Drugb posted:

I don't believe any of us want to support any thiefman. If the PNC find these folks stealing then they should be jailed. What we are concerned about is that they are posturing for political gain. They promised the PNc support base Indians head on a stick. Now they failed to deliver after 2 years with the economy in free fall. Let the chips fall where they may. 

I agree with your statement regarding not supporting thieves. They are innocent but until proven guilty in a court of law. They will have their day in court.

Bibi Haniffa posted:

yuji22 posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Why is the GRB board being charged for an alleged book keeping error?

Because the PNC is on an Indo witch hunt.

The GRB books has been PNC property for two years now, how do we know that the entry wasn't removed sometime over the past two years to fabricate charges against the Board? 

True dat nuh gyal..is only black people dem who know how fo tief.

Most Guyanese are thieves, yes I am saying it!!!

Bibi Haniffa posted:

yuji22 posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Why is the GRB board being charged for an alleged book keeping error?

Because the PNC is on an Indo witch hunt.

The GRB books has been PNC property for two years now, how do we know that the entry wasn't removed sometime over the past two years to fabricate charges against the Board? 

Bibi you make me laugh. Such a simpleton and a dummy. That is why there is going to a trial to prove these allegations.

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

cain posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

yuji22 posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Why is the GRB board being charged for an alleged book keeping error?

Because the PNC is on an Indo witch hunt.

The GRB books has been PNC property for two years now, how do we know that the entry wasn't removed sometime over the past two years to fabricate charges against the Board? 

True dat nuh gyal..is only black people dem who know how fo tief.

Not the brightest light in the room. 

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

Is it against the law to provide legal services to Guysuco? 

FC posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

yuji22 posted:

Bibi Haniffa posted:

Why is the GRB board being charged for an alleged book keeping error?

Because the PNC is on an Indo witch hunt.

The GRB books has been PNC property for two years now, how do we know that the entry wasn't removed sometime over the past two years to fabricate charges against the Board? 

Bibi you make me laugh. Such a simpleton and a dummy. That is why there is going to a trial to prove these allegations.

She is obviously clueless as to what this means. She calls it a bookkeeping error. 

"Six former members of the Guyana Rice Development Board (GRDB) were held for questioning by the Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) yesterday afternoon for allegedly omitting to record a “particular inflow of money” and they are expected to face charges today."

The Namakaram Crabdaag stole money from the people at Rosignol, why not investigate him???

Meanwhile, while the PNC is busy fabricating charges and creating public harassment, BJ is busier, meeting with the Exxon boys in his office yesterday.  Lol.

Oi Bibi, is this what FreeDumb house provided you to post as a rebuttal? U too funny.

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

Is it against the law to provide legal services to Guysuco? 

What a dumb question! Let's see what fees were paid to the attorney(s) and for what services.

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

Is it against the law to provide legal services to Guysuco? 

What a dumb question! Let's see what fees were paid to the attorney(s) and for what services.

The question is in response to a dumbass assertion. You stated that the man should be investigated for providing legal services to Guysuco.

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

Is it against the law to provide legal services to Guysuco? 

What a dumb question! Let's see what fees were paid to the attorney(s) and for what services.

The question is in response to a dumbass assertion. You stated that the man should be investigated for providing legal services to Guysuco.

An audit is to uncover errors and irregularities. Charging for legal services is not exempt from an audit since the fees could have been very high to facilitate major kickbacks. Learn something.

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

Is it against the law to provide legal services to Guysuco? 

What a dumb question! Let's see what fees were paid to the attorney(s) and for what services.

The question is in response to a dumbass assertion. You stated that the man should be investigated for providing legal services to Guysuco.

An audit is to uncover errors and irregularities. Charging for legal services is not exempt from an audit since the fees could have been very high to facilitate major kickbacks. Learn something.

There is nothing for me to learn from a dunce like you. You made a stupid statement, now own up to it. If you're going to try and be a smartass, the first thing you need to ensure is that you're smart. In your case, you're nothing but a dunce so that makes you just an ass.

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

Mars posted:

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

From what I'm observing SOCU's focus is on political opponents of the Granger administration rather than everyone in the past and present regardless of political affiliation. Why don't they investigate Brian Tiwari or Khemraj Ramjattan who allegedly provided legal services to Guysuco during the PPP years in government.  Let's bring out the files on everyone if we are serious about these audits.

Is it against the law to provide legal services to Guysuco? 

What a dumb question! Let's see what fees were paid to the attorney(s) and for what services.

The question is in response to a dumbass assertion. You stated that the man should be investigated for providing legal services to Guysuco.

An audit is to uncover errors and irregularities. Charging for legal services is not exempt from an audit since the fees could have been very high to facilitate major kickbacks. Learn something.

There is nothing for me to learn from a dunce like you. You made a stupid statement, now own up to it. If you're going to try and be a smartass, the first thing you need to ensure is that you're smart. In your case, you're nothing but a dunce so that makes you just an ass.

Calling me dunce does not make a dunce. If this government is sincere about an audit they would have hired an independent auditing firm free of political ties. The whole country is upset over hundreds of millions being paid to a group of PNC die-hards to conduct audits. If Guysuco is running at a deficit then an audit is supposed to check all cash outflows, including those spent on legal fees.  Take your bullshit statement to an intelligent person and they will tell you are just damn biased or stupid.

Billy you are grasping at straws. You are veering off your initial assertion which is the individual should be investigated because he provided services for a fee.  Why evidence can you present that this warrants an audit?  How much were the fees ? Were the fees excessive? Or you are throwing jello on a wall and hope it sticks?

FC posted:

Billy you are grasping at straws. You are veering off your initial assertion which is the individual should be investigated because he provided services for a fee.  Why evidence can you present that this warrants an audit?  How much were the fees ? Were the fees excessive? Or you are throwing jello on a wall and hope it sticks?

Why should others be subjected to an audit?  

Bhai Billy, dont waste time with IDIOTS!!!!!!!

Billy Ram Balgobin posted:

FC posted:

Billy you are grasping at straws. You are veering off your initial assertion which is the individual should be investigated because he provided services for a fee.  Why evidence can you present that this warrants an audit?  How much were the fees ? Were the fees excessive? Or you are throwing jello on a wall and hope it sticks?

Why should others be subjected to an audit?  

Wow Billy answering a question with question!!! What this says you are just pissing in the wind.