I wished I did not have to do this because Dr. Tennyson Joseph is a man I admire. He was kind enough to write a review for my book Prime Ministers of Barbados. For him I have great respect.. However since my post on Facebook directing my friends here to dwell on some of the comments made in his Nation article last Tuesday and some of the comments made in response to the post have resulted in his writing a whole article on those Facebook posts I must respond. First of all can anyone tell me what does this comment lifted from last Tuesdays article mean: The second is the presence of a former Prime Minister and political leader within the ranks of the party, who has not only publicly voiced his opposition to her style of leadership, but has demonstrated his willingness to act independently. His unwillingness to be led extends the life of the Government and diminishes her public perception as a true and secure leader. ? I have serious objection to his comment in todays article where he writes: The crescendo was started by a mischievous post which claimed that it appears as if he is saying one of the answers to the problem is to get rid of Owen . First of all the comment was not mischievous but was a commentary on something written by a scholarly person in a newspaper (i.e placed in the public domain). Secondly what other inference should I have made? Is it not reasonable to assume that this is one of possibly two conclusions that one could arrive at?. The other possible conclusion would be that Owen Arthur should be silenced. Today I am equally amazed by the conclusion of the article which reads as follows: By the way of advice, as long as Mottley remains leader, the opposition will persists. Perhaps the time has come for Mottley to negotiate away her leadership, and allow the party to settle around an uncontested. recognized leader .
Posted on: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 11:18:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015