TriniTuner.com | Latest Event:
Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Cjruckus wrote:See brett you won't find any of these things in the Coup Documentary on TV 6.
Bakr tried to help the people before, but the Government was the Problem. The NAR did not want Bakr to make any political advances, which is why they had the Jamaat under lock.
Again with 33 seats in the house you expect everybody in the country to keep loving you, but after 2 years this was not the case. I expect the same thing to happen with the PP in power. they feel they are too big for themselves.
eliteauto wrote:funny you call ppl brainwashed and blind but the facts are there (were you there?) In case you weren't the NAR won the election on the theme "One Love" ("We will rise" ver1) in 1996, the electorate was fed up of the PNM and the oil boom was over and we were in a recession, the NAR adopted a drastic fiscal policy of cutting public servants COLA, wage freeze, tightening the negative list etc whilst promoting a State dependent economy (hence cj's socialist comment) public servants were unhappy and police officers marched around the Red House ( this is/was illegal btw but they were fed up) narco trafficking/transhipping was now setting in and the lure of the money was strong, the Jamaat was able to galvanise hundreds of disenchanted and jaded youths and were seen as a direct threat to the groundswell that the NAR had enjoyed 3 years prior and they were very anti-JAM, hence the occupation of the land next door and the tearing down of the wall, setting up the tension that eventually ran into the coup attempt that Bakr mistakenly thought would have been supported by the people
nismoid you're coming off like a dyed-in-the-wool UNCite who will oppose for opposing sake trying hard to align the PNM to everything negative and be anti-cjruckus irregardless of if he makes sense, that makes you a sycophant, the suggestion is that Patrick Manning, Basdeo Panday, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj etc had prior knowledge of the events not a PNM party alignment and collusion in the coup
eliteauto wrote:funny you call ppl brainwashed and blind but the facts are there (were you there?) In case you weren't the NAR won the election on the theme "One Love" ("We will rise" ver1) in 1996, the electorate was fed up of the PNM and the oil boom was over and we were in a recession, the NAR adopted a drastic fiscal policy of cutting public servants COLA, wage freeze, tightening the negative list etc whilst promoting a State dependent economy (hence cj's socialist comment) public servants were unhappy and police officers marched around the Red House ( this is/was illegal btw but they were fed up) narco trafficking/transhipping was now setting in and the lure of the money was strong, the Jamaat was able to galvanise hundreds of disenchanted and jaded youths and were seen as a direct threat to the groundswell that the NAR had enjoyed 3 years prior and they were very anti-JAM, hence the occupation of the land next door and the tearing down of the wall, setting up the tension that eventually ran into the coup attempt that Bakr mistakenly thought would have been supported by the people
nismoid you're coming off like a dyed-in-the-wool UNCite who will oppose for opposing sake trying hard to align the PNM to everything negative and be anti-cjruckus irregardless of if he makes sense, that makes you a sycophant, the suggestion is that Patrick Manning, Basdeo Panday, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj etc had prior knowledge of the events not a PNM party alignment and collusion in the coup
nismoid wrote:eliteauto wrote:funny you call ppl brainwashed and blind but the facts are there (were you there?) In case you weren't the NAR won the election on the theme "One Love" ("We will rise" ver1) in 1996, the electorate was fed up of the PNM and the oil boom was over and we were in a recession, the NAR adopted a drastic fiscal policy of cutting public servants COLA, wage freeze, tightening the negative list etc whilst promoting a State dependent economy (hence cj's socialist comment) public servants were unhappy and police officers marched around the Red House ( this is/was illegal btw but they were fed up) narco trafficking/transhipping was now setting in and the lure of the money was strong, the Jamaat was able to galvanise hundreds of disenchanted and jaded youths and were seen as a direct threat to the groundswell that the NAR had enjoyed 3 years prior and they were very anti-JAM, hence the occupation of the land next door and the tearing down of the wall, setting up the tension that eventually ran into the coup attempt that Bakr mistakenly thought would have been supported by the people
nismoid you're coming off like a dyed-in-the-wool UNCite who will oppose for opposing sake trying hard to align the PNM to everything negative and be anti-cjruckus irregardless of if he makes sense, that makes you a sycophant, the suggestion is that Patrick Manning, Basdeo Panday, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj etc had prior knowledge of the events not a PNM party alignment and collusion in the coup
just a few words for you and your pnmite partners :-
during that time, I had already voted twice, how many times did you or your pnmites partners voted back in those days?
back then I was one of the people defending property from looters during the coup,
I was protecting my children,
I was one of the people trying to restore democracy in Trinidad,
where were you? how old were you at the time?
what i know about those times was first hand knowledge, not what people said or what i read somewhere.
and if you feel i am a dyed-in-the-wool unc-ite, well thats your opinion, but I am anything that a pnmite isn't.
and in case you didnt know, ramesh maraj was whose lawyer at the time?,,,, abu bakr
the people who got shot in the red house were who?
only the people in govt at the time.
ever heard abu bakr say he had a deal with manning?
so it is reasonable to say that people in the pnm conspired with abu bakr to stage the coup.
no kant, the only thing that is a fact is that the pnm who was in opposition at the time ,conspired with abu bakr to stage the coup.
pioneer wrote:nismoid wrote:it was never a 'dick measuring' contest however if it was, your spouse and female family members would tell you not to do that cause you would lose.
but back to the topic, when the COI starts you will see how much facts i just stated.
so i hope this thread is still here.
end of discussion.
LOL
man i think many threads ago you lost all street cred...noone takes you serious...your lack of informed opinions/statements enforces such
you no better than a uncmite...you talk before you think and speak pure uneducated and uninformed RUBBISH
please come back in 2014...by then you might have learned something about your country...
which further makes me think you are guyanese...because you were selling tiger balm and dinner mint outside woodford square...doesn't mean you were "protecting property"
it's only ah peerhah and ah umbrella dude...take it light
are you guyanese?
UML wrote:BTW wah allyuh think about the State auctioning his land....good idea...but i dont think anyone will buy them for fear of being bullied off of it, sell it cheap or even killed!!!
eliteauto wrote:Gov't got pwnt.
1. To enquire into—
(i) the causes, nature, extent and impact of the attempted coup, including any contributing historical, social, economic, political and other factors;
(ii) the underlying purpose and extent of the intention behind the plot that led to the attempted coup;
...
(iv) the identity of any person or any local, regional or international authority, institution, organisation or entity who incited, masterminded, planned, directed, conspired towards, consented to, connived at, acquiesced in, participated in, aided or abetted the carrying out of, had prior knowledge of , or was implicated or otherwise involved in criminal acts or omissions, including looting, which were committed in connection with the attempted coup, and the extent to which any such person, authority, institution, organisation or entity did any such thing or had prior knowledge of, or was implicated or otherwise involved in, any such acts or omissions;
(v) the national security deficiencies and breaches of law that facilitated the attempted coup and the extent to which it was possible to prevent the occurrence of the attempted coup;
(viii) The continuing propensities for criminal activity arising from the attempted coup and the correlation, if any; between the attempted coup and the trafficking, supplying and possession of illegal drugs, firearms and ammunition.
Counsel: During the course of you captivity, were you given anything to eat or drink?
Robinson: I refused water, I refused tea. I refused anything that they gave me that would have to go into my stomach because I was convinced that I would be poisoned by these men.
Counsel: Do you recall when the Parliament was stormed whether Mr Patrick Manning was in the Parliament?
Robinson: No. Mr Patrick Manning was not in the Parliament when the Parliament was stormed.
Counsel: What about Mr Basdeo Panday?
Robinson: Neither was he there.
Counsel: Did anyone of your captors come to you and ask you to communicate with the Regiment or the Protective Services in any way whatsoever?
Robinson: Yes, the person whose name I subsequently found out was Bilaal Abdullah. He came to me with his gun and microphone as I lay on the floor asked me whether I would do what I was instructed to do. And I said yes. I had just finished reading Vidia Naipaul’s book Among the Believers, so I had gathered from that book some impression about the character of these Muslim fanatics. That’s why I said yes, but I had intended to oppose whatever they asked me to do.
He then left me and went, and I thought that he had gone to consult with Abu Bakr. I did not know, but that was my impression. He came back, holding the gun nearby and putting the microphone to my mouth and said, ‘Will you instruct the Regiment to withdraw and lay down their guns because the government has fallen?’
I receive that instruction with revulsion. I thought it was not only impertinent, I thought I could not possibly do anything of the sort and should do just the opposite. So I shouted to the Regiment, ‘These are murders and torturers. Attack with full force!’
Counsel: What was Abdullah’s reaction to that?
Robinson: He drew back—it appeared to be in shock—but a young man who was a short distance away fired a gun. I don’t know whether he intended the direction in which it went—but it passed through my right knee, hitting me on the right side and exiting on the left side. That’s the bullet . My medical advisers told me that if the bullet had diverted about half an inch differently I would have died in a short space of time.
Counsel: While in captivity, were you handed any envelope by the Muslimeen?
Robinson: Yes, at one stage I was handed an envelope by one of the Muslimeen who whispered to me, ‘From your wife.’
Counsel: Did you open the envelope, Sir?
Robinson: I was really surprised at this because I thought these people were inhuman. And now I felt, well, they are human after all (Smile across his face). I opened the envelope and saw a bit of paper with a note, and I read the note, only three words, “I love you, Patricia,” who was my wife and that strengthened me because I did not know what was happening to her or to my children.
Johnson: Well what I observed was that while all the commotion was going on and people were scurrying around and screaming that representative Leo des Vignes was still standing and I was thinking why doesn’t he go down and as I looked again he was down, he was bleeding, that’s what I saw on that side.
Johnson: Mr Robinson objected. He said no that you all are murderers and traitors and ‘I would do no such thing’ and ‘Attack with full force.’ And as soon as he said that I heard shots .
Counsel: Was he speaking into a microphone or some sort of telephonic device?
Johnson: I don’t know. I subsequently learned that he was given some equipment.
Counsel: What happen when Mr Robinson said this?
Johnson: After those defiant statements by Mr Robinson as I said I could remember thinking, speaking to myself. Now we are dead, I told myself. Then suddenly I heard shots. I think I heard more than one and we were all startled and then we heard Mr Robinson groaning, moaning, he was obviously hurt and Mr Dookeran at that point said, ‘We don’t want any bloodshed, let us negotiate.’
Johnson: I think the negotiations stepped up because Dr Hosein realised that if the persons who are injured did not get attention, they would perhaps die. So I think Dr Hosein was the person, apart from the prime minister, who really really stepped up and was a hero in that situation. So he was concerned about the negotiations stepped up, he was concerned that Mr Des Vignes was perhaps losing blood or consciousness, so part of the negotiations was to get assistance for Mr Des Vignes and also for Mr Robinson.
Counsel: So as a result of Dr Hosein’s efforts to step up the negotiations and people needing attention and so on, did that bear fruit?
Johnson: Yes it did bear fruit because the morning we understood that they agreed to let Minister Dookeran go out and they agreed to let Mr Des Vignes go out and they agreed also to get some medication for Mr Robinson’s eyes.
pioneer wrote:What exactly they hoping to uncover from this?
The truth will never come out anyhow...
However, the Nanga Committee was not accepted by Mr Basdeo Panday. They continued their disrupted conduct and therefore I had to have them...their positions terminated.
Meanwhile, they had been going about in the country attacking the measures that were being introduced by the Government and attacking the prime minister and I have information that even in my absence (while) abroad, when Mr Panday would act for me as my deputy, he would use the occasion to attack me in the country. It was clear to me, even without that information, that his purpose was to bring down the Government. And that is the reason why I expelled all of his faction, which had been consulting among themselves in secret as Club 88.
Robinson has an axe to grind...
In denying the claim, Panday told the T&T Guardian yesterday: “Everybody has a little axe to grind in the country these days.” He chuckled when told of Robinson’s claim. “How could I have done that?” he asked. In the early days of the NAR regime, Panday acted for Robinson during his absence from the country.
Humes wrote:Former president and then prime minister ANR Robinson gave his testimony on the first day of the enquiry. Here's the transcript.Counsel: During the course of you captivity, were you given anything to eat or drink?
Robinson: I refused water, I refused tea. I refused anything that they gave me that would have to go into my stomach because I was convinced that I would be poisoned by these men.
Counsel: Do you recall when the Parliament was stormed whether Mr Patrick Manning was in the Parliament?
Robinson: No. Mr Patrick Manning was not in the Parliament when the Parliament was stormed.
Counsel: What about Mr Basdeo Panday?
Robinson: Neither was he there.Counsel: Did anyone of your captors come to you and ask you to communicate with the Regiment or the Protective Services in any way whatsoever?
Robinson: Yes, the person whose name I subsequently found out was Bilaal Abdullah. He came to me with his gun and microphone as I lay on the floor asked me whether I would do what I was instructed to do. And I said yes. I had just finished reading Vidia Naipaul’s book Among the Believers, so I had gathered from that book some impression about the character of these Muslim fanatics. That’s why I said yes, but I had intended to oppose whatever they asked me to do.
He then left me and went, and I thought that he had gone to consult with Abu Bakr. I did not know, but that was my impression. He came back, holding the gun nearby and putting the microphone to my mouth and said, ‘Will you instruct the Regiment to withdraw and lay down their guns because the government has fallen?’
I receive that instruction with revulsion. I thought it was not only impertinent, I thought I could not possibly do anything of the sort and should do just the opposite. So I shouted to the Regiment, ‘These are murders and torturers. Attack with full force!’
Counsel: What was Abdullah’s reaction to that?
Robinson: He drew back—it appeared to be in shock—but a young man who was a short distance away fired a gun. I don’t know whether he intended the direction in which it went—but it passed through my right knee, hitting me on the right side and exiting on the left side. That’s the bullet . My medical advisers told me that if the bullet had diverted about half an inch differently I would have died in a short space of time.
...Counsel: While in captivity, were you handed any envelope by the Muslimeen?
Robinson: Yes, at one stage I was handed an envelope by one of the Muslimeen who whispered to me, ‘From your wife.’
Counsel: Did you open the envelope, Sir?
Robinson: I was really surprised at this because I thought these people were inhuman. And now I felt, well, they are human after all (Smile across his face). I opened the envelope and saw a bit of paper with a note, and I read the note, only three words, “I love you, Patricia,” who was my wife and that strengthened me because I did not know what was happening to her or to my children.
VexXx Dogg wrote:I have real respect for that man for those words.
Toney: There was some shooting, you had the shooting coming from outside and they (Muslimeen inside) were responding and then having beaten Mr Robinson they then asked him to tell the forces outside to back off because if they continued shooting, they would endanger everyone. They gave him this walkie talkie (radio set) and told him tell the forces outside to back off, words to that effect, because they (Muslimeen) are in control now and if they (State forces) continued like this, many people will be killed.
And I heard Mr Robinson say these people are torturers and murderers and vagabonds and “Attack with full force” and then of course I heard a gunshot and Mr Robinson started bawling in pain. “You all have shot me. I am going to die. I am prepared to die for my country, you all are going to kill me. I am going to die for my country” and he kept repeating that on and on and on. And I think they tried to stop him from saying those words.
I heard the voice of Dr Emmanuel Hosein saying “All you don’t do that, all you don’t do that. If all you do that all you will kill him.” And I got the impression that they backed off. But he continued moaning and groaning “I will die for my country, I will die for my country.”
Counsel: Was the attitude of your captors toward you aggressive and hostile?
Toney: Of course, of course, of course. Clearly their intent was to humiliate us and kill us if necessary. There was fire. They were all armed. Some of them had two guns and they were pointed to us at all times. Their intent was bad.
Former government minister John Humphrey's advice to the Muslimeen insurgents to "get something in writing" delayed the release of the hostages in the Red House by one day.
This was revealed by former NAR minister Joseph Toney during testimony at the Commission of Enquiry into events surrounding the 1990 coup attempt.
"I think there was some discussion between Bilaal Abdullah and Selwyn Richardson about some condition and we were lined up to leave and John Humphrey told him (Abdullah) 'Be careful. Remember what happen to the soldiers (in 1970). You better get that in writing'. Well, we stayed there for another day," Toney stated.
Asked by lead counsel for the Commission, Avory Sinanan SC, whether Humphrey volunteered this information, Toney said: "Yes".
Toney said discussions then ensued on how "this thing should be put in writing and the question, the whole train of our leaving there was shot down, whilst they sorted that matter out".
Toney said his colleagues were "quite upset".
"You wondered which side is he (Humphrey) on?"
Toney, who drafted two of the documents—one in which the hostages agreed to support Winston Dookeran as prime minister and another, the resignation of former prime minister ANR Robinson— said he had to "cajole" Robinson to sign the documents.
"You know he is a very stubborn chap. And when I went around, even though he was in pain, and bleeding and dishevelled, his face all battered up. He was grumbling that he was not prepared to sign anything. And I had to whisper to him, because gunmen were very close to me: "Sign this, it doesn't mean anything. Let us just sign this thing and get out of here". He borrowed the spectacles of Mr Rawle Raphael to look at the document and then he signed. He is a great chap," Toney said.
He said he did believe that the document were unenforceable.
"All my legal instincts told me that these things (documents) would have been thrown in the waste paper basket. Because of the circumstances under which these things were done. I couldn't see a court upholding it at all," he said.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: Dizzy28 and 69 guests
