Having chosen to make the disclosure of an alleged threat on his life public, even if delayed by one year, Prime Minister Patrick Manning now needs to make the information available to the police so that the threat to the life of the chief executive officer of the State can be investigated by them.
This threat should not be taken lightly and allowed to pass without the full security system of the State being put to work on the matter. Whether Prime Minister Manning is "not afraid of any man" is irrelevant. The fact must be that people who would contemplate such a crime against the constitutionally elected leader of the nation cannot be allowed to exist amongst us to plan further crimes against the country.
In the instance of the alleged attempt to separate the Prime Minister's convoy of vehicles, that is a well-known incident and the officer has been reported, investigated and dismissed from the service for inappropriate behaviour. There however was nothing in that finding which indicated anything sinister in the behaviour of the officer. There certainly was no evidence from the investigation to suggest that the officer in question was part of some clandestine plot to assassinate the Prime Minister; punctilious and silly perhaps, but no hint of the officer working with others to assassinate the Prime Minister.
The question therefore is why bring this matter up in a conversation that he was having with party supporters about assassination threats against the life of the Prime Minister? Next is Prime Minister Manning's cryptic assertion that it was fortunate that the assassination threat made against him was not reported then as there "would have been bloodshed."
Whose blood would have been shed and by whom? Prime Minister Manning has fallen into the habit of making assertions on a range of issues without giving details or logical explanation. This seems to suggest that as Prime Minister all he needs to do is to make a claim which should then be accepted without question. But having been in political office for close on 40 years, Mr Manning must know that that is not how a democracy works. Moreover, it is he who has been calling on the media to properly inform and educate our audiences on matters of the day. It certainly cannot be that Mr Manning would expect the media to simply report the story he has given without investigating such statements which involve the security of the nation.
So if the Prime Minister is to be taken seriously with this his latest claim that he has been targeted for assassination, then he has to make the report to the police, give all the information he has and allow CoP (Ag) Philbert James to set his officers to work to find the would-be assassins. If not, then there would be some who would accuse the Prime Minister of seeking a diversion to take the heat off his Government for bluntly refusing to establish a commission of enquiry into the events of July 1990, crime in the country and his recent fourth postponement of local government elections.
One of the continuing contentions about the July 1990 coup attempt was the claim that there were indications before hand that there was some form of clandestine activity going on behind the scenes. And that warnings were being ignored. The alleged threat could be another early warning signal which the State must investigate to completion.