My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2006

« ‘I’m on the right path,’ says O’Neill, & hits out at social media | Main | What a kick in the teeth! »

01 December 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

You would also hope that Peter O'Neill might be sumpsimutive too.

Unfortunately your average Papua New Guinean politician does not seem to think that there is anything wrong with their past questionable deals and ripping off of their countrymen and countrywomen.

In fact, I get the impression that they think they were very smart for doing it and should be celebrated for it. Look at me, I'm rolling in kina, aren't I great!

Both Peter O'Neill and Belden Namah need to come clean on their past indiscretions. They will be amazed at the public's tolerance and maybe even respected for it.

Both of them should repent now, before it's too late.

Phil - Recently whilst doing a rather tricky crossword puzzle, I acquired a rather unusual word which seems to sum up the psyche of the gentleman mentioned.

The word is- Mumpsimus which according to the dictionary is defined s follows:

1. adherence to or persistence in an erroneous use of language, memorization, practice, belief, etc., out of habit or obstinacy (opposed to symposiums ).

2. a person who persists in a mistaken expression or practice (opposed to symposiums ).

Origin: 1520–30; from a story, which perhaps originated with Erasmus, of an illiterate priest who said mumpsimus rather than sūmpsimus (1st plural perfect indicative of Latin sūmere to pick up; see consume) while reciting the liturgy, and refused to change the word when corrected

So let's hope that the gentleman’s previous malady has now been cured and he now practises sumpsimus.

The issue - that is, the authorisation of the K8 million plus payment to Paraka Lawyers - raised by Belden Nama is one that must be investigated.

The PM Peter O'Neill and Finance Minister Marabe's evasive rhetoric is the concern of many people including the social media group.

Until an investigation is done, the two men will carry the black mark with them.

Police have passed the buck to Task Force Sweep and the ball is in TFS's court. This case will be the test of TFS's impartiality.

He's certainly an interesting man Bob.

He went to jail over the Sandline affair - that must be a plus in his favour.

He has very astutely realised the power of social media and the bias of printed media.

He likes to gamble and he can't hold his liquor and it gets him into trouble.

The thing that bothers me is the question of where he acquired his wealth. Conventional wisdom has it that he was instrumental in clear felling a large area of the Sepik and took most of the profits himself.

While destroying the environment is reprehensible I don't think its illegal in this case. There might be some consolation if the area is used for agricultural purposes, which apparently will be the case. And, of course, we in Australia are in no position to be critical about clearing forest.

Come clean about the wealth, get off the grog, lose a bit of weight, stop visiting casinos, stop bragging about his money and show a bit of humbleness, support the Crocodile Prize, and he's a viable alternative leader.

I'm still on the fence about Belden Namah, but prepared to drop one side or the other. There's lots of gossip but I'd like to know the facts. Where does he stand?

The best profile of the man I've read was this one by Sil Bolkin about a year ago - KJ

Despite the context this is a very encouraging article for Papua New Guinea.

It seems, in Belden Namah, that a real opposition now exists in the parliament.

He recently lost a member, who switched sides to the government, but perhaps it is best that the opportunists leave anyway.

He now has a hard core of members and they can build from that base to become very effective if they so desire.

If the matter is proven then the evidence of who got what and when should be easily traceable through the associated paper trails as after all the monies received would have been by bank transfer not in cash in a paper bag?

As the gentleman concerned was probably nothing more than a facilator and middleman who would have been obliged to give other interested parties their cut of the loot and subsequent disbusements made would, one would think, be easily traceable?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)