Samaroo Claims CIA Helped Government:
When Will We Know the Full Story of 1990
On a television programme “Remembering 1990” on the night of the 28th Anniversary of the 1990 attempted Coup, Prof. Brinsley Samaroo, a former Minister of the NAR Government made yet another ‘startling revelation’ about the events of July 27-August 1, 1990.
Samaroo, for the first time, claimed that the US Ambassador, military and the CIA played important roles in support of the Government during that important event in our nation’s history.
This role of the CIA and US was not even disclosed to the 2013 Commission of Enquiry (CoE) and Samaroo’s revelation has prompted questions as to why this was not presented to the CoE or otherwise to the people of this country.
Former AG of the same NAR Government, Anthony Smart, two days later declared that Samaroo’s account was ‘inaccurate’ and ‘mistaken’, claiming that Samaroo was not aware of the facts as he had returned to the country on July 30 (which Samaroo indicated on the tv programme).
This whole development has prompted several citizens to ask: What else are they sweeping under the carpet? Why wasn’t this told to the CoE?: Why are we now hearing this?; Will we ever know the Truth?
Tall Tale or Confirmation
The entire TV Special and Samaroo’s revelations can be seen at: https://www.tv6tnt.com/news/local/remembering-tv-special/article_c71aeb56-9273-11e8-83aa-833c5fdb8ab5.html.
Samaroo’s presentation included a lot of supposition and speculation about the Venezuelan President’s preparedness to ‘take over’ Trinidad to prevent use of this country as a ‘staging area’ for a ‘Libyan invasion of Venezuela’.
The alleged Libyan invasion talk sounds like a conspiracy theory with all the intrigue of global political machinations.
What it does not explain is why would Libya want to invade Venezuela? Why would Libya which has never engaged in such aggression against countries in its own part of the globe want to come half-way round the planet to attack our neighbour?
Such military adventures are the usual stuff of colonial and imperial powers, not countries like Libya.
And the historian’s account of this is largely based on his assumptions.
At other points in the programme, Samaroo was not able to clearly link particular events with particular dates even when directly asked.
But, when it came to the US, its army and CIA involvement he was quite specific as to the type of aircraft used to bring in US military and ‘specialized equipment’. He gave specifics of the location and purpose for which the equipment was used. He gave details about the CIA operatives as numbering four – 2 male and 2 female. He even claimed that one female indicated she was previously involved in the Entebbe airport situation.
And he spoke of specific ‘advice’ given by this female agent on when the hostage release was to be done.
Ever since 1990, there have been many stories about US involvement in the situation. Samaroo’s utterances are either confirmation of those stories or as Smart suggests just a tall tale.
The question arises: Why would an accomplished historian risk his reputation with these disclosures?
What is there to hide if the OAS alliance leader and its CIA assisted the NAR Government which was ‘inexperienced in such situations’, as Samaroo put it?
What is Smart Up To?
Why would Smart deny CIA role when it was saving their butts and not overthrowing their government like it has done in other countries? 
In October 2006, Smart said this in a letter to the press: “… although its numbers were depleted by the incarceration of Robinson and most of the Cabinet in the Red House, the NAR government continued to function during the crisis with those members who were not held hostage. It also successfully secured the freedom of the hostages held simultaneously at two separate locations — the Red House and TTT.”
Is Smart now trying to deny the CIA involvement to continue the narrative of the “heroism” of the NAR Government and Ministers?
Is the image of the NAR so important that he would suggest that Samaroo was telling tall tales and seek to denigrate a renowned historian for such a narrow self-serving purpose?
Or has Samaroo spilled the beans on something that all the Government witnesses at the CoE and since 1990 decided or were told not to let the population know?
We Deserve The Truth
The events of the attempted coup are described as the ‘darkest hour’ in our country’s history, as ‘an assault on our democracy’ and such terms.
On this 28th anniversary, our President called for commemoration of the events.
Every administration between 1990 and 2013 refused to conduct any form of enquiry to get at the Facts and the Truth of what really happened in those historic days of 1990, what were the causes and what we should learn from it.
Even the Recommendations in Chapter 12 of the Report of the Commission of Enquiry remains labeled ‘Confidential’ and hidden from the population.
We, the citizens of this country, have a RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH about 1990.
For too long, the politicians have denied us that right or only told us their version of events, a version that supports their image of ‘heroism’ and ‘patriotism’.
Is Prof. Samaroo now to be pilloried for letting another facet of that truth out of the bag?
We hope not.
 
Clyde A Weatherhead
A Citizen Demanding
Our Right to Know
July 29, 2018
 

On Friday July 20, in a special sitting of the House of Representatives, the 3rd Notice of Nomination for the office of Police Commissioner, the 7-year Acting Commissioner was rejected by the Government.
Inevitably, the PM came with reason number 3 for rejecting Williams and declaration #2 that the “process needs to be abolished”.
Rejection of Williams
In the first 2 nominations, the PM and his majority in the House creatively rejected them with:

1. The process is flawed, cumbersome, convoluted, expensive and unreliable, then
2. The ‘deal-breaker’ was nomination of persons who did not apply for the post.

Well, Williams DID apply for the post, and not for the first time. He also has been on a string of acting appointments and functioning in the position spanning three administrations.
Coming to nominee #3, there was great anticipation about what the Government was coming with this time to reject a man who has been acting in the position for 7 years.
He didn’t apply for the post was out.
Ten years ago, the then PM’s “position then was Williams wasn’t ready for the responsibility of the post”, this PM reminded us.
In 2018, “Government would not accept this notification, as we expect to respond in a way that will bring about some element of change and after seven years we don’t believe that just a confirmation - of not the incumbent, but the holder of an acting position - will change it.”, he went on.
So, with a promise that Cabinet will provide Williams with a pension that is personal to him, this PNM administration has declared Williams not up to the requirement of “intervention of change” – not up to the job.
So, round 3 of the nomination saga produces a ‘performance appraisal’, of sorts, of a failed candidate. And, after years of excuses for the demise of the management of the Police Service allegedly because the CoP was ‘only Acting’, he is put out to pasture as unfit.
The Process Must Be Abolished
Having rejected nominee #3, the Opposition’s feeble ‘yeah’ vote irrelevant anyway, the PM return to “de process”.
With nomination #1, the PM denounced the process in all manner and form. He conveniently forgot to remind us that he was one of the Parliamentarians who created this convoluted, unworkable process in 2006 when they all amended the Constitution.
They gave themselves the power to ‘decide’ the composition of the Police Service Commission (PolSC) with veto power over the nominees of the President and more veto power over the Commission’s nominees for Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner.
In 2015, this PM and his majority in Parliament produced Legal Notice 218 of 2015 reshaping the ‘process’ they created in 2006 (on behalf of the President).
So, the PNM in 2006 and 2015 had 2 bites of the cherry and the recruitment process remains a mess and ‘must be abolished’ as the PM declared on Friday.
In fact, by giving the powers the PolSC previously exercised over the entire Police Service to the Commissioner (over 7,000 officers), the Parliamentarians completely messed up the entire management of the Police Service.
Just check how many Judicial Review cases there have been against the Commissioner compared to how many there were against the Commission prior to 2006.,
Now, this PM who voted for the process in 2006 and 2015 says it must be abolished.
Abolishing it would mean, going back to amend the 2006 Constitution amendments and the details of the process in the Legal Notices 218 and 219 of 2015, and a special majority will be required for the Constitutional amendments.
After the wholly unnecessary Special Select Committee to conduct quasi-judicial review of the PolSC’s recruitment process, the Government declared it was going to change the process. Minister Hinds even went on radio to say they would include publishing the applicants’ photos in the newspapers and invite public comment on each of them.
But, the PNM couldn’t do it alone. So, they back-tracked on that and accepted the Order of Merit List ‘as the Law’, as the PM is fond of calling it.
Now, while declaring the need for its abolition, the PM hints that they may yet not reject one of the nominees on the Merit list. Of course, if they do that, they will claim its because “We require an intervention of change to give ourselves a chance to get the upper hand” (against the criminals) as the PM put it on Friday.
So, the process must go, but, we may still appoint a Commissioner under this flawed, unreliable, cumbersome, convoluted and expensive process, even if it’s just “to avoid legal challenges” which the PM said his Government will avoid. More likely, it will be because that is their preferred nominee.
This whole mess was created by unanimous vote of all Parliamentarians. But, they refuse to admit that they are really responsible for the state of the Police Service management by those decisions in 2006.
Let’s see where Nomination Notices #4, 5, 6, etc take us.

Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Fighting for
Democratic Renewal of
Our Society
July 21, 2018

The Murder Toll Has Crossed 300 in 167 Days:
What is Happening to Our Safety and Security
 “If a man with an automatic weapon spray a crowd of innocent people trying to kill somebody, and you end up killing three people, and four almost got killed, and others could have been killed, this indiscriminate killing – isn’t that what terrorism is? Indiscriminate killing of innocent participants, that’s what it is.” – PM Rowley on I 95.5

Last week, the Prime Minister and Head of the National Security Council expressed his indignation at the ‘indiscriminate killing’ which he labelled ‘terrorism’.
That was in response to the mass shooting of 6 people, 3 killed on the Chaguaramas boardwalk.
The Minister of National Security, Ag. Commissioner of Police, Williams and Head of Defence Force held a media conference to condemn the killings and promise ‘heightened joint security presence ..during the holidays…as a deterrent’.
This ‘joint approach will give citizens a sense of security’, the Minister promised.
This kind of media conference and promise of greater joint presence or military presence in communities, etc. has become routine since the first killing of a pair of school youth in uniform in Laventille. They have been repeated with the slaughter of another school boy in that area and every time there is a new flare up in the killing spree in Enterprise or other ‘hot spot’.
The Prime Minister and Minister Dillon have repeatedly told us that Government does not fight crime. The Police is the principal crime-fighting security agency and the ‘law enforcement agencies’ are the ones who will deal with crime.
Sadly, all these pronouncements have not provided any let up in the ‘indiscriminate killing of innocent persons’ the PM called terrorism seven days ago when an 8-year-old was among the critically wounded.
Our Right to Safety and Security Must be Guaranteed
If guaranteeing the Right to Safety and Security of Citizens is not the responsibility of the Government, then can the PM explain to us why his party included a 10-point Crime Plan in its Manifesto in 2015; why he and his National Security Minister address the nation after every murderous mass killing and offer “solution”?
Or, why is Ministry of National Security launching ‘The National Crime Prevention Programme’ tomorrow (July 18) replete with speeches by the PM, Senior and Junior National Security Ministers?
We do not need assurances of ‘a sense of security’ from the Government.
We need our Right to Safety and Security guaranteed!
So, after 300 murders in 167 days (according to media tallies), after ‘terrorist’ killers easily escaped a location with one road in and out, a nearby police post and police station along the road, are we to seriously think that another ‘Crime Prevention Programme’ will make it any safer for citizens in their homes, in public areas like the boardwalk, or anywhere?
Will there be new performance targets for the Police in terms of:

• Response Time to Citizens’ calls for help
• Detection Rates
• Conviction Rates?

Round 3 of Commissioner Nomination Friday
Or will the 3rd round of Nomination by the House of Representatives on Friday, July 20, produce Point 1 of the Party-in-Power’s 10-point Crime Plan – Appointment of a Commissioner of Police.
Oh yes, that is on the Order Paper and MP’s will dutifully come out during their vacation to ‘consider’ another Notification of Her Excellency (also on vacation after 4 months in office) “in respect of the nomination of Mr. Stephen Williams”.
Will the Government whose PM told us in relation to the first 2 episodes of this sad tale that nomination of persons for the position who did not apply for it ‘was the deal breaker’ was the real reason they rejected the first 2 nominations, now accept the nomination of a man who not only applied for the position, but, has occupied it for several years?
Or, will the ‘convoluted process’ which was unanimously put in place by all Parliamentarians in 2006 and further detailed by this Government in Legal Notice 218 0f 2015 by again be the excuse for failing to appoint a Commissioner?
Certainly, it will be most interesting to see what convoluted logic they will come up with for rejecting the nomination of Ag. Commissioner Williams on Friday. And, if rejected, will the Government expect Williams to enthusiastically lead the ‘principal law enforcement agency’ in implementing Wednesday’s Government Crime Prevention Programme?
After all, in round 2, the PM repeatedly reminded us that the Merit List of Nominees IS THE LAW.
Or will he and his Party-in-Power veto this opportunity to implement Point One of their 2015 Crime Plan and confirm to all of us that that plan was only useful for the purposes of trying to win votes?
Whatever transpires on Wednesday with the launch of the Crime Prevention Programme or on Friday when the 3rd nomination is considered by the Lower House, how would either of these outcomes make the guarantee of the Right to Safety and Security for All Citizens any more a reality?
We, the People, are not spectators in this tale of a sad land. We are its principal characters.
The ‘indiscriminate killing of innocent’ people, the ‘terrorism’, denounced by the PM only a week ago, must be halted.
That is the job of the State – the Government, the Protective Forces, etc.
We do not need any more lip service and talk shop.
We NEED ACTION.
 
Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Fighting for
Democratic Renewal of
Our Society
17 July 2018