Just when I was beginning to believe my experiences at the hands of primordial politicians and their even more desperate hacks should be relegated to the history books, that our country had moved on since the political debacles of the 80s and mid-90s, that we had finally learned what journalism is all about, well, sadly, I’ve been given reason to think again. The more things change . . .
It seems I’ve thrown my old enemies into yet another tailspin. Why? I’m not sure but I suspect the UWP’s natural hatred for investigative journalism that went into hiding after that unforgettable 1997 battering has been resurrected by my revelations during last Thursday’s TALK, reproduced in the weekend STAR. My goodness, who knew so much bile could pour out of one alcoholic beak?
But really, folks, what did I say about the China-Taiwan brouhaha that has not been confirmed both by front-line representatives of the dissident eight and others still faithful to the prime minister? According to Stephenson King, who is holding the fort in Sir John’s unexplained suspicious absence, it is absolutely true that during Cabinet meetings leading up to last Monday’s signing the prime minister sought support for relationships with both China and Taiwan, albeit essentially different, while the dissidents—led by the foreign affairs minister—had insisted on full diplomatic relations with Taiwan, thereby effectively spitting on the existing One-China agreement that in a February 15 letter to his Beijing counterpart Rufus Bousquet had pledged to support and respect.
There was no reason to suggest that just because the whole Cabinet had not agreed with a particular idea the government was in imminent danger of cracking up, King assured inquisitive reporters. In any event, he observed, Cabinet conclusions were seldom unanimous, yet members always observed the strict collective-responsibility-before-parliament rule.
My own blow-by-blow account of the diplomatic volte face coincided with King’s. Like a good reporter, I had deliberately resisted comment on the actions of the dissident eight members of the prime minister’s Cabinet. So what was it that sent the nation into a tizzy even before last Thursday’s TALK had gone off the air? What precisely did I say to warrant the bizarre headless-chicken attempts at damage control? Did I inadvertently hit a raw nerve?
Why am I being saddled with all kinds of nefarious motives even by such as STAR columnist Jeff Fedee—of all people? What exactly might he be afraid of? As for Hot FM’s notorious dirt dispenser, well, is there anyone in all of St Lucia who does not know he is to the airwaves what City Council garbage trucks are to the environment? Even when they have dumped their noisome load they continue to stink up the atmosphere with their ever mephitic presence. Nuff said about that particular chunk of rumshop detritus!
No, I’ve not forgotten Friend Fedee. Count on it, we’ll return to him before long. As I say, I cannot for the life of me fathom why the UWP’s vipers have turned on me. I suspect I carelessly allowed myself to get caught between peas of a certain pod. On the one hand there are the UWPeas who recognize the fragility of their situation: a government comprising suspect characters, most of them ambitious beyond their abilities, at least three living only for the hopefully imminent day when a new leader must be chosen.
Then there are the current handicapped leader’s enduring adoring supporters who seem ready to push their luck to its outer limits, including a possibly suicidal return to the polls, rather than meekly handing over their government to the over-ambitious wannabes. Both sides share a common disease: marrow-freezing fear. Fear that the exposed truth might result in another tsunami reminiscent of the one that, a decade ago, had swept the dreaded SLP into office.
For both UWPeas, anything is better than Kenny Anthony as prime minister—even a bunch of political cads and a leader too lame to take control of his own Cabinet. So while the keep-Compton-in-office-regardless-of-cost crowd are demanding the heads of at least two Cabinet members, they can’t control their atavistic urge to kill the bringer of bad news. Meanwhile, the super eight must have someone to blame for their folly. And who better than their old enemy from the days of Braff, Joe Cox etcetera? Who better than Rick Wayne who, legend has it, UWPs learn to hate (fear?) at their mothers’ nipples?
Alas, Rick Wayne was never easy meat. Not then, not now. Not for George Odlum in his prime; not for John Compton when he was widely known as “the messiah”; not for Allan Louisy, Kenny or Tony. And definitely not for Vaughan Lewis. What to do?Now that they had power again (on paper, anyway!), why not pick up where they had left off in 1996? Bad habits die hard, after all. Why not dominate the airwaves with intelligence insulting declarations? Which is where the pathetic purveyor of noise pollution comes in. True, no one in his or her right mind takes him seriously, but then his audience was never famous for its collective intelligence. At any rate, so the UWPeas believe.
Yes, they would instruct the Hot FM-inate to spew all kinds of anti-Rick Wayne rubbish; perchance something might stick. Forget the old porn schtick. It would be even more useless today than it had been 30 years ago, this being the era of the Internet, cell-phone cameras and so on—not forgetting the increasingly popular STAR back page. What some might’ve considered porn in the era of hypocrisy and official cover-ups is today boudoir photography for Valentine’s Day postcards. Ain’t life grand?
On the other hand, there were the perennial losers ever on the lookout for any excuse for their miserable existence. Why not play on their weaknesses and suggest Rick Wayne was paid millions by the Chinese to promote their diplomatic cause? Why not say Rick Wayne exposed the underbelly of the Taiwan monster in return for incentives from the Kenny Anthony government?Alas, verifiable facts are guaranteed to get in the way of mindless propaganda? If Rick Wayne received gifts from the Kenny Anthony government in exchange for his support, then for crissakes why was he so critical of the then prime minister for over five years? Indeed, there are those who believe the SLP lost the last elections as a direct consequence.
In any event, the concessions to STAR Publishing are available to other businesses, including Hot FM. If that company’s managers don’t know how to access that entitlement, then, as Juk Bois might say, toof! By the way, concessions to STAR Publishing, like concessions to local hotels and other places of business, are published in the Gazette for public information. So this week’s announcement by that motor mouth on the hill was hardly a scoop. Then again, so what’s new?
As for the other matter, that I was paid millions by the Chinese to sink Taiwan’s boat, not true. (I can’t help wondering what the other Bousquet’s China friendship Association might say about that. Kenny, too, whose pro-China efforts I relentlessly opposed. And Peter Lansiquot!) But if indeed I had been approached to do for the Chinese what I can do better than most, hey, I might well have accepted—with certain conditions, among them that the STAR would as usual remain open to all views, for and against a relationship with China. After all, advertising is the lifeblood of the business I’m in; advertising in all its forms.
I’m also in the business of endorsing, have been for years. Just check the bodybuilding magazines, especially those published in my heyday. If I may be permitted a small arrogance, I am a man of obvious influence that on-the-ball business people may be prepared to pay for. Several school principals continue to invite me to address their students, for one simple reason. I’ve proved, over and over, that I can get a message across. My credibility is indisputable, in case you had not noticed, dear doubtful reader.
Truth be told, I am seriously considering a proposition to set up office as a lobbyist, an American commonplace.Enough. I was never offered millions by the Chinese. End of story. On the other hand, the word everywhere is that the Taiwanese dished out millions to certain public servants who agreed to support their cause even at the risk of a political catastrophe. If that’s true, as many evidently believe, that some of the recipients are elected officials, then certainly we have a very serious problem on our hands. At any rate, that possible problem must be investigated.
Finally, we come to the prime minister’s address to the nation that was never delivered by him, that I read during last week’s TALK. I believe the reaction to that speech that clearly suggests the prime minister was railroaded was instinctive. It left people with the pungent smell of rat in their nostrils. But more of that in due course. Who gave me the speech? Who else but the ghost of Deep Throat!
I promised to return to my friend and STAR columnist Jeff Fedee. (By the way, his article in last Saturday’s edition suggests Jeff is supportive of the Taiwan position. So why was it published in the STAR when, according to some, the paper’s owner was under contract to lobby in behalf of China?) In his last column Fedee writes, apropos the contentious Taiwan accord: “Our leaders should be concerned with respect for democratic principles, collective Cabinet responsibility and human ideals that transcend short-term gains . . . In the letter [sic] read by Rick Wayne that was purported to have been intended as a national address by Sir John to all St Lucians, he [Compton] would have been heavily criticized in his former days as an autocrat and a dictator if he rode roughshod over a majority decision in Cabinet. “Rick’s exposé may have been historical but was it ethical?”
Certainly Jeff should know it’s the job of reporters to uncover and expose to public scrutiny precisely what politicians would prefer to keep secret from the people. When Woodward and Bernstein uncovered the sordid details of Watergate that finally brought down Richard Nixon, did the two Washington Post journalists serve America’s best interests or were their actions unethical? I cannot imagine a news story that did not depend on informants. It’s the nature of that beast called journalism.As for that so-called majority vote that rendered John Compton a lame-duck prime minister, that one will hold for another show!
Caption: Rufus Bousquet (left) with sir John Compton in 2001: Who knew the past would repeat itself?