Someone please tell Minnis and KPT to GIVE the Freeport hotel (that they want the government to own) to Izzie ............ He is begging for a hotel ......... He needs to be given a consolation prize for what Perry did with Bahamar ................. smdh

The Baha Mar development was wrongfully taken from Sarkis by the corrupt Christie-led PLP government in what was tantamount to a nationalization of the development for the benefit of Red China. But don't expect Carl Bethel to do anything towards righting the wrong of the previous government. It was Carl Bethel's mentor Hubert Ingraham who brought Red China to the Bahamas and Carl Bethel only has loving eyes for Red China!

The FNM Government promised they ,in fact PM Minnis promised he would sell the Bar Mar
and he must have promised Mr. Sarkis something, There is nothing to Stop the FNM
Government. They can take the hotel from the present owners ,close it down and sell it.
they can remove VAT. They can close the web shops. those are promises they made to
Bahamians . Also Bains Town Tax free zone. These promises helped them to win the
election. So far they have promised and have not delivered on not one single one.

For once I agree with Birdie, more or less, lol!!!

The good thing about Mudda's comments is that they are written in English (and not gibberish) so that at least I can understand them and analyze them for factualness and truth. Let us take his first sentence:

"The Baha Mar development was **wrongfully** taken from Sarkis **by the corrupt Christie-led PLP government** in what was tantamount to a **nationalization** of the development **for the benefit of Red China."**

"Wrongfully" implies that it was done without or against Court orders. Not so. Quite the contrary: every Court order was obeyed.

No argument that the "PLP government" was corrupt but they did not take anything away from anyone. It was the Courts, through due process of law. Now, if the argument is that the Bahamas is a banana republic without due process and that all judges are corrupt and just there to rubber-stamp the government's bidding, then he should say so and give some factual proof.

"Nationalisation" is the process by which property is transferred to the ownership of the nation. Was Baha Mar ever, even for a millisecond, in the ownership of the Bahamas? No, it was not.

"For the benefit of Red China": this would imply that the Chinese benefitted financially. In fact, when you take how much money they lent and subtract how much they recovered, they are down billions.

So we are actually left with: "Don't expect Carl Bethel to do anything." What a shocker! An AG who does nothing against the due process of law?! What is this world coming to?

Overall:

Entertainment value: B-
Factualness: F. Must revise harder.

Be ready for the Mudda doppelgangers to vilify you. I have lost count of how many names that he posts under.

Agreed Banker. He is a paid special interest propagandist interested in perpetuating the historical status quo. The multiple accounts is his attempt to lend credibility to his posts. He is posting from a couple accounts in this same thread.

Are you really one of the very few silly enough to believe our judiciary was untouched by the wide spread and rampant corruption of the previous government? If so, you must have been impressed by the dazzling performances of the likes of Allyson Maynard-Gibson as AG, Gomez as Minister of Legal Affairs, Justice Winder and others under the guise of 'law'. Sarkis and his legal advisors were not nearly as impressed according to filings made in the UK High Court.

As for nationalization, for many corrupt third world governments it is simply the means to achieve a pre-determined end. Even corrupt greedy government officials often know their limitations in owning and managing certain types of nationalized assets to maintain and/or enhance value for their own pockets. It is therefore not uncommon for nationalized assets to end up in the hands of a pre-ordained buyer or operator either as an integral part of or shortly after the nationalization event. Such a pre-ordained buyer or operator is usually only too willing to engage in backroom deals of one kind or another with corrupt government officials, the end result being great unjust enrichment for all concerned except the original owner of the nationalized assets.

I believe we share pretty much the same opinion of Carl Bethel.

Got the alert. He's just being cynical.

Excellent response mudda.
Yours is a valuable voice in the mayhem of adolescence only too common here.

Comrades! He's back, again!
Ever get the feeling the red shirts cabinet keeps shoving batteries up ass Izmirlian, just enough tease him how they gon makes good on his daddy's $800,000… cause he's stubborn like an energizer bunny who doesn't give up?

Energizer Bunny - (Back Again)!

.........////https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK2yanPus_0

No, Mudda, you cannot get away so lightly with your reply, as it lacks intellectual rigour.

As I said in my comment above, and you seem to stress in your reply, your argument really is that this is a banana republic and that the judges are corrupt. I use the present tense because judges are appointed for life and do not change with political elections. If they were corrupt under Christie they remain corrupt under Minnis and probably were corrupt under Papa and Pindling before them, as Christie is far too stupid to have invented corruption. There can be no arguing with that fact. If that is truly so, then there is no hope for this country whatsoever. If that is what you mean, say so. Let us know where you stand.

That cannot possibly be the opinion of Sarkis, as he invested a lot of money here. Only an idiot or a clueless playboy toying with Daddy's money would invest in a country with no rule of law. Which do you think he is?

You forgot to mention that it would also mean that judges in both the Bahamas and the USA are corrupt and that the Bahamian government had the capacity to pre-determine and influence the results of the US courts.

Can everyone just ignore 'mudda' and his other accounts?... He takes away from the conversation in the commentary here at the tribune.

Ahhh, and here we see yet another ardent anti-Sarkis PLP supporter.

Nothing to do with political affiliation. I have never voted for the PLP in my life. I look at facts and all the facts point to Sarkis being an imbecile who managed to fuck things up all by himself, without any help from any politician.

Sarkis and his father gambled on a 'banana republic' Bahamas in much the same way that his father did many years ago in Gabon with the family's peanuts and other nuts empire. You win some and you lose some. But that fact in no way justifies the wrongful de facto nationalization event that was undertaken by the corrupt Christie-led PLP government for the benefit of Red China with big time kickbacks flowing to crooked senior Bahamian officials at the highest levels of government. Sarkis and his father will have their day in court - the UK High Court.

Nothing wrong with that. If the UK Court establishes different facts, I will believe them. No argument there.

Er, Gambia actually, not Gabon. Or maybe they're the same place :)