That Mr Sandy can make as xenophobic and as racist a remark as the one he uttered in reference to his fears of an Indian presence in Tobago and can continue to be embraced and endorsed as a viable candidate for the upcoming THA election speaks volumes with regard to the worldview of the party to which he belongs.
To say that what he said represents a "slip of the tongue" caused by the heat of the moment is so infantile and ridiculous it does not deserve further comment.
To say that what he said represents a "slip of the tongue" caused by the heat of the moment is so infantile and ridiculous it does not deserve further comment.
That which a man speaks – his word – is not separate and apart from the man. A man's word is the man! To therefore "apologise" for the man and his word but to continue to endorse the man as one who is representative of the party and the people for whom he speaks, means that the apology is hollow.
The apology is nothing more than an expression of "regret" that what was spoken was spoken at an inopportune time and place but in essence does not deviate from the view held by those for whom he speaks.
This means therefore that any person who has business with Mr Sandy and with those for whom he speaks, will have feelings of being in an advantageous position or disadvantageous position depending on their ethnicity.
All of his past decisions are therefore called into question and any future decision he makes for the collective, based on his own testimony and confession of just who he is, will be held up to the scrutiny about whether or not, or to what extent they might be influenced by his anachronistic bias.
His past and future decisions are all therefore now open to question.
Therefore I ask, to what end is he being retained as being representative of the people? How can the group whose ideology he endorses and who, after his expression of bias while speaking on their behalf, continue to validate him as being a part of their fold if they say that they abhor what he said? Their actions – all of them – are frankly hypocritical.
Further to this, should the people of the region — those who claim to be represented by Mr Sandy — endorse the man and his words by re-electing him as the man who will speak for them, then they too are sending a clear message of bias that has no place in the 21st century.
Even their founding father, Dr Williams, said: "there can be no mother Africa for those of African origin, and the T&T society is living a lie and heading for trouble if it seeks to create the impression or to allow others to act under the delusion that Trinidad and Tobago is an African society."
Hilton Sandy should in shame and disgrace deem himself unworthy of representing anything else but absolute backwardness and bigotry and quietly withdraw his candidacy. Only such an act will render moral legitimacy to his herd.
Steve Smith
The apology is nothing more than an expression of "regret" that what was spoken was spoken at an inopportune time and place but in essence does not deviate from the view held by those for whom he speaks.
This means therefore that any person who has business with Mr Sandy and with those for whom he speaks, will have feelings of being in an advantageous position or disadvantageous position depending on their ethnicity.
All of his past decisions are therefore called into question and any future decision he makes for the collective, based on his own testimony and confession of just who he is, will be held up to the scrutiny about whether or not, or to what extent they might be influenced by his anachronistic bias.
His past and future decisions are all therefore now open to question.
Therefore I ask, to what end is he being retained as being representative of the people? How can the group whose ideology he endorses and who, after his expression of bias while speaking on their behalf, continue to validate him as being a part of their fold if they say that they abhor what he said? Their actions – all of them – are frankly hypocritical.
Further to this, should the people of the region — those who claim to be represented by Mr Sandy — endorse the man and his words by re-electing him as the man who will speak for them, then they too are sending a clear message of bias that has no place in the 21st century.
Even their founding father, Dr Williams, said: "there can be no mother Africa for those of African origin, and the T&T society is living a lie and heading for trouble if it seeks to create the impression or to allow others to act under the delusion that Trinidad and Tobago is an African society."
Hilton Sandy should in shame and disgrace deem himself unworthy of representing anything else but absolute backwardness and bigotry and quietly withdraw his candidacy. Only such an act will render moral legitimacy to his herd.
Steve Smith
No comments:
Post a Comment