PAM was formed in 1965 and from that year the Democrat newspaper initiated a systematic and relentless personal attack on the leaders of the Labour Party and on anyone else who was suspected of being in sympathy with the Labour Party. Civil Servants were not exempted from the Democrat's venomous and unjustified attacks.
 
  Our First National Hero, His Excellency, Sir Robert L. Bradshaw, was called "Finny Hand" Bradshaw. Labour supporters were called "Labour Dogs". Three female Civil Servants were attacked constantly in the Democrat. One female was called "the Establishments Mule", another was called "Lucky Anne" and the third was referred to, over and over, as "Rich Ruby".
 
  In 1979, during an acute shortage of cane-cutters, a number of Civil servants went out on mornings to cut cane in the fields of sugar estates lying within a 2-3 mile radius of Basseterre.
 
  Teams of PAMites went out each morning, not to assist with the cutting of cane, but to ridicule, harass and mock all those who were helping with the harvesting of the sugar cane crop.
 
  Every Saturday the Democrat attacked in its columns, the same Civil Servants who were doing their voluntary, unpaid and patriotic duty. If the PAMites did not want to assist with the reaping of the sugar cane crop, that was their business. But for them to harass, ridicule and scorn the volunteers " Civil Servants and Private Sector Employees " who were trying to help the Sugar Industry and the country, was most disloyal, unpatriotic and subversive.
 
  At the same time that PAM and the Democrat were trying to prevent the smooth and early harvesting of the sugar cane crop, the leaders of PAM went about proclaiming how much they love the country and how much they care for the Sugar Industry.
 
  After PAM entered government in 1980, on the back of the NRP, the Democrat's weekly attack on Labour Politicians and Labour Supporters was led by a feature writer going under the name of "JOSHUA, the Son of Nun". Reliable reports indicate that since the year 2004, Joshua, the Son of Nun, has been employed in the Civil Service.
  
  "Joshua, the Son of Nun", selected for his  weekly newspaper targets, certain Civil Servants, especially the Senior ones, who were perceived as not being partial to PAM. Efficiency, productivity, performance, professionalism, did not matter to the "Son of Nun". What mattered to him was whole-hearted devotion and commitment to the policies and practices of the People's Action Movement.
 
  The "Son of Nun's" vitriolic attacks launched from the pages of the Democrat soon caught on like wildfire. Other PAM writers followed suit and used the pages of the Democrat newspaper to politicise or rather, to PAMOCRATISE the entire Civil Service and the Police Force. The Democrat's efforts resulted in a politically divided Civil Service and a politically divided Police Force.
 
  Under the PAM regime a junior female Civil Servant from Sandy Point with not even Economics at "O" Level was brought in and placed in the number 2 position in the Central Planning Unit over the head of a university graduate with a First Class Honours Degree in Economics.
 
  The same PAM Government was pushing hard to second the same female Sandy Pointer to a job outside of the local Civil Service so that she would earn more money. Mercifully the Public Service Commission (PSC) and the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB) stopped the nonsense.
 
  A Superintendent of Police who retired and went to New York to work in the Security Service of the United Nations was recalled after an absence of 3-5 years and appointed as Commissioner of Police over the heads of his previously–superior officers. The PAM Government amended the Pensions Act to accommodate the PAM Commissioner of Police. His service was considered to be unbroken, for pension purposes, under the Revised Pension Act.
 
  PAMites love to open their mouths and put themselves in embarrassment. A writer in a recent issue of the Democrat newspaper attempted to castigate the Labour Government for the way that that Government has treated former Governor, Sir Probyn Inniss. Let us however examine how PAM treated Sir Probyn while he served as the Queen’s Representative.
 
  Sir Probyn Inniss was elevated to the office of Governor from the position of Permanent Secretary, Establishments. His elevation was widely acclaimed throughout all sectors and sections of our society. He served with class and distinction in the office of Governor.
 
  PAM came into power while Sir Probyn Inniss was Governor. The PAM Government Cabinet took a decision to increase the salary and allowances of all Ministers and Members of the House of Assembly and the Governor as well. The increase offered to the Governor was a mere pittance in comparison with what Dr. Simmonds and his Cabinet voted for themselves. Dr. Simmonds is a physician. Sir Probyn is a lawyer.
 
  The Governor wrote respectfully to Dr. Simmonds requesting a review of the mater. One letter led to another and one thing led to another until in the end, Dr. Simmonds decided to "fire" the Governor from the job and from Government House. Dr. Simmonds had no such powers. Sir Probyn refused to leave Government House.
 
  In the end Dr. Simmonds managed to arrange for Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the Second, to revoke the appointment of Sir Probyn as Governor of St. Kitts and Nevis. Now what kind of Mickey Mouse argument PAM is advancing in the Democrat. The Labour Government elevated Sir Probyn Inniss to the office of Governor. The PAM Government removed him from that office. In spite of that fact, the PAMites think that they have done Sir Probyn no ill.
 
  Again and again and again, PAM tries to resurrect the dead and defunct MYTH that the Labour Party was somehow involved in the disappearance of Billy Herbert, because Billy was in some way a threat to the Labour Party. The truth is that Pam’s main weapon against Labour was neither Dr. Herbert nor Dr. Simmonds, but Michael Powell. And no one tried to do away with Michael Powell.
 
  Detective Superintendent Alex Ross from Scotland Yard was in St. Kitts for quite a while investigating the disappearance, at sea, of the MAXI II. Did the PAMites who are propagandising now, present any relevant and credible information to Alex Ross? The answer is NO! Why? Because PAM had no relevant or credible information to present.
 
  Alex Ross himself told the newspaper reporters from overseas that the Labour Party had neither the means nor the motive; nor the resources, nor the expertise; to effect the disappearance of the MAXI II. The PAMites know this, but they do not care. They have no regard for the truth or for the facts.
 
  How could Billy Herbert be a threat to the Labour Party when he himself failed on three successive occasions to capture a seat in the use of Assembly? When he led his party to defeat at the polls on three successive occasions? The Labour Party scored a 7-0 victory at the polls in 1966, 1971 and 1975.
 
  Billy is credited with crafting the Bill entitled "The House of Assembly Elections Ordinance (Amendment) Act, 1982. The Bill was passed into law, but the legislation helped PAM to win an Election on two occasions only. That is in 1984 and 1989. Shortly after 1995 PAM became frustrated over its own legislation and cried out aloud for it to be changed.
 
  The social and political fiasco of 1993 is also credited to Billy Herbert. Members of the PAM Party have since disclosed that it was Billy Herbert who advised Dr. Simmonds to renege on the terms of the Agreement signed in the presence of 9 priests at the Four Seasons Resort in Nevis. Billy Herbert was of much greater help to Labour than he was to PAM. After the 1993 fiasco, Labour won the Elections 7 to 1.
 
  Just as PAM tried to mix-up the harmless and innocent Lee Moore in the untimely death of Paul Southwell in St. Lucia, just so PAM is forever trying to mix-up the harmless and innocent Labour Party in the disappearance at sea, of the MAXI II. What a hopeless, reckless degenerate party!
 
  Over the past several weeks, a number of PAMites have taken to writing weekly articles and columns in the Democrat. Most, if not all, of such material published in the Democrat deals with trivial, insignificant, sensational, attention-grabbing "Mickey Mouse" stuff. It is all about Bradshaw, or what some Labour supporter did or what some former member of PAM (now turned Labour) has done.
 
  Our First National Hero, His Excellency Sir Robert L. Bradshaw is the frequent butt of a number of PAM jokes and fierce criticism. But no one in Labour has ever claimed that Mr. Bradshaw was without fault, that he was sinless, that he was infallible or that he was perfect. What we have been saying is that Mr. Bradshaw is of legendary, heroic and historic status.
 
  His vision, his foresight, his dedication, devotion and commitment to the task of uplifting his countrymen has transformed St. Kitts and Nevis socially, politically, constitutionally, culturally, financially and economically. Furthermore, Mr. Bradshaw could never be associated with the wicked, evil, devilish and diabolical things which form PAM's chief stock-in-trade.
 
  When Jesus Christ walked the streets of this earth, on one occasion He went into the temple in Jerusalem and drove out the money-changers. That was a most daring and provocative act.
 
  If PAM was around in those days, the party members would have cursed Jesus and called him a Labour man. They would have over-looked all the miracles He performed and labelled him as a bad man to whom no one should ever listen.
 
  Today, no one knows the name of the money-changers, but we know that Jesus Christ has changed the course of western History, Culture, Religion, Philosophy and Ideals.
 
  PAM should forget trivialities and push the small stuff aside. PAMites should educate the general public concerning the number of times that the party tried to block the economic development of this country, for purely selfish partisan political reasons.
 
  People in St. Kitts ought to know that PAM dissuaded three different sets of overseas developers from putting down a hotel in St. Kitts on the site of the present Fort Thomas Hotel. PAM always claim that the party loves St. Kitts and has the interests of the people at heart. Yet PAM does all the things that are designed to hurt St. Kitts the most. The present Fort Thomas Hotel building was constructed from funds put up by a local consortium.
 
  In the late 1960s when PAM was in opposition, a senior PAM Executive Member (he later became a Minister of Tourism) organised a taxi-drivers' strike while one of the largest cruise liners was lying at anchor in the Basseterre Roadstead. It was Earl Clarke who saved the day. He organised a group of private car-owners to take the tourists on tours of the island. PAM still say that the party loves St. Kitts and is interested in the welfare of the people.
 
  Around the year 1996, PAM arranged for a poor, ignorant and simple PAM taxi driver in The Circus to place full-page advertisements in the world's leading newspapers, admonishing all prospective investors overseas, not to put their money in any business venture in St. Kitts. Does PAM really love St. Kitts?
 
  Were the leaders of PAM really born in St. Kitts? How would such advertisements help St. Kitts or its people?
 
  Electoral Reform! Electoral Reform! Electoral Reform!  Insofar as this matter is concerned the attitude of PAM has left hundreds of voters confounded and confused. It is the PAM party which in 1999initiated the strident call for Electoral Reform. PAM said then that Electoral Reform is "an urgent national priority". Now, PAM wants no part or parcel of Electoral Reform.
 
  During the debate in the Assembly in 1983, the late Lee L. Moore QC, argued for the introduction of Voter I.D. cards in our electoral system. The PAM Members of the Assembly vigorously opposed Lee Moore's argument. Now PAM is saying that the party has always been in favour of Voter I. D. Cards. That certainly is not true. PAM also is trying hard to dictate and determine all the relevant features of the Voter I. D. Card which may be selected. How hypocritical!
 
  Before the change in our Electoral System in 1983, our System never did allow for nationals living abroad permanently to return home just for one day or two days, just to vote. PAM made all this possible and took great advantage of the situation. PAM exploited the situation which the party created for its own selfish purposes. Just as before, Lee Moore pointed out in the Assembly all the opportunities for fraud, cheating, breaching of the Regulations, etc, etc. The PAMites ignored Lee Moore's wise and objective counsel.
 
  Nowadays, PAM is against allowing nationals to return home to vote as they have been doing since 1984. PAM now wants to restrict the scope that overseas nationals have been enjoying since 1984, by recommending that drastic and severe restrictions should be placed on this particular group of nationals.
 
  Can anyone tell me truly why PAM is refusing to participate in Electoral Reform, the Reform that PAM has been agitating to bring about since 1999? Was PAM honest and sincere then? Is PAM honest and sincere now?
 
  In 1999 PAM said that Electoral Reform is "an urgent national priority". From all appearances it would seem that for PAM, Electoral Reform is now neither "urgent" nor a "Priority". Why was PAM in 1983 so violently opposed to the idea of introducing Voter I. D. Cards?
 
  Why is PAM so anxious in 2007 to have Voter I. D Cards as part of our Electoral System? If Voter I. D. Cards was a bad idea in 1983, why isn’t it a bad idea in 2007? Does PAM believe that what is good for the goose is also good for the gander? I doubt it.
 
  It is obvious that the Democrat and its columnists have run out of ideas. They have no facts and they have no ideas. So they have to rely on telling lies, on ridicule, on abuse, on character assassination, on propaganda and on innuendoes. What a miserable and despicable lot of people.