Latest update March 28th, 2024 12:59 AM
Mar 19, 2011 Letters
Dear Editor,
I write in response to Mr. Freddie Kissoon’s unjustified attack on the late Mr. Sharief Khan calling the distinguished veteran journalist, among other names, “a deep-seated racist” (Kaieteur News, March 14). Kissoon is wrong about Khan. Kissoon offers no evidence showing how Khan was a racist. We need evidence, not polemics and unsubstantiated charges – that is worse than being a racist.
Khan was not my friend. But I knew him from visiting SN’s office and interacting with him. He was no racist and abhorred racism. David de Caires admired and respected his fairness and objectivity. If Khan were a racist or showed biases, he would have been removed from SN long before 1992 just like how de Caires wanted Kissoon out of SN as a weekly columnist after his doctorate faux pas came to light.
Kissoon claims, “Khan masqueraded as a journalist” describing the man’s writings as “bogus journalism”. Khan was a qualified journalist. He may not have possessed a degree in journalism like Annan Boodhram or Vishnu Dutt. But he had training in journalism and was employed by news agencies as a correspondent from Guyana for many years. David de Caires and Miles Fitzpatrick recognised the value of Khan as a media person. That was why SN employed Khan as a reporter and an editor. Many have written about Khan describing him as an outstanding journalist and that was my personal experience with him.
It is Kissoon who is masquerading as a journalist. It is his writings that have repeatedly proven to be bogus and unprofessional. Most of what Kissoon pens are fictional and when his inaccuracies are exposed, he attacks people.
Kissoon contrasts Khan with other journalists making derogatory comments about the man’s professionalism. But Kissoon deliberately neglected to mention two important points: Khan did not work for an illegal government and Khan never condoned electoral frauds.
Kissoon states that Khan could not write persuasively or intellectually. I disagree. I could not think of one of Kissoon’s reports or commentaries lacking either. But I can attest to the fact that Kissoon’s writings lacking intellect and his arguments are not persuasive.
Kissoon claims de Caires wanted Khan out of SN. That is not factual. De Caires had utmost respect for Khan and did not want Khan to leave SN. De Caires told me Khan was among the best journalists in the Caribbean and he was disappointed that Khan left to edit Chronicle. It just goes to show that Kissoon never stops manufacturing information to discredit people who are dead or alive. Kissoon has shown he has no morality going to extreme extent to manufacture information to discredit opponents.
I agree with Kissoon that Khan had his biases, but there was nothing wrong with some of them. He was biased in favour of the restoration of democracy. But so was I and so many others like Rupert Roopnarine, Eusi Kwayana, etc. who fought against the dictatorship.
Khan never compromised his professionalism and honesty. SN editor Annan Persaud can attest to that. Khan did encourage activists to write against the oppressive dictatorship publishing such letters and he quietly supported our struggle in New York against the dictatorship since as a newspaper man he could not openly side with us. What is biased about that? Did we not want democracy?
It is untrue that Khan shut out “news” about WPA or other parties or organisations from SN. Final decision on publishing any matter rested with de Caires. So Khan could not control what was published in SN. And anyone reading SN from 1986 thru 1992 would see articles from or about the WPA in virtually every issue.
Khan was one of the finest reporters the country produced and a fair editor and one of the fiercest defenders of democracy.
I remember Khan chiding me for going after those who rigged elections and who banned essential goods from the country.
I remember him publishing responses from Rashleigh Jackson on articles I wrote about fraudulent elections and publishing a letter from Olato Sam attacking my poll in 1997. Sam said the NACTA poll predicting a 55% victory in December 1997 for the PPP would be wrong. That was the actual outcome.
Finally, I disagree with the attack unleashed on that eminent journalist Rickey Singh who Kissoon describes as a PPP propagandist. Singh is widely respected as an objective reporter and commentator and is not a propagandist.
Vishnu Bisram
THIS IDIOT TELLING GUYANA WE HAVE NO SAY IN THE 50% PROFIT SHARING AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH EXXON.
Mar 28, 2024
Minister Ramson challenge athletes to better last year’s performance By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – Guyana’s 23-member contingent for the CARIFTA Games in Grenada is set to depart the...B.V. Police Station Kaieteur News – The Beterverwagting Police Station, East Coast Demerara (ECD) will be reconstructed... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – In the face of escalating global environmental challenges, water scarcity and... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]