Comment history

iamcitizen says...

Mr. Harrison... "Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people”. Leviticus 19:16.

On Stop the naysaying

Posted 6 September 2016, 11:42 a.m. Suggest removal

iamcitizen says...


I wish to, hereby, exercise my privilege, as a citizen, to say that ****Fred Mitchell is an ass!**

iamcitizen says...

**The Equality umbrella must not leak. Period!**

Why should we participate in a constitutional referendum to extend additional rights and privileges to foreigners while that same constitution enabled the government to grant rights and privileges to foreigners while withholding them from us?

**It’s time for this to end!!!!!**

The Gender Equality Referendum must be expanded to a fifth (5th) question in relation to a Constitutional Amendment to Article 26(4)(e) to bring full constitutional equality to all categories of Bahamian Citizens.

Article 26. (4) (e) of the Constitution enabled the Government to enact a law (The Gaming Act) that prohibits Bahamian citizens from gambling in and owning casinos but allows foreigners to do so.

In the circumstances, should Bahamian citizens be asked to vote “YES” to constitutional amendments, that will enshrine rights and entitlements to foreigners, in the Bahamas, while that same constitution currently withholds rights and entitlements from Bahamians that it extends to foreigners?

The answer of course is NO!

Citizens should, therefore, demand that a fifth (5th) question be added to the current crop of constitutional referendum questions in relation to eliminating the offensive Article 26. (4) (e) from the constitution..

Citizens must demand that the Government, in the interim and as a good faith gesture, amend the Gaming Act to afford Bahamians the right to own and gamble in casinos, before the scheduled referendum.

Should the government refuse to do so, which will be a clear signal that the Government intends to continue this most egregious denial of this right to Bahamians, then all right thinking Bahamians should vote “NO” to all four (4) of the proposed questions.

the government must now take these first steps toward finally putting bahamianas first, by giving us the right to choose whether we wish to own and gamble in casinos.

we cannot continue to accept and allow the government, banks and foreign employers treating bahamians as second-class citizens.

We hereby invite the Graduate and the 4Yes camp to vote Yes for 5.

http://tribune242.com/users/photos/2016…

On Equality umbrella must not leak

Posted 4 May 2016, 9:14 p.m. Suggest removal

iamcitizen says...

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

On FNM founder backs Minnis

Posted 30 March 2016, 6:04 p.m.

iamcitizen says...


Question: How can anyone who regions from public office for being
engaged in dishonorable acts, become honorable upon his/her resignation as a consequence of having committed those dishonorable acts??????
Only in The Bahamas!!!!!!*

iamcitizen says...

Tennyson Wells is obviously repeating Dr. Minnis' racial sentiments characterizing white Bahamians and black Bahamians who do not support Minnis as "racists" and "uncle toms", respectively.

Minnis, aided by Wells is creating new divisions within the FNM along racial lines.

Minnis needs to publicly repudiate these remarks failing which he should resign! He is unfit to lead the Free National Movement..much less The Bahamas..

On Lightbourn told of criticism at FNM meeting

Posted 8 February 2016, 3:38 p.m. Suggest removal

iamcitizen says...

This statement by Dr. Minnis is nothing more than a hackneyed cant laced with insincerity. It failed to address and ameliorate the crisis within the FNM. Instead he sought to rationalize and justify Senator Rolle's egregious attack on her colleagues by invoking her right to freedom of expression in a feeble attempt at masking and minimizing same.

As his statement was vacuous. I offer no further comment.

On Minnis: Keep it in the family

Posted 27 January 2016, 2:09 p.m. Suggest removal

iamcitizen says...

**fnm central council does not have the authority to "modify" provisions of the constitution!**

Mr. Pintard's assertion that should the FNM Central Council choose to have a non-voting event, the convention would only be held to share the party’s vision, outline elements of its plan of action, share different dimensions of its platform and/or modify the constitution of the party among other things,**is utter nonsense!!!!!**

**the council cannot decide to not have an election of officers at convention**!

The fact is, **the fnm council is not empowered to modify provisions of the constitution** which unequivocally states at Article 51 (e) that the convention shall have an "election of officers of the party".

The constitution can only be modified / amended by the Convention. (See Article 21 which states: **"Central Council SHALL carry out the directives issued by the convention)**

This is no more than a feeble attempt to further mislead Pintard and Minnis' blind followers some of whom have never seen a copy of the party's constitution much less read one.

These ill advised tactics will only serve to further divide an already weakened party. The FNM must now move with alacrity to mend fences, regain the confidence of the Bahamian people and on to rescuing the nation from the death grip of this woefully inept PLP administration.

On FNM convention - but no voting?

Posted 21 January 2016, 3:32 p.m. Suggest removal

iamcitizen says...

Geoffrey B Stuart, Esquire, JP,, a recent Minnis appointee to the FNM's Executive has hit the ground running with this uninformed and divisive response to the "Call to arms…." letter. I suppose he has to demonstrate his appreciation for his appointment.

His response is at best derisive and at worst a willful misrepresentation of the facts with respect to the former candidates' membership in a non- particularized "Grouping", (save for the former candidates) alleged to be anti Minnis and whose sole raison d'etat is to control the FNM. Utter rubbish!!!

Mr. Stuart's call for unity and the burying of hatchets are no more than vacuous slogans employed to feign sincerity.
His true motive is to vilify the former candidates and identify them with FNMs who Minnis and others close to him refer to as **Ingrahamiites…** FNMs who have been deliberately marginalized because of Minnis' insecurity which has resulted in his feeble and misguided mission.

The irony in all of this is that the so called Ingrahamites are those persons who formerly served as leaders party officers, Cabinet Ministers, members of parliament as well as political strategists, speechwriters, advisors and marketing specialists whose services have been sorely missed as evidenced by the FNM's lack luster performance over the past three and a half years.

Had Minnis and his executives accepted the advice and help given and offered by the aforementioned individuals the Free National Movement, as an organization, would be far better off than it is today.

The Free National Movement needs to be reunited, re-energized and made battle-ready for the next general elections. It's not about **Minnis, Butler or Ingraham**…it's about love of country It's all about doing what's in the best interest of this nation and the Bahamian people - not it's would-be leaders.

For those of you who truly love The Bahamas, I entreat you to move away from your full-length mirrors which will enable you to see the bigger picture…the country…which is crying out to be rescued from the PLP's death grip.

You are letting the Bahamian people down with your petty bickering. You're better than this. You have proven that you know how to win and govern…need I remind you of your past achievements?

So come together, FNMs, in full convention! Work through your problems. Reunite! Articulate your vision for rescuing the nation from its many woes. The people are crying out for deliverance! d0 not let the bahamian
people down.!

On FNM council

Posted 19 January 2016, 5:21 p.m. Suggest removal

iamcitizen says...


This is an excellent idea save for the suggestion that the allocated funds would fall within the Chief Justice's purview as the Judiciary, itself, should not be seen to be party to contractual agreements for services from private sector providers for obvious reasons. The task could be actioned through the office of the Director of Court Services which would be given the requisite statutory underpinning and its dedicated finance officer. The Ministry of Tourism has a similar model, again, for obvious reasons. Maybe then the utter mess that currently exists in the Supreme Court Registry would be corrected and freed from the political directorate's oversight.