Rowley double dose of "cravitiousness'.

Since people lust after money according to what it can purchase for them, the lust for power is the root of all evil. For that reason many have concluded Dr Keith Rowley is a man who will do anything because he is "cravitious" in the following two ways:

1. He desperately wants to shed his self-inflicted wajang stigma;
2. He's overcome with the desire to be the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago.

The first covetousness has led him to hire an image consultant. But, cosmetics may hide blemishes, not remove them, not so Mr Leopard?

The second though, is the real, unquenchable frenzy giving him ulcers—everything he does is aimed at fulfilling his prime ministerial ambitions.

It's a desperate race against time—like every human, he has no say over when Death will come knocking...like every PNMite, he knows if the PNM doesn't make it back by 2015, it never, ever shall.

That's why, on September 24th 2012, in his Republic Day message, Dr Rowley did pretentiously extol the role of the Mass Media and promise to do his utmost to protect media practitioners, to wit:

“The price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance...In these contemporary times, the role and responsibility of the Mass Media must never be over emphasised...It is therefore incumbent upon all of us to maintain an open mind and a watchful eye in being so endowed."

Apparently, he is not one of us, as, within three months, when given the opportunity to walk his "all of us is godfather" talk, he would make a volte face and refuse to alert the media personality, or her boss, or his own PNM colleagues, upon receiving a mysterious document which allegedly signalled a member of the said Mass Media was in imminent, life-threatening danger.

Dr Rowley's queer behaviour doesn't surprise me for two reasons:

1. In the same widely-circulated, Republic Day speech, Dr Rowley had also provided a hint he would not even allow such a threat get in the way of his political ambitions—he pointed out  that "the excesses and indiscretions of unworthy leaders cannot be undervalued."
2. In his wrapping-up contribution to his absurd, no-confidence motion, he confessed to taking the deliberate decision not to show the document to his own PNM parliamentary colleagues because, in his mind, he was the only trustworthy official, his colleagues, according to Mighty Shadow, being a gaggle of gossipers.

In light of the foregoing, it's beyond doubt neither Dr Keith Rowley, nor his PNM, is worthy of a second look if their names or symbol appear on any ballot paper in future.

Media must be fair and balanced.

Commentary by Jai Parasram.

The Express newspaper appears to have taken upon itself the role of private investigator in an attempt to find some clear evidence against the son of Jack Warner so that perhaps it could use it advantageously against the National Security Minister and the PP government. 

It sent an investigative reporter to Miami to track down Warner's sons to ask if they are under investigation. 

The reporter, based on the story in the Express newspaper, turned up empty-handed. There was no smoking gun, so scandal beyond the manufactured crisis that has been swirling in the media and the Internet for a while and nothing compelling other than the fact that the paper may have done Warner a favour by clarifying some of the doubt that existed about his sons being under house arrest.

There is nothing wrong with a reporter or a news organisation chasing a story or even using the stunt described by journalist Mark Bassant to gain entry to the secure residence of the Warners. What is questionable is the highly speculative nature of the story and the innuendoes in it.

It is common knowledge that the Warners were wealthy long before the change of government in 2010, through investments in several businesses and real estate.