-
THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes. -
That's not me guys. Like I said surreal. It was obvious to even Andrew Holness for different reasons. It's no coincidence that the Plantation Peggies rose to defend. -
My issue not being privy to the defence transcripts of presentation and after listening to the CVM panel where it is stated, this is a public school thereby it is to be governed under constitutional laws where rastafarian children are permitted to wear locks as their right to express themselves. Why deny any African child to do same, regardless of religion ?
Again not being privy to the defence presentation, I see nothing wrong if he made the point that the school administrators should look at the child as a rastafarian,not that it should be inquired or declared because it is already covered under the constitution under freedom of expression and to show preference to a group because of religious affiliation would be prejudicial.
The justices other points of hygiene relating to lice and junijo have no scientific merit and in fact highlights the justices bias or prejudice. Those infestations are not limited to locks and are not proven to exist in locked people at a disproportionate rate. The other declaration that the schools action does not stop the child from expressing the hairstyle because the child can be enrolled in another school is mind blowing. It seems it didn't occur to them that the same situation could occur again and more importantly that their ruling on this matter of a public school will embolden others to take action against the child if the parents tried to enroll the child at other institutions, worse yet the ruling can be applied nation wide in any institution. Isnt their ruling now law!
The whole ruling is of sheer enslaved colonial prejudicial bias,its a shame we need ammendments to rule it out. In my opinion the constitution covers the african child,the interpretation doesnt and that is the problem.
That is abstract thinking, you question thoughts within thoughts,motives within motives in this case,rulings within rulings.Last edited by Sir X; August 5, 2020, 06:02 AM.THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
If the jutices acknowledge expression for rastafarians, then why not the common african folk, to not do so is prejudicial ?
If it is to be believed that the defence presented that the law should look at all with locks to be treated as rastafarians, then the question should be why not given the issue of hygiene /lice/junjo being associated with locks ?
It would require justices to rule on the science of locks being disprortianetly associated with locks, which they did and it shows prejudicial bias not supported by science and that bias can be enforced across the land which again puts it against "rastafarian locks" or the constitution which covers the rastafarian faith to wear locks.
The justices erred in that rastafarian religion should not be an issue but the expression of an african hairstyle similar to that faith, that is clean and well kept is the issue(hygiene). Blaming the lawyer is nothing more than an attempt to cover their asses.Last edited by Sir X; August 5, 2020, 01:04 PM.THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
dummy logic... the justices ruled on the evidence provided...they even alluded to it in the judgement...the claimant did not provide any evidence to rebut the defendants testimony of past incidents of hygiene related incidents with loced & braided hair at the school...counsel was found wanting...now run along king dummy
Comment
-
The clown speaks about logic
THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
Its going to be hard for you. School has the right to dictate standards. What if students want to tatoo up and wear their pants down to their ankles and gold teeth and so on. Who sets the standards. What I dont agree with is the idea of dreads potentially being unhygienic. I think that is a prejudicial attitudeComment
-
No one is saying the school doesnt have the right to dictate standards in this case "hygienic" standards that relate to locks. As you noted it is prejudicial because 1) rastafarians are allowed to express themselves with locks under the constitutioin, you would think hygiene is a factor under the law 2) is it reserved for rastafarians and not other afro jamaicans, which is also prejudicial because they ruled as such 3) Its not based on any science,moreso outright enslaved colonial bias, 4) stating the child can enroll in another school does not factor in that other institutions can carry out same treatment, in fact it is a declaration that all who wear locks can be discriminated against because of unscientific colonial mental prejudicial bias of "hygienic" locks.
The justices made a mockery and contradicated the constitution on those 4 points.Of note the justices in their ruling stated the lawyer made a "vailant" effort which to me means, they understood some of his points or the ramifcations , how in the world could they put it in writing.
Last edited by Sir X; August 5, 2020, 05:58 PM.THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
show me the sections in the constitution that were "contradicated"...Originally posted by Sir X View Post
Comment
-
Please.
THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
Brick,Brick,Brick ....aaaah sah!
Suh Anju knew loooooong time ?
https://youtu.be/khrLKPWn_uQ
A see why yuh nervous, labarite nuh like locks from Busta time,nuh true.THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
In other words a total contradiction !
CONCLUSION
Rastafarianism may not be the issue in the Virgo case, but the Rastafarian hairstyle was definitely the issue. While the rationale for ruling against some of the breaches claimed is, in the view of this column, unassailable, the rationale for some of the others do not appear to be equally so. As a society of Afro-Jamaicans, it should give us, at the very least, a moment’s pause, that braids, beads and locks (largely Afrocentric hairstyles) should still be in issue in Jamaica today. Hopefully, the decision, given its importance, will be appealed to the highest level.
- Shena Stubbs-Gibson is an attorney-at-law and a legal commentator. Send feedback to shena.stubbs@gleanerjm.com or follow her on Twitter: @shenastubbs. This column is printed every other week.
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/c...readlocks-caseTHERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
-
Exposed!
Defending the indefensible.
There is another untapped angle, 16 years old is school age, and happens to be the age of consent.
Old guts can have their way with girls restricted in choosing hairstyles.
Been asking the question regarding Rasta teachers, or teachers adorning Rasta hairstyle, isn't the threat still there?Comment
-
There is another angle, the bastard act passed in the 70s, where all children are to be treated equal and are entitled to inheritance. My reasoning is if Rasta children are a special class, are children who are not, entitled to same rights of expression,specifically hair ?THERE IS ONLY ONE ONANDI LOWE!
"Good things come out of the garrisons" after his daughter won the 100m Gold For Jamaica.
"It therefore is useless and pointless, unless it is for share malice and victimisation to arrest and charge a 92-year-old man for such a simple offence. There is nothing morally wrong with this man smoking a spliff; the only thing wrong is that it is still on the law books," said Chevannes.Comment
Tweet
Comment