Curiouser and Curiouser

“Now let it work. Mischief, thou art afoot.
Take thou what course thou wilt!”

• Julius Caesar, act 3 scene 2

In the tale as told by the Bard of Avon, following the Caesar’s assassination, Mark Antony, addressing aggrieved plebeians (ordinary citizens) uttered the words quoted above. Put in modern language, it reads: Now, let it work. Trouble, you have begun—take whatever course you choose! Having let the genie or monster out of the bottle, let it take its own course.
So, unfolding before our very eyes is a situation in which we may well all declare, mischief thou art afoot.
An apparently simple and innocuous matter of a visit of a senior government official and her delegation to meet with our PM and his delegation (the regular stuff of international diplomacy) is being turned into a tragi-comedy worthy of Shakespeare’s theatrical imagination.
This visit involved the approved opening of our borders to facilitate, borders on either side were closed as part of anti-pandemic measures.
Also, uncommon, the visiting senior official had only been recently subject of imposed sanctions by more than one major power.
Further inimitable features have been provided by those who seem incapable of telling a simple straight story about this fateful visit.
The PM and his trusty ‘Gary Sobers’ – Minister in the OPM, NatSec Minister, expert and spokesman on energy matters, former party PRO, and more - have managed to tell a story of this visit which has invited curious investigations and questioning of their veracity.
Here are some examples,
The PM suggested that

1. he received and met with a delegation but did not know who the 5 men who were part of it were because they were ‘not introduced’.
2. The meeting was about COVID-19 pandemic response but not one single health official on either side was present
3. He was unaware of the details of the aircraft that the visitors arrived on.

The NatSec Minister added that:

1. While he approved the opening of the borders to facilitate the visit, he knew nothing about who made up the delegation nor about the aircraft conveying them into a secure space
2. There was no question as to what the VP wanted to discuss
3. He asked for the visit to be delayed for 11 days because the VP had a flu.
4. The meeting was of 3 on the TT side and 2 on the visiting delegation – the VP of that country and a Mr. Chavez; the other men were conducted to a “housing bay”
5. The meeting was conducted with participants in “PPE gear”.

The simple contradiction between these 2 versions about who actually met with whom as delegations is just the beginning. If the Minister is correct, the PM met 2 people but was not introduced to Mr. Chavez (sic).
Several issues arise on the Min, Nitec’s account:
Did not know who was coming and on what aircraft – However, flight manifest and other official documents (yet uncontroverted) show the details about both the plane and passengers were official information before the visit date (March 27). Wouldn’t that be all regular?
There was no questioning or discussion about the agenda of the meeting – Yet the PM said that the meeting was to discuss COVID and the Minister agrees. Otherwise, was this a friendly chat that required breach of our pandemic defences?
The NatSec Minister requested delay for 11 days. But we are told that all decisions by the same Minister about treatment of  permitted persons are based on the ‘advice of the science and health professionals’. The quarantine period protocol is the 14-day incubation period. How did this Minister apparently unilaterally vary that to 11 days for someone with symptoms and visiting our Head of Government?
I have not referred to any ‘gasoline deal’ or any kowtowing by the Opposition to Uncle Sam to avoid comingling and confusing the issues.
Why is it on the simple matter of an official visit by a neighbouring diplomatic delegation are we being presented with so much chicanery and obfuscation?
I plead again (at the risk of fuelling the ire of the Facebook trolls) for STRAIGHT ANSWERS from our Elected Representatives because of their DUTY of ACCOUNTABILITY to the PUBLIC.
All this ‘mischief’ taking its course is absolutely unnecessary.
If we are not considered worthy of simple accountability as the People of this country, perhaps our elected officials would prefer to account to those who have openly accused them of violating the OAS Treaty.

Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Demanding Accountability
13 May 2020

---