Walter Rodney, Gregory Smith, and Pamela
By Parvati Persaud-Edwards
FEAR stalked the land. Freedom then was only a word found in the dictionary, and a concept cradled in the soul of revolutionaries. Police were enforcers rather than protectors, and the soldiers were terrorists holding the nation ransom to a despot.
Food was a luxury, basic items were banned and practically everyone, except for the bureaucrats – for whom nothing was restricted - became a criminal because everyone was forced to buy foodstuff on the black-market.
Housewives spent most of their days, sometimes with infants in arms, queuing up for a pound of butter, a loaf of bread, a pint of ‘kero’, or a roll of toilet tissue, being lashed to stay in line by mounted police. Babies’ milk was also banned.
Infrastructural and organisational systems had deteriorated to the point of almost complete dysfunction, so that rats were eating babies in the hospitals and the educational system became an abysmal failure as a consequence. Children were kept out of school to look after younger ones while the mothers joined food lines that stretched for blocks; or they were forced to fetch water from long distances because GUYWA, like GPL and other utility providers, was on the brink of collapse. It was during that period of ‘Empty Rice Pots’ that the culture of children selling cigarettes and sweets on the streets evolved.
It was a time when wages of Public Servants were frozen at $2,000.00 and, in order to keep jobs, Public Service employees were forced to march in sun and rain to glorify the Supreme Leader, to work for free on their weekends and holidays at Hope Estate, and to replace cane cutters as scabs.
It was a time of rigged elections, when patriots were killed defending ballot boxes and revolutionaries were killed defending the truth.
To raise a voice in criticism of the Supreme Leader or the administration courted death, jail on trumped-up charges, or terror tactics targeting one’s family members.
Infrastructure and souls were degraded and decayed and hopelessness held the land in a grip that wrested acceptance from a beaten people.
It was into such an ethos, such a dynamic of terror, that a brilliant young historian named Walter Rodney decided to join forces with revolutionaries who were courageously, at great risk and sacrifice, trying to unseat a monolithic monster, up to that time with no success.
At the time, it was perilous to hold meetings because thugs from the administration-sponsored, infamous House of Israel beat and terrorized those who participated or attended. They did not even stop at murder, and many paid the supreme price, including the gentle, peaceful photographer of the Catholic Standard, Fr Darke, who was run down and stabbed with the bayonet of a rifle in plain view of onlookers.
To misquote – It was the worse of times for this nation, but it was also the best of times, because courage blossomed in hearts like budding flowers. Spring of hope was in the air and patriots were prepared to lay down their lives – and often did, for a long-cherished dream of real freedom, which had not been conferred on this nation even after the grant of the instruments of Independence by Great Britain. Terror and fear were palpable, but so was determination.
I quote from a WPA Press Release dated 13th June 2006. “In l974, he (Walter Rodney) returned to Guyana to take up an appointment as Professor at the University of Guyana, but the Government rescinded the appointment. But Rodney remained in Guyana, joined the newly-formed political group, the WPA (Working People’s Alliance) and, between l974 and his assassination in l980, emerged as the leading figure in the resistance movement against the increasingly authoritarian PNC Government.”
In defense of Arnold Rampersaud, Rodney said: “We have had too much of the foolishness of race…I think external intervention was important in bringing the races against each other from the fifties, and particularly in the sixties. But I’m concerned with the present. If we made that mistake once, we cannot afford to be misled on that score today. No ordinary Afro-Guyanese, no ordinary Indo-Guyanese can afford to be misled by the myth of race. Time and again it has been our undoing...”
Walter Rodney’s voice resounded in the corridors of power, through the dynamic which, although not conceptually new, was being embraced and expounded by a charismatic young black leader; and people across the divides were listening and responding, to the chagrin and fury of the despots. Walter’s denouement of the administration, and his open challenge, won the admiration and respect of the working class, to the extent where the WPA was quickly evolving as a vibrant Third Force on the political landscape of this nation and providing a catalyst that propelled Guyanese out of apathetic hopelessness into a new era of optimism. Even those who did not join him liked and respected him, because his sincerity was like a beacon of light in the darkness of the prevailing times.
He was rocking the long-entrenched foundation on which the bastion of tyrannical dictatorship was built, and bridging the divides in the nation on which it thrived. The powers-that-be were not amused. This voice preaching anarchy had to be silenced.
An explosion at 8.00 p.m. on June 13, l980, rocked the nation and simultaneously brought an end to the life of Walter Rodney, along with the budding hope for a unified nation.
The plot involved betrayal so ugly that it paralleled the story of Judas. Army Sergeant Gregory Smith pretended friendship and loyalty to the WPA and Walter Rodney. He persuaded Rodney that he needed a walkie-talkie set to aid communication in his work, and that he (Smith) was in a position to provide one.
Rodney uplifted the set from the Russell Street apartment of Smith’s girlfriend, Gwendolyn Jones, unaware that a deadly explosive device, timed to detonate at 8.00 pm, had been installed inside of the receiver. Rodney was directed to park his vehicle at a distance that took him near to the Georgetown Prison and await Smith’s communication in order to test the effectiveness and range of the set.
This was an elaborate plot to blame Rodney’s assassination on misadventure, due to a failed attempt of his to bomb the Georgetown Prison. The counter-accusations of devastated WPA members, who knew the absolute impossibility of Rodney wanting to harm helpless prisoners, that Rodney had been assassinated, and that Sgt Gregory Smith had actualized the plot, brought denials from the administration that such a person ever existed. He had been spirited, together with Gwendolyn Jones and their children, out of the country by army personnel. Every trace of his existence had been obliterated and the then Government, and the army administration, maintained their contention that Gregory Smith never existed, and that he had never been a member of the GDF.
But one woman exposed this lie.
Pamela Beharry had shared the Russell Street apartment with Gwendolyn Jones, mother of two of Smith’s children, who was rebuilding her relationship with her former estranged lover, Smith, while her husband was abroad.
Beharry, who used to read the WPA pamphlets Smith brought when he visited Jones, had grown to admire the courage of young Rodney, not realizing that the radio set stored in a carton behind the sofa was destined to be the instrument of his death.
On many occasions, Smith and other army personnel often locked her out of the apartment for hours, forcing her to stay with a friend in Alberttown until they left.
On the evening after Rodney’s assassination, Beharry, who had heard that Smith was being implicated, was on her way to her friend’s house when she saw soldiers with drawn guns surrounding the house. She immediately ducked behind some bushes, crawled away, and hid under a bridge. The next morning, she telephoned her friend who worked at the Ministry of Health. Her friend was terrified and warned Pamela to hide because soldiers were looking for her.
Beharry knew that the administration was denying Smith’s existence and recognised the threat to her life, since she was the only civilian, apart from Gwendolyn Jones, who knew of Smith’s covert activities, the nature of which she was unaware prior to Rodney’s death.
Beharry still has nightmares from the days when she was a fugitive from Guyana’s army, hiding under cardboard on the streets, under bridges, behind bushes, because her relatives and friends, afraid for the safety of their families, refused to give her sanctuary in their homes, which were occasionally staked out by soldiers, so any guarantee of her safety was questionable.
Remembering a lawyer named Moses Bhagwan from the WPA pamphlets, Beharry fearfully made her way to his office. \There was a long line of people in his reception area so the secretary requested that she wait; but she scribbled a note to him, mentioning Rodney, and was granted immediate audience. When she recounted her experiences, Bhagwan took her to Miles Fitzpatrick.
Miles showed her a picture of Rodney, and she immediately recognised him as the man who had been given a radio set at the Russell Street apartment by Gregory Smith on June 13.
Beharry was secreted in the home of a religious order, and the WPA went on the offensive, forcing the government and the army to eventually admit to the existence of Smith, although they continued to deny complicity in his assassination.
Today, Beharry, a true heroine of the revolution, albeit by default, subsists on an income below $l0, 000 per month in a squalid apartment without electricity or running water. The tenement yard in which she lives is located in one of the most dangerous areas of Georgetown.
Gregory Smith was never brought to justice for his heinous crime, but justice was meted out in any case. Living all one’s life as a fugitive, with the sword of Damocles hanging over your head, scorned and reviled by all, losing a solid career with potential for a wonderful future, and being branded murderer of a national figure is no small punishment. Imprisonment within one’s soul is the worse imprisonment of all.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Burke & Corbin: petty Power-hungry PNC stooges at war
Letter: Mr Corbin's minions cannot intimidate me
Published on Saturday, April 5, 2008
Dear Sir:
Guyana's Opposition and PNCR leader, Mr. Robert Corbin, Friday directed his "PNCR North America" group to attack me personally for CGID's statement of fact that he has been "ineffective as opposition leader, and seems to lack a vision for the country." They did not address the substance of our contention but, instead, sought to reduce a discussion on verifiable determinations to an exercise in personal vilification. It is not my desire to descend with them into the cesspool of gutter politics to hurl filth, as it is beneath my dignity. People who are bankrupt and cannot compete in the arena of ideas and lack vision, do so best. I must note however, that I have never seen as much as a letter to the press, from this so-called "PNCR of North America" group, condemning the PPP government's racism and constitutional violations. I am therefore happy that they have fired up their engines to attack me. I hope that they can overcome their smarting and personal vendetta, and direct their misplaced fire and nascent enthusiasm to the condemnation of the myriad injustices that plague our beloved homeland. I am amused that Mr Corbin could mobilize his few supporters in North America to attack me but cannot mobilize ten people for a street march in Guyana. I am even further amused that he could not muster the courage to attack and mobilize against Head of the Presidential Secretariat in Guyana, Dr Roger Luncheon, who recently referred to him as a fool. He remained as quiet as a church mouse then but has now galvanized his obsequious minions to attack me. That notwithstanding, his Machiavellian politics cannot intimidate me. Their response is bereft of substance and is symptomatic of a hollow leadership. It's school-boyish, infantile platitudes are infradig. They claim that "Rickford Burke was eager to ingratiate himself to President Jagdeo during last year's (2007) Folk Festival in Brooklyn." Even if this were true, what has is to do with the price of cheese in Scotland or Mr Corbin being an incompetent leader? It is a desperate and pitiful stringing together of a clumsy lie, by an idle mind, to spawn a mendacious cocktail of vitriol. But it is cowardly and laughable. Their statement also foolishly claimed that I asked for a photo opportunity with Jagdeo at the Folk Festival; another blatant lie. I was at the event with a New York State Supreme Court Judge, a State Senator and an Assemblyman and was introducing them to the event organizers when Jagdeo came by and photographers asked for a group photo. In any event, even if I had asked for a photo of the President, what is its relevance to a discussion about Corbin's competence as opposition leader? This is an amateurish diversion. Corbin's so-called North America group also suggested that I emigrated from Guyana while he (Corbin) remained. How imbecilic can they be? This contention would have been slightly credible and less ridiculous and hypocritical, had Corbin not asked his supporters, who have themselves emigrated from Guyana, to make this charge. Furthermore, their attack on me for emigrating is an insult to all Guyanese immigrants in New York. If this is how Mr. Corbin truly feels about us, then why come to us for financial donations? Mr Corbin's group also asked, "If, indeed, Mr Burke is interested in the removal of the Jagdeo regime, as he so robustly proclaims, perhaps he should explain why he was so eager to ingratiate himself to President Jagdeo?" I don't know what this question is expected to achieve as I have never "ingratiated" myself to Jagdeo or attempted to (or intend to attempt) to remove his regime. Mr Corbin and his supporters seem confused. CGID is not the political opposition and is certainly not in the business of "removing regimes." If Mr Corbin intends to continue to hope that others will do his job for him, then he should look elsewhere. The removal of the "Jagdeo regime" might be his agenda but it is certainly not an expressed objective of ours. I hope that his so-called North America group can actually contribute his agenda. They need not worry about ours. As we have said before, we all criticize the PPP government for its ineptitude but the truth is that Corbin and the rest of the leadership of the political opposition are in lockstep with this paralysis of incompetence that permeates Guyana's governance and political culture. I have also argued that "Mr Corbin appears to be nonplussed, like a deaf man amidst a sonic boom, as the state collapses; unmoved by events and circumstances. Citizens are murdered everyday and the Police conducts no investigations. The Chief Magistrate has been removed from office for no legitimate reason, the government commits crimes against humanity; including torture and extra-judicial killing, people are executed by death squads with alarming frequency, there is massive corruption in government, including law enforcement and the judiciary, and the country is overrun by drug-lords, with full complicity of the government. Amidst all of this, all Mr Corbin's does is "talk" at a press conferences. Is this all he can do? I hold firm to the above views and make no apologies. I will however "talk half and lef half." Rickford Burke
Published on Saturday, April 5, 2008
Dear Sir:
Guyana's Opposition and PNCR leader, Mr. Robert Corbin, Friday directed his "PNCR North America" group to attack me personally for CGID's statement of fact that he has been "ineffective as opposition leader, and seems to lack a vision for the country." They did not address the substance of our contention but, instead, sought to reduce a discussion on verifiable determinations to an exercise in personal vilification. It is not my desire to descend with them into the cesspool of gutter politics to hurl filth, as it is beneath my dignity. People who are bankrupt and cannot compete in the arena of ideas and lack vision, do so best. I must note however, that I have never seen as much as a letter to the press, from this so-called "PNCR of North America" group, condemning the PPP government's racism and constitutional violations. I am therefore happy that they have fired up their engines to attack me. I hope that they can overcome their smarting and personal vendetta, and direct their misplaced fire and nascent enthusiasm to the condemnation of the myriad injustices that plague our beloved homeland. I am amused that Mr Corbin could mobilize his few supporters in North America to attack me but cannot mobilize ten people for a street march in Guyana. I am even further amused that he could not muster the courage to attack and mobilize against Head of the Presidential Secretariat in Guyana, Dr Roger Luncheon, who recently referred to him as a fool. He remained as quiet as a church mouse then but has now galvanized his obsequious minions to attack me. That notwithstanding, his Machiavellian politics cannot intimidate me. Their response is bereft of substance and is symptomatic of a hollow leadership. It's school-boyish, infantile platitudes are infradig. They claim that "Rickford Burke was eager to ingratiate himself to President Jagdeo during last year's (2007) Folk Festival in Brooklyn." Even if this were true, what has is to do with the price of cheese in Scotland or Mr Corbin being an incompetent leader? It is a desperate and pitiful stringing together of a clumsy lie, by an idle mind, to spawn a mendacious cocktail of vitriol. But it is cowardly and laughable. Their statement also foolishly claimed that I asked for a photo opportunity with Jagdeo at the Folk Festival; another blatant lie. I was at the event with a New York State Supreme Court Judge, a State Senator and an Assemblyman and was introducing them to the event organizers when Jagdeo came by and photographers asked for a group photo. In any event, even if I had asked for a photo of the President, what is its relevance to a discussion about Corbin's competence as opposition leader? This is an amateurish diversion. Corbin's so-called North America group also suggested that I emigrated from Guyana while he (Corbin) remained. How imbecilic can they be? This contention would have been slightly credible and less ridiculous and hypocritical, had Corbin not asked his supporters, who have themselves emigrated from Guyana, to make this charge. Furthermore, their attack on me for emigrating is an insult to all Guyanese immigrants in New York. If this is how Mr. Corbin truly feels about us, then why come to us for financial donations? Mr Corbin's group also asked, "If, indeed, Mr Burke is interested in the removal of the Jagdeo regime, as he so robustly proclaims, perhaps he should explain why he was so eager to ingratiate himself to President Jagdeo?" I don't know what this question is expected to achieve as I have never "ingratiated" myself to Jagdeo or attempted to (or intend to attempt) to remove his regime. Mr Corbin and his supporters seem confused. CGID is not the political opposition and is certainly not in the business of "removing regimes." If Mr Corbin intends to continue to hope that others will do his job for him, then he should look elsewhere. The removal of the "Jagdeo regime" might be his agenda but it is certainly not an expressed objective of ours. I hope that his so-called North America group can actually contribute his agenda. They need not worry about ours. As we have said before, we all criticize the PPP government for its ineptitude but the truth is that Corbin and the rest of the leadership of the political opposition are in lockstep with this paralysis of incompetence that permeates Guyana's governance and political culture. I have also argued that "Mr Corbin appears to be nonplussed, like a deaf man amidst a sonic boom, as the state collapses; unmoved by events and circumstances. Citizens are murdered everyday and the Police conducts no investigations. The Chief Magistrate has been removed from office for no legitimate reason, the government commits crimes against humanity; including torture and extra-judicial killing, people are executed by death squads with alarming frequency, there is massive corruption in government, including law enforcement and the judiciary, and the country is overrun by drug-lords, with full complicity of the government. Amidst all of this, all Mr Corbin's does is "talk" at a press conferences. Is this all he can do? I hold firm to the above views and make no apologies. I will however "talk half and lef half." Rickford Burke
Friday, April 4, 2008
Freddie - PNC whiner boy; AFC picking up PNCR’s “fire-rage”
Peeping Tom
UNCLE FREDDIE WRONG AGAIN!
Ow, Uncle Freddie, you aren’t tired of being wrong? Yuh wrong, but is a good thing that yuh not strong, because there is nothing more wrong than a man who is both wrong and strong.You ain’t shame that the educational psychologist listed nearly twenty grounds on which you are wrong? Ow, Uncle Freddie, yuh mean is bluff yuh did bluffing about the Oedipus Complex?Then, only yesterday Bisram wrote to correct you on a number of issues. He, too, says that you are wrong. His poll projections have, time and time again, been proven right; so tell me, Uncle Freddie, how come this man is so accurate yet you accuse him of being a pretender?Then there is the man who you say you will reply to his every letter. The man said that you were wrong about him and his geography. Is everybody saying that yuh wrong, Uncle Freddie. Parrot seh yuh wrong. Blame it on the Government seh you wrong; now Peeper gat to tell you yuh wrong again.Ow, Uncle Freddie, why yuh wrong so often? Is it because you are running out of criticisms of the Government? I know you don’t like the Government, but please try to be a little more accurate at times, so that you could enjoy some credibility. Give Jack he jacket. Give the Government some credit when credit is due. Stop being so one-sided! You becoming like a stuck record. From the time somebody open the newspaper and they see you write about the PPP, they can close the newspaper. They know that is sheer criticism yuh penning about the Government.Open yuh eyes and tek the blinkers off! How could you say that the PPP worse than Burnham? If they so bad, how come you doing so well? You forget the days when you used to have to fetch water fuh bathe? When you used to have to ketch bus to go to work? Now the economy improve and yuh living in skyscraper, driving fancy SUV, and even thinking about going on extended weekend trips to Berbice when the bridge complete.Ow, Uncle Freddie, how come you wrong again about the bridge? Dat is a beautiful bridge that is being assembled across the Berbice River. Which floating bridge is going to have aesthetics? What yuh want them fuh do, put some flower plants on the pontoons?Was the same thing with the stadium. Yuh jump up and criticize the stadium, even though dem boys seh yuh never ever been inside one. Give Bharrat some praise, nuh. The man build one of the best stadiums in the Caribbean. It is a showpiece and allows Guyana to host international cricket. Don’t bad mouth Bharrat all the time!Give, also, the Government some credit for standing up for principle. How is it you could have supported the Opposition walk out of Parliament? How is it that you blamed the Government for not supporting amendments that were clearly not agreed to by the larger stakeholder grouping? That grouping agreed to the establishment of long overdue constitutional commissions within three months; they also agreed to establish a standing committee on national security, along with other agreements which have to be done by Parliament. How then can you side with the Opposition when it was the Opposition that tried to have inserted into the motion a clause dealing with equitable access to the State-owned media? How could you be so wrong, Uncle Freddie?I want you to find one stakeholder outside of the Opposition Parliamentary party who will come forward and admit that, during the stakeholder forum, there was an agreement on access to the State-owned media. Let the other stakeholders come forward and indicate whether there was any such agreement. How, if there was consensus on that, did it not find its way into the Bourda Consensus? Tell me, Uncle Freddie! Admit you are wrong!Now, to crown off your wrongness, yuh complaining about street lights in Ithaca. How come yuh blaming the Government fuh that one? Street lights in villages are the responsibility of the NDCs, not the Government. But, then again, you would not know that, because you never grow up in a village.
The Parrot Speaks
AFC picking up PNCR’s “fire-rage”
The Parrot has noted the many similarities in behaviour between the AFC and the PNCR. One is tempted to believe that the similarities are not coincidental, since the last, and incidentally the first, Presidential candidate of the AFC, the Trot-man, was a former “big boy” in the PNCR. He represented Palm Tree jungle in Parliament for many years, challenged Uncle Bob in a leadership race, and refused to vacate his seat after deserting the Palm Tree prior to the 2006 elections. One can safely assume that, for any man who wants to “Trot” to the highest seat of a political organisation, he must possess certain qualities which would facilitate his success and occupation of the said seat. These qualities generally include, amongst others, ambition, experience vis-à-vis institutional memory, astuteness and the ability to denigrate and out-manoeuvre opponents. Given these requirements, it is again safe to conclude that the Trot-man possesses these qualities, but “quantitatively” less than Uncle Bob. This would explain his unsuccessful challenge to the Palm Tree throne. His knowledge of the PNCR’s modus operandi facilitates him not only securing (these traits help him to keep the RumJHATTan at second) his Antagonistically Furious Crown (AFC) in his current political palace in the “liming” street, but to steer his Affluently Few Comrades (AFC) in a direction he determines; a direction that is now evidently similar to Uncle Bob’s.This similar directional “steering” and the latest position of the Trot-man’s party can be construed as direct competition between himself and Uncle Bob on who can do best what both have in common; street protest. No, it wasn’t Uncle Bob who made the recent threat of street protest; it was the Trot-man’s party. The Parrot being so accustomed to the PNC calling for protest that, in reading, the letters AF were mistaken for PN in the articles which alluded to the AFC’s indication that street protests are not ruled out in relation to alleged lack of Parliamentary democracy. Basically, every person is known for certain qualities he/she possesses. In cases where an executive is hired or reassigned to manage an entity, one’s expectations of the entity’s subsequent performance are generally related to the skills of the person at the helm. Given the opportunity, persons are ecstatic to practice the skills they possess. The Trot-man’s street experience can be regarded as a skill he acquired during his time when he was a servant in the Palm Tree palace; and now, being the crown wearer of the AFC, he is eager to display it. Every Guyanese weary of the post-election protest in 1997 would recall the peace and tranquility that prevailed before and after the 2006 election. This exemplified the political maturity and the now democratic culture of the Guyanese people. Even Uncle Bob was commended for resisting the urge of post-election protest in 2006. The drought in protest action since is now being threatened by the contemplation of the Trot-man’s party to emulating Uncle Bob and his party’s engrained trait. The Parrot recalls that old people used to talk stories of when two female neighbours used to “buse” up each other during the day, and when the husbands come home, some used to “pick up” their wife’s “fire-rage” and “buse” up in the evening. It seems that the Trot-man’s party, AFC, is about to “pick up” Uncle Bob’s party “fire-rage” that was left dormant almost a year and a half ago. Squawk! Squawk!
UNCLE FREDDIE WRONG AGAIN!
Ow, Uncle Freddie, you aren’t tired of being wrong? Yuh wrong, but is a good thing that yuh not strong, because there is nothing more wrong than a man who is both wrong and strong.You ain’t shame that the educational psychologist listed nearly twenty grounds on which you are wrong? Ow, Uncle Freddie, yuh mean is bluff yuh did bluffing about the Oedipus Complex?Then, only yesterday Bisram wrote to correct you on a number of issues. He, too, says that you are wrong. His poll projections have, time and time again, been proven right; so tell me, Uncle Freddie, how come this man is so accurate yet you accuse him of being a pretender?Then there is the man who you say you will reply to his every letter. The man said that you were wrong about him and his geography. Is everybody saying that yuh wrong, Uncle Freddie. Parrot seh yuh wrong. Blame it on the Government seh you wrong; now Peeper gat to tell you yuh wrong again.Ow, Uncle Freddie, why yuh wrong so often? Is it because you are running out of criticisms of the Government? I know you don’t like the Government, but please try to be a little more accurate at times, so that you could enjoy some credibility. Give Jack he jacket. Give the Government some credit when credit is due. Stop being so one-sided! You becoming like a stuck record. From the time somebody open the newspaper and they see you write about the PPP, they can close the newspaper. They know that is sheer criticism yuh penning about the Government.Open yuh eyes and tek the blinkers off! How could you say that the PPP worse than Burnham? If they so bad, how come you doing so well? You forget the days when you used to have to fetch water fuh bathe? When you used to have to ketch bus to go to work? Now the economy improve and yuh living in skyscraper, driving fancy SUV, and even thinking about going on extended weekend trips to Berbice when the bridge complete.Ow, Uncle Freddie, how come you wrong again about the bridge? Dat is a beautiful bridge that is being assembled across the Berbice River. Which floating bridge is going to have aesthetics? What yuh want them fuh do, put some flower plants on the pontoons?Was the same thing with the stadium. Yuh jump up and criticize the stadium, even though dem boys seh yuh never ever been inside one. Give Bharrat some praise, nuh. The man build one of the best stadiums in the Caribbean. It is a showpiece and allows Guyana to host international cricket. Don’t bad mouth Bharrat all the time!Give, also, the Government some credit for standing up for principle. How is it you could have supported the Opposition walk out of Parliament? How is it that you blamed the Government for not supporting amendments that were clearly not agreed to by the larger stakeholder grouping? That grouping agreed to the establishment of long overdue constitutional commissions within three months; they also agreed to establish a standing committee on national security, along with other agreements which have to be done by Parliament. How then can you side with the Opposition when it was the Opposition that tried to have inserted into the motion a clause dealing with equitable access to the State-owned media? How could you be so wrong, Uncle Freddie?I want you to find one stakeholder outside of the Opposition Parliamentary party who will come forward and admit that, during the stakeholder forum, there was an agreement on access to the State-owned media. Let the other stakeholders come forward and indicate whether there was any such agreement. How, if there was consensus on that, did it not find its way into the Bourda Consensus? Tell me, Uncle Freddie! Admit you are wrong!Now, to crown off your wrongness, yuh complaining about street lights in Ithaca. How come yuh blaming the Government fuh that one? Street lights in villages are the responsibility of the NDCs, not the Government. But, then again, you would not know that, because you never grow up in a village.
The Parrot Speaks
AFC picking up PNCR’s “fire-rage”
The Parrot has noted the many similarities in behaviour between the AFC and the PNCR. One is tempted to believe that the similarities are not coincidental, since the last, and incidentally the first, Presidential candidate of the AFC, the Trot-man, was a former “big boy” in the PNCR. He represented Palm Tree jungle in Parliament for many years, challenged Uncle Bob in a leadership race, and refused to vacate his seat after deserting the Palm Tree prior to the 2006 elections. One can safely assume that, for any man who wants to “Trot” to the highest seat of a political organisation, he must possess certain qualities which would facilitate his success and occupation of the said seat. These qualities generally include, amongst others, ambition, experience vis-à-vis institutional memory, astuteness and the ability to denigrate and out-manoeuvre opponents. Given these requirements, it is again safe to conclude that the Trot-man possesses these qualities, but “quantitatively” less than Uncle Bob. This would explain his unsuccessful challenge to the Palm Tree throne. His knowledge of the PNCR’s modus operandi facilitates him not only securing (these traits help him to keep the RumJHATTan at second) his Antagonistically Furious Crown (AFC) in his current political palace in the “liming” street, but to steer his Affluently Few Comrades (AFC) in a direction he determines; a direction that is now evidently similar to Uncle Bob’s.This similar directional “steering” and the latest position of the Trot-man’s party can be construed as direct competition between himself and Uncle Bob on who can do best what both have in common; street protest. No, it wasn’t Uncle Bob who made the recent threat of street protest; it was the Trot-man’s party. The Parrot being so accustomed to the PNC calling for protest that, in reading, the letters AF were mistaken for PN in the articles which alluded to the AFC’s indication that street protests are not ruled out in relation to alleged lack of Parliamentary democracy. Basically, every person is known for certain qualities he/she possesses. In cases where an executive is hired or reassigned to manage an entity, one’s expectations of the entity’s subsequent performance are generally related to the skills of the person at the helm. Given the opportunity, persons are ecstatic to practice the skills they possess. The Trot-man’s street experience can be regarded as a skill he acquired during his time when he was a servant in the Palm Tree palace; and now, being the crown wearer of the AFC, he is eager to display it. Every Guyanese weary of the post-election protest in 1997 would recall the peace and tranquility that prevailed before and after the 2006 election. This exemplified the political maturity and the now democratic culture of the Guyanese people. Even Uncle Bob was commended for resisting the urge of post-election protest in 2006. The drought in protest action since is now being threatened by the contemplation of the Trot-man’s party to emulating Uncle Bob and his party’s engrained trait. The Parrot recalls that old people used to talk stories of when two female neighbours used to “buse” up each other during the day, and when the husbands come home, some used to “pick up” their wife’s “fire-rage” and “buse” up in the evening. It seems that the Trot-man’s party, AFC, is about to “pick up” Uncle Bob’s party “fire-rage” that was left dormant almost a year and a half ago. Squawk! Squawk!
AFC a middle-class party unable to attract any credible following
AFC should apologise to the stakeholders gathering
I have heard some quite amazing April 1, pranks in my lifetime but none that I heard in the past matched two stories that I heard this year. And of course they both occurred in Guyana.The first story was about a man who went into a police station to report that he had just been robbed of over two million dollars which he had withdrawn from the bank. Apparently, as the report went, the man, who is separated from his wife, was hoping that upon learning of his dilemma his wife would feel sorry for him and reunite. That man must be a risk-taker because I know of some women who would feel the very opposite if their paramours were to lose a large sum of money. They would not even think twice about dumping any man who has lost a large sum of money. So if that guy has a wife who feels sorry for him because he was robbed, he had better try to win back her love because she is indeed a kind-hearted woman.If the Peeper thought that this guy faking a robbery to win sympathy was the best April 1 day prank of this year, the Peeper was mistaken. It would seem as if the Alliance For Change was trying to outdo that fellow when it hosted a press conference and announced that there was no longer any parliamentary democracy in Guyana. The basis for this mind-boggling statement is because of the failure of the PPP to allow opposition amendments to a motion dealing with the Stakeholders Forum. The AFC is contending that the refusal of the government to support the amendments proposed to the motion constituted naked contempt for the parliamentary process and the stakeholders.I do not know how the AFC arrived at that position since the government was within its rights not to accommodate the amendments proposed. While there certainly could have been no harm in including the AFC's demand for mention of Article 13 in the resolved section of the motion, there were other things that the AFC sought to include that were not part of the consensus reached between the government and the stakeholders. Therefore, it was unethical and unprincipled for the AFC to have supported the inclusion of items on which there was no consensus.In fact, the AFC should be ashamed to have sought to have included in the motion reference to equitable access to the State media. There was no consensus reached on this point during the forum and therefore its inclusion in the parliamentary motion would have constituted a betrayal of the larger gathering.In fact, it is my view that those who sought to have the issue of equitable access to the State media inserted in the amendment when it was clear that this was not a specific agreement on which consensus was arrived at between all the stakeholders, should be censured by being suspended from any future meeting of the stakeholders.The AFC should therefore, against this background, be lecturing anyone about the lack of parliamentary democracy which in any event has a much different connotation than simply being inclusive.When we speak of parliamentary democracy, we refer to the right of the citizens of a country to freely elect parliamentary representatives of their choice. It is misuse of the concept to refer to the lack of inclusive politics within the Parliament as constituting a lack of parliamentary democracy. In fact, the very foundation of democracy within the Westminster model rests on the idea that the people freely elect their Parliament. If, however, the Alliance For Change feels that there is a lack of such democracy and feels that it has no other choice but to take to the streets, then so be it. I do not know who the AFC is going to get to support any public march that it has.The Alliance For Change is a middle class party that will be unable to attract any credible following for any march against parliamentary democracy, more especially as it exposed the unprincipled nature of the amendment that sought to have inserted a commitment to equitable access to the State media. The AFC should seriously consider apologising to the ruling party and to all stakeholders for its support of amendments that were not agreed to by the overall stakeholder grouping. And the stakeholders should break their silence and denounce this attempt to use the name of the grouping to push an item, no matter how laudable it is, over which no consensus was reached.
PPP remains a strong and vibrant force
Dear Editor,From the beginning there was profound hatred and jealousy for the PPP and it proliferated and dominated every realm of their psyche. The dedicated consistency to the most perverted and brazen form of propaganda against the PPP emanates from the depth of hatred and jealousy for the progressive strive the party continues to make in the absolute interests of all Guyanese.In the history of local politics, the PPP has proven to be the most qualified and competent organised force to deliver the goods and services to Guyanese across the ethnic, social, religious and political divide. As a third world developing country, Guyana’s performance record is commendable even in the face of the harsh realities and challenges, a lot of which are created by the dominance and influences of the developed world.Guyana’s management of its economy by successive PPP/C administrations, the reduction of the debt burden and provision of basic goods and services to its people could be referred to as miraculous undertakings given the inheritance of a bankrupt economy left by the PNC. The U.S. Government validates Guyana’s investment in its people through its Assistant Secretary of State, Thomas Shannon, who visited Guyana last week. Shannon at a Joint Press Conference with President Bharrat Jagdeo is quoted as saying, “What we have learnt over time is that for democracies to be successful, they must deliver the goods and benefits and services to the poor, the most vulnerable members of society and to do that they have to invest in their own people and we are seeing that here in Guyana.” He went on to state that Guyana’s accomplishment is indicative of the kind of advances it is making in the very important area of people investment. Those anti-PPP band-wagoners, critics of all sorts, in their absence of rationalised positions opt to fabricate untenable claims about the persistence of marginalisation and discrimination in our society. These claims are orchestrated falsehoods aimed at undermining the potential for increased support, especially among Afro-Guyanese. The PPP has maintained a steady majority in general elections because of the increasing support of Amerindians and Afro-Guyanese. If Region Four is any example to go by, bearing in mind it was the traditional stronghold of the PNC, then the one seat PNC gained over the PPP/C at 2006 Regional elections requires serious notation. Shaken by the reality of growing Afro-Guyanese population within the PPP, these critics utilising their celebrated art of deceit sought to relegate the Afro-Guyanese support in the PPP nomination day parade to a bought and paid for arrangement, an outright absurdity resemblance of an entrapped mind. I am sure it is similarly amusing to every other sane Guyanese that these PPP critics, in attempting to rationalise power sharing as a solution to the withdrawal of their propagandistic masquerading, in one breadth challenges the veracity, competence and intellect of the PPP/C administration. These critics hold an entrenched hatred for the PPP because its philosophy, principles and beliefs remain relevant to the Guyanese people, especially the poor and working class categories. The tenacity of the PPP is of unmatched character. The critics, many of whom have failed to undo the onslaught of injustices against Guyanese in the many years of the PNC dictatorial and oppressive regime, are in no moral authority to criticise the PPP for a superiorly far better job of governance. Many of the governance issues that affect efficient progression in Guyana today were inherited by the PNC. The rebuilding process was never intended to be an overnight task, certainly not in the state Guyana was left. As the only working class movement in Guyana, the PPP will continue amidst all the difficulties of inadequate financial and human resources, to earnestly strive to shape an environment in which every Guyanese can lead productive lives through the development of their full potential. What’s next critics?Kwame McCoy
I have heard some quite amazing April 1, pranks in my lifetime but none that I heard in the past matched two stories that I heard this year. And of course they both occurred in Guyana.The first story was about a man who went into a police station to report that he had just been robbed of over two million dollars which he had withdrawn from the bank. Apparently, as the report went, the man, who is separated from his wife, was hoping that upon learning of his dilemma his wife would feel sorry for him and reunite. That man must be a risk-taker because I know of some women who would feel the very opposite if their paramours were to lose a large sum of money. They would not even think twice about dumping any man who has lost a large sum of money. So if that guy has a wife who feels sorry for him because he was robbed, he had better try to win back her love because she is indeed a kind-hearted woman.If the Peeper thought that this guy faking a robbery to win sympathy was the best April 1 day prank of this year, the Peeper was mistaken. It would seem as if the Alliance For Change was trying to outdo that fellow when it hosted a press conference and announced that there was no longer any parliamentary democracy in Guyana. The basis for this mind-boggling statement is because of the failure of the PPP to allow opposition amendments to a motion dealing with the Stakeholders Forum. The AFC is contending that the refusal of the government to support the amendments proposed to the motion constituted naked contempt for the parliamentary process and the stakeholders.I do not know how the AFC arrived at that position since the government was within its rights not to accommodate the amendments proposed. While there certainly could have been no harm in including the AFC's demand for mention of Article 13 in the resolved section of the motion, there were other things that the AFC sought to include that were not part of the consensus reached between the government and the stakeholders. Therefore, it was unethical and unprincipled for the AFC to have supported the inclusion of items on which there was no consensus.In fact, the AFC should be ashamed to have sought to have included in the motion reference to equitable access to the State media. There was no consensus reached on this point during the forum and therefore its inclusion in the parliamentary motion would have constituted a betrayal of the larger gathering.In fact, it is my view that those who sought to have the issue of equitable access to the State media inserted in the amendment when it was clear that this was not a specific agreement on which consensus was arrived at between all the stakeholders, should be censured by being suspended from any future meeting of the stakeholders.The AFC should therefore, against this background, be lecturing anyone about the lack of parliamentary democracy which in any event has a much different connotation than simply being inclusive.When we speak of parliamentary democracy, we refer to the right of the citizens of a country to freely elect parliamentary representatives of their choice. It is misuse of the concept to refer to the lack of inclusive politics within the Parliament as constituting a lack of parliamentary democracy. In fact, the very foundation of democracy within the Westminster model rests on the idea that the people freely elect their Parliament. If, however, the Alliance For Change feels that there is a lack of such democracy and feels that it has no other choice but to take to the streets, then so be it. I do not know who the AFC is going to get to support any public march that it has.The Alliance For Change is a middle class party that will be unable to attract any credible following for any march against parliamentary democracy, more especially as it exposed the unprincipled nature of the amendment that sought to have inserted a commitment to equitable access to the State media. The AFC should seriously consider apologising to the ruling party and to all stakeholders for its support of amendments that were not agreed to by the overall stakeholder grouping. And the stakeholders should break their silence and denounce this attempt to use the name of the grouping to push an item, no matter how laudable it is, over which no consensus was reached.
PPP remains a strong and vibrant force
Dear Editor,From the beginning there was profound hatred and jealousy for the PPP and it proliferated and dominated every realm of their psyche. The dedicated consistency to the most perverted and brazen form of propaganda against the PPP emanates from the depth of hatred and jealousy for the progressive strive the party continues to make in the absolute interests of all Guyanese.In the history of local politics, the PPP has proven to be the most qualified and competent organised force to deliver the goods and services to Guyanese across the ethnic, social, religious and political divide. As a third world developing country, Guyana’s performance record is commendable even in the face of the harsh realities and challenges, a lot of which are created by the dominance and influences of the developed world.Guyana’s management of its economy by successive PPP/C administrations, the reduction of the debt burden and provision of basic goods and services to its people could be referred to as miraculous undertakings given the inheritance of a bankrupt economy left by the PNC. The U.S. Government validates Guyana’s investment in its people through its Assistant Secretary of State, Thomas Shannon, who visited Guyana last week. Shannon at a Joint Press Conference with President Bharrat Jagdeo is quoted as saying, “What we have learnt over time is that for democracies to be successful, they must deliver the goods and benefits and services to the poor, the most vulnerable members of society and to do that they have to invest in their own people and we are seeing that here in Guyana.” He went on to state that Guyana’s accomplishment is indicative of the kind of advances it is making in the very important area of people investment. Those anti-PPP band-wagoners, critics of all sorts, in their absence of rationalised positions opt to fabricate untenable claims about the persistence of marginalisation and discrimination in our society. These claims are orchestrated falsehoods aimed at undermining the potential for increased support, especially among Afro-Guyanese. The PPP has maintained a steady majority in general elections because of the increasing support of Amerindians and Afro-Guyanese. If Region Four is any example to go by, bearing in mind it was the traditional stronghold of the PNC, then the one seat PNC gained over the PPP/C at 2006 Regional elections requires serious notation. Shaken by the reality of growing Afro-Guyanese population within the PPP, these critics utilising their celebrated art of deceit sought to relegate the Afro-Guyanese support in the PPP nomination day parade to a bought and paid for arrangement, an outright absurdity resemblance of an entrapped mind. I am sure it is similarly amusing to every other sane Guyanese that these PPP critics, in attempting to rationalise power sharing as a solution to the withdrawal of their propagandistic masquerading, in one breadth challenges the veracity, competence and intellect of the PPP/C administration. These critics hold an entrenched hatred for the PPP because its philosophy, principles and beliefs remain relevant to the Guyanese people, especially the poor and working class categories. The tenacity of the PPP is of unmatched character. The critics, many of whom have failed to undo the onslaught of injustices against Guyanese in the many years of the PNC dictatorial and oppressive regime, are in no moral authority to criticise the PPP for a superiorly far better job of governance. Many of the governance issues that affect efficient progression in Guyana today were inherited by the PNC. The rebuilding process was never intended to be an overnight task, certainly not in the state Guyana was left. As the only working class movement in Guyana, the PPP will continue amidst all the difficulties of inadequate financial and human resources, to earnestly strive to shape an environment in which every Guyanese can lead productive lives through the development of their full potential. What’s next critics?Kwame McCoy
Guyana helps CARICOM with food
CARICOM team holds discussion with President-as plans for agriculture, food security forum forge ahead
With the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) moving ahead with its plans to address food security in the Region as a result of rising food prices and other issues affecting CARICOM states, a regional team led by CARICOM’s Secretary-General Edwin Carrington yesterday met with President Bharrat Jagdeo to finalise schedules for various fora on the critical issues.Following up on a meeting held in December, 2007 when CARICOM Heads met to discuss the problem of rising food prices and its effects on the region, the Secretary General pointed out that since President Jagdeo is the Head of Government responsible for agriculture and thus, the initiative in the region, today’s discussion was mainly to outline specific dates for a number of meetings which will be convenient to the Guyanese Leader. These will lead up to the major agriculture investment forum involving CARICOM Heads in June. By mid-month, it is expected that the Heads will host a press conference on the issue while a forum to be held in Guyana is being planned for next week. “One of the ways in dealing with the issue of food prices is enhancing the supply, increasing the supply. In fact, there are two aspects, not only food prices, but even food availability. We have to produce it, and Guyana is not only fortunate to have the President leading but you (Guyanese) have a country with one of the inputs necessary for food production – land - something which is not much in abundance in a number of the CARICOM countries”, the Secretary-General posited.He noted that Suriname and Belize also have an advantage in this area. “These are countries in CARICOM that have a large capacity in terms of land and I expect that a significant amount of any increase of the Region’s agriculture will take place right here in Guyana,” he said. As food prices continue to soar in CARICOM and other countries as a result of the rising cost of fuel due to increased demand and a switch in crops among other occurrences, Governments have been putting interim measures in place to cushion the effects. Guyana recently announced a zero-percent excise tax on diesel, in response to the March increase in fuel prices. Oil is now priced at US$110 per barrel. Government also, earlier this year, zero-rated additional food items which once attracted Value Added Tax (VAT). Meanwhile, a number of commodities on the international market have been continuing to increase including milk, cheese and wheat-flour. Last week, The Ministry of Agriculture, in its efforts to promote food security in Guyana, launched a ‘grow more’ campaign to encourage citizens to produce more food locally.
With the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) moving ahead with its plans to address food security in the Region as a result of rising food prices and other issues affecting CARICOM states, a regional team led by CARICOM’s Secretary-General Edwin Carrington yesterday met with President Bharrat Jagdeo to finalise schedules for various fora on the critical issues.Following up on a meeting held in December, 2007 when CARICOM Heads met to discuss the problem of rising food prices and its effects on the region, the Secretary General pointed out that since President Jagdeo is the Head of Government responsible for agriculture and thus, the initiative in the region, today’s discussion was mainly to outline specific dates for a number of meetings which will be convenient to the Guyanese Leader. These will lead up to the major agriculture investment forum involving CARICOM Heads in June. By mid-month, it is expected that the Heads will host a press conference on the issue while a forum to be held in Guyana is being planned for next week. “One of the ways in dealing with the issue of food prices is enhancing the supply, increasing the supply. In fact, there are two aspects, not only food prices, but even food availability. We have to produce it, and Guyana is not only fortunate to have the President leading but you (Guyanese) have a country with one of the inputs necessary for food production – land - something which is not much in abundance in a number of the CARICOM countries”, the Secretary-General posited.He noted that Suriname and Belize also have an advantage in this area. “These are countries in CARICOM that have a large capacity in terms of land and I expect that a significant amount of any increase of the Region’s agriculture will take place right here in Guyana,” he said. As food prices continue to soar in CARICOM and other countries as a result of the rising cost of fuel due to increased demand and a switch in crops among other occurrences, Governments have been putting interim measures in place to cushion the effects. Guyana recently announced a zero-percent excise tax on diesel, in response to the March increase in fuel prices. Oil is now priced at US$110 per barrel. Government also, earlier this year, zero-rated additional food items which once attracted Value Added Tax (VAT). Meanwhile, a number of commodities on the international market have been continuing to increase including milk, cheese and wheat-flour. Last week, The Ministry of Agriculture, in its efforts to promote food security in Guyana, launched a ‘grow more’ campaign to encourage citizens to produce more food locally.
Army Helicopters for Guyana army
Army helicopter arrives
The Government of Guyana has delivered on its promise to enhance the work of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF) with the arrival of one of the two Bell 206 helicopters that it had committed to purchasing to aid in crime fight. The helicopter which is outfitted with spotlights arrived yesterday from Costa Rica and is stationed at the GDF Air Corps, Timehri.Chief of Staff of the GDF Commodore Gary Best said the helicopter will begin air surveillance from tomorrow.Subsequent to the Lusignan massacre, President Bharrat Jagdeo had announced that government will be purchasing two helicopters to improve the army’s air patrols which will aid in the fight against transnational crimes and serve as a deterrent to the establishment of illegal airstrips. The other helicopter is expected to arrive from the United States.In this year’s budget, $900M of the $13.7B for the security sector was allocated for the purchase of the helicopters and other equipment and gear for the Joint Services. Following the Lusignan and Bartica massacres which left 23 persons dead, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (T&T) loaned Guyana a helicopter to render assistance in the pursuit of criminal gangs which have been carrying out ruthless killings and robberies.The administration has made several interventions to improve the work of the GDF including in the area of training. Government has made available in this year’s budget $63M for training of GDF ranks and officers. Last year $46.19M was spent in this area.
The Government of Guyana has delivered on its promise to enhance the work of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF) with the arrival of one of the two Bell 206 helicopters that it had committed to purchasing to aid in crime fight. The helicopter which is outfitted with spotlights arrived yesterday from Costa Rica and is stationed at the GDF Air Corps, Timehri.Chief of Staff of the GDF Commodore Gary Best said the helicopter will begin air surveillance from tomorrow.Subsequent to the Lusignan massacre, President Bharrat Jagdeo had announced that government will be purchasing two helicopters to improve the army’s air patrols which will aid in the fight against transnational crimes and serve as a deterrent to the establishment of illegal airstrips. The other helicopter is expected to arrive from the United States.In this year’s budget, $900M of the $13.7B for the security sector was allocated for the purchase of the helicopters and other equipment and gear for the Joint Services. Following the Lusignan and Bartica massacres which left 23 persons dead, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (T&T) loaned Guyana a helicopter to render assistance in the pursuit of criminal gangs which have been carrying out ruthless killings and robberies.The administration has made several interventions to improve the work of the GDF including in the area of training. Government has made available in this year’s budget $63M for training of GDF ranks and officers. Last year $46.19M was spent in this area.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
PPP remains a strong and vibrant force
PPP remains a strong and vibrant force
FROM the beginning there was profound hatred and jealousy for the PPP and it proliferated and dominated every realm of their psyche. The dedicated consistency to the most perverted and brazen form of propaganda against the PPP emanates from the depth of hatred and jealousy for the progressive strive the party continues to make in the absolute interests of all Guyanese.
In the history of local politics, the PPP has proven to be the most qualified and competent organized force to deliver the goods and services to Guyanese across, the ethnic, social, religious and political divide. As a Third World developing country Guyana’s performance record is commendable even in the face of the harsh realities and challenges a lot of which are created by the dominance and influences of the developed world.
Guyana’s management of its economy by successive PPPC administrations, the reduction of the debt burden and provision of basic goods and services to its people could be referred to as miraculous undertakings given the inheritance of a bankrupt economy left by the PNC.
The U.S. Government validates Guyana’s investment in its people through its Assistant Secretary of State, Thomas Shannon who visited Guyana last week. Shannon at a Joint Press Conference with President Bharrat Jagdeo is quoted as saying, “What we have learnt over time is that for democracies to be successful, they must deliver the goods and benefits and services to the poor, the most vulnerable members of society and to do that they have to invest in their own people and we are seeing that here in Guyana.’’ He went on to state that Guyana’s accomplishment is indicative of the kind of advances it is making in the very important area of people investment.
Those anti-PPP bandwagoners, critics of all sorts in their absence of rationalized positions opt to fabricate untenable claims about the persistence of marginalization and discrimination in our society. These claims are orchestrated falsehoods aimed at undermining the potential for increased support, especially among Afro-Guyanese. The PPP has maintained a steady majority in general elections because of the increasing support of Amerindians and Afro-Guyanese. If Region 4 is any example to go by, bearing in mind it was the traditional stronghold of the PNC, then the one seat PNC gained over the PPPC at 2006 Regional elections requires serious notation.
Shaken by the reality of growing Afro-Guyanese population within the PPP, these critics utilizing their celebrated art of deceit sought to relegate the Afro-Guyanese support in the PPP nomination day parade to a bought and paid for arrangement, an outright absurdity resemblance of an entrapped mind.
I am sure it is similarly amusing to every other sane Guyanese that these PPP critics in attempting to rationalize power sharing as a solution to the withdrawal of their propagandistic masquerading, in one breadth challenges the veracity, competence and intellect of the PPP/C administration.
These critics hold an entrenched hatred for the PPP because its philosophy, principles and beliefs remain relevant to the Guyanese people, especially the poor and working class categories.
The tenacity of the PPP is of unmatched character. The critics many of whom have failed to undo the onslaught of injustices against Guyanese in the many years of the PNC dictatorial and oppressive regime are in no moral authority to criticize the PPP for a superiorly far better job of governance. Many of the governance issues that affect efficient progression in Guyana today were inherited by the PNC. The rebuilding process was never intended to be an overnight task, certainly not in the state Guyana was left.
As the only working class movement in Guyana, the PPP will continue amidst all the difficulties of inadequate financial and human resources, to earnestly strive to shape an environment in which every Guyanese can lead productive lives through the development of their full potential. What’s next critics? KWAME MCKOY
FROM the beginning there was profound hatred and jealousy for the PPP and it proliferated and dominated every realm of their psyche. The dedicated consistency to the most perverted and brazen form of propaganda against the PPP emanates from the depth of hatred and jealousy for the progressive strive the party continues to make in the absolute interests of all Guyanese.
In the history of local politics, the PPP has proven to be the most qualified and competent organized force to deliver the goods and services to Guyanese across, the ethnic, social, religious and political divide. As a Third World developing country Guyana’s performance record is commendable even in the face of the harsh realities and challenges a lot of which are created by the dominance and influences of the developed world.
Guyana’s management of its economy by successive PPPC administrations, the reduction of the debt burden and provision of basic goods and services to its people could be referred to as miraculous undertakings given the inheritance of a bankrupt economy left by the PNC.
The U.S. Government validates Guyana’s investment in its people through its Assistant Secretary of State, Thomas Shannon who visited Guyana last week. Shannon at a Joint Press Conference with President Bharrat Jagdeo is quoted as saying, “What we have learnt over time is that for democracies to be successful, they must deliver the goods and benefits and services to the poor, the most vulnerable members of society and to do that they have to invest in their own people and we are seeing that here in Guyana.’’ He went on to state that Guyana’s accomplishment is indicative of the kind of advances it is making in the very important area of people investment.
Those anti-PPP bandwagoners, critics of all sorts in their absence of rationalized positions opt to fabricate untenable claims about the persistence of marginalization and discrimination in our society. These claims are orchestrated falsehoods aimed at undermining the potential for increased support, especially among Afro-Guyanese. The PPP has maintained a steady majority in general elections because of the increasing support of Amerindians and Afro-Guyanese. If Region 4 is any example to go by, bearing in mind it was the traditional stronghold of the PNC, then the one seat PNC gained over the PPPC at 2006 Regional elections requires serious notation.
Shaken by the reality of growing Afro-Guyanese population within the PPP, these critics utilizing their celebrated art of deceit sought to relegate the Afro-Guyanese support in the PPP nomination day parade to a bought and paid for arrangement, an outright absurdity resemblance of an entrapped mind.
I am sure it is similarly amusing to every other sane Guyanese that these PPP critics in attempting to rationalize power sharing as a solution to the withdrawal of their propagandistic masquerading, in one breadth challenges the veracity, competence and intellect of the PPP/C administration.
These critics hold an entrenched hatred for the PPP because its philosophy, principles and beliefs remain relevant to the Guyanese people, especially the poor and working class categories.
The tenacity of the PPP is of unmatched character. The critics many of whom have failed to undo the onslaught of injustices against Guyanese in the many years of the PNC dictatorial and oppressive regime are in no moral authority to criticize the PPP for a superiorly far better job of governance. Many of the governance issues that affect efficient progression in Guyana today were inherited by the PNC. The rebuilding process was never intended to be an overnight task, certainly not in the state Guyana was left.
As the only working class movement in Guyana, the PPP will continue amidst all the difficulties of inadequate financial and human resources, to earnestly strive to shape an environment in which every Guyanese can lead productive lives through the development of their full potential. What’s next critics? KWAME MCKOY
Where was Caricom in the Burnham years?
Mitchell is a hypocrite. What redress he wants?
Just feeding the fires of racism, all the Caricom bigots.
Where was Caricom in the Burnham years?
April 2, 2008
Dear Editor,I was so disturbed reading your report of Sir James Mitchell’s lecture headlined “Racial tensions here cry out for redress “. Was he reading a PNCR lecture? Where was Caricom during 28 yrs of PNC rigging the elections, jailing people for speaking out, assassination of Dr Rodney, dominance of government jobs and so on.
The fact that he can come to Guyana and speak freely is a change! He needs to let the PNCR know that they need to work with the government to solve this problem.
Enjoy your stay Sir.
Yours faithfully,Ravindra Diadat
Just feeding the fires of racism, all the Caricom bigots.
Where was Caricom in the Burnham years?
April 2, 2008
Dear Editor,I was so disturbed reading your report of Sir James Mitchell’s lecture headlined “Racial tensions here cry out for redress “. Was he reading a PNCR lecture? Where was Caricom during 28 yrs of PNC rigging the elections, jailing people for speaking out, assassination of Dr Rodney, dominance of government jobs and so on.
The fact that he can come to Guyana and speak freely is a change! He needs to let the PNCR know that they need to work with the government to solve this problem.
Enjoy your stay Sir.
Yours faithfully,Ravindra Diadat
Friday, March 28, 2008
Hinckson's total fabrication and blatant lie; AFC joins PNCR in destabilization tactics
President Jagdeo slams Hinckson's blatant lie and total fabrication
AFC (PNCR junior) joins PNCR in destabilization campaign
"....Not a rumour, but a report from a reliable source that the PNC/R is harbouring thoughts of closing down the country, a belief that the late Desmond Hoyte once promoted. This time around, it was announced at a recent public meeting held at the venue under the popular cork tree in the area of the original Laing Avenue Flats. Clousseau can only listen and will be making mental notes in the event that future use of some help in determining the veracity of whatever emerges from the current criminal activities...."
"....On the matter of negotiation with criminals, Jagdeo said, "any person who could watch an innocent child sleeping and kill [him or her], won't listen to reason."
Meanwhile, two days after the Bartica massacre, Jagdeo had visited the area after cutting short a visit to New York. He said the two killings were committed by the same group and the only way to "end this" would be to pursue the killers and find them "since you can't reason with people who commit these types of crimes". ..."
OP slams Hinckson’s mediation offer claim as ‘total fabrication’, ‘blatant lie’
THE Office of the President yesterday vehemently denied as a ‘total fabrication’ and a ‘blatant lie’ , the claim circulated yesterday by sedition accused Oliver Hinckson that a mediation offer he made last February 1 was discussed with a representative of President Jagdeo.
In a statement, distributed at Court by Defence Counsel Nigel Hughes, Hinckson alleged that, after the press conference hosted by Mayor Hamilton Green on February 1, the Head of State sent a high ranking Member of Parliament (MP) to meet with him.
Hinckson said the purpose was to engage him specifically on his proposal and the trusted emissary, who is a member of the Central Executive of the ruling political party, met with him at a prominent social club for two and a half hours.
The statement also claimed the two had extensive discussions on issues which arose out of the mediation offer and, at the conclusion of their meeting, the President’s representative assured Hinckson that he would contact him, shortly, on what had been discussed.
The statement said the subsequent preferment of charges against Hinckson is an act of gross political vindictiveness.
But the Office of the President, in a prompt response, said the statement circulated by Hinckson is a ‘total fabrication’.
“President Jagdeo wishes to advise that the claim in the (Hinckson) statement is a total fabrication and a blatant lie,” the OP said.
“At no point in time has the President dispatched any emissary and/or made arrangement for any engagement whatsoever with the sedition accused, Mr. Oliver Hinckson,” the Office of the President declared
“It is the President’s contention that the statement is clearly intended to mislead the public and create confusion about the President’s rejection of talks with criminals,” OP contended.
Opposition boycott of National Stakeholders Motion ill-timed- Minister Rohee -
Gov’t has no power to change outcomes of consensus THE refusal of the Parliamentary Opposition parties yesterday in the National Assembly to engage in discussion on government’s Motion on the National Stakeholders Meeting has been described as ‘most unfortunate’.
The boycott by the Opposition was done on the basis that the Motion was intended mainly for political grandstanding by the government and refusal to make certain amendments to the Motion.
On the other hand, the administration maintained that the amendments which the Opposition was seeking were out of the administration’s control since it was not agreed to by the stakeholders involved.
Advisor on Governance at the Office of the President and People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Member of Parliament Ms. Gail Teixeira, outside of the House, explained that it would be an act of bad faith if the government had gone in that direction.
“We were told yesterday that they had a combined Opposition amendment. We looked at it and we advised them that they were adding in things that we had not reached a national consensus on at the national stakeholders and therefore, we should take a principled decision that if the stakeholders agreed to these six things we should replicate those faithfully.”
She further explained that, “We (government) have no authority to add on to the Clauses, issues that we had not reached consensus on, nor were they the primary thrust of the discussions of national stakeholders.”
The Opposition was seeking for amendments to be made to include Article 13 of the Constitution which deals with inclusiveness and they also wanted to include the need for equitable access by Parliamentary parties to the state media.
“…the AFC and Mr. Corbin raised the issue of access to the state media. However, in the five meetings this was not the number one issue nor when we drafted the agreement. Therefore, the government took a principled position that we could not do a disservice to the stakeholders and we had no authority to speak on behalf of all 40 of them to change what were the issues or add to what were the issues agreed to by the 40 organisations,” Teixeira argued.
The ‘be it resolved clause’ of the government motion which was put forward by Prime Minister Samuel Hinds, was sought for the National Assembly to take note of the engagements of the National Stakeholders meeting and accept the output as reflecting national consensus on the agreed upon actions.
The ‘further resolved’ clause sought for the House to accept the national consensus arrived at during those meetings with the President and what the stakeholders undertook to provide its (Parliament) fullest support and to assign its highest priority in implementing those commitments that called for action by Parliamentary bodies.
The Opposition parties were in receipt of the Motion since March 17.
Meanwhile, Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee, during his presentation, made the point that the Opposition parties were trying to achieve what they could not have during the National Stakeholders meeting, through the Parliament. This, he said, is “sad” since matters on security should not be used for political gains.
“I do not want to speculate the reason for it (boycott) but it is most unfortunate that the opposition benches would seek to use three factors, one of which is that what they did not achieve in the negotiations they try to bring it here to achieve it…These are flimsy grounds,” Minister Rohee said.
The Home Affairs Minister further stated that the document does not belong to the Parliamentarians so it would be unfair for them to make whatever decisions they choose.
“The document does not belong to us only in this Parliament. Those decisions that were taken belong to others who do not sit in this Honourable House and therefore, if that process belongs to a much larger grouping of people, one will obviously have to consult with those people.”
The administration, through President Bharrat Jagdeo, began discussions with Parliamentary Political Parties and civil society following two shocking massacres at Lusignan on the East Coast Demerara and Bartica in Region Seven, which are believed to have been perpetrated by criminal gangs.
The outcome of the meetings which involved a number of recommendations by the stakeholders included the establishment of a new Parliamentary Standing Sectoral Committee on national security, with Ministerial representation and the appointments of the six (6) Constitutional Commissions within 90 days.
Attorney-at-Law Nandlall clears air on meeting with Hinckson- has no authority to make presentation on behalf of President
ATTORNEY-at-Law Anil Nandlall yesterday clarified what he called misleading information being peddled by ex-soldier, Oliver Hinckson, in relation to a meeting between the two gentlemen.
“I want to say categorically that I have never met with Mr. Hinckson for and behalf of the President or for and behalf of the PPP or the Government of Guyana. I have no authority to do so and I never met with him as an agent of any of those entities and or persons whom I name above.”
A statement purportedly signed by Hinckson was circulated yesterday to the media indicating that President Bharrat Jagdeo made arrangements for a top level People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) political functionary to meet and discuss matters related to Hinckson’s proposal for mediation.
Nandalall pointed out that even if he was approached by Hinckson to represent him, he will not.
“I met with him in my capacity as a private Attorney-at-Law in practice and we had certain discussions with which the ethics of my profession prevent me from disclosing…I have not been consulted and I have not been retained on those matters and I will not be appearing for him even if he attempts to retain me,” he said.
AFC (PNCR junior) joins PNCR in destabilization campaign
"....Not a rumour, but a report from a reliable source that the PNC/R is harbouring thoughts of closing down the country, a belief that the late Desmond Hoyte once promoted. This time around, it was announced at a recent public meeting held at the venue under the popular cork tree in the area of the original Laing Avenue Flats. Clousseau can only listen and will be making mental notes in the event that future use of some help in determining the veracity of whatever emerges from the current criminal activities...."
"....On the matter of negotiation with criminals, Jagdeo said, "any person who could watch an innocent child sleeping and kill [him or her], won't listen to reason."
Meanwhile, two days after the Bartica massacre, Jagdeo had visited the area after cutting short a visit to New York. He said the two killings were committed by the same group and the only way to "end this" would be to pursue the killers and find them "since you can't reason with people who commit these types of crimes". ..."
OP slams Hinckson’s mediation offer claim as ‘total fabrication’, ‘blatant lie’
THE Office of the President yesterday vehemently denied as a ‘total fabrication’ and a ‘blatant lie’ , the claim circulated yesterday by sedition accused Oliver Hinckson that a mediation offer he made last February 1 was discussed with a representative of President Jagdeo.
In a statement, distributed at Court by Defence Counsel Nigel Hughes, Hinckson alleged that, after the press conference hosted by Mayor Hamilton Green on February 1, the Head of State sent a high ranking Member of Parliament (MP) to meet with him.
Hinckson said the purpose was to engage him specifically on his proposal and the trusted emissary, who is a member of the Central Executive of the ruling political party, met with him at a prominent social club for two and a half hours.
The statement also claimed the two had extensive discussions on issues which arose out of the mediation offer and, at the conclusion of their meeting, the President’s representative assured Hinckson that he would contact him, shortly, on what had been discussed.
The statement said the subsequent preferment of charges against Hinckson is an act of gross political vindictiveness.
But the Office of the President, in a prompt response, said the statement circulated by Hinckson is a ‘total fabrication’.
“President Jagdeo wishes to advise that the claim in the (Hinckson) statement is a total fabrication and a blatant lie,” the OP said.
“At no point in time has the President dispatched any emissary and/or made arrangement for any engagement whatsoever with the sedition accused, Mr. Oliver Hinckson,” the Office of the President declared
“It is the President’s contention that the statement is clearly intended to mislead the public and create confusion about the President’s rejection of talks with criminals,” OP contended.
Opposition boycott of National Stakeholders Motion ill-timed- Minister Rohee -
Gov’t has no power to change outcomes of consensus THE refusal of the Parliamentary Opposition parties yesterday in the National Assembly to engage in discussion on government’s Motion on the National Stakeholders Meeting has been described as ‘most unfortunate’.
The boycott by the Opposition was done on the basis that the Motion was intended mainly for political grandstanding by the government and refusal to make certain amendments to the Motion.
On the other hand, the administration maintained that the amendments which the Opposition was seeking were out of the administration’s control since it was not agreed to by the stakeholders involved.
Advisor on Governance at the Office of the President and People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Member of Parliament Ms. Gail Teixeira, outside of the House, explained that it would be an act of bad faith if the government had gone in that direction.
“We were told yesterday that they had a combined Opposition amendment. We looked at it and we advised them that they were adding in things that we had not reached a national consensus on at the national stakeholders and therefore, we should take a principled decision that if the stakeholders agreed to these six things we should replicate those faithfully.”
She further explained that, “We (government) have no authority to add on to the Clauses, issues that we had not reached consensus on, nor were they the primary thrust of the discussions of national stakeholders.”
The Opposition was seeking for amendments to be made to include Article 13 of the Constitution which deals with inclusiveness and they also wanted to include the need for equitable access by Parliamentary parties to the state media.
“…the AFC and Mr. Corbin raised the issue of access to the state media. However, in the five meetings this was not the number one issue nor when we drafted the agreement. Therefore, the government took a principled position that we could not do a disservice to the stakeholders and we had no authority to speak on behalf of all 40 of them to change what were the issues or add to what were the issues agreed to by the 40 organisations,” Teixeira argued.
The ‘be it resolved clause’ of the government motion which was put forward by Prime Minister Samuel Hinds, was sought for the National Assembly to take note of the engagements of the National Stakeholders meeting and accept the output as reflecting national consensus on the agreed upon actions.
The ‘further resolved’ clause sought for the House to accept the national consensus arrived at during those meetings with the President and what the stakeholders undertook to provide its (Parliament) fullest support and to assign its highest priority in implementing those commitments that called for action by Parliamentary bodies.
The Opposition parties were in receipt of the Motion since March 17.
Meanwhile, Minister of Home Affairs Clement Rohee, during his presentation, made the point that the Opposition parties were trying to achieve what they could not have during the National Stakeholders meeting, through the Parliament. This, he said, is “sad” since matters on security should not be used for political gains.
“I do not want to speculate the reason for it (boycott) but it is most unfortunate that the opposition benches would seek to use three factors, one of which is that what they did not achieve in the negotiations they try to bring it here to achieve it…These are flimsy grounds,” Minister Rohee said.
The Home Affairs Minister further stated that the document does not belong to the Parliamentarians so it would be unfair for them to make whatever decisions they choose.
“The document does not belong to us only in this Parliament. Those decisions that were taken belong to others who do not sit in this Honourable House and therefore, if that process belongs to a much larger grouping of people, one will obviously have to consult with those people.”
The administration, through President Bharrat Jagdeo, began discussions with Parliamentary Political Parties and civil society following two shocking massacres at Lusignan on the East Coast Demerara and Bartica in Region Seven, which are believed to have been perpetrated by criminal gangs.
The outcome of the meetings which involved a number of recommendations by the stakeholders included the establishment of a new Parliamentary Standing Sectoral Committee on national security, with Ministerial representation and the appointments of the six (6) Constitutional Commissions within 90 days.
Attorney-at-Law Nandlall clears air on meeting with Hinckson- has no authority to make presentation on behalf of President
ATTORNEY-at-Law Anil Nandlall yesterday clarified what he called misleading information being peddled by ex-soldier, Oliver Hinckson, in relation to a meeting between the two gentlemen.
“I want to say categorically that I have never met with Mr. Hinckson for and behalf of the President or for and behalf of the PPP or the Government of Guyana. I have no authority to do so and I never met with him as an agent of any of those entities and or persons whom I name above.”
A statement purportedly signed by Hinckson was circulated yesterday to the media indicating that President Bharrat Jagdeo made arrangements for a top level People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) political functionary to meet and discuss matters related to Hinckson’s proposal for mediation.
Nandalall pointed out that even if he was approached by Hinckson to represent him, he will not.
“I met with him in my capacity as a private Attorney-at-Law in practice and we had certain discussions with which the ethics of my profession prevent me from disclosing…I have not been consulted and I have not been retained on those matters and I will not be appearing for him even if he attempts to retain me,” he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)