people will believe an unsigned document. Even if true not one injun name employed under PNM In th SSA
Well if it's not true then Kamla could bring a motion of privilege against Al Rawi for reading from the letter., but she didnt. Nevertheless it was enough for Nigel Clement to sue the state and be awarded untold millions. Furthermore, I dont know the ethnicity of ppl employed at SSA and I dont care, once they do their job.
The days of hiring the telephone operator as the director, reading a fake resume in parliament and calling anyone who criticise her appointment racist and sexist is over.
zoom rader wrote:^^^oh grom PNM ppl don't understand dem tings, you should have juss left it as
De Dragon wrote:Habit7 wrote:zoom rader wrote:Great story Habit7 .
Only PNM people will believe an unsigned document. Even if true not one injun name employed under PNM In th SSA
Well if it's not true then Kamla could bring a motion of privilege against Al Rawi for reading from the letter., but she didnt. Nevertheless it was enough for Nigel Clement to sue the state and be awarded untold millions. Furthermore, I dont know the ethnicity of ppl employed at SSA and I dont care, once they do their job.
The days of hiring the telephone operator as the director, reading a fake resume in parliament and calling anyone who criticise her appointment racist and sexist is over.
Wrong!!!! As you love to say, inform yourself. Nigel Clement was awarded his compensation not because of this, but due to the Government failing to file a defence against his wrongful dismissal allegation. Even if they had filed a defence his claim was they breached natural justice in not dismissing him fairly, not due to any unsigned, unsubstantiated letter claiming purging of alleged PNM-aligned SSA members. It's like when Rowley's case by the IC in the Landate affair was dismissed on the grounds that he didn't have a hearing, not that he was guilty or not guilty, but procedurally the case was doomed by unfairness and bias caused by the release of the allegations against him before informing him of the allegations.
Ex-SSA director wins against State for wrongful dismissal
Published on Aug 4, 2015, 8:58 pm AST
By Rickie Ramdass
FORMER director of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA), Nigel Clement, who was fired from his post in 2010, emerged victorious at the High Court in Port of Spain last week in a lawsuit filed against the Government for wrongful dismissal and breach of contract.
Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh entered judgment in favour of Clement after the State failed to file a defence challenging his contention that he had been wrongfully removed as director of the SSA, based on the advice of the Cabinet, and that the wrongful termination of his contract and subsequent statements made by Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar in Parliament had directly affected his prospect of future employment.
Despite ruling in Clement's favour, the damages to be awarded for breach of contract and wrongful dismissal are yet to be assessed.
On October 23, 2010, after just nine months of being appointed to the position on a three-year contract, Clement's post was revoked by the President without notice, based on the advice of Persad-Bissessar.
On that same day, Special Branch officers and members of the Anti-Corruption Investigations Bureau (ACIB) carried out a raid of the SSA's offices and took control.
In his statement of case, Clement contended that he and his staff were later informed by the officers that they were no longer allowed access to the SSA's offices.
As a result of this, Clement said he contacted then Minister of National Security, Ret Brig John Sandy, who said he had no knowledge of the actions undertaken by the ACIB.
As the PM instructed
However, Clement said the following day he was contacted by Sandy who informed him the officers had been acting on the instructions of Persad-Bissessar.
He further said, on November 12, 2010, Persad-Bissessar made a statement in Parliament concerning the revocation of his appointment, accusing him of being responsible for the merging of the SSA and Security Intelligence Agency (SIA), which had been involved in the unlawful wire-tapping of phones belonging to certain politicians, trade unionists and members of the media during the tenure of the People's National Movement (PNM) administration.
Breach of natural justice
It was based on these allegations that Clement contended his prospect of finding future employment had been negatively affected.
To date, Clement said the State has failed to inform him of the reasons or grounds to justify the instructions of Persad-Bissessar or the National Security Council (NOC) that he be relieved from duty.
He had alleged the decision to revoke his appointment was in breach of the rules of fairness and natural justice.
On its failure to file a defence, the judge ordered that damages (to be assessed) be paid for loss of future employment and also consequential loss beginning from the date of him being fired in November 2010, to the date of judgment.
Additionally, the Office of the Attorney General had also been ordered to pay his legal cost.
Representing the State were attorneys Russell Martineau SC, Gerald Ramdeen and Kendra Mark, while Reginald Armour SC, Vanessa Gopaul and Tamilee Budhu appeared for Clement.
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/20150804 ... -dismissal
Habit7 wrote:De Dragon wrote:Habit7 wrote:zoom rader wrote:Great story Habit7 .
Only PNM people will believe an unsigned document. Even if true not one injun name employed under PNM In th SSA
Well if it's not true then Kamla could bring a motion of privilege against Al Rawi for reading from the letter., but she didnt. Nevertheless it was enough for Nigel Clement to sue the state and be awarded untold millions. Furthermore, I dont know the ethnicity of ppl employed at SSA and I dont care, once they do their job.
The days of hiring the telephone operator as the director, reading a fake resume in parliament and calling anyone who criticise her appointment racist and sexist is over.
Wrong!!!! As you love to say, inform yourself. Nigel Clement was awarded his compensation not because of this, but due to the Government failing to file a defence against his wrongful dismissal allegation. Even if they had filed a defence his claim was they breached natural justice in not dismissing him fairly, not due to any unsigned, unsubstantiated letter claiming purging of alleged PNM-aligned SSA members. It's like when Rowley's case by the IC in the Landate affair was dismissed on the grounds that he didn't have a hearing, not that he was guilty or not guilty, but procedurally the case was doomed by unfairness and bias caused by the release of the allegations against him before informing him of the allegations.
There was more than one reason and because the UNC failed to mount a defence the judge ruled in favour of all of them. One of them being Kamla directly called for his firing on the advice of Surajdeen Persad. No doubt that letter would have been used as evidence and again, KPB raised no opposition to it being read in the House.
Sadly, you still need to be more informed
Ex-SSA director wins against State for wrongful dismissal
Published on Aug 4, 2015, 8:58 pm AST
By Rickie Ramdass
FORMER director of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA), Nigel Clement, who was fired from his post in 2010, emerged victorious at the High Court in Port of Spain last week in a lawsuit filed against the Government for wrongful dismissal and breach of contract.
Justice Ronnie Boodoosingh entered judgment in favour of Clement after the State failed to file a defence challenging his contention that he had been wrongfully removed as director of the SSA, based on the advice of the Cabinet, and that the wrongful termination of his contract and subsequent statements made by Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar in Parliament had directly affected his prospect of future employment.
Despite ruling in Clement's favour, the damages to be awarded for breach of contract and wrongful dismissal are yet to be assessed.
On October 23, 2010, after just nine months of being appointed to the position on a three-year contract, Clement's post was revoked by the President without notice, based on the advice of Persad-Bissessar.
On that same day, Special Branch officers and members of the Anti-Corruption Investigations Bureau (ACIB) carried out a raid of the SSA's offices and took control.
In his statement of case, Clement contended that he and his staff were later informed by the officers that they were no longer allowed access to the SSA's offices.
As a result of this, Clement said he contacted then Minister of National Security, Ret Brig John Sandy, who said he had no knowledge of the actions undertaken by the ACIB.
As the PM instructed
However, Clement said the following day he was contacted by Sandy who informed him the officers had been acting on the instructions of Persad-Bissessar.
He further said, on November 12, 2010, Persad-Bissessar made a statement in Parliament concerning the revocation of his appointment, accusing him of being responsible for the merging of the SSA and Security Intelligence Agency (SIA), which had been involved in the unlawful wire-tapping of phones belonging to certain politicians, trade unionists and members of the media during the tenure of the People's National Movement (PNM) administration.
Breach of natural justice
It was based on these allegations that Clement contended his prospect of finding future employment had been negatively affected.
To date, Clement said the State has failed to inform him of the reasons or grounds to justify the instructions of Persad-Bissessar or the National Security Council (NOC) that he be relieved from duty.
He had alleged the decision to revoke his appointment was in breach of the rules of fairness and natural justice.
On its failure to file a defence, the judge ordered that damages (to be assessed) be paid for loss of future employment and also consequential loss beginning from the date of him being fired in November 2010, to the date of judgment.
Additionally, the Office of the Attorney General had also been ordered to pay his legal cost.
Representing the State were attorneys Russell Martineau SC, Gerald Ramdeen and Kendra Mark, while Reginald Armour SC, Vanessa Gopaul and Tamilee Budhu appeared for Clement.
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/20150804 ... -dismissal
Only a SLA would read that and glean what meaning you ascribed to it. Where does it specifically say that that unsigned paper has any bearing on the court matter. Do you really believe that that was what she would have been accused of saying in Parliament? There was no defence filed! I suspect because the procedure for his termination was wrong, so he got his money and kudos to him. Let's hope the same justice applies for those SSA ex-employees who were fired for "loss of confidence"Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 104 guests
