NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who the hell thinks the Orange Orangutan has any skills????????????

Nehru posted:

Who the hell thinks the Orange Orangutan has any skills????????????

Why you bashing your fellow New Yorker? He had to have enormous skills to make the Manhattan skyline what it is today. 

Robbing and enslaving small business owners are NOT skills!!!

Leonora posted:

Nehru posted:

Who the hell thinks the Orange Orangutan has any skills????????????

Why you bashing your fellow New Yorker? He had to have enormous skills to make the Manhattan skyline what it is today. 

I agree, but some of their actions seems to isolate some people, due to power grabbing ??          . 

Politics seems to be something that you cant win all the time [regarding structure, etc].

Trump added to  the NY skyline, and Jagdeo  failed at the Skeldon factory and Berbice bridge, but Marriott was successful and more investments went to Guyana, during Jagdeo's  time.    

Jagdeo must have Bggred Tola. He loves the man so much that he is mentioning the man’s name 24/7. Comparing Trump’s wealth to Jagdeo’s ?

Bai Tola, you must be living a beggar man’s life by living door mouth to door mouth since you have a totally screwed up perception about wealth and wealth accumulation.

Some people gatt Trump stuck in dem craw, some gatt Jagdeo stuck in dem craw.  Tola gatt both Jagdeo and Trump stuck in he craw.  Both them will be around, so he should come up for oxygen every now and then!!

yuji22 posted:

Jagdeo must have Bggred Tola. He loves the man so much that he is mentioning the man’s name 24/7. Comparing Trump’s wealth to Jagdeo’s ?

Bai Tola, you must be living a beggar man’s life by living door mouth to door mouth since you have a totally screwed up perception about wealth and wealth accumulation.

I don’t remember coming across a man do obsessed with multipe men.  Is like he get day dreams, night dreams and wet dreams over dem two bannaz!

Jagdeo is a power hungry kaka-rass lil bhai when it comes to Trump, kicking him to the curb with his wealth and  a warped mind.                  

Baseman posted:

yuji22 posted:

Jagdeo must have Bggred Tola. He loves the man so much that he is mentioning the man’s name 24/7. Comparing Trump’s wealth to Jagdeo’s ?

Bai Tola, you must be living a beggar man’s life by living door mouth to door mouth since you have a totally screwed up perception about wealth and wealth accumulation.

I don’t remember coming across a man do obsessed with multipe men.  Is like he get day dreams, night dreams and wet dreams over dem two bannaz!

He is into men, especially wealthy men and gets upset when they ignore him so he comes here to vent his frustration. He gets Jagdeo and Trump’s wet dreams day and night. He is always Jagdeo this and Jagdeo that.

President Granger will give him one good kick if the tries that on him.

He would be better off  focusing on his “Charity”.

yuji22 posted:

Baseman posted:

yuji22 posted:

Jagdeo must have Bggred Tola. He loves the man so much that he is mentioning the man’s name 24/7. Comparing Trump’s wealth to Jagdeo’s ?

Bai Tola, you must be living a beggar man’s life by living door mouth to door mouth since you have a totally screwed up perception about wealth and wealth accumulation.

I don’t remember coming across a man do obsessed with multipe men.  Is like he get day dreams, night dreams and wet dreams over dem two bannaz!

He is into men, especially wealthy men and gets upset when they ignore him so he comes here to vent his frustration. He gets Jagdeo and Trump’s wet dreams day and night. He is always Jagdeo this and Jagdeo that.

President Granger will give him good one kick if the tries that on him.

He would be better off focusing on his “Charity”.

Quite an interesting conversation,lots of reference to antiman behavior.

Sometime what one claims to be are the opposite.

Bai, watch your mouth when big man talking. Go play in the lil bai corner wid dem crying Lilly Sissy posters.

OK Knuckleheads,

Let me give it a shot...

Yes, in terms of their management styles (and other areas). They both personalize politics, having a hand in everything. Trump’s problem is that he has so much on his plate that he has to let go of some of the responsibilities to other Secretaries and agencies. But they have a penchant for personality politics where they get personal and may even be vindictive to their opponents. 

Both men are obsessed over power, and tend to move in the direction of securing more power, when given the opportunity. They will use power to achieve their own ends, with little regard for democratic values.

However, Trump’s acumen in the business field places him in the category of  any other robber baron in the US....they know how to game the system to secure wealth, with little regard for the poor. 

Politically, they are both crude political players, though Jagdeo has learned a lot over the years how to be more politically savvy and more diplomatic.

They both crave international recognition: Trump wants to revive the power of the US to where it was post-WW2. Jagdeo wants to be known as the Champion of the Earth.

Both of them have very little regards for women...you bannas already know this...

yuji22 posted:

Bai, watch your mouth when big man talking. Go play in the lil bai corner wid dem crying Lilly Sissy posters.

What's Bigman ? is't talking about who Bug..ring who.

The participants looks more like Sissy posters.

Looks like you knuckleheads already corrupt Tula thread with too much BS...no wonder he trying to catch that cow walking in front of him

VishMahabir posted:

Looks like you knuckleheads already corrupt Tula thread with too much BS...no wonder he trying to catch that cow walking in front of him

Tola thread IS BULLSHIT!!  So we juss feed am!

VishMahabir posted:

OK Knuckleheads,

Let me give it a shot...

Yes, in terms of their management styles (and other areas). They both personalize politics, having a hand in everything. Trump’s problem is that he has so much on his plate that he has to let go of some of the responsibilities to other Secretaries and agencies. But they have a penchant for personality politics where they get personal and may even be vindictive to their opponents. 

Both men are obsessed over power, and tend to move in the direction of securing more power, when given the opportunity. They will use power to achieve their own ends, with little regard for democratic values.

However, Trump’s acumen in the business field places him in the category of  any other robber baron in the US....they know how to game the system to secure wealth, with little regard for the poor. 

Politically, they are both crude political players, though Jagdeo has learned a lot over the years how to be more politically savvy and more diplomatic.

They both crave international recognition: Trump wants to revive the power of the US to where it was post-WW2. Jagdeo wants to be known as the Champion of the Earth.

Both of them have very little regards for women...you bannas already know this...

Both are men of the Base......Basemen....no pun intended!!

Nehru posted:

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agree Nehru. 

Absolutely NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Trump is a CHUMP.

Jagdeo is a CHAMPION.

Both Jagdeo and Trump treat women like garbage. 

Tola posted:

Both Jagdeo and Trump treat women like garbage. 

How do you know that?

VishMahabir posted:

Looks like you knuckleheads already corrupt Tula thread with too much BS...no wonder he trying to catch that cow walking in front of him

Bhai, da is  Gandhi  walking behind de cow. 

Tola posted:

VishMahabir posted:

Looks like you knuckleheads already corrupt Tula thread with too much BS...no wonder he trying to catch that cow walking in front of him

Bhai, da is  Gandhi  walking behind de cow. 

Dat pix don’t look like the Mahatma...he wearing too much clothing.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Tola posted:

Both Jagdeo and Trump treat women like garbage. 

How do you know that?

Because Jagdeo treated him that way!  Now he vex up!!

VishMahabir posted:  Dat pix don’t look like the Mahatma...he wearing too much clothing.

Vish, you remind me of this:

"...In 1931, he was invited for tea with Queen Mary and King George V at Buckingham Palace during a visit to London. Dressed in his customary dhoti, a loincloth loosely draped over his naked torso and wearing homemade sandals, he must have been the oddest looking visitor to Buckingham Palace. When the meeting was over, he was walking out of the palace gates when a journalist asked if he thought he was wearing enough. Gandhi’s reply: 'But the King was wearing enough for the both of us.'..."

Leonora posted:

VishMahabir posted:  Dat pix don’t look like the Mahatma...he wearing too much clothing.

Vish, you remind me of this:

"...In 1931, he was invited for tea with Queen Mary and King George V at Buckingham Palace during a visit to London. Dressed in his customary dhoti, a loincloth loosely draped over his naked torso and wearing homemade sandals, he must have been the oddest looking visitor to Buckingham Palace. When the meeting was over, he was walking out of the palace gates when a journalist asked if he thought he was wearing enough. Gandhi’s reply: 'But the King was wearing enough for the both of us.'..."

A good one

VishMahabir posted:

Leonora posted:

VishMahabir posted:  Dat pix don’t look like the Mahatma...he wearing too much clothing.

Vish, you remind me of this:

"...In 1931, he was invited for tea with Queen Mary and King George V at Buckingham Palace during a visit to London. Dressed in his customary dhoti, a loincloth loosely draped over his naked torso and wearing homemade sandals, he must have been the oddest looking visitor to Buckingham Palace. When the meeting was over, he was walking out of the palace gates when a journalist asked if he thought he was wearing enough. Gandhi’s reply: 'But the King was wearing enough for the both of us.'..."

A good one

Many people do not seem to know that Gandhi was actually in South Africa before returning to Colonial India. Nelson Mandela was a follower of Gandhi (before he realized that it was not a system that was effective against the racially divided SA state). Martin Luther King jr was also impressed with Gandhi’s civil disobedience method of resistance. 

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

Perhaps, Baseman can shed some light on this? 

VishMahabir posted:

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

History will tell although he had the majority of the people on his side,he was shut out by the USA.

I have some reading material from behind the scenes, how he was shut out, can share with you, unfortunately you don't accept private messages.Bear in mind not interested in invading your privacy.

Wont post on Political.

Django posted:

VishMahabir posted:

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

History will tell although he had the majority of the people on his side,he was shut out by the USA.

I have some reading material from behind the scenes, how he was shut out, can share with you, unfortunately you don't accept private messages.

Wont post on Political.

Thanks. 

But Django, I think the point I was making was that Jagan was ineffective in terms of doing anything to contain the PNC and its transgressions, fully knowing that the Burnham government was an illegal one. 

From everything I have read so far recently on Guyana history it look like Jagan was only revolutionary in theory, thus, Jagan probably felt more comfortable with the rhetoric, but was unwilling to go any further than taking action.

From what I am learning, it was the PPP which was there from the time the Burnham dictatorship built itself up from its base to the time Guyana became more like a military dictatorship. So, the PPP is just as guilty, and at fault, for not seriously challenging the dictatorship. The PNC was allowed to run its course, under a weak opposition. What does shut out mean. No political leader would stand idlessly for 28 years knowing that the country was sliding into a dictatorship. 

Regarding what you said about Rodney...He too was “shut out”, even more so, simply because of his willingness to use force and the West wanted nothing to do with him.

So my point is this: Are PPP supporters willing to accept that it was the “cowardice” of their leadership which allowed Burnham to establish his dictatorship? After all, the PPP did give, support (I believe they call it “Critical Support”).  Are they willing to accept that Jagan was inconsequential, a lost soul, an ineffective leader, who contributed to the mess Guyana is in today? Just as much as Burnham is?

Because that’s how I see it....but I could be wrong. 

VishMahabir posted:

OK Knuckleheads,

Let me give it a shot...

Yes, in terms of their management styles (and other areas). They both personalize politics, having a hand in everything. Trump’s problem is that he has so much on his plate that he has to let go of some of the responsibilities to other Secretaries and agencies. But they have a penchant for personality politics where they get personal and may even be vindictive to their opponents. 

Both men are obsessed over power, and tend to move in the direction of securing more power, when given the opportunity. They will use power to achieve their own ends, with little regard for democratic values.

However, Trump’s acumen in the business field places him in the category of  any other robber baron in the US....they know how to game the system to secure wealth, with little regard for the poor. 

Politically, they are both crude political players, though Jagdeo has learned a lot over the years how to be more politically savvy and more diplomatic.

They both crave international recognition: Trump wants to revive the power of the US to where it was post-WW2. Jagdeo wants to be known as the Champion of the Earth.

Both of them have very little regards for women...you bannas already know this...

Darn like u writing a college paper dude. 😀😀

VishMahabir posted:

Django posted:

VishMahabir posted:

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

History will tell although he had the majority of the people on his side,he was shut out by the USA.

I have some reading material from behind the scenes, how he was shut out, can share with you, unfortunately you don't accept private messages.

Wont post on Political.

Thanks. 

But Django, I think the point I was making was that Jagan was ineffective in terms of doing anything to contain the PNC and its transgressions, fully knowing that the Burnham government was an illegal one. 

From everything I have read so far recently on Guyana history it look like Jagan was only revolutionary in theory, thus, Jagan probably felt more comfortable with the rhetoric, but was unwilling to go any further than taking action.

From what I am learning, it was the PPP which was there from the time the Burnham dictatorship built itself up from its base to the time Guyana became more like a military dictatorship. So, the PPP is just as guilty, and at fault, for not seriously challenging the dictatorship. The PNC was allowed to run its course, under a weak opposition. What does shut out mean. No political leader would stand idlessly for 28 years knowing that the country was sliding into a dictatorship. 

Regarding what you said about Rodney...He too was “shut out”, even more so, simply because of his willingness to use force and the West wanted nothing to do with him.

So my point is this: Are PPP supporters willing to accept that it was the “cowardice” of their leadership which allowed Burnham to establish his dictatorship? After all, the PPP did give, support (I believe they call it “Critical Support”).  Are they willing to accept that Jagan was inconsequential, a lost soul, an ineffective leader, who contributed to the mess Guyana is in today? Just as much as Burnham is?

Because that’s how I see it....but I could be wrong. 

VishMahabir posted:

Django posted:

VishMahabir posted:

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

History will tell although he had the majority of the people on his side,he was shut out by the USA.

I have some reading material from behind the scenes, how he was shut out, can share with you, unfortunately you don't accept private messages.

Wont post on Political.

Thanks. 

But Django, I think the point I was making was that Jagan was ineffective in terms of doing anything to contain the PNC and its transgressions, fully knowing that the Burnham government was an illegal one. 

From everything I have read so far recently on Guyana history it look like Jagan was only revolutionary in theory, thus, Jagan probably felt more comfortable with the rhetoric, but was unwilling to go any further than taking action.

From what I am learning, it was the PPP which was there from the time the Burnham dictatorship built itself up from its base to the time Guyana became more like a military dictatorship. So, the PPP is just as guilty, and at fault, for not seriously challenging the dictatorship. The PNC was allowed to run its course, under a weak opposition. What does shut out mean. No political leader would stand idlessly for 28 years knowing that the country was sliding into a dictatorship. 

Regarding what you said about Rodney...He too was “shut out”, even more so, simply because of his willingness to use force and the West wanted nothing to do with him.

So my point is this: Are PPP supporters willing to accept that it was the “cowardice” of their leadership which allowed Burnham to establish his dictatorship? After all, the PPP did give, support (I believe they call it “Critical Support”).  Are they willing to accept that Jagan was inconsequential, a lost soul, an ineffective leader, who contributed to the mess Guyana is in today? Just as much as Burnham is?

Because that’s how I see it....but I could be wrong. 

You skiteee  accomplish lots a reading within a short time about Guyana and studying the school  books. 

We some great pretenders at GNI. 

Vish,

As i have mentioned Jagan had the support of the people and was powerless against the forces that kept him at bay.Don't play with Uncle Sam.

There is nothing he could have done,Burhnham was a smart fella and with the backing of the USA,the game was well played.There are reasons why he picked some one from the outside,to head the Military forces.There was also a secret Police Department who used to spy on the people.I know these folks during the time.

There was this waiting until he croaks, prior to that there was some talks of National Front Government.

Simply put the USA called the shots.

yuji22 posted:

We some great pretenders at GNI. 

Dude sometimes you does waste talk.

Jagdeo grabs his own balls while Trump grabs the punani 

Amral posted:

Jagdeo grabs his own balls while Trump grabs the punani 

That puts Trump way way ahead of Jagdeo....

(dis way fo Cain)

Amral posted:

Jagdeo grabs his own balls while Trump grabs the punani 

Which do you grab?

VishMahabir posted:

Django posted:

VishMahabir posted:

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

History will tell although he had the majority of the people on his side,he was shut out by the USA.

I have some reading material from behind the scenes, how he was shut out, can share with you, unfortunately you don't accept private messages.

Wont post on Political.

Thanks. 

But Django, I think the point I was making was that Jagan was ineffective in terms of doing anything to contain the PNC and its transgressions, fully knowing that the Burnham government was an illegal one. 

From everything I have read so far recently on Guyana history it look like Jagan was only revolutionary in theory, thus, Jagan probably felt more comfortable with the rhetoric, but was unwilling to go any further than taking action.

From what I am learning, it was the PPP which was there from the time the Burnham dictatorship built itself up from its base to the time Guyana became more like a military dictatorship. So, the PPP is just as guilty, and at fault, for not seriously challenging the dictatorship. The PNC was allowed to run its course, under a weak opposition. What does shut out mean. No political leader would stand idlessly for 28 years knowing that the country was sliding into a dictatorship. 

Regarding what you said about Rodney...He too was “shut out”, even more so, simply because of his willingness to use force and the West wanted nothing to do with him.

So my point is this: Are PPP supporters willing to accept that it was the “cowardice” of their leadership which allowed Burnham to establish his dictatorship? After all, the PPP did give, support (I believe they call it “Critical Support”).  Are they willing to accept that Jagan was inconsequential, a lost soul, an ineffective leader, who contributed to the mess Guyana is in today? Just as much as Burnham is?

Because that’s how I see it....but I could be wrong. 

Why have you determined that Cheddi Jagan should have borne the burden of the many deaths that would have resulted from the revolution? Would you be willing to risk your life, the lives of your loved ones and of your supporters in such violence?

VishMahabir posted:

Django posted:

VishMahabir posted:

Jagan, on the other hand, seemed like a confused chap....impressed with Gandhi on the one hand,  and infatuated with Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries....one wonders why he allow an illegal regime to run its course in Guyana for 28 years and not see eye to eye with revolutionaries like Dr Walter Rodney, whom he labeled as an “adventurist”.

History will tell although he had the majority of the people on his side,he was shut out by the USA.

I have some reading material from behind the scenes, how he was shut out, can share with you, unfortunately you don't accept private messages.

Wont post on Political.

Thanks. 

But Django, I think the point I was making was that Jagan was ineffective in terms of doing anything to contain the PNC and its transgressions, fully knowing that the Burnham government was an illegal one. 

From everything I have read so far recently on Guyana history it look like Jagan was only revolutionary in theory, thus, Jagan probably felt more comfortable with the rhetoric, but was unwilling to go any further than taking action.

From what I am learning, it was the PPP which was there from the time the Burnham dictatorship built itself up from its base to the time Guyana became more like a military dictatorship. So, the PPP is just as guilty, and at fault, for not seriously challenging the dictatorship. The PNC was allowed to run its course, under a weak opposition. What does shut out mean. No political leader would stand idlessly for 28 years knowing that the country was sliding into a dictatorship. 

Regarding what you said about Rodney...He too was “shut out”, even more so, simply because of his willingness to use force and the West wanted nothing to do with him.

So my point is this: Are PPP supporters willing to accept that it was the “cowardice” of their leadership which allowed Burnham to establish his dictatorship? After all, the PPP did give, support (I believe they call it “Critical Support”).  Are they willing to accept that Jagan was inconsequential, a lost soul, an ineffective leader, who contributed to the mess Guyana is in today? Just as much as Burnham is?

Because that’s how I see it....but I could be wrong. 

Jagan was a wuss.  He pushed out anyone who took a hardnose stance and kept people like Gilly, dead head communist ideologues who lived for the dream and nothing else.  Why you think he cheated out Balram Singh Rai?

@ antabanta

Why have you determined that Cheddi Jagan should have borne the burden of the many deaths that would have resulted from the revolution?

Not sure what you are asking...of course, Burnham had a greater role to play in how the country evolve because he controlled the government. However, he did not operate in a vacuum. He used the Opposition when he wanted to buttress his claims to supporting democracy. Jagan gave him that space, rather than challenging him and trying to make it difficult for him to run the country. Yes, the Europeans played a role, but the PPP cannot always blame the white man, which they seem to love to do. The PPP acted like dead meat for 28 years, yet they had the support of most of their supporters to make it difficult for Burnham to simply get a smooth ride, until the arrival of Rodney. 

In addition to the above, I am making an argument that the PPP GNIers here should accept the fact that Jagan is as much responsible for them being scattered around the world today...Its easy to be a revolutionary in your mind and while living abroad.  

Why was Rodney able to challenge Burnham? What burden of "many deaths" did he cause during his opposition to Burnham? (the fact that he was killed in the struggle does not negate this question).

Would you be willing to risk your life, the lives of your loved ones and of your supporters in such violence?

No. not me. But there seems to be a lot of people in Guyana who were wiling to risk their lives to change the system (Rodney included). I would think that it is up to leaders who have to guide their people and convince followers to take whatever actions were necessary.