Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

They know fully well that these gatherings usually become out of control and results in violence against indos and millions in damages to public and private property. PNC/APNU was urging its supporters in Albouystown, Agricola and other troubled villages to be part of 'history' outside parliament today. Granger also promised Armageddo. These people know fully well what they were doing 

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by Nehru:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

 Bhai, Dont try explaining to brainless Jackasses!!!

Oh Lard! Keera means low nutrient which means limited brain powah! 

FM
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

FM
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

We means 52% of de peopkle who vote against PPP in 2011. 

FM
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

We means 52% of de peopkle who vote against PPP in 2011. 

You do not speak for 99.999 % of those who voted against the PPP.

FM
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

For the PPP, if it's not broken; don't fix it.

FM
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

For the PPP, if it's not broken; don't fix it.

Yes clearly the PPP admires the Burnham dictatorship and seeks to adopt a smuch of it as possible, even its House of Israel goons!

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

For the PPP, if it's not broken; don't fix it.

Yes clearly the PPP admires the Burnham dictatorship and seeks to adopt a smuch of it as possible, even its House of Israel goons!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

FM
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

For the PPP, if it's not broken; don't fix it.

Yes clearly the PPP admires the Burnham dictatorship and seeks to adopt a smuch of it as possible, even its House of Israel goons!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Eh eh Sketel_man you acknowledge yuh in love with de HOI hooligans and Biurnham law. LOL! 

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

Changes to certain parts of the constitution requires over 60% of the MPs.

 

PNC and AFC has not presented effective proposals in parliament to make these changes to the constitution.

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by caribny:
And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

Changes to certain parts of the constitution requires over 60% of the MPs.

 

PNC and AFC has not presented effective proposals in parliament to make these changes to the constitution.

Yuh mekking up nancy story again?

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by caribny:
And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

Changes to certain parts of the constitution requires over 60% of the MPs.

 

APNU will gladly changes parts of it now they know how it hurts them, as well the AFC.

 

So don't chat nonsense that they isn't support to change it. The PPP never tried to.

FM
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Eh eh Sketel_man you acknowledge yuh in love with de HOI hooligans and Biurnham law. LOL! 

Yes. We have long known that the only thing that the PPP had against Burnham is that they weren't able to be dictators then. Well they are now and are taking full advantage of the whole package.

FM
Originally Posted by albert:

They know fully well that these gatherings usually become out of control and results in violence against indos and millions in damages to public and private property. PNC/APNU was urging its supporters in Albouystown, Agricola and other troubled villages to be part of 'history' outside parliament today. Granger also promised Armageddo. These people know fully well what they were doing 


u better hide. U will be going to jail too.

S
Originally Posted by Conscience:

The few mislead "Protesters" organised by APNU is not a true reflection of the vast number of the Guyanese populace, the public is very upset with 10th parliament especially the AFC/APNU.

You better pray and hope the amount of people that hit the streets remain "a few" de low breed PPP will be running for cover if that changes.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Eh eh Sketel_man you acknowledge yuh in love with de HOI hooligans and Biurnham law. LOL! 

Yes. We have long known that the only thing that the PPP had against Burnham is that they weren't able to be dictators then. Well they are now and are taking full advantage of the whole package.

When u look back, Forbes knew the PPP was upto no good. It justified rigged elections. Too bad, Carter sided wid crooks.

S
Originally Posted by HM_Redux:
Originally Posted by Conscience:

The few mislead "Protesters" organised by APNU is not a true reflection of the vast number of the Guyanese populace, the public is very upset with 10th parliament especially the AFC/APNU.

You better pray and hope the amount of people that hit the streets remain "a few" de low breed PPP will be running for cover if that changes.

Ramses needs to be chased into the Demerara River so the high tide wash him away. Blasted dunce who never worked a day in his life-freaking bullies are always lazy bums. 

S
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by caribny:
And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

Changes to certain parts of the constitution requires over 60% of the MPs.

 

APNU will gladly changes parts of it now they know how it hurts them, as well the AFC.

 

So don't chat nonsense that they isn't support to change it. The PPP never tried to.

Now ... only now in 2014 and not, in particular, from 1992?

 

PNC only now realized these part of the constitution need revision/changes?

 

Has the PNC ever made any proposals, through the press or specifically in parliament, to make the changes?

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:
Originally Posted by skeldon_man:
Originally Posted by Kapadilla:

De peopkle have a right to protest! 

They do have a right to protest; they don't have a right to destroy and disobey the law.

We doan respect no Burnham law. Burnham law is foh PPP not we. 

Who is "WE"? You mean just you. It was the law for 28 years, why did you not approach Forbes then and let him know his laws do not pertain to you?

And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

Granger chairs the constitutional reform committee in parliament; what has he done? 

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Originally Posted by caribny:
And why after 22 years has the PPP not seen it fit to change that law.  Clearly the PPP now loves the Burnham law.

Changes to certain parts of the constitution requires over 60% of the MPs.

 

APNU will gladly changes parts of it now they know how it hurts them, as well the AFC.

 

So don't chat nonsense that they isn't support to change it. The PPP never tried to.

Now ... only now in 2014 and not, in particular, from 1992?

 

PNC only now realized these part of the constitution need revision/changes?

 

Has the PNC ever made any proposals, through the press or specifically in parliament, to make the changes?

Granger chairs the constitution reform committee in parliament what has he done to effect changes? Nothing!

FM
Originally Posted by HM_Redux:
Originally Posted by Conscience:

The few mislead "Protesters" organised by APNU is not a true reflection of the vast number of the Guyanese populace, the public is very upset with 10th parliament especially the AFC/APNU.

You better pray and hope the amount of people that hit the streets remain "a few" de low breed PPP will be running for cover if that changes.

HM in a land where the average person earns US$200/month, if that, and in a city where this doesn't even cover rent people really don't have time for protests.  That is other than those who the PPP will pay GY$5k to disrupt as soon as they get a chance.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×