Albert Brandford Squirms And Ducks – Says It Is Fault Of Readers For Choosing Wrong Meaning Of “Inbred” Slur Against Barbados Prime Minister

A few days ago we took Albert Brandford to task for his racial slur against Prime Minister David Thompson in the Nation News article The Money Factor.

You can read about our disgust with Brandford in our article The Nation’s Albert Brandford Makes A Backhanded Racial Comment Against Barbados’ New Prime Minister.

The debate continues today with Mr. Brandford replying to BFP’s article. As you can read below, Mr. Brandford claims that the blame belongs with readers who have “chosen” the wrong meaning for his use of the word “inbred”…

Albert Brandford Writes To Barbados Free Press

BFP,

I came late to your reaction to my article. It is unfortunate – but not surprising, given some of the other comments you have made – that you would have chosen the meaning of ‘inbred’ not intended. I was merely referring to his innate sense of entitlement, that is, from birth. Racial slurs would have no place in my discussions on political events, I assure you.

Albert Brandford

albertbrandford@nationnews.com

Mr. Brandford’s original comment can be seen here.

Barbados Free Press Replies To Albert Brandford

Mr. Brandford…

1/ You are undoubtedly aware of the BLP’s long standing use of derogatory racial terms in reference to Prime Minister Thompson.
2/ You are undoubtedly aware of the foul rumours and innuendo that the BLP has long used when talking about Prime Minister Thompson’s parentage.
3/ You are a professional writer who is well skilled in using double entendres to cross lines and get away with it.
4/ Had you meant “innate sense of entitlement” you could and would have said that. But you used the word “inbred”, with all of the word’s baggage in context with the BLP slur campaign against David Thompson.
5/ To now say that it is the fault of readers for “choosing” the wrong meaning for the word that you used in disingenuous, and frankly, part of your foul little game and the act of a coward.

No, Mr. Brandford…

We don’t believe that a professional journalist such as yourself did not carefully consider the meanings and impact of your chosen words. You were seeking to write a “hit-piece” about the swearing in of the new Prime Minister and you did so in the most foul and racially-charged way possible – after a campaign filled with BLP racial insults to Mr. Thompson.

You just didn’t think you’d be called on it.

Mr. Brandford, you owe Prime Minister David Thompson and the citizens of Barbados a PUBLIC APOLOGY in the same print and internet edition of the Nation News that printed your foul statements.

77 Comments

Filed under Barbados

77 responses to “Albert Brandford Squirms And Ducks – Says It Is Fault Of Readers For Choosing Wrong Meaning Of “Inbred” Slur Against Barbados Prime Minister

  1. Shona

    Brandford is “courageous” to call the PM “inbred” but he won’t mention the injustice of the Ronja Juman strip search.

  2. Justice Seeker

    “NOT INTENDED????????”

    Owen Arthur’s statement at his nomination was misinterpreted too. Likewise, his “co-leader” statement.

    Get real, Brandford, the healing winds of change have removed the heaviness from our hearing, the blindness from our eyes and dumbness from our tongues. Write what you really mean and stop trying to believe that there are no Barbadians who analyse journalists words. I am yet to see you write an article highlighting P.M. David Thompson in a positive way. If I am mistaken in saying that, enlighten me by referring me to such articles.

  3. false pride

    people are too proud to apologise in Barbados and take responsibility for mistakes or errors in judgment. Instead, they circle the wagons and point in another direction.

  4. Jason

    Albert knew exactly what he was writing. Too late to backpeddle, Albert. You’ve been caught.

  5. West Side Davie

    Brandford should apologize. Good for you BFP for not letting him get away with it.

  6. Yammy

    Come on Albert be a man. But u know i am finding these BLPs not really taking this loss too well. it makes me wonder what wud have happened had they kept the government . i cringe at the thought

  7. frankology

    “DAVID THOMPSON has finally achieved his life-long ambition: to be the Prime Minister of Barbados.

    Newspaper photographs of his swearing-in ceremony last Wednesday portray a smugness that reflects his inbred sense of entitlement.”
    ………………………………………………………………………………
    Where in the dictionary the word “inbred” relating to racial slurs? The synonym for the word “inbred” is “innate” which mean “being talented through inherited qualities; “a natural leader”; “a born leader”; “an innate talent”).

    Your interpretation of Brandford’s statement has no relevance to what you are advocating, thus I say again, he is not guilty. I would like you explain to the public how you reach your conclusion on this statement and the dictionary used indicating or linking the word “inbred” with any racial connotations.

    Possibly, you might have to retract on your views.

  8. frankology

    Anyone of the above posters took the time to open a dictionary and find the terminology for “inbred” or “innate” before postings. Remember, you might see people hopping onto a bus, and you likewise do the same thing without knowing where the bus is going. Try not to be a follow pattern.

  9. Anonymous

    “Mr. Brandford, you owe Prime Minister David Thompson and the citizens of Barbados a PUBLIC APOLOGY in the same print and internet edition of the Nation News that printed your foul statements.”

    Why? on your say so that he INTENDED the comments as racist?

    If he meant it to be racist why would he bother to deny it if he INTENDED it to be racist? Can no one ever correct themselves in what was clearly an ambiguous statement?

    One must apologize now whenever BFP deems what someone’s intentions are?

    If BFP decides my or someone’s intentions are such and such, we are disqualified from correcting BFP?

    The evidence necessary to subject oneself to an attack by the BFP seems to grow weaker. BFP will brand you a racist should they interpet what you write as racist and you have no recourse to correct them.

    The comment is so ambiguous that I venture to say that the only thing Brandford is certainly guilty of is a poor choice of words.

    To brand the man a racist on this evidence is pure speculation for which he has every right to come here and refute. Only he can know with certainty his true intention and I see no reason for him to deny what he truly meant.

    If the BLP is guilty of racist comments, it would seem by extension anyone who is associated with them must be guilty of racism if a comment can be interpeted as racist (even if alternative interpetations exist?)

    Then again, how dare I challenge the infallible BFP. They dont post anything without evidence (or hear it from anything other than a reliable source). He must surely be racist !

  10. Getting BYE

    why must we be subjected to such foul language anonymous?

    **********

    BFP Comments

    That was not “anonymous” – it is a part of a group of blogs promoted by Notes From The Margin

  11. Anonymous

    Frankolgy, I take the point about the meaning of ‘inbred”.

    However, I will be generous to his accusers and it is possible because Mr Thompson is of mixed race that the comment COULD be interpeted as racist.

    It should be enough for anyone, for Mr Brandford to be allowed to correct or clarify himself.

  12. Anonymous

    BFP …..E , if you appreciated my comment for being “polite, refined and mannerly” why cant you do the same.

  13. frankology

    However, I will be generous to his accusers and it is possible because Mr Thompson is of mixed race that the comment COULD be interpeted as racist.
    ………………………………………………………………………………….
    Even if Mr. Thompson is of ‘mixed race’, the language still do not reflect such. Here are the breakdown of words used in Brandford’s statement.
    portray – “assume or act the character of; represent”.
    smugness – “an excessive feeling of self-satisfaction”
    entitlement – “right granted by law or contract (especially a right to benefits”.

    Now tell me, where on earth can Brandford’s statement be reflected as being racial unless you are in his mind, but for the moment, I have to accept the written word.

  14. frankology

    Wow, what foul language. You people who write such vile language and put them on the internet, later on in your life, you will be the first begging the almighty for forgiveness. Remember, if your children turn out bad, remember the fruit don’t fall to far from the tree. You all are despicable and a menace to society who ever you are.

  15. Anonymous

    Frankology,

    As I said, I was being generous.

    You make a strong case. Doubt it will convince BFP.

  16. reality check

    Wow Albert!!!

    If these BFPE people are your friends you might want to consider upgrading. They seem to be somewhat inbred.

    They might have an adverse affect on your ability to be more precise as well as being able to say something nice or constructive rather than negative.

    *************

    BFP Comments

    Hi RC

    Do you notice that Notes from the Margin is now involved in the wholesale promotion of a group of blogs all operated by BFPE? Everything seems to click into place with Notes from the Margin… never an article that could be said to be the least bit critical of the BLP government and continued links to those foul blogs that threatened to murder Adrian Loveridge and others when no one else does except the BLP Blog!

    Yup… got Marginal’s number.

  17. Anonymous

    frankology:

    You should be the last to talk as your offspring are in the same class as Thompson.
    I am sure that if the same statements were made towards your wife and children, you would be singing a different tune.
    As usual …your slip is showing.

  18. Anonymous

    I need to stop being Anony, there is too many.

    Frankology, I am one who has referred to you with a capital F

  19. Rumplestilskin

    Even if one does not take into account the comment as perceived racist, Brandford’s article was derogatory of a new PM, to wit ”portray a smugness that reflects his inbred sense of entitlement”

    is portraying the PM in a negative light, as the ‘online dictionary definition of smug is :

    ”Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one’s situation”

    Offensive satisfaction?

    Methinks that you all were looking at the wrong word to prove the writer’s intent.

    The word ‘smug’ gives context to the sentence.

    The statement, whether racist or not, was and is derogatory.

  20. Rumplestilskin

    Having said that, such opinion is merely Brandford’s and as such, his free right to opine.

    Fortunately for him, the Government has changed and now he is free to opine away at whatever suits his imagination.

    Pity the newspapers did not appear to have the confidence in the previous administration’s reaction to critcism as to be so relaxed as to have a variety of writers critical of Government and Ministerial actions.

    Thank the Almighty that things have changed.

  21. ninemikemike

    To the cowardly anonymous with the sewer mouth, you are not only gutless, but you undermine any argument you might have, though I seriously doubt that such an ignoramus would know what an argument was if it bit him in the backside.
    You are just a fool, and if the other blogs you mention are so good, I for one will not visit them if they are inhabited by the sort of foul-mouthed ignorant, racist idiot you have shown, without any doubt, yourself to be.
    Begone, and foul your own doorstep.

  22. frankology

    I am sure that if the same statements were made towards your wife and children, you would be singing a different tune
    ………………………………………………………………………………….
    No I will still follow the same line. You are a so called journalist, who now is becoming personal. You should be man enough to state the word has no racial content, but you are so hard-lined being a partisan supporter that have to tow the line.

    I know you might no me, and you know that I am privileged to some nasty statement uttered by you. But I will not go down the same line as you. I will debate your inefficiency to comprehend a simple word within a statement.

  23. frankology

    The word ’smug’ gives context to the sentence.

    The statement, whether racist or not, was and is derogatory
    ………………………………………………………………………………….
    Why the reverse spin. Smugness is defined “an excessive feeling of self-satisfaction”

    If someone is enlightened, happy, excited, self aggrandisement or elated to reach the pinnacle of one’s success. Would you relate that statement to racial slur? Instead of posters joining with the blog in trying to align a statement to race, you could be offering the new Government tangible ideas to move forward the country.

    To you Anonymous who might know this writer, it seems that you could be the one using those vile language since you are known to be a controller of reverse spin. Prime Minister Thompson will soon know who is associating with when you cannot get your way.

  24. Red Lake Lassie

    In CONTEXT of the election campaign and in CONTEXT of the continuing foul racial attacks on Thompson, Brandford had to have known what he was doing.

    I side with BFP and the others who see the racism and reference to the PM’s parentage.

    BFP please take down those cussings!

  25. frankology

    If Mr. Brandford is diametrically opposed with the Honourable David Thompson it would be better to use his entire writing to reach a conclusion. What you did was pick a statement, failed to comprehend that statement, therefore reaching the wrong conclusion. My debate is base on a particular statement, not the entire article or Brandford’s entire political writings.

  26. Radiance

    I definitely can’t infer a racist flavor from the use of the word “inbred”. But I would go beyond the use of the word “smugness” or any one particular word in my judgement of the article. The entire article was like a childish rant. It was peevish in tone and distasteful. It sounded as though it was written by someone with a personal axe to grind, and not like a responsible political commentary. The article was, in short, unprofessional.

  27. Peltdown Man

    “Radiance”, thanks for finally making the only real valid point.

  28. Tony Hall

    Albert Brandford stepped on the line. He did not cross it. However, given his allegiance to Mascoll he will by any means necessary attack the PM. He, like others is still traumatised by the BLP loss but he had better wake up. Have no fear BFP readers PM Thompson will continue to ignore him and he will eventually hang himself, blasted drunkard he is.

  29. Anonymous

    Frankology:

    You are just playing with words on this issue.If you were to take every word for their literal meaning,then we would all be wrong or all right.

    The fact of the matter is that the atmosphere at the time also helps each of us to draw our own conclusions based on emotions etc.

    If I were to say you are GAY (which also means happy,contented ,satisfied),I would bet that your first reaction would be to justify your sexual preference
    So please stop trying to be our English teacher and deal with the fact that to the average Bajan living here ,knowing the writer’s personality and bias,will more or less see the article for what it really is……..a smear against the Prime Minister!!.

  30. frankology

    ,knowing the writer’s personality and bias,will more or less see the article for what it really is……..a smear against the Prime Minister!!.
    …………………………………………………………………………………..
    Are you dealing with the the article or the statement mentioned by BFP? As I stated before I agree with you regarding the attacks on the Prime Minister. But in this case, I am looking at the statement ONLY, published by BFP which do not reflect race. These are two separate and distinct cases.

    But I do agree with you that the writer’s articles are anti-Thompson.

  31. Albert Brandford

    Rumplestilskin,

    I found it amusing – and revealing – that you would locate an online dictionary with a definition of “smug”… : “Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one’s situation”.

    Then you asked: “Offensive satisfaction?”

    Notice that you deliberately ignored “feeling great … satisfaction …”.

    But that would have contradicted the foolishness about it being “derogatory” or a racial slur that you and some of the others have been posting, wouldn’t it?

    Strangely, I encountered a determination to ignore words in simple sentences or twist them for a sensational angle in a recent exchange of e-mails with one of the better known contributors to this blog. Even when the errors and mistakes in his complaints were shown to be his and his alone, he remained defiant to the end.

    Pity.

    ****************

    BFP Comments

    And still Mr. Brandford cannot bring himself to admit that many Bajans received his article in the same way as did BFP. He cannot bring himself to even make the expected classic face-saving non-apology of “IF I offended anyone unintentionally, I apologise”

    He doesn’t even have the pretend grace to do that.

    But that is OK, and we give him full credit for coming here and engaging in a free and open discussion with Bajans who disagree with him. That takes far more courage and strength of character than exhibited by most of the folks who were an integral part of the previous BLP government and their strategic support base.

    Watching Albert Brandford in the coming years will be interesting because Bajans can see his heart and motivation on his sleeve even when he thinks he is being his most sophisticated at sliding something in.

    Good luck Albert, and we are most sincere in that wish because we believe that in a few months you will begin to doubt many of your core beliefs and values, if that isn’t happening already. We’ve been through that a couple of times ourselves and it is not easy. Less so when in the public eye.

    We believe that you will remain as a notable political reporter, only now as part of a free and vibrant political discussion.

    You and your colleagues will have to adapt to the new world, but once again, you are out in front with your willingness to plunge right in.

    Welcome… the water is fine!

    … afterthought….

    Why don’t you consider starting your own blog? Many journalists in major markets have done so and found that it provides another opportunity for synergy. The blog feeds the newspaper columns which feed the blog and TV and Radio appearances – that feeds the other venues etc. etc etc.

  32. Roosevelt King

    I am not here to defend Albert Brandford but I have to wonder when I see and hear people accusing an African man of racism. It is a red herring? What do Africans know about racism? Not even the first clue.

    Is it really racism for an African to use the term inbred? Is it racism for an African to call a white man names? What is the difference when a white man call an African names? I will tell you; a history of 300 years of racist brutality, deprivation and death and the “mens rea”.

    When a African call a white man names it is out of anger. When a white man call an African names it is an attempt at humiliation.

    How dare any white man accuse an African of Racism? Are you trying to hide or subsume your guilt? Are you trying to pass it off on us? Is this a pyschological ploy? Can Mr. Thompson be racist? Can Albert Branford accuse him of racism? Can Albert Brandford really make a racist comment?

    I put it to you that 300 years of brutality can only logically be followed by 300 years of anger and bitter resentment. Can Africans be blamed? And while the original perpetrators are long dead and gone, their offspring are enjoying all the rewards of racism including keeping racism institutionalised.

    To continue to refer to statements coming from Africans as racists comments is to neglect the innate anger caused by 300 racism and furhter exploit the psyche of Africans to perpetuate the same racism.

    Keep it clean. You live in glass houses.

    ROK
    admin@bango.org.bb

    *****************

    BFP says

    Hello RK,

    What the hell makes you think that the writer of that piece was white?

    We will have to disagree with many of your observations. This BFP writer has been where you are in your thoughts and I can tell you that the chains that pull you down are of your own making.

    I will never forget my family’s history – all of it.

    But neither will I be a victim of the same mentality that kept my family down for generations.

    I am free. So are my sons and my woman.

    You can be free too.

  33. formerly anony

    The key point is whether BFP’s claim that Mr Brandford made a racist statement is valid or not?

    The article may or may not be anti Thompson but that is irrelevant. Mr Brandford is entitled to be anti Thompson if that is his opinion.

    I believe, on balance, support by Mr Brandfords own denials, that it is most unreasonable to brand him a racist on such flimsy (and ambiguous)evidence.

    But then on an anonymous blog where one can slander someone with little or no evidence and where there is no recourse for the accused to seek legal redress, should we be surprised?

  34. DisneyWorldLover

    When I read Brandford’s article the first time I took his “inbred” comment to be a slight against Thompson’s mixed race.

    He says that he didn’t intend it that way and I would like to believe him. The nagging question I have is why he chose a word that could be interpreted as a slight against Thompson’s mixed race. Expecially that the BLP and on their BLP blog made Thompson’s mixed race an issue during the election and before.

    I can understand BFP taking “inbred” in a race way because I did too. What did Brandford really mean? Only he knows the truth but I still ask him why as a “professional” writer didn’t he use a less ambiguous phrase that couldn’t be said to be racist?

  35. frankology

    Very professional BFP, which of the BFP moderators are you? I concur with you based on the guts of Mr. Brandford to come on the blogs and state his case. Wither he is right or wrong, we have to give him credit. We had individuals who refuse to agree or deny with statements on the blogs, thus, these people will automatically becomes guilty as charge, unless a non-partisan person defends them. Anyway, that’s a professional move by both parties.

    ***********

    BFP replies

    The comment was written by Marcus with input from Shona… while spooning mashed peas into the little one.

  36. BFP

    seeing as Albert Brandford is hear reading this what does he think about the Ronja Juman “blank search warrant” raid by the police and strip searching her and looking in her vagina for the DPP’s back rent? Why dont he write about that? I and many others would like to know why the nation News ignore this?

    shona

    ********************

    For those not familiar with the Ronja Juman story, here is a good place to start…

    We Publish All The Documents: Barbados Director Of Public Prosecutions, Police Sgt Paul Vaughan And The Blank Search Warrant Scandal

  37. Anonymous

    I do not think a man should be obligated to give the classic “if I have offended anyone…..” type apology anytime someone misinterpeted his remarks.

    Should that be the case, we would need apologies after nearly every printed article. It should be enough that he clarified his intent.

    However, BFP has branded the man a racist in a headline post. Despite his denials and the fact that BFP has hardly proved their case (guilty by association with the BLP seems to be the backbone of their case), I think if any apology should be forthcoming, it should be from BFP to Mr Brandford.

    *************

    BFP Comments

    We will just have to agree to disagree then as it appears that many folks understood Mr. Brandford’s comments in the way we do, and still do.

  38. starting

    I find it difficult to side with Branford given his longstanding invective against Thompson. Branford has turned off many with his relentless and often unjustified negative focus and one sided articles on Thompson. His extreme partiality to Mascoll has compelled many to believe he and Mascoll shared his political correspondent column..

  39. Roosevelt King

    Dear BFP,

    You really don’t get it. You think you are free? Good thoughts to harbour. Keep it up. One day you will get there.

    ROK

  40. Anonymous

    “………..it appears that many folks understood Mr. Brandford’s comments in the way we do…….”

    That people have understood it that way is beyond dispute.

    Why though is it not enough for a man to explain he had no such intention?

    Are we to police his conscience? Is he a liar as well as a racist?

    If he meant it as you claimed, surely he would now come to us and explain indeed he felt Mr Thompsons white heritage lead to this sense of entitlement to lead. Why now say otherwise?

    More importantly how can a man defend himself against misinterpetation if he comes to your forum (for which you commended him) to clarify his comment but this is not good enough for you. What exactly is Mr Brandford to do?

  41. Yardbroom

    Before the debate degenerates into a dictionary’s definition of a word, we should look at the sentence again:

    …”Newspaper photographs of his swearing-cermony last Wednesday portray a smugness that reflects his inbred sense of entitlement”…

    I believe the word “inbred” was chosen for a particular purpose, because the whole construction of the sentence hangs on the force of that word.

    If the author did not know that, I would hesitate to call him a professional journalist, because the word seems clumsy in the sentence otherwise. If it is not clumsy and was used for effect, what effect?

    A dictionary’s definition of inbred -there are others – is: “produced as a result of inbreeding”.

    I rest my case.

  42. ninemikemike

    Roosevelt King – you sound very sad to me, feeding off your insecurities, perhaps as a smoke-screen for your inadequacies?
    What do you say to the victims of Mad Bob Mugabe, “Emperor” Bokassa, and their like – or can you find a difference between their tribalism, and the racism you are going to be a victim of (and presumably teach your descendants to feel victims of) for the next 300 years.
    No progress in that direction; I should take heed of BFP’s excellent reply to your outburst if I were you.

  43. born and bred

    ninemikemike:

    Agreed.

    Why can’t we all make a committment to put the past behind us; to forgive.

    Unforgiveness causes UNTOLD physical diseases (psychosomatic diseases).

    Is it really worth it ROK?

  44. born and bred

    And with regards to Mr. Brandford’s article:

    Let us look at the entire sentence.

    Inbred is not the KEY; it is what inbred is linked to that solves the puzzle.

    It is “his inbred sense of entitlement” Let’s take a look at entitlement because that fills out the word picture.

    The Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary defines it as:

    Belief that one is deserving of or entitled to certain privileges.

    Now we see that Mr. Brandford is suggesting, by his words, that Mr. Thompson has it inbred within him to believe that he is one deserving or entitled to certain privileges.

    To take this a step further, in the days of slavery was this not the mind-set of A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER of the FORMER SETTLING CAUCASIANS OF THIS COUNTRY ? Yes it was.

    Kindly read the above sentence carefully and let us leave it in the past.

    Therefore, as I have mentioned in another posting; Language both spoken and written is complex.

    Mr. Brandford self-admitted “Wordsmith” that he is could not have failed to be aware of the “picture he was painting”. It is one thing to verbally say something in the “heat of the moment” but most of us are aware that we need to be very careful of what we put in writing. To write such a comment about the democratically voted Prime Minister of this Nation in the National Newspaper is really in poor taste.

  45. passin thru

    Many people understood the newspaper “inbred” comment as an insult against Thompson’s parents. I did.

    Brandford should acknowledge that and take responsibility for saying something in a way that could be misinterpreted. To blame the many readers that see “inbred” as an insult instead of looking at how he wrote the piece is too stubborn on Brandford’s part.

    Unless he intended the double meaning in the first place!

    Mr. Brandford should apologize I agree.

  46. Anonymous

    Before I ever read a political piece by Brandford I had heard that he was not writing in a professional way. So I read a couple articles and thought that what I had heard was true. I hardly read him these days but I saw the article you are talking about and thought that it was distasteful. Hatred exhibits itself in many ways. Yet, I blame the newspaper.

  47. Anonymous

    The post of leader of the OPPOSITION has deteriorated to the point that the moraless one now has control.

    How low can it get???

    When one looks at the real cause for the parties defeat at the last election it would seem from the selection process that they are setting up for a long time in opposition by virtue of their choices to lead the opposition maybe when the move was made to appoint George Payne as the leader of the opposition it may have served the party better than their eventual selection.

    This nation will never accept one such as this as a leader of this wonderful country we expect our leaders to travel the high MORAL ground and this is not the case in this selection.

    Actually sometimes I am left to ask does this person have ANY MORALS AT ALL?

    MANY, MANY QUESTIONS about morals.

  48. John

    … now if Albert Brandford and Harold Hoyte really wanted to show us how professional they were/are/could be, then they would look into the breaking of the laws by all the parties and investigate the former PM’s assertion.

    Instead, the Nation comes up this morning with some hyperbole about BL&P in Question Time.

    Here is what Albert Brandford’s and Harold Hoyte’s news paper had to say:

    To the BL&P:

    “Don’t you think that instead of complaining about the staples and nails left in your poles from the placement of placaards and posters pictured at right by both political parties, that you should just have them removed and then send one half of the bill to each party?

    And suppose they don’t pay, you may ask?

    No problem, don’t you provide the electricity to their respective headquarters?

    Or, if that is too drastic, why not let the whole of Barbados know how much it cost you and how both parties refused to pay?

    Just don’t try to recover those costs by passing them on to the average consumer…..”

    What asinine logic!!

    The cost to the average consumer is the example of the lack of respect for private property and the flagrant breach of the laws of the land by each and every one of our leaders.

    Here we have the premier Newspaper taking the high ground one minute when the billboards are erected by one party. Now it doesn’t have the drive to investigate when it is clear that all parties are at fault.

    When this simple omission is put with the use of the word inbred it only goes to show the intent of word usage.

    What a crappy Newspaper the Nation is.

  49. ninemikemike

    The Nation is a worthless rag. No-one should believe anything it prints, it has proved itself to have the basest motives – DO NOT BUY IT – simple really.

  50. observing

    Branford’s invective was harsh. The bigger picture though is that he claims to base his “opinion” on a picture at a swearing in. Couldn’t he at least have been honest and publicly declare his clear blatant dislike and probably disdain for Thompson?

    Today’s article and the attempt to focus solely on Kellman and Thompson’s “possible” logic only confirms this even more.

    And by the way, are there any other current “objective” political journalist whose articles are all about pulling down, criticising and decring Prime Minister or Leader of the Opposition of the day?

  51. PiedPiper

    Born and Bred: I think Mr. Brandford’s meaning was very clear but he has couched it in such a way that permits him to protect himself by claiming he meant something else.
    If his Editor in Chief was doing his job, he should have been aware of Mr. Brandford’s true meaning before the article went to press so one has to ask 1) Is the Editor in Chief of The Nation just not doing his job or 2) Does the Editor in Chief of the Nation condone this sort of back-handed racism?
    Regardless, Mr. Brandford should be put on notice or perhaps even dismissed for his blatantly partisan views and not very subtle attacks on PM Thompson’s heritage.

  52. Lady Anon

    Frankology…I agree with you on the definition of “inbred”. And I agree with you with the possible alternative words, especially “innate”.

    However, as a journalist, I think that Mr. Brandford should have questioned himself as to whether he should have used the word “inbred” which has several connotations or used the word “innate” which means the same thing but is less inflammatory.

    While I understand the usage of the word, its use inflamed others who really don’t care whether the word was used correctly, but rather the impression it gave.

    Mr. Brandford should have been more responsible.

  53. born and bred

    Dear BFP:

    What’s happening?

    How are these three disgusting and vulgar submissions from “Anonymous” getting passed your screening/moderation?

  54. frankology

    I agree with you on the definition of “inbred”. And I agree with you with the possible alternative words, especially “innate”.
    ………………………………………………………………………………….
    We have to understand Barbadians regarding the linking to others without understanding the true cause. We see people pelting rocks and we start pelting rocks not knowing the real reason.

    I bet the majority joined the BFP bandwagon without finding out the meaning of the words mentioned in the statement, some possibly might not even read the statement, but make a dive not realising the pool is empty.

  55. frankology

    Can you publish this cuss bird IP.

  56. ninemikemike

    Is that your entire vocabulary Mr big brave anonymouse?

  57. Goodness Gracious

    I find it quite amusing that B.F.P., either through its own comment, or by allowing some of the most sagacious and vituperative attacks on my fellow Barbadians by anonymous bloggers that I have seen anywhere, could be so sanctimonious about the writing of a newspaper columnist.

    Brandford is entitled to his opinion, whether we agree with it or not. If we do not agree we are free to say so. Now that is a free press. Because we do not agree does not however give us the right to accuse the man of racist motives. It may come as a surprise to BFP and WIV but there are lots of Barbadians out there who will either agrees or disagree with Brandford. Human nature is like that. You either hate or love public figures.

    So come on guys don’t take it so personally. It is not difficult for someone of average intelligence to work out what a commentator’s biases or foibles are. B.F.P commentators demonstrate theirs frequently.

    Perhaps we all need to rise above the sensational name calling that I see on this blog, either that or get some therapy.

    The Elections are over so keep it clean in 2008 it belittles your training to do otherwise. Any jackass can run a smear campaign. Lets have some real analysis on important issues and bring some true value to this blog.

    **********************

    BFP Comments…

    GG says “Lets have some real analysis on important issues and bring some true value to this blog.”

    That’s the funniest thing we’ve heard since it was announced that Mia is now leader of the BLP.

    Ok… Let’s talk about a REAL ISSUE.

    Let’s talk about how the Director of Public Prosecutions had the police do a middle of the night raid on one of his former tenants who owed back rent. Let’s talk how the police used a pre-signed blank search warrant that is now posted on the internet for all to see. Let’s talk about how they dragged her off at 3am to the police station to have her vagina searched for back rent.

    Let’s talk about how they had a trial where the Director of Public Prosecutions acted both as a private witness and in his official capacity. Let’s talk how the judge modified the court transcripts in conspiracy with the DPP and how all the court documents and a whole lotta proof are posted on the internet where anyone can see them.

    Let’s talk about what 60 Minutes or any real journalists would do with those Ronja Juman documents if this was America or the UK.

    Here… look HERE and you can see them for yourself.

    Then… let’s talk!

  58. anonlegal

    BFP stated:

    Let’s talk about how they had a trial where the Director of Public Prosecutions acted both as a private witness and in his official capacity.
    ————————————————-

    I adressed this before but maybe i need clarification. Are you suggesting that the DPP was the lawyer in court, as well as a witness?

    I have already stated that as far as i know there is nothing in the law that prevents the DPP from being a witness (especially when he is the complainant). If you are aware of something that I overlooked feel free to tell me

    ***** BFP Replies, YES… it is called conflict of interest. Read Ronja Juman’s statement and you will see the the DPP acted at the trial in both his official capacity and as a witness – both in relation to the trial of Juman.

    If you can’t see anything wrong with that… well… that says everything anyone needs to know about your knowledge of justice and the law.

    *******

    BFP also stated:

    “Let’s talk how the judge modified the court transcripts in conspiracy with the DPP and how all the court documents and a whole lotta proof are posted on the internet where anyone can see them.”
    ————————————

    I also stated last time that the documents you have posted online do not, by themselves, show any unlawful behaviour on the part of the DPP. As for the alleged modification of transcripts, I am not sure how you became aware of such mdification, nor am I sure how modifying court transcripts was beneficial to the DPP, but i am sure you at BFP will enlighten me.

    *******************

    BFP Says…

    It is interesting that you argue so vehemently against any sort of wrongdoing when anyone can look at the documents posted online and see a half a dozen serious issues that need answers.

    Once again, your position says everything about you.

  59. Radiance

    Who Dat,

    I want to add to something you said. I love blogs, but blogs have a major weakness in that they they tend to attract people of like opinion. After a while, many blogs become a place for people to sit around the online table and nod their heads in agreement. Those who think differently tend to have their ideas derided and dismissed. This issue afflicts any number of blogs out there, and you will also see it with newspapers who align themselves with certain political perspectives. Alternative views get short shrift. But, maybe that is just how the world works.

    I take blogs for what they are. They are great for getting a combination of factual information, opinions, rumors, and innuendos about issues. I just try try to maintain a skeptical outlook on whatever is written on a blog (or in any media) until I can think about the issue some more.

    As for BFP’s discussion of racism, I might say more on that at a later date. All I’ll say for now is that I have been reading this blog for about 9 months or so, and their emphasis is usually the same. It’s BFP’s prerogative, though, to write about what truly matters to them at heart.

  60. Hants

    Mr. Brandford statement was meant as an insult to PM Thompson.Plain and simple.

    Mr.Brandford’s time would be better spent glorifying his former master Owen S Arthur or maybe he will be joining Griffith and Truss in attacking Arthur.

  61. anonlegal

    BFP said
    “It is interesting that you argue so vehemently against any sort of wrongdoing when anyone can look at the documents posted online and see a half a dozen serious issues that need answers.

    Once again, your position says everything about you.”
    ————————————————–

    Once again you misunderstand me. I do not agree with what the DPP did. This should have been handled in the civil court.

    I am just advising that you should not point to the documents you have posted online as hard evidence indicating unlawful behaviour on his part (those documents implicate him in anything).
    ———————————————–

    *****************

    BFP says,

    “those documents don’t implicate (the DPP) in anything”

    HA HA HA …. only if you are one of his friends!

  62. Hants

    BFP…we should have a discussion on the motives of BLP members and operatives who are now attacking Owen Seymore Arthur.

    Another inside attack in the Nation.

    http://www.nationnews.com/editorial/344410459239319.php

    I wonder how many of these BLPites are going to try and turn from red to gold?

    *******************

    BFP replies,

    Hi Hants,

    yup… I have a little something on the go now and Shona is doing up a cartoon also.

  63. Radiance

    Well, well, well.

    BFP really did take down Who Dat’s post. (Or was it True Dat? I forget. The post is gone at this point in time.) And all that was in the post was a critique and some disagreement with other positions on this board. I wonder whose post will be the next to vanish without a trace.

    I guess blogs are not as impartial as we like to think.

    ********************

    BFP comments,

    You never thought that all blogs and especially BFP was “impartial.” That is one of two lies in your comment, but it is the most obvious lie.

    The other lie is that you and your organised friends also have an agenda in your visits to BFP. Hey… its a free world especially on the internet – and we are free to delete any comment or refuse any commenter at any time. In the case of the comments that you are referring to, we reserve the right to prohibit comments that we have determined are part of a group agenda or are being posted by one person or group under different names.

  64. frankology

    Why all the fuss about Griffith and Truss regarding Arthur and “politics on inclusion”. Are these characters a part of the officialdom within the party?. Maybe, it is possible that the said Griffith and Truss, who possibly might be members of the party, were not in the forefront for any positions within the party and might now be displaying belligerent behaviour due to the party loosing election.

    To me, these guys are just retaliating due to being overlooked.

  65. anonlegal

    BFP, you stated that the DPP was acting in his official capacity.

    I am merely asking how was he acting in his official capacity? was he the lawyer prosecuting the case? I dont get that impression from what MS Juman described.

    In her statement Ms Juman seemed to be describing a preliminary inquiry, not the actual trial (Preliminary inquiries are proceedings held to determine whether there is enough evidence to go to trial).

    Ms Juman stated that :

    “As I sat in court it was my impression that the magistrate was not differentiating the difference between Mr. Leacock’’s official title as DPP and the fact of his involvement in this case was as a complainant and nto in is official capacity.”

    Ms Juman didnt say that the DPP was the lawyer prosecuting the case nor did she say that he acting in his official capacity…..she seems to be saying that she was under the impression that the magistrate was not appreciating that Mr Leacock’s involvement in the case was as a complainant and not as DPP.

    My question was merely how was he acting in his official capacity? I am not against Ms Juman, I am just asking a question for clarification.

    ****************************

    BFP says,

    While in court for the purpose of testifying as a private witness, the prosecutor showed DPP Charles Leacock a letter in his capacity as the Director of Public Prosecutions.

    That kind of conflict of interest would be prohibited by law in most civilized jurisdictions and would be frowned upon by the vast majority of the legal community in Barbados.

    From Ronja Juman’s statement…

    “On the last court date Mr. Charles Leacock was at court prepared to give his evidence a letter from you my attorney was served upon the court to the Magistrate who read it and proceeded to pass it around to both the Prosecution as well as Mr. Leacock as she said he was the DPP and should read it.”

    Ronja Juman’s full statement can be read here.

    How can you say that justice appeared to be done and was done under all the circumstances anonlegal? You MUST be incredibly biased in favour of the DPP or you haven’t a clue about what the legal system is supposed to be about.

  66. Radiance

    Well, well, well.

    BFP really did take down Who Dat’s post. (Or was it True Dat? I forget. The post is gone at this point in time.) And all that was in the post was a critique and some disagreement with other positions on this board. I wonder whose post will be the next to vanish without a trace.

    I guess blogs are not as impartial as we like to think.

    ********************

    BFP comments,

    You never thought that all blogs and especially BFP was “impartial.” That is one of two lies in your comment, but it is the most obvious lie.

    The other lie is that you and your organised friends also have an agenda in your visits to BFP. Hey… its a free world especially on the internet – and we are free to delete any comment or refuse any commenter at any time. In the case of the comments that you are referring to, we reserve the right to prohibit comments that we have determined are part of a group agenda or are being posted by one person or group under different names.

    ***********************************************************
    BFP, you have the right to delete or leave posts at your choosing. Never did I say otherwise. In fact, I said it is your prerogative to post what you want.

    But, yes. This is a good example of what I mean about blogging. Not all blogs. Some blogs. People who disagree tend to become “the enemy”. The things they say are “lies”. Lies? Me and my organized friends? Agenda???? I know now from your comments that you really have no idea about who is blogging here. I want to laugh, but your responses are not funny in the least. They are similar to those of people who suffer from paranoia. Or similar to those of people who hate to be contradicted.

    But, now you see how easy it is for the media, any media, to become tainted. The desire to have control and hold on to it is like a drug. It is too easy for any group of people with some degree of control of what the public hears and sees to demonize and eliminate dissent. It does not matter whether the control extends over a nation, a national newspaper, or a blog. You have preached against these very ills for months. Stay true to your philosophy, and let both agreement and dissent have a place on your blog.

    So, BFP, even if you delete this post, you personally will be reading this. Do not become the very thing you claim to despise.

  67. anonlegal

    Alright, we are getting nowhere with this.

    I have not said anything about justice apppearing to be done…….I have just suggested that there is nothing in the law which prohibits the DPP from appearing as a witness in a case.

    I dont like the course of action the DPP took. You can take that for what its worth.

  68. Bert

    frankology your post on Griffith and Truss analysis of why BLP lost confirms without a doubt you are a loyal BLP operative and an insider in the party. Its time you stop trying to hoodwink us with your neutrality crap.

  69. Hants

    Frankology says…”Maybe, it is possible that the said Griffith and Truss, who POSSIBLY might be members of the party, were not in the forefront for any positions within the party.

    Well Frankology, Griffith has been writing pro BLP spin in the Nation up until January 15th 2008.

    Truss has been a loyal BLP servant.

    The attacks on Owen by these BLP stalwarts are shocking when the BLP has claimed to be a cohesive political unit.

    The barrel bust open and evahbody trying to trample the top crab.

  70. frankology

    I am using psychology due to the behaviour of the two gentlemen. You are free to label, but I know who I am and for sure I am not affiliated with the BLP. Everytime someone have to comment you start the labeling, but you can see by these two behaviour, the underlying rage due to the loosing of the election. Maybe, it is based on them being on the breadline. If you are a follower of WI cricket, you will get the jest. Everyone start to point fingers.

  71. frankology

    The barrel bust open and evahbody trying to trample the top crab.
    ………………………………………………………………………………….
    Just what I am saying. It has nothing to do with partisan politics. It is clear to see by the behaviour.

  72. Jerome Hinds

    frankology
    January 28, 2008 at 4:07 pm
    Why all the fuss about Griffith and Truss regarding Arthur and “politics on inclusion”. Are these characters a part of the officialdom within the party?. Maybe, it is possible that the said Griffith and Truss, who possibly might be members of the party, were not in the forefront for any positions within the party and might now be displaying belligerent behaviour due to the party loosing election.

    To me, these guys are just retaliating due to being overlooked.

    *************************************
    FRANKOLOGY,

    How can you claim these guys were over looked…..when George Griffith sat on the CBC board ?

    FRANKOLOGY……you had better concentrate on St. Michael North – West to perform better next time !

  73. Bert

    Jerome,
    I believe you meant Clyde Griffith sat on CBC board as dep chairman. He also competed with Ezra Alleyne as BLP’s staunchest yardfowl columnist.

  74. Leviticus

    Albert needs to be exposed. And I hope the DLP gives Roxanne Gibbs the information they have on Mascoll writing his articles every week. David Thompson has information too. And I hope he uses it to expose this charlatan journalist.

  75. Jerome Hinds

    Bert, thanks for the correction.

    Both Griffith’s are persons of ill – repute !

  76. BIRDPICKMANGO

    The comments of the Nation’s senior political correspondent Albert Branford post election article also made me angry, but for different reasons. For me, the two offensive lead lines questions Branford’s mindset rather than suggest a racial slur. Why would Branford choose to show his resentment (finally achieved his life long ambition…) when the article was about the money factor? Why did he see ‘smugness’ (a negative emotion) in the photographs? What is it about Thompson that triggered these emotions? Is it possible that Thompson’s color e.t.c and achievement is perceived by Branford as a symbol of privilege (slave master)? If this were so, would it be logical to implied conditionality of the words that follow? And can we also conclude that former MP, Clyde Mascol (who Branford strongly supported) for the same reason, viewed Thompson’s return as President as “taking bread out his mouth” and resented it?
    It is always our beliefs, values and experiences that interpret whatever we see. Otherwise, different perceptions would not be possible. What scares me is that Albert Branford is not alone, and in the name of progress, we continue to shoot down our gems.

  77. (69)

    Brandford clearly demonstrates a dislike for Mr. Thompson (for at least two years or about the same time Mascoll crossed) however to brand him a racist is quite far ferched.