He is correct though. A charge and conviction for removing client money held in trust??? That should be grounds for elimination from political office forever.

"*If there was evidence,” he told The Tribune, “do you think that I would not have been charged?”*

Nygard and Sam dont have one charge at police headquarters...so, no.

"*The only payment SpaceX made to The Bahamas, Mr Munroe said, was to reimburse logistical costs related to a Falcon rocket landing off the coast*"

It's possible the statement should be corrected to "*the only payment that we know about*"

Who is the *high ranking politician* making *deals* with Colombian cocaine traffickers to facilitate passage of cocaine shipments through any Bahamian airport facility? Who is the Ministerof Aviation? I believe it is in their interest to find this alledged (according to the senior police officer Curtis in charge of all airports) nation traitor.

Wasnt some legislation proposed to allow the Ministry of Tourism to "*accept gifts*"? Such a weird ammendment. No definition on size of gift or who the ultimate beneficiary would be. You know sometimes the official in charge gets to keep gifts when they leave office. I believe the Minister of Tourism proposed this adjustment, perhaps he should have a conversation with the minister of Aviation and find out who was negotiating with SpaceX.

"*national Security Minister Wayne Munroe says the Royal Bahamas Defence Force should be judged not by the misconduct of one or two people*"

We can most definitely judge the leadership that allowed the fire downtown to rage and these men to "*happen*", it appears to be always 100 steps behind the obvious. If they are not willing to provide any oversight of any system because they know nothing about it, why are they in place?

"*Reuters cited a quote it said came from a spokesperson for Mr Cooper that said: ....Mr Rahming said that quote was unauthorised*"

Does the DPM stoop behind his spokesperson and whisper what he wants him to say?

"*According to Mr Rahming, Mr Pyfrom did not know he was doing an interview with Reuters*"

Why does it make a difference? Would he lie to another news agency and tell the truth to Reuters?

Not sure I'd call it "unfortunate", but officials have to be diplomatic.

We're in a crisis of "*easy money*" and "*whoredom*"

I recall needing to break a $50 dollar bill to pay for parking in the Elizabeth Avenue parking lot. This was some years ago... it would have been before COVID I believe, but uncertain. I wanted something cheap, luckily there was a pastry shop across the street. I walked over and purchased a cinnamon bun and soda. I recall being a little surprised, the place was empty, the pastry offerings were scanty and I thought old and stale. The only people in the store were the young serving lady and two white men sitting at the back, leaning over the table, talking in low undertones. I recall being somewhat wary when the men, I "thought", because I wasnt looking directly at them, stopped talking as I walked closer to their area. I remember having the distinct impression, omg I just walked in on a major drug deal! Im in the presence of either the Jackal or El Chapo. It was Elizabeth on Bay!. Was it a "deal" but maybe not drugs? Was my impression correct that the odd atmosphere was due to it being a front for illegal activity?

Who knows? It will be the backdrop for chapter numero uno, in my first creative work of fiction.

The question to ask is, why has the fuel charge increased when gas prices are going down?

"***Socially ethical profits refer to the idea that businesses can be both profitable and socially responsible**, generating financial gains while also contributing positively to society and the environment. This involves integrating ethical considerations into business models and decision-making processes, ensuring operations are conducted in a way that benefits stakeholders (employees, customers, communities, and the environment) rather than just maximizing shareholder wealth.*" google

You dont read.

**@Island Warrior is the first person I've heard whose identified the problem**. It's among the persons using in excess of 800kwh per month. This is why persons like you and PLP sycophants can call talk shows to say nothing has changed and their bill is lower. This is how they designed it. And yes, it's a socially ethical approach that lower income people should bear a lower burden of cost. But the reality of rising prices today, unless you're in the upper class and uber wealthy, simply having a higher salary doesnt unburden you from the weight of bills.

What isnt ethical is to gaslight higher income persons telling them to wash less clothes and read by candle light.

This is key in what Island Warrior described:
"*The fuel charge for usage over 800 kWh jumped by $46.80—from $75.61 in 2024 to $122.41 in 2025—despite only a slight decrease in the rate per kWh*

The fuel charge for usage over 800kwh was already higher than that for usage below 800kwh, so the more you used above 800kwh, your bill would appear to grow exponentially. That was the situation in July 2024.

**In July 2025 they increased the fuel charge rate for usage over 800kwh by 60%(?) and didnt notify anybody. They knew the rate had increased significantly, but continued with the line that "*bills have dropped*". This isnt "*gaslighting*", this is out and out deception. If spoken from the floor of the HOA, its a more serious charge**

And hence we have the reason that FOCOL Pike and the Govt agreed to a clause in the contract that they didnt have to get approval from URCA for rate changes in the first three years. They can change as they like without notifying anyone.

FOCOL btw declared an extraordinary 20mil net profit. They were extremely pleased.

"*Building on this solid financial foundation, the company’s strong Q2 2025 performance — with net income reaching $20.1 million at **mid-year** — positions FOCOL to **exceed last year’s earnings***"