Is our media interested in knowing

[Sir X]

and informing John Public , what were the Wada recommendations , post ridiculous visit.

Where did Dr wright aka Quacko or Dr Wrong , get info that we have a testing lab at UWI ?

Does he have info of anyone drugging why he would make the tip of the iceberg comment ?If so given his professional capacity , he owes it to John Public to step forward with such info !

Does he view his comments as unprofessional and malicious ?

How can any athlethe trust him with a drug sample , given his statements which point to percieve bias ?

Can he continue in any capacity as a trusting drug tester , given his utterances?

[Willi]

I would not trust him...

[Sir X]

Mi say it long time ,bredda dangerous,same bredda call fi the harshest penalty after the stimulant ting.

Whey di media deh.Oral is one thing

http://www.televisionjamaica.com/Pro...x/Videos/30720


http://www.televisionjamaica.com/Pro...x/Videos/30749

[Historian]

Very Good Questions

Very good questions, X.

And by the way (and this is beside the topic), Usain Bolt disappointed me immensely in his public dismissal of Shelly-Ann’s relevant concerns. But then again, that is the Bolt that I’ve known over the years. For example I’ve posted here in the past my observation that he is one of very few athletes who do not turn back and congratulate their competitors (not even if those competitors are fellow Jamaicans like Yohan Blake and Warren Weir)!

It’s all about Bolt, but I recognized this long ago!

and informing John Public , what were the Wada recommendations , post ridiculous visit.

Where did Dr wright aka Quacko or Dr Wrong , get info that we have a testing lab at UWI ?

Does he have info of anyone drugging why he would make the tip of the iceberg comment ?If so given his professional capacity , he owes it to John Public to step forward with such info !

Does he view his comments as unprofessional and malicious ?

How can any athlethe trust him with a drug sample , given his statements which point to percieve bias ?

Can he continue in any capacity as a trusting drug tester , given his utterances?

[Don1]

Your views on Bolt are irrelevant. Whether he wishes to congratulate the also rans or not is entirely his concern

[Mosiah]

How yuh gi trovel suh?

[Historian]

A Question....

Your views on Bolt are irrelevant. Whether he wishes to congratulate the also rans or not is entirely his concern

Is your name now “X”?! My post was directed at X, and was a reply to his sensible comments.

Why do you, Don1, feel that you have to be constantly all over this board? Day in and day out you make ****ery here with your stupid JLPNP and other tribalist matters!

Get a life, my friend! If you don’t have one, then join an old folks’ home!

[Sir X]

All isnt lost in Jamaican media

The Wall Street Journal and Jamaica

Published: Tuesday | November 19, 2013 0 Comments




Ewart Walters, GUEST COLUMNIST

The Wall Street Journal's surprising intervention into the matter of Jamaica's athletic drug-testing programme is an eyebrow raiser. But history shows that this speculative story of November 13 about the bona fides of JADCO Chairman Herb Elliott - complete with a picture of the unsullied Usain Bolt - fits nicely in with the journal's track record and is part of its DNA.It also serves to underscore The Gleaner's warning in a recent editorial about the possible geopolitical reasons for the harsh, unrelenting focus on the sustained high performance of Jamaica's athletes, if not really on JADCO's testing regime.
Known as 'the bible of US conservatism', the Wall Street Journal has consistently supported and promoted the interests of the US Right wing through the Republican Party and its very well-heeled neo-conservative fellow travellers. It has rarely diverted from being the mouthpiece for US commercial activity. Even more rarely has it been known to devote any attention to Jamaica or things Jamaican.
For instance, when in the last few years, the official murder rate in Jamaica hovered in the 1,500-per-annum range, the Wall Street Journal did not appear to take notice or call for a change of government. Flash back some 33 years when the murder figures were nearly half as much, however, and that newspaper jumped headlong into Jamaican politics and promoted a change of government.
It was the spring of 1980. The battle to oust the government of Michael Manley had reached its zenith. It had started in the 1976 election year and received support from several newspapers, particularly American ones. It subsided for a while and then made a furious return around 1979 as election year 1980 loomed, so much so that it prompted calypsonian Lord Laro to compose and sing his song, Foreign Press.
And that's when the Wall Street Journal fired its big cannon. It published an editorial on Jamaica, offering comfort to the US metals companies that were mining bauxite in Jamaica by its prophecy that their man Edward Seaga would be winning the upcoming election and that he would "remove the bauxite levy" of late 1974.
The editorial seemed to climax a spate of news stories in the Wall Street Journal that consistently 'bun bad lamp' on Jamaica and Jamaica's image. But in the midst of this campaign, a delegation from the Wall Street Journal appeared one day at the Consulate General of Jamaica on Second Avenue in Manhattan, New York, with an interesting offer. The Wall Street Journal was offering to publish a full-colour centre spread, and the objective would be to promote Jamaica in the most positive way.
The consul who received the delegation could not believe his ears. He listened, amazed, to the details of the offer, noting with care that this enticing offer came with a price. Yes! Having spent the last year or so daubing mud all over Jamaica and things Jamaican, the Wall Street Journal was now offering its services to clean up the mess it had made. But Jamaica would have to pay.
other considerations
The thing is, when it comes to Jamaica, the Wall Street Journal has never really been interested in doing a news story or a feature story simply on the basis of straight news, but more likely has been impelled by other considerations.
The American woman who had been working for certain Jamaican interests in the US, and who in 1981 got rewarded with the contract for public relations for all Jamaican agencies operating in the US, more than once boasted to the Jamaican consul in New York of her connections to Right-wing news media and, specifically, named the Wall Street Journal.
Exactly what forces are behind this year's extensive focus on Jamaican athletes is as yet unknown. Clearly, JADCO dropped the ball in its slothful response. Clearly, Prime Minister Simpson Miller picked it up and took swift corrective action.
Equally clearly, several athletes have been tested and found wanting. And while there might well be legitimate reasons in some cases, the fact remains that the bona fides of the Wall Street Journal, and not only Dr Elliott, must now also be placed under the microscope.
Ewart Walters is a journalist, author and former diplomat. His autobiography, 'To Follow Right - A Journalist's Journey', was published in 2011. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

[Don1]

Mi an yuh ah nuh fren suh back off wid dat. Mi nuh ave nuh Fish fren

Yuh disrispek mi wid no provocation an yuh expec fi get whe wid dat??

You post at your own risk likkle turd... memba mi tole yuh

[Don1]

den wait ..yuh nuh si ow di bwoy tek step wid man?? if mi mek dat pass any likkle turd like MissTorian agguh try a ting... so

JUDGMENT!!!!!!!

[Karl]

Very good questions, X.

And by the way (and this is beside the topic), Usain Bolt disappointed me immensely in his public dismissal of Shelly-Ann’s relevant concerns. But then again, that is the Bolt that I’ve known over the years. For example I’ve posted here in the past my observation that he is one of very few athletes who do not turn back and congratulate their competitors (not even if those competitors are fellow Jamaicans like Yohan Blake and Warren Weir)!

It’s all about Bolt, but I recognized this long ago!

I think both Shelly-Ann and Bolt messed up.
Shelly-Ann should not have gone out on a limb about our athletes engaging in a boycott...and Bolt should not have thrown her under the bus.

Bolt should have taken his dismay at her utterances private (sure he was blindsided by the press with the news...but a being nimble on 'his feet' and a deflected response while he digested the info) and make the appropriate 'sounds'. ...perhaps, I can understand the thinking that we are underrepresented...blaa! blaa!

[Sir X]

No messing up on both of their part, they did what the bigger heads couldn't do speak on an issue that affects them and a wider extent Jamaicans .

The repercussions are out, that's the jist of it! Wada has to deal with that PR ,they can't throw malicious words or terms around without push back from people and organizations with billions on the table.

No doubt the IAAF will push that PR be it selfish bolt loosing millions or Shelly Ann/Jamaica boycott.

Good PR no mess up in my book.Jamaicans can nickel and dime the petty stuff as to why Bolt is selfish or why Shelly put Bolt billions in that position.

[Don1]

I don't see the big deal...they both express their opinions forthrightly and without any disrespect

We're making a mountain out of a molehill

[Sir X]

Jamaicans!

[Willi]

Our athletes? I only recall her speaking about herself!