Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
cornfused wrote:Six attempts at procurement , no results, something is more than wrong
rebound wrote:Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Like a 6 million tow job
Yes, let us focus on past corruption. This is guaranteed to ensure that the PNM stays clean and are held to account. What we are witnessing here is the hijack of the procurement process by individuals who have a vested interest in seeing that their colleagues, and their financiers get the tender, plain and simple.
Now lets try it without the use of UNC/PP/dem. Go.....................
Point out where I mentioned any party.
go....
so since you are the only one mentioning party-as always....its up to you to take the knot out of your unc underoos.
oh einstein..we can only focus on the past corruption...since future corruption hasnt happened yet.
with six attempts at procurement, I find myself thinking that corruption my be happening now....
Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Like a 6 million tow job
Yes, let us focus on past corruption. This is guaranteed to ensure that the PNM stays clean and are held to account. What we are witnessing here is the hijack of the procurement process by individuals who have a vested interest in seeing that their colleagues, and their financiers get the tender, plain and simple.
Now lets try it without the use of UNC/PP/dem. Go.....................
Point out where I mentioned any party.
go....
so since you are the only one mentioning party-as always....its up to you to take the knot out of your unc underoos.
oh einstein..we can only focus on the [b]past corruption...since future corruption hasnt happened yet[/b].
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Like a 6 million tow job
Yes, let us focus on past corruption. This is guaranteed to ensure that the PNM stays clean and are held to account. What we are witnessing here is the hijack of the procurement process by individuals who have a vested interest in seeing that their colleagues, and their financiers get the tender, plain and simple.
Now lets try it without the use of UNC/PP/dem. Go.....................
Point out where I mentioned any party.
go....
so since you are the only one mentioning party-as always....its up to you to take the knot out of your unc underoos.
oh einstein..we can only focus on the [b]past corruption...since future corruption hasnt happened yet[/b].
That PNM education system that you love to tout, seems to have failed you miserably. Let's make this so that even you can understand:
There are three basic tenses, past, present and future tense. I was referring to the present corruption taking place. Typical PNM knee jerk, reactive mentality "we go see wen dah happen" instead of enacting legislation to make corruption unpalatable to anyone even thinking about it in the future
JUHN Scarfy has no plan for anything, nor has he shown any inclination to discipline anyone (read Lester Henry), so future corruption, will happen under this PNM Government. Go, I do enjoy your spin so.........
.........
Now lets try it without the use of UNC/PP/dem. Go.....................
Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Like a 6 million tow job
Yes, let us focus on past corruption. This is guaranteed to ensure that the PNM stays clean and are held to account. What we are witnessing here is the hijack of the procurement process by individuals who have a vested interest in seeing that their colleagues, and their financiers get the tender, plain and simple.
Now lets try it without the use of UNC/PP/dem. Go.....................
Point out where I mentioned any party.
go....
so since you are the only one mentioning party-as always....its up to you to take the knot out of your unc underoos.
oh einstein..we can only focus on the [b]past corruption...since future corruption hasnt happened yet[/b].
That PNM education system that you love to tout, seems to have failed you miserably. Let's make this so that even you can understand:
There are three basic tenses, past, present and future tense. I was referring to the present corruption taking place. Typical PNM knee jerk, reactive mentality "we go see wen dah happen" instead of enacting legislation to make corruption unpalatable to anyone even thinking about it in the future
JUHN Scarfy has no plan for anything, nor has he shown any inclination to discipline anyone (read Lester Henry), so future corruption, will happen under this PNM Government. Go, I do enjoy your spin so.........
.........Now lets try it without the use of UNC/PP/dem. Go.....................
that what you said?
Redman wrote:The discussion was about concerns of letting CABINET make the decision.
The concerns suggested that they would do sheeeit.
I agree that cabinets abuse their power.
I posted a situation where a CABINET did sheeit.
Ignoring the others like the SOE and the ballsing up of the highway to Point.
I think these are relevant and sterling examples of a CABINET abusing its power.
Given the simple fact that it is the immediate past CABINET.
They remain a textbook case of CABINET's tendency to do sheeit.
If you are saying you disagree then say so...or not.
I dont care.
Redman wrote:Check page one of the thread
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:The discussion was about concerns of letting CABINET make the decision.
The concerns suggested that they would do sheeeit.
I agree that cabinets abuse their power.
I posted a situation where a CABINET did sheeit.
Ignoring the others like the SOE and the ballsing up of the highway to Point.
I think these are relevant and sterling examples of a CABINET abusing its power.
Given the simple fact that it is the immediate past CABINET.
They remain a textbook case of CABINET's tendency to do sheeit.
If you are saying you disagree then say so...or not.
I dont care.
Once again, your lame attempt to "criticize" the PNM falls flat because you seem unable to do so without mentioning the UNC. If the ferry decision going to the hardcore PNM is sheit, say so, no need to mention any past UNC dotishness. Then again you have your handlers to please...............
RedVEVO wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:The discussion was about concerns of letting CABINET make the decision.
The concerns suggested that they would do sheeeit.
I agree that cabinets abuse their power.
I posted a situation where a CABINET did sheeit.
Ignoring the others like the SOE and the ballsing up of the highway to Point.
I think these are relevant and sterling examples of a CABINET abusing its power.
Given the simple fact that it is the immediate past CABINET.
They remain a textbook case of CABINET's tendency to do sheeit.
If you are saying you disagree then say so...or not.
I dont care.
Once again, your lame attempt to "criticize" the PNM falls flat because you seem unable to do so without mentioning the UNC. If the ferry decision going to the hardcore PNM is sheit, say so, no need to mention any past UNC dotishness. Then again you have your handlers to please...............
UNC had Tobago peeps happy !
But PNM doing what now ?
They even stopped the JSC and hiding.
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Check page one of the thread
You mean the one with the generic, group all together critiques like "sunlight the best disinfectant" and "any other PM would be different?
Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Check page one of the thread
You mean the one with the generic, group all together critiques like "sunlight the best disinfectant" and "any other PM would be different?
you really went and check
rofl
this thread must be so important to you
smh
Redman wrote:I missed the memo where my POV has to meet your criteria.
Yet my pre school discussion skills are forever attracting your attention.
And you miss what does not fit your internal narrative-thats been obvious to all.
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:The discussion was about concerns of letting CABINET make the decision.
The concerns suggested that they would do sheeeit.
I agree that cabinets abuse their power.
I posted a situation where a CABINET did sheeit.
Ignoring the others like the SOE and the ballsing up of the highway to Point.
I think these are relevant and sterling examples of a CABINET abusing its power.
Given the simple fact that it is the immediate past CABINET.
They remain a textbook case of CABINET's tendency to do sheeit.
If you are saying you disagree then say so...or not.
I dont care.
Once again, your lame attempt to "criticize" the PNM falls flat because you seem unable to do so without mentioning the UNC. If the ferry decision going to the hardcore PNM is sheit, say so, no need to mention any past UNC dotishness. Then again you have your handlers to please...............
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:I missed the memo where my POV has to meet your criteria.
Yet my pre school discussion skills are forever attracting your attention.
And you miss what does not fit your internal narrative-thats been obvious to all.
No, your blatant lies and PNM hero worship attract my attention. Without fail, and having failed every time as well, you always slink away with some juvenile comment when challenged.
Redman wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:I missed the memo where my POV has to meet your criteria.
Yet my pre school discussion skills are forever attracting your attention.
And you miss what does not fit your internal narrative-thats been obvious to all.
No, your blatant lies and PNM hero worship attract my attention. Without fail, and having failed every time as well, you always slink away with some juvenile comment when challenged.
This rich coming from such a person as yourself.
eliteauto wrote:De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:The discussion was about concerns of letting CABINET make the decision.
The concerns suggested that they would do sheeeit.
I agree that cabinets abuse their power.
I posted a situation where a CABINET did sheeit.
Ignoring the others like the SOE and the ballsing up of the highway to Point.
I think these are relevant and sterling examples of a CABINET abusing its power.
Given the simple fact that it is the immediate past CABINET.
They remain a textbook case of CABINET's tendency to do sheeit.
If you are saying you disagree then say so...or not.
I dont care.
Once again, your lame attempt to "criticize" the PNM falls flat because you seem unable to do so without mentioning the UNC. If the ferry decision going to the hardcore PNM is sheit, say so, no need to mention any past UNC dotishness. Then again you have your handlers to please...............
read this and chuckled, for 5 years you insisted that any criticism of the PP had to be juxtaposed against and include criticism of the PNM for it to be legitimate, now the shoe is on the other foot you're bellyaching?
hydroep wrote:^Well if you are to believe the faithful, nobody eh suffering. Everything apparently is a gross exaggeration of the truth...
rspann wrote:Why Trinis beating up over this issue? Who suffering ? Who voted for that?
rspann wrote:Why Trinis beating up over this issue? Who suffering ? Who voted for that?
Truckers curse Cabo Star
KINNESHA GEORGE-HARRY
Wednesday’s sailing aboard the MV Cabo Star cargo vessel from Scarborough to Port-of-Spain was delayed by seven hours due to a mechanical problem.
The vessel was scheduled to depart the Port of Scarborough at 11 pm, however, it eventually departed at 6.02 am yesterday.
One trucker recounted his experience indicating that the first announcement of the delays came just after 2 am.
“I was outside on the deck taking some breeze because inside was a little warm plus I’m a late sleeper. Around 12.30 am I started to query why we weren’t sailing and was told that the engines weren’t starting and that’s causing a delay. By this time, many passengers were asleep and had no idea what was taking place. Around 2-ish an official announcement was made over the vessel’s PA system that the sailing would be delayed due to a mechanical problem. They apologised and said it should be resolved in one hour,” he said He said that by 4 am, he along with a few of the passengers were so upset that they began cursing. “Some of us freely disembarked and later on the others were asked to disembark the vessel. Those who wanted to travel on the fast ferry had the option to.”
The upset trucker said during this time, he overheard both the Bridgeman’s crew and port officials saying that no vehicles would be offloaded from the Cabo Star and a Cruise ship would be coming to port soon and the Cabo Star could not stay where it was. That, he said, caused more heat as many wanted to cancel their Trinidad trip, take their vehicle and return home.
“So it boiled down to a case where your vehicle going Trinidad still, whether you like it or not, although your plans already messed up.”
Passengers accommodated on the TT Express arrived in Trinidad at 11 am, while the Cabo Star limped behind with vehicles and livestock on board reaching Port of Spain at 2.30 pm.
Contacted for comment, public relations officer of the T&T Inter-island Transportation Company Vilma Lewis-Cockburn said the vessel experienced mechanical issues without giving further explanation. She, however, confirmed that the situation on the Cabo Star was rectified and the ferry eventually left Tobago around 6.02 am instead of its scheduled time of 11 pm.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 220 guests