Con­sol­i­dated Fools

Mus­ings are thoughts, the thought­ful kind. For the pur­pose of th­ese ar­ti­cles, a-mus­ings are thoughts that might amuse, en­ter­tain and even en­lighten.

The Star (St. Lucia) - - LOCAL - By Michael Walker

You have to hand it to that well-known and highly in­flu­en­tial mélange of mixed per­son­al­i­ties known as Con­sol­i­dated Fools, per­haps bet­ter known to devo­tees and de­trac­tors alike as CF, the mas­ter of tom­fool­ery and buf­foon­ery, whose skills as the ul­ti­mate wa­ver of promised, but sel­dom-to-be-re­vealed ev­i­dence clearly matches, per­haps even threat­ens, those of his lord and men­tor (L&M) when not re­veal­ing, but discussing all the same, se­lected con­tent of a Top Se­cret Re­port.

For those not in the know, sedi­tion is de­fined as “in­cit­ing or caus­ing peo­ple to rebel against the author­ity of a state” and sedi­tious be­hav­iour is pun­ish­able by death in cer­tain parts of the world. But let's leave CF and his L&M to their pos­tur­ing and take our minds back a few months in time to a Thurs­day night's TALK on which Rick pre­sented his in­vited guest, a young man, who spoke about the frus­tra­tions, dis­ap­point­ments and chal­lenges that af­flict the youth of to­day on a daily ba­sis. The young man was so irate, so moved, that he vented his frus­tra­tion and anger in an out­burst of ut­ter de­spair declar­ing that he wished he could shoot the prime min­is­ter on the spot, or words to that ef­fect.

Of course this rev­e­la­tion, on air, to Rick Wayne and, by ex­ten­sion, to the whole na­tion (be­cause what do peo­ple do on Thurs­day evenings other than watch Rick rant­ing?) caused some­what of an up­roar fu­eled by the usual party hacks, de­fend­ers of the faith, and AAs – and I do not mean alcoholics anony­mous (The first A denotes the per­son and the sec­ond A is the ab­bre­vi­a­tion for a vul­gar term for “anal syco­phants.” Enjoy!)

What was said on Rick's show was not so bad. The per­pe­tra­tors, Rick and the lad, said what they said in full view of the na­tion. It was merely an ex­pres­sion of pure frus­tra­tion. Surely, Dear Reader, even you have had mur­der­ous thoughts (I could have killed her!) with­out leav­ing a trail of corpses in your wake. There was no way any sane and sen­si­ble per­son could have in­ter­preted the com­ments vented on Rick's show to be an in­vi­ta­tion to sedi­tion or an in­cite­ment to re­bel­lion and so­cial chaos. (Rick's Thurs­day show, TALK, is car­ried live on W-Vent 93.5 or 94.7 – so you have no ex­cuse to miss it.)

Now in my view – hum­ble as I al­ways am – CF's in­sin­u­a­tions, pre­sented with­out any proof, of a cadre of po­lice of­fi­cers bent on dis­rup­tion, per­haps de­stroy­ing the gov­ern­ment, or over­throw­ing the regime, even ar­rest­ing the Cab­i­net, or maybe clos­ing ranks with the Op­po­si­tion, and all that such en­act­ments would mean in the imag­i­na­tions of the masses, in­clud­ing blood run­ning in the gut­ters, corpses hang­ing from low branches, bul­let-rid­dled bod­ies float­ing down­stream and – Oh-hor­ror-of-hor­rors – the Cas­tries Cus­tody Suite packed tight with SLP politi­cians eat­ing prison gruel dished out by Phil Cornon-le-Cob on floors awash with hon­ourable urine, are – given the vivid na­ture of gos­sip­ing imag­i­na­tions - much more sedi­tious and in­iq­ui­tous than any­thing ever ut­tered in frus­tra­tion on Rick's show.

If CF is with­hold­ing ev­i­dence of an in­sur­gency and re­fuses to hand over the said ev­i­dence in a timely fash­ion, then I would imag­ine he would be guilty of a crime, the ram­i­fi­ca­tions of which, if the revo­lu­tion ever came, would leave him with blood and the well-be­ing of this so­ci­ety on his hands. CF, with­out men­tion­ing names, talks of a spe­cific group of po­lice of­fi­cers. How much more dam­ag­ing to po­lice moral can it get? Of course, in the usual CF way, proof is promised in the form of “tune-in-next-week” ad­mo­ni­tions to hear the lat­est “proof” to sup­port his claims. The good thing is, of course, that CF will never present his “proof” – it's merely a di­ver­sion­ary tac­tic – so we are safe for a week at least. But se­ri­ously, with­hold­ing ev­i­dence is a crime, more so if the sub­mis­sion of the ev­i­dence would have pre­vented a crime from ever hap­pen­ing at all. Once CF placed the stamp of of­fi­cial­dom – THE PO­LICE – on the al­leged, planned dis­rup­tion, he el­e­vated the threat to lev­els even higher than those of Odd­ity Od­lum's hey­days! A core of rank­ing po­lice of­fi­cers is a great ral­ly­ing point for rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies tired of the sta­tus quo. CF is a dis­grace to his of­fice. And the PM, with his se­lec­tive at­tacks on the po­lice force through al­lu­sions to dam­ag­ing but un­re­vealed (he is the only one qual­i­fied to read the re­port clearly) proof of mis­con­duct (we have to take his word for it), is not a jot bet­ter.

With friends like CF, who needs en­e­mies? The life of Thomas Becket, Arch­bishop of Can­ter­bury, ended af­ter his king had ut­tered the words “Who will rid me of this med­dle­some priest?” and four of his knights, ea­ger to curry favour, took him at his word. And then there's Bill Shake­speare's Julius Cae­sar be­fore the Se­nate build­ing: (Casca first, then the other Con­spir­a­tors and Bru­tus stab Cae­sar who looks into his for­mer friend’s eyes and ut­ters his im­mor­tal, yet dy­ing, words) “Et tu, Brute! Then fall, Cae­sar!”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Saint Lucia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.