Persaud, Maxwell were wrong
I would like to respond to two rebuttals published on Monday, July 30, 2012 in response to my article published in Kaieteur News Sunday’s edition.
Mr. Mike Persaud, I am sure, has read many of my previous articles and should know that I do not hold a brief for any political party be it government or opposition, so there is no need for me to defend anyone as Mr. Persaud suggests- I write the facts as I see them.
Unlike Mr. Persaud, I am not going to deal in conjecture obeah or “tea bags” to determine who gave the order; who is responsible or whether the actions of the police were justified, or who should be fired.
I suggested that an impartial Commission of Inquiry should determine that. If the Commission finds that the threat level did not necessitate the force used by the police those culpable will be subject to prosecution.
I still contend that the deaths of the young men should not be used as an excuse to burn, loot, rob and extort money. I wish Mike had addressed the core issues of my article. Was the shooting justified? Should the rest of Guyana electricity consumers continue to subsidize Linden? Should the lawlessness be allowed to continue unabated? Should politicians capitalize on the death of those young men to further their own political agenda?
Those are the issues I would have liked Mike and Mr. Maxwell to respond to. And yes, Mike, if three canecutters were shot by the police, I would make the same argument for an impartial Commission of Inquiry. And as you know sugar workers were, in the past, shot by the police.
Mr. Maxwell is a frequent letter writer, and I would have thought that by now he would have developed the art of rebuttal.
Sadly, Mr. Maxwell wrote a ten paragraph diatribe about the ills of the PPP and little to do with the core discussion in my article. He has proven my point that people are using the deaths at Linden to further their own agenda.
I will not engage in any intellectual response to Mr. Maxwell as it may be difficult for him to comprehend. Mr. Maxwell’s use of fancy sounding words like “dastardly intellectual revisionism and fraudulence” may make him look smart; it doesn’t mean he is smart. That much is revealed in his diatribe.
For example Mr. Maxwell calls the hundreds of “peaceful protesters” a handful of vagrants. Now I am not sure if that is smart for Mr. Maxwell to call the people of Linden vagrants.
Mr. Editor, when I speak of going back to the sixties, I was referring to the disastrous consequences of the disturbances and the effect they had on the country. No one, I am sure wants a return to that time therefore it is necessary to resolve issues before they escalate to as we Guyanese describe as “out a hand”.