 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total: 10107 Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 |
|
IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF THE END?
Canada drops Guyana from its aid list. May close its Embassy
February 26, 2009 | By knews | Filed Under Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon
In what must bring a sense of dj vu to those who lived under the Burnham regime and saw the withdrawal of Western aid, the Canadian Government says it has dropped Guyana and Nicaragua from this part of the world from its aid list. It also took off eight countries in Africa.
In what has to be a rejection of the Government of Guyana, the Canadians say they will increase aid to the English-speaking Caribbean minus Guyana and up its assistance to Haiti. To add salt in the wound, Ottawa has now replaced Guyana and Nicaragua from this region with two countries that are far wealthier than Guyana Colombia and Peru.
Guyana ranks with Haiti and Guatemala as the three poorest countries in this part of the world. Bolivia is above all three. If the Canadians were interested in alleviating poverty around the world then it could not have excluded Guyana and bring in Colombia. Guyana needs far more cash than Colombia.
Something is not right. It couldnt be based on GDP and GNP. Any World Bank statistical outlay would reveal that Guyana is only above Haiti in the Caricom family as having the lowest GNP. The question is why?
The answer is quiet diplomacy. The Canadians have not made it public. They will not make it public. But four factors are at work. The first one is the human rights record. Canadian diplomats believe that democracy has not been achieved in Guyana despite the immense resource help of the ABC (America, Britain, Canada) countries.
A leading diplomat at the High Commission in Kingston told one of Guyanas most senior journalists that Canada is fed up with Guyanas politics. The ethnic factor is the crucial nuance that has figured in the decision. Canadian diplomats have analysed Guyana as a country where power is perennially used to decrease and increase the role of the race to which the ruling party belongs.
In addition, Canadian observers have been uncomfortable with the authoritarian drift that they saw gaining momentum after the 2006 elections. When Western governments evaluate politics in Guyana, they always juxtapose it against what obtains in the rest of the Caribbean. Governments keep changing hands in the Caribbean but not Guyana. While democracy deepens in the rest of the Caricom region, Guyana slides back.
The rejection of the Freedom of Information Act (FIA) makes Guyana a focus of attention of countries like Canada. I am absolutely sure that this truculent attitude to the FIA by the Guyana Government must have contributed to the perception that Canada should not aid such a country.
The second reason has to do with ideology. There is a feeling in the ABC countries (America, Britain and Canada) that President Jagdeo is beginning to sound anti-West and may be ready to continue Guyanas long flirtation with an anti-West, leftist ideology. One doesnt have to look far to see traces of this. President Jagdeo has attacked the US on a number of occasions.
In an address to the Guyana Defence Force, President Jagdeo referred to corruption in the spending of money on the Iraqi war. On another occasion, he hinted at Guantanamo.
Recently, he directed some not so diplomatic remarks in relation to a case of cocaine being transported to Canada which brings us to the third situation. Canada, like the US, feels that Guyana does not arrest big drug traffickers. They always get caught when they leave these shores. There is the feeling that drugs and politics have an ongoing relationship in Georgetown.
Fourthly, the Canadian may close the Embassy as part of cost-cutting measures in the current global melt-down. Guyana seems to be looking towards China, India and non-traditional areas for trade and investment and there may not be sufficient trade between the two countries to warrant a continuation of aid to Guyana and the retention of the High Commission on Young Street. This should be depressing news for PPP supporters because as soon as they vote for the PPP, they leave for Young Street to apply for their Canadian visa.
So does the PPP know how the Canadian feel? It is possible that Canadian sentiments may have been relayed to certain key PPP players though not necessarily the President or Dr. Luncheon. One thing that must be borne in mind is that the Canadian take their cue from the Americans. So watch out for some similar movement from the Americans. With sugar in trouble, bauxite heading for the grave, remittances in decline plus the global crisis in full swing, the Canadian announcement will no doubt shock New Garden Street. Trouble is definitely ahead. Can Guyana see a Velvet Revolution?
By supererro
Thursday, February 26, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Is the the beginning of the end??????
Canada drops Guyana from its aid list. May close its Embassy
February 26, 2009 | By knews | Filed Under Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon
In what must bring a sense of dj vu to those who lived under the Burnham regime and saw the withdrawal of Western aid, the Canadian Government says it has dropped Guyana and Nicaragua from this part of the world from its aid list. It also took off eight countries in Africa.
In what has to be a rejection of the Government of Guyana, the Canadians say they will increase aid to the English-speaking Caribbean minus Guyana and up its assistance to Haiti. To add salt in the wound, Ottawa has now replaced Guyana and Nicaragua from this region with two countries that are far wealthier than Guyana Colombia and Peru.
Guyana ranks with Haiti and Guatemala as the three poorest countries in this part of the world. Bolivia is above all three. If the Canadians were interested in alleviating poverty around the world then it could not have excluded Guyana and bring in Colombia. Guyana needs far more cash than Colombia.
Something is not right. It couldnt be based on GDP and GNP. Any World Bank statistical outlay would reveal that Guyana is only above Haiti in the Caricom family as having the lowest GNP. The question is why?
The answer is quiet diplomacy. The Canadians have not made it public. They will not make it public. But four factors are at work. The first one is the human rights record. Canadian diplomats believe that democracy has not been achieved in Guyana despite the immense resource help of the ABC (America, Britain, Canada) countries.
A leading diplomat at the High Commission in Kingston told one of Guyanas most senior journalists that Canada is fed up with Guyanas politics. The ethnic factor is the crucial nuance that has figured in the decision. Canadian diplomats have analysed Guyana as a country where power is perennially used to decrease and increase the role of the race to which the ruling party belongs.
In addition, Canadian observers have been uncomfortable with the authoritarian drift that they saw gaining momentum after the 2006 elections. When Western governments evaluate politics in Guyana, they always juxtapose it against what obtains in the rest of the Caribbean. Governments keep changing hands in the Caribbean but not Guyana. While democracy deepens in the rest of the Caricom region, Guyana slides back.
The rejection of the Freedom of Information Act (FIA) makes Guyana a focus of attention of countries like Canada. I am absolutely sure that this truculent attitude to the FIA by the Guyana Government must have contributed to the perception that Canada should not aid such a country.
The second reason has to do with ideology. There is a feeling in the ABC countries (America, Britain and Canada) that President Jagdeo is beginning to sound anti-West and may be ready to continue Guyanas long flirtation with an anti-West, leftist ideology. One doesnt have to look far to see traces of this. President Jagdeo has attacked the US on a number of occasions.
In an address to the Guyana Defence Force, President Jagdeo referred to corruption in the spending of money on the Iraqi war. On another occasion, he hinted at Guantanamo.
Recently, he directed some not so diplomatic remarks in relation to a case of cocaine being transported to Canada which brings us to the third situation. Canada, like the US, feels that Guyana does not arrest big drug traffickers. They always get caught when they leave these shores. There is the feeling that drugs and politics have an ongoing relationship in Georgetown.
Fourthly, the Canadian may close the Embassy as part of cost-cutting measures in the current global melt-down. Guyana seems to be looking towards China, India and non-traditional areas for trade and investment and there may not be sufficient trade between the two countries to warrant a continuation of aid to Guyana and the retention of the High Commission on Young Street. This should be depressing news for PPP supporters because as soon as they vote for the PPP, they leave for Young Street to apply for their Canadian visa.
So does the PPP know how the Canadian feel? It is possible that Canadian sentiments may have been relayed to certain key PPP players though not necessarily the President or Dr. Luncheon. One thing that must be borne in mind is that the Canadian take their cue from the Americans. So watch out for some similar movement from the Americans. With sugar in trouble, bauxite heading for the grave, remittances in decline plus the global crisis in full swing, the Canadian announcement will no doubt shock New Garden Street. Trouble is definitely ahead. Can Guyana see a Velvet Revolution?
By supererro
Thursday, February 26, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
RE- HISTORY VIEWED THROUGH ETHNIC LINES
llanus:
"The politics of race is what destroyed our country,and by and large many of those leaders where either impotent or indifferent to it.Burnham's fixation with power at all cost was his means of confronting it."
Absolutely llanus. Like Corbin, Burnham failed to prioritize the needs of his party, its constituency, and the nation as a whole over his estimitaion of himself as the only leader capable of dealing with the threat to the wholeness of Guyana. In this process, he contributed to, and created the atmosphere for, the elimination of our Mandela, our Martin Luther King, Our Barack Obama, our Gandhis and John Browns. When leaders inculcate ill-conceived notions that they are divinely authorised into their positions, it facilitates emergence into power of the very forces they fear. Burnham's inculcation of his indispensibility, like Corbin's today, obstructs the emergence of leaders capable of steering Guyana along paths that compel decision making influences like race and ethnicity to hibernate back into the ignorant mental crevices that nuture and spawn them.
The most poignant evidence that many of those who are dumping on Burnham are doing so because of the skin he was born into is the fact that they can never point to any particular policy or position to substantiate their views. Electoral abuse, yes, but the PPP leader threw away a Subpoena issued on those very allegations. Economics, well they continue to broadly assert that Burnham messed up the economy with anectdotes that flitter around bars and bottom houses as the evidence of how he did that. And one cannot equate Burnham's handling of the economy or anything else in Guyana without comparing it to the current alternative. Crime, there were upsurges in violent criminal activity at intervals during Burnham's rule but he always managed to put measures into place to curb them. Go back as far you want and you will find evidence of those measures and the men Burnham assigned to carry them out. And for the most part theye were within the Law, as opposed to having one set of criminals eliminating rivals and ethnic others at the behest of the political side that they supported.
There is an old saying in Guyana "that yo don't throw away your bad for your mattee good". I never paid much attention to it before. What I have come to realize however, is that when you are dealing with those who accept this as the biblical standard for their perspective, it behooves you to act likewise. In Guyana, murderers, drug traffickers, corrupt politicians are routinely given a pass because they are not black and are psycophants of the ruling political mafia. I have absolutely no intention of being diplomatic about this observation, the existing evidence of which fairly leaps out of the presentations of the many bloggers and pundits pontificating on the problems and history of Guyana.
By victoriaguy
Thursday, February 26, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Anansi
Anansi, I hear you.It is important those who now seek to lead us learn from the collective mistakes of the previous leaders.Burnham played his part and or was right in terms of us asserting our identity as an independent people.
The politics of race is what destroyed our country,and by and large many of those leaders where either impotent or indifferent to it.Burnham's fixation with power at all cost was his means of confronting it.
By llanus
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
llanus
llanus said "I say this without fear, Forbes Burnham, faults and all, was and will remain the most brilliant Guyanese to ever occupy the office of President of Guyana". Llanus for the sake of Guyana, I hope you are wrong and that that Burnham does not for much longer "remain the most brilliant to ever occupy" the Guyana Presidency. Burnham, Hoyte, Cheddi, Janet, Jagdeo in hindsight they all don't seem so brilliant!
By Anansi
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
History view through ethnic lens.
VG,when this letter first appeared in the press, I was like here we go again.This character Rajendra Rampersaud is bent eroding every and all aspects of black achievement and scholarship in Guyana. It is part of a well thought out strategy to reduce or confine those who are not of a certain ethnic hue to the dustbin of our social and political history.
Burnham is fair game in the arena of politics in Guyana. Serious academics, scholars and history will be the ultimate judge.However, what no one can question, is the academic brilliance and scholarship of LFSB.Rampersaud reference to Burnham being 'able' betrays the vile contempt he holds for the man, and we must ask why. Is it as a result of his politics and or his race? Boysie was an able man, Burnham a scholar.No amount of racial contortions can change those facts. He won 'Percival ' scholarship,won the British Guiana scholar award,at the only one person was eligible to win each year.Before going to London and being delayed by the war, he won an external first class honours degree, all before the age of 21. He was to later graduate at the top of his law class, and won every academic honour and prize at the university of London and at Gray's Inn.Mr Rampersauds putrid facts and writings can never erase that.
The danger in this, is that we descend into some precarious ground when we allow others to define who our leaders are, and by what standards they are to be judged. I say this without fear, Forbes Burnham, faults and all, was and will remain the most brilliant Guyanese to ever occupy the office of President of Guyana.
By llanus
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
REVISED HISTORY AMOUNT TO PURE LIES
In George Orwell's 1984, there was a state program that converted individuals into non persons because of some animus they engendered in the ruling segment of the society. And true to form, this is another George Orwell's fictional policy that has been adopted in Guyana by the ruling party and its crusade of psycophants. Theirs is a constant campaign to revise the history of Guyana so that it conforms to the prejudice that is product of their nurturings. And as is demonstrated in the foregoing assault on facts and truth by Rajendra Rampersaud, the primary target is always Burnham. Bring Burnham down posthumously they believe, and the entire group will fall at their feet in obsequious subjugation.
In 1972, Guyana enjoyed a trade surplus in the region of millions of US dollars. That year our energy bill was about 24 million US or thereabouts. The following year OPEC declared an oil embargo that subsequently played havock with the economies of all non oil producing nations. Small and limited economies like Guyana were particularly affected. The industrial terrorism and sabotage on the main foreign currency earning industry, the Sugar Industry, by PPP operatives added to the econmic burden Guyana was facing. I would dare anyone to examine any nation comparitive to Guyana then that was not an oil producer, and compare its economic state over the ensuing period with Guyana's. They say that when you are doing analysis you should always examine variables to determine what effect, if any, they might have on your final conclusions. The problem with our arm chair historians is that they make conclusions and then try to find evidence to corroborate them. A pity.
Forbes Burnham used electoral machinations to put on hold the advent of a triumphalist regime into power. In so doing he stifled the emergence of one of the greatest leaders to come out of Guyana and the Caribbean, to wit, Walter Rodney. In terms of Guyana's economy, the fact that the PPP has received far more aid, far more international grants, far more reduction or eliminations of foreign debt, and we are still floundering like floating debris in run away high tide suggest that the alternative to Burnham would have been infinitely worse.
Like Raphael Trotman said in his letter of resignation from the PNC, "despite all of its faults the PNC was pound for pound a far more efficient and better political party than the PPP", or words to that effect. Even the PNC of today, idiot Corbin nothwithstanding, would be able to put together a far more fairer, balanced and productive Government than the PPP. One cannot wish for the skies when the reality of that is unattainable. One has to make decisions or judgements based on what is on the ground. And if given a choice between the PPP and PNC I personally would choose the PNC any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Why? Well let's look at that shall we.
Walter Rodney was able to influence Guyanese to challenge the order of the PNC. The PNC was always malleable. The PNC did not engage in economic racism and marginalization. Like I asserted heretofore, the constituency of the PNC during its 28 years in power were not handed over the commercial industry at the expense of those who had traditionally controlled it. The same cannot be said of the PPP. They have set out to rip the economic foundation from under the feet of constituents of the PNC by ignoring the Bauxite Industry, placing an ethnic ceiling in public and civil service positions, marginalizing and under serving villages and communities as punishment for voting and supporting the PNC. In other words, the difference between the PNC and PPP is bad and worse. It took me a while to recognize that distinction, and I am sure that every day eyes are opening to similar recognition.
By victoriaguy
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
RE-HISTORY VIEWED THROUGH ETHNIC LENSES
It is not the case that Boysie Ramkarran had more influence in
Parliament than Burnham
By Stabroek staff | February 25, 2009 in Letters Dear Editor,
Rajendra Rampersauds letter in the Kaieteur News of February 23, 2009 titled Boysie Ramkarran had more impact on parliamentary proceedings than Burnham did, is inaccurate and rather unfortunate. It cannot be supported by facts, the records of Hansard or by those who attended Parliament during that time.
First, let me make it clear; Boysie Ramkarran was a great raconteur, always ready with witty and incisive repartee. The only time he did not seem to have a ready response was when Burnham turned to the Speaker and quipped that we had two douglas in Parliament, Boysie Ramkarran and Shirley Field-Ridley.
Oft times, I have recalled some of his gems, both at home and abroad. At his passing, I paid glowing tribute to this aspect of a man I liked, and even though in different political camps, we shared a cordial and respectful relationship from the time I met him when he was a minister. By any measure he was a good gentleman and a solid patriot.
However, Mr Rampersauds reference to Burnham as an orator because he quoted a few Latin phrases seem to be part of a studied campaign to diminish the stature of Forbes Burnham and trivialize his contribution to the making of Guyana. Intellectuals and scholars regarded Burnham as a great orator and statesman.
The first West Indian to win the coveted Speakers Cup from a university in London, the home of our language, was LFS Burnham. I have heard British and European legislators extol Burnhams delivery, command and use of English. Let us give Jack his jacket.
Mr Rampersauds talk about elections is not germane to the burden of his letter, but to suggest that anyone else could have made a greater impact in parliament than Burnham is truly a non sequitur. Beyond that, Burnham did not take part in parliamentary debates after 1970, so we could not make a judgment after that period.
Allow me this caveat: one can appreciate Mr Rampersauds anxiety to make small, certain others. Nevertheless, I urge him and others to seek the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; end this relentless assault on LFS Burnhams name.
Yours faithfully,
Hamilton Green, JP
By victoriaguy
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
HISTORY VIEWED THROUGH ETHNIC LENSES
Boysie Ramkarran had more impact on parliamentary proceedings than Burnham did
February 23, 2009 | By knews | Filed Under Letters
Dear Editor,
I refer to an editorial of February, 18, in which L.F.S. Burnham was described as a great wit in Parliament.
There is an unfortunate tendency to ascribe superhuman qualities to Burnham in almost every sphere of activity in which he engaged law, politics, oratory (because he quoted a few Latin phrases) etc. While Burnham was an able and brilliant man, he used his abilities to rig elections and stay in power illegally. The state of Guyanas economy is an indictment of the glory you attributed to him. However, there are others, some unlettered, who far surpassed Burnham in many things.
The most celebrated wit in Guyanas legislative history was former Deputy Speaker, Boysie Ramkarran, the late father of the current Speaker, Ralph Ramkarran, and a founding stalwart of the PPP who served as Cheddi Jagans deputy for many years. This is acknowledged by all. Even PNC members of the legislature between 1957 and 1985 will confirm Ramkarrans power of devastating repartee.
Victims of his sharp tongue included Speaker Sase Narain himself as well as Burnham. Ramkarrans brilliant put downs, usually of the powerful, pompous or pretentious, were always known to be without malice and enlivened the entire chamber, with embarrassed smiles from the victims.
Having known Boysie Ramkarran personally as a man of quick wit and also a high sense of humour, a number of veteran journalists such as Paul Persaud and Cecil Griffith who covered that period had told me that Parliament will not be the same again.
Rajendra Rampersaud
By victoriaguy
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
RAPE? ABSOLUTELY!!!
I agree with you absolutely Roses1. The carnal knowledge charge is an antiquated euphemism that do mask the real horror of child rape. Since consent is the key factor in rape, and under the law children are presumed incapable of giving consent to sex, the Carnal knowledge description redundant.
To know a child carnally is to rape a child. Just charge the buggers for rape. What they should ideally do is enact legislation to parse the crime of rape into two categories, with increased penalities for aggravated rape, i.e, the carnal knowledge of a minor.
By victoriaguy
Wednesday, February 25, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Superero
When people choose to remind others of the setbacks Guyana experienced under the PNC, it is not done to excuse the current PPP regime for their inept handlings. Instead, it is to demonstrate that the PNC is not a better alternative. I saw first hand how inept PNC leaders in Linden were at handling the flood situation at Kara Kara and other areas where there was water accumulation Many stated that they were totally surprised that some areas of Linden would flood and asserted that if they had known, they would have taken precautionary measures. If I, a visitor from America could tell within a day that the tons of garbage and overgrowth I saw in the trenches would obviously lead to flooding because of the heavy rains, why couldnt they. My point here is that we all do a good job bashing the ruling party and we should. However, I do not think we hold our PNC members like Hamilton Greene who is the Mayor of Georgetown, and the mayor and town council members of Linden accountable for the state of the localities they are paid to oversee. We honestly need to put the fire under these peoples behinds. They have been passing the buck for too long.
Guyana is in desperate need of a competent political party and or figure to lead our nation and put country first. We are in desperate need of change and I am willing to give the AFC a chance. If the PNC or PPP could produce a qualified candidate that I felt could move the country forward, then he or she would have my support. However, I would be a fool to put my eggs in the basket of either Corbin or Jagdeo and those who continue to support them can only blame themselves for contributing to Guyanas demise.
In addition, when I brought up the sad state of Guyanas economy at the time of Burhnams death, I was quickly made to know that Guyanas economy had grown under Hoyte and that the PPP have inherited an economy that was growing and recovering. I agree, the economy was recoveringrecovering from Burhnams horrible economic policies that took Guyana from being the bread basket of the Caribbean in the late sixties and early seventies to the laughing stock of the Caribbean by the late seventies and early eighties. Part of the reason why Guyanas economy was growing under Hoyt is because he reversed many of Burhnams economic policies that had begun to cripple the nation. I know tons of Guyanese of all races, most of whom professionals, who left Guyana during the late seventies and early eighties not for the United States or Canada, but other Caribbean nations like Trinidad and Barbados because the standard of living in these nations was actually higher. I could understand Guyanese leaving for the USA, Canada, and The UK but for Guyanese professionals to have been leaving Guyana for other 3rd world nations at that time shows that life in Guyana under the PNC could not have been as great as many claim. Even as Guyanas economy grew under Hoyte, Guyana was still not the land of milk and honey and was still considered one of the poorest nations in the western hemisphere and that is no misrepresentation on my part. When my black maternal grandmother, aunt and cousin left Guyana in 1990 and came to North America to join my mom, they did not give Guyana the accolades. Guyana was described as a nation full of pot holes, run down dilapidated buildings, decrepit infrastructure, and very few opportunities for advancement. My aunt, who happened to be a trader and often traveled to Suriname, Brazil and the Caribbean always commented on how these nations were much better off than Guyana. I always remembered my aunt stating that Guyana had gone to the dogs and this was during Hoyts time and she was and still is a strong PNC. So again, we should not spare the PPP any blame but lets not fool ourselves that the problems only started under the PPP. Guyana has been a broken nation for a long time.
Lastly, I appreciate the fact that you have chosen not to be nasty to those who dont see eye to eye with you. It shows class, a virtue that can not be brought with money and it definatly doesnt come with a degree. Although I don't agree with all your opinions, you definately have my respect
peace
By denobrega
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
lex
I have decided not to take my friends with me to Guyana where I plan on spending a month this summer. Yes I enjoyed my nine days so much that I want to return for a month in July to tour Guyana and also help my dad with the businesses he runs from Canada. Since I will spend part of my time in Guyana working, I don't think I will have time to host them as I would like. In addition my collegues are white, rich and spoilt and I don't want them to judge me based on the condition of my native land especially Linden where my mom's family is not too well off. I don't really mind taking them to my dad's house in Georgetown because he has all the modern amenities and is located in a nice gated community. However, as you guys know, as soon as you leave any of Guyana's gated communities you are back in the 3rd world and I don't want my friends to leave Guyana with a bad impression because I know that it would reflect badly on me. As I stated before, Georgtown seems to be modernizing giving all the new and modern buildings I saw going up so I wont be surprised if the city catches up with the rest of the modern world in the next 5 years. If Georgtown continues down this path, just maybe if I may take them to see Guyana. Until then, I don't want them to see the tons of trash outside the parliament building or the children who ran up to my uncles car begging for money. It would be too embarressing
By denobrega
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
NOTE TO ALL NEWSPAPER WRITERS IN GUYANA
HAVING SEX WITH A CHILD IS CALLED RAPE!!!!! This "having carnal knowledge of " crap is keeping this horrible crime from being identified as what it actually is. A VIOLENT, INEXCUSABLE CRIME THAT SHOULD NOT ONLY COST YOU YOUR FREEDOM BUT ALSO YOUR LIFE.
http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/news/local/02/24/man-21-in-relationship-with-13-yr-old-girl-%e2%80%93-court-hears/
By Roses1
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Hi Denobrega
We all know that Linden is boring and depressing. If you decide on taking your friends to Guyana, I suggest you take them to Linden and let them experience it for themselves. they may have a different opinion about Linden. In fact, Linden has such rich history, why would you not want to share it with them.
I suggest you take them on a tour of the mines, let them cross the river to Wismar on the boat and take them on a drive around linden. I am suggetsing these sites because this is what my husband enjoyed doing in Linden even though it was really hot. He prefers Linden over Georgetown. Americans love to explore different things and places. Go and have fun with your friends and stop listening to negative people. Be safe.
By Lex
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
RE- FALLACIES OF BURNHAM
There is a kind of cognitive disconnect in this discourse that is amazing. In the first place, I have yet to read a line in any of the posts pointing out the positives of Burnham that allude to his void of faults. And excuse me, but one has to be severly tunneled in their perspective if they live in the US, was maybe educated in the US, and find the highlighting of the good points of a historical figure they have problems with abnormal or biased.
George Washington the father of the US owned slaves, so too did Thomas Jefferson. Abraham Lincoln who signed the emancipation proclamation made it quite clear in his writings that he did not believe that blacks were the equals of whites. How come we do not become appoplectic over the glowing historical tributes that are offered up in support of them. Burnham had flaws severallly, but so too does almost everyone for whom glowing praises are written day in and day out.
Democracy has many more important pillars than the quadrennial ethnic referandum being used as the gold standard for Guyana. Baron De Toqueville in his analysis of American Democracy in its early stages opined that the true manifestation of democracy is the comfort and security enjoyed by minorities in those societies. Democracy cannot be obtained in a society in which the value of ones life is dependent on the color of ones skin or the texture of ones hair.
Racial prejudice is not a product of disagreeing with the views of anyone. Such prejudices however, are notably obvious in the predisposition to form arguments based on stereotypical cliches and cognitive obstinacy. Burnham died 24 years ago. The PPP has been in Government for 16 years. All of the things they claimed that were wrong under Burnham they now cherish to their breast. For people to ignore these and other damning evidences of corruption, hypocrisy and incompetence, while constantly reciting anecdotes to blame Burnham for the current state of Guyana, lend to the suggestion that they are either being deliberately obtuse, or deliberately prejudiced.
Now let's talk about evil. When Burnham took over the Government of Guyana the power of commerce was in the hands of Indians, Portuguese and Chinese. During the 28 years Burnham and the PNC were in power that power and control did not migrate into the hands of the constituency he is associated with. When one is examining these social issues one has to look at at changes that are evidentiary impacts of the polices one is attributing to evil and corruption and bias. It is not enough to haul out invectives that are products of cultural antipathy, and then expect others to meekly say Amen.
Guyana has always been a nation modeled on the social premise that you if you were white you were alright, if you were brown you can stick around, but if you are black you must stay back. There has been a concentrated effort over the past 16 years to shift the paradigm of discourse to an ignorance of that historical memory. There has never been an institutionalised or cultural establishment of black superiority. Racial and ethnic intolerance has never, in this world and in Guyana, been an equally shared cultural belief system. The world in general and Guyana in particular exist on a continuum of perceptual value with black at the extreme negative end and white on the extreme positive end. This universally acceptable human stratification influences the perspective of arguments and analysis of many, and is clearly discernible in the insupportable positions that these many take. To proceed with any discussion or argument from a paradigm designed to attribute angelic personalities to one group while according the opposite to another should be utterly unacceptable.
I do not hold to the view that violence is the answer or solution to the problems and issues we face in Guyana. I do not hold to the view that any one group is completely innocent, (well except the indigenous peoples), and any other one group is completely guilty. I will not shift from the principle that a civilized society must always embrace the consensus of the rule of law, of equality under the law, of the presumption of innocence, of the Courts being the only forum where guilt or innocence can be determined in matters or questions of constitution or laws. I will not shift from the notion that a political state must not only vocally stress and advocate principles of equality, that state must manifestly appear to its minorities to be doing just. The problem with many of us Guyanese is that too we are so damn bipolar that we cannot abstractly grasp the importance or value of these ethical yardsticks unless the contradicting effect is on our group.
By victoriaguy
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
monkey see monkey do
Besides all the good qualities that most Guyanese possess(and we have alot),our ppl seem to like to be like other ppl. When Jamaicans come out in the streets to do public porn dubbed passa passa, i see GT (guyana) slowly following that pattern. If you want to know what's the latest fashion in the USA, just go to a party in Guyana.There are many more examples i can give you but i move to make my point. Ask de chirren bout Guyanese culture and all they can tell u is bout Mash.Gone are the days when ppl in Guyana were real
Guyanese,sad. Now in view of all this,the one thing id like to see us follow another country with is our "political power system",let's have our presidents stay for a set period and not be able to run ever again. I think this will help
By black
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
FALLACIES of Burnhamism
Why don't we stop the hypocrisy? USSR was powerful under autocratic rule. Cuba was never a democracy under Castro. Burnham cannot be blamed for what Jagdeo is doing. It is idiotic to even mention same.
While I agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion; it is also required that the subject must not always be hearsay or assumptions. Hard and cold facts are essential to stay in the debate. Most of us like to look up Wikipedia for information, but it is widely claimed to give out false information. Practically, the university I attend wants no research done through Wikipedia, period! One can suffice it to mean not all the places we research have the whole truth.
Economic spies that were sent to destroy Guyana's economy after Burnham went rogue on America are responsible for the US report on Guyana. That too, is not the whole truth.
Now, name calling is and was never my thing, and I will stay away from same regardless of who chooses to label me one way or the other.
Denobrega, I appreciated your comments and questions. However, when you posited statements like, Just check out information about the state of Guyanas economy at the time of Burhnams death in 1985. Check out Guyanas GDP at that time and the evidence will show that Guyana had lost its former glory long before the PPP took over in 1992. you began to thread into unknown territory just to stay in the debate. Let us deal with the urgency of now and what this present administration can do different (if any) to bring some semblance of order to our countrys state of affairs.
My young friend is trying to compare then with now; hopelessly! Regardless of who or what Burnham is labeled as, one cannot seriously deny that he was a visionary and an astute intellectual mind. The best minds in the PPP had nothing but admiration for the man who was a giant in his prime. Some people hypocrisies have no limitation!
Did he make mistakes? Yes he did! Putting the bauxite & sugar industries into the hands of Guyanese were costly mistakes. Moving failed managers from one state entity to another until they mess up again was too sympathetic. We are a people who dont give thanks, period. Ask me, I know! Going around in circles are unnecessary and useless.
There are only three inspirational (black) politicians I have seen in my lifetime thus far and Forbes Burnham was one of them.
Mr. Obama is not in office a good month yet, and the opposition is trying to blame him for everything that is wrong with America right now. It is down right egregious to have the PPP in power for seventeen years and the PNCR name is still being called as part of the problem today; hogwash!
What the PNCR should be blamed for, is sitting idly by and letting Jagdeo and company destroy the morale of their constituents.
By supererro
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: Denobrega
Denobrega if you know all that you say you know about burnham and the pnc why is it you coming on this site and asking all these questions , when you already know the answers. Batowl was correct, cause he already peeped your cards.
By amen-ra-ta
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Amen-ra-ta
Are you asserting that you have no biases whatsoever, that your perceptions are so pristine and pure and always on point and aren't colored by your experiences, ideologies, and overall world view. If that is so, you definately have reached a great state of enlightenment and worthy of the title Buddha or Christ. Everyone is biased to some extent and to just point fingers at me shows that you are no way close to being englightened.
My search for answers comes from my quest to understand how a man like Burhnam can be seen as void of corrupt tendencies even though he rigged elections to win Guyana's highest seat. My argument has always been that Burhnam did not uphold the principles of democracy. Democracies call for limited government. When a ruler isnt working under a system of checks and balances, as a human being he or she can and more than likely will become corrupt. That is just plain human nature. Burhnam was no more inherently evil than you or I. Give any one of us uncheaked power and more than likely we will tend to abuse it. This has nothing to do with me trying to be racist by " blaming the black man" for Guyana's downfall. It seems like I am being labled a racist because I have a Portuguese last name so the assumption is that I am a Portuguese. Well let me state that my father may be portyuguese bnut my mother is probably blacker than anyone else in this room and in America that makes me black as well. What is interesting is that others who are assumed to be black have also made negative comments yet because I have a portuguese last name, I seem to be the only one who gets the flack. Oh well, so is life.....
By denobrega
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: Denobrega
Denobrega it seem that you have a quest to know all about guyana and it's politics, my best bet for you to do is to go and do some research in the library, and learn what you need to know and use it in an unbiased way to form your conclusion, and check the un if you want to know when guyana gained it's status.
By amen-ra-ta
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: How did Burhnam deal with those who challenged his authority.
I am not certain that Denobrega really wants to hear the answers to the questions that are being posed. Knowledge is worthless unless shared. Some folks though share knowledge to advance their own agenda, while others for the pure delight of edification. The answers to most of Denobrega's musings are found in the history books. There are those of us around that may add a personal touch to the happenings because of our involvement, both in favor or against any subject. There will be no answer good enough for Denobrega. Denobrega has already made his conclusion. I do not fault Denobrega for his views. I am disappointed though that his views are not more grounded in research and facts. However, if I am wrong, please do share. The wait to be edified by you is suffocating.
By batowl
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
How did Burhnam deal with those who challenged his authority.
How did Burhnam handle those who opposed him. Were people allowed to freely challenge his authority as one would be able to in a legitimate democracy. Was Burhnam running an autocracy. If so, then he has to share some of the blame for setting the tone.
In addition, when did Guyana obtain the status as the second poorest country in the Americas after Haiti.
By denobrega
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Burnham era was bad for Guyana
The Burnham era was bad for Guyana, and even though the Jagdeo era may be worse, that does not eliminate the need to remember accurately the Burnham era.
By Anansi
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
ELECTED DICTATORSHIP
Freddie Kissoon in this piece touches on the central points I made in my preceding posts. That there is a palpable double standard in much of the analysis that takes place about Guyana. And many like me, more and more, are coming to the cunclusion that there is truism in the notion of "better the devil we know than the one we don't". I wonder how much our vitriol would have been tempered had we been able to discern what the successors of Burnham would be like.
Guyana is a dictatorship regardless of the fact that dictatorship was elected into ruler ship. This regime is no different than the State Governments of the US South back in the 50s and 60s, when the minority did not have the vote and the majority favoured regimes that were outwardly prejudiced. The PPP operate with hubris that is influenced by this ethnic majoritorian advantage, something that was not there during the PNC control of Government. In addition, from policies advanced like VAT on electricity cost for Lindeners and the refusal to allow them access to information that is not funneled out of PPP propaganda mediums, the PPP evidences a kind of spiteful and meanspiritedness that is unique to this region.
By victoriaguy
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
LIKE I SAID!
Mashramani and redirected memories
FEBRUARY 23, 2009 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES / COLUMNISTS, FREDDIE KISSOON
The Burnham days are gone. Long gone. But memories of what happened during his reign live on but have taken a shape that none of us would have expected. As Guyanese over the age of fifty reflect on the origin of Mashramani, they will ask themselves millions of questions about what we knew then and what we see now.
To most Guyanese who lived through the political age that gave birth to Mashramani and many other motifs associated with Forbes Burnham, the inevitable reflection presents itself was Burnham all that bad when we think of what Guyana is today? Were Burnham and his band that horrible as leaders when you see what we have to put up with in this country in 2009?
I speak to many persons from that era and I get the expected answer - Guyana in many ways is as terrible a polity as it was back then and perhaps even more so. This comes from dozens of persons who were participants in the long fight against President Burnham and went through immense suffering for their courage.
It numbs the mind to hear them describe the atrocities that characterize the exercise of power today. These sentiments do not come only from persons who were in the vanguard of the WPA. They come from civil society leaders, academics and business people who have no reason to say anything good about the governorship of President Burnham.
In many ways, then, Mashramani today is an irony of a memory or a memory of an irony. It directs us back to the epoch of Burnhamite domination but it vividly reminds us that the future can be worse than the past.
Paradoxically Mashramani reminds us of what Ras Tom Dalgetty once wrote in a letter about Forbes Burnham. Dalgetty is someone I know very well going back to the seventies. He was very helpful to the WPA in those days.
He admonished us in that letter that we in the WPA should have tried to mellow Burnham rather than seek to remove him. Ras Dalgetty of course has made that observation in hindsight. He came to that conclusion because he sees that the future is worse than the past. I know Tom was just being emotional. It is the vexation of what Guyana has turned out to be after the fall of the PNC that moves people like Tom and countless others to redirect or reshape their memories.
There is a question that young people always ask the folks who fought Burnham. I believe that inquiry follows WPA leaders and activists in organizations like the GHRA, the original founders of FITUG and like-minded groups wherever they go- why did you guys fight down Burnham so? Now look at the things that pass unprotected that yall would have crucified Burnham for.
I once wrote a similar line in one of my columns about two years ago, and I got a response through the letter pages from one of Burnhams daughter. Unfortunately, she misunderstood that line and interpreted it to mean that her father was not a bad ruler and now we are admitting to that. The old saying is so applicable here two wrongs do not make a right. Not because the PPP may be worse that makes Burnham good. This is unsound logic.
So in todays Guyana, Mashramani serves that ironic purpose. It drives you to come to grips with todays reality Guyana is full of nasty political things that are far more frightening than when the power of Burnham stalked the land. Hard as that is to accept, there is a ring of truth to it.
Take a pencil with a sheet of paper and tick off the policies of Burnham that brought us out into the streets with pickets, vigils and confrontations with the police. Then juxtapose those items on your page with what we see now. The truth has to be faced. Those who told us we would have crucified Burnham for these acts are deadly accurate in their assumption.
What has come over the psyche of this nation? Why many petty acts of indiscretions of the PNC under Burnham drove us to fight with Burnham, and we stand motionless when grave venalities have become the norm in this land?
This essay will run out of space if we make up another list, this one enumerating the wrongs of the PPP. Burnham nationalized Guyana but the property known as Guyana remained in the legal name of the Guyanese nation. Today the rulers, their families and acolytes have legally purchased Guyana.
In a forthcoming column, I will tell you about another Pradoville being carved out.
Happy Mashramani!
By victoriaguy
Monday, February 23, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
THEN AND NOW
Guyanas development under PNC unquestionable
February 22, 2009 | By knews | Filed Under Letters
Dear Editor,
John Da Silvas insistence that the country decayed under the PNC and improved under the PPP is inaccurate.
Space doesnt permit a full account of development under the PNC. The PNC took office from the PPP in 1964. It assumed leadership of an under-developed economy dominated by strikes, claims of marginalisation, the Kaldor Budget, and racial conflicts that destroyed relationships, villages, and buildings and caused lives and forced relocation.
In agriculture the PNC increased rice productivity to two crops per year, improved rice grade, built more rice mills and built the silo plants to store rice. The MMA and Tapacuma Irrigation Project Schemes were built to improve drainage. NARI and REPAHA were built for research and development and were also attended by Caribbean nationals.
Housing developments were done in the regions through self-help. GNCB, GAIBANK and Mortgage Finance were created to give opportunities to the small man. So too were the NIS and GCIS. The nationalisation of bauxite and sugar removed the colonial barriers of natives staying in their quarters and not being able to aspire to high office.
Nursery, secondary, multilateral and community high schools were built throughout the country. Guyanas early childhood education programme was the envy of the Caribbean. The University of Guyana was taken out of Queens College building, programmes expanded and the Turkeyen campus built under the PNC. Education was made possible for all, from nursery to university, irrespective of religion, race, gender, finance and so-called brilliance.
The PNC took office with less than 200 miles of the countrys roads asphalted. Others were paved with red clay (loam) mud, or pebbles. The Demerara Harbour Bridge, Canje Bridge, asphalted roadways and highways stretching throughout the length and breath of the country are the accomplishments of the PNC.
Local manufacturers built or assembled the Tapir vehicle, bicycle, fridge, freezer, gas stove, radio, textile, shoes and stereos. Guyana also produced milk, balata and canned fruits.
The rise in oil prices in the 1970s threw Guyanas economy in disarray. Guyana was not unique in this regard.
There were food and gas lines around the globe as other countries suffered the effects. Coupled with the economic crisis, the PNC had to deal with the PPP, WPA, upsurge in trade union agitation and constant sabotage through the burning of young sugar-cane. In 1977 GAWU struck for 133 days. During those days sugar and bauxite formed the economys mainstay, and the economic setbacks that were caused by these actions are still to be honestly admitted to.
The PNC was forced to make choices. Other countries use crisis moments to innovate and chart bold paths. The PNC attempted this with the restriction or ban of some items, and advocated a grow-more-food campaign and reliance on indigenous products that could have made Guyana the giant of the Caribbean. The crisis created opportunities for creativity, local rice flour, preserved fruits, juices, ground provisions, vegetables, salted fish, pork, ham, blackeye, mung peas, vegetable oil, milk and so forth. Those who capitalised on the new economy made money.
The Opposition encouraged farmers to plant enough for their sustenance. It is regrettable partisan politics hijacked a golden opportunity for Guyanas development. Opportunities instead became a political football that hurled accusations that a group was specifically targeted when every group used wheaten flour, peas and other restricted items in their daily lives.
There were mistakes and successes, as are normal in human endeavours. However, it is unfair and disingenuous to say Guyana decayed under the PNC when the facts do not support this. The public is smart and will judge the PPPs management of our economy over the last 16 years.
Humphrey Charles
By victoriaguy
Sunday, February 22, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
BURNHAM WAS BAD COMPARED TO WHOM?
llanus your criticism of Burnham I can take without any retort, because it comes from analysis of objectivity. However, many of those in this forum who only appear to launch attacks on Burnham are the worse kinds of hypocrites because they do so via a prism of race as opposed to objectivity.
There is a cabal on every website whose genes are directly linked to Orwell's pigs, becuase their views and opinions embody the same cockeyed rationale exhibited by Orwell's porcine characters after they had chased out the farmer and took over the farm. Similarily, these human reservoirs of fanatical moral and ethical relativity curse out Burnham while ignoring the worse that has come with his successors.
Yes, Burnham had faults, but when they claim he was bad my question is compared to whom? Cheddie Jagan who immediately after he took office began replacing qualified black civil and public servant departmental heads with unqualified Chaffeurs and donkey cart drivers? Janet jagan whose opinion of herself as a Magnimus leader led her to throw away a subpoena issued by a Justice of the High Court? Or Jagdeo who presided over the worse experience of muderous vigilanteism in the commonwealth Caribbean? Burnham never played the race card throughout his tenure. Go back and examine the letter columns of the newspapers and compare them with the triumpalist and racist diatribe that is an everyday feature of the Chronicle. It was under Burnham that national recognition was given cultural events and land marks. Yes, this blackman presided over the establishment of national holidays commemorating Indian Culture. Name one event or holiday the decrepit cabal in power backed that was not attached to their ethnicity.
We have to end our tolerance for the bald faced lies that passes for truth about racial prejudice in Guyana. I am tired of it and will not be diplomatic in my expressions of that truth. These idiots and charlattans live off of this inverse proportional shyte of producing anectdotal claims that do not stand up to examination. Under the PNC, the Police went after criminals with such secerity that MAO was formed to protest Police Brutality. Under the PPP a criminal psychopathic gang led by international drug traffickers is allowed carry out Soweto style vigilante raids on black people. Indian Criminals who are caught with arms and ammunition and a whole heap of illegal shyte are let go, while black suspects are gunned down and their bodies paraded on front pages of newspapers.
No sensible black person should ever trust their lives or the lives of their children and relatives to the philosophy of ethically and morally impaired pundits with ulterior motives. We should be running as far as possible from anyone who claims that the PNC was worse than the PPP or that the PPP is good for Guyana, because they are in effect telling us not to believe our lying eyes. That is why they come out slide out the woodwork when I address these issues. The worse thing you can do is to lay it out as it is.
They hate Burnham and the PNC because as appeared early in the doctrine they are not comfortable living under the rule of the son of a slave. Apaan jaat was not started by us. Let's get this straight. The first time Jagan ran for Premier he got the majority of the black vote. It was when he and the party leadership established a platform of vote for your own, and a bunch of triumpalistc rantings after he won the first past the post vote in 1960/61, that black people got riled up. We have to end our tolerance for his-story that seeks to propell one group up to Brahmin status and the other down to the dalit pit.
By victoriaguy
Sunday, February 22, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Llanus Superero
So If the PNC's coalition with the UF help him to win the 64 election fairly, why didn't it help him to win subsequent elections. Did the coalition fall apart. What happened?
By denobrega
Saturday, February 21, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Llanus: good point
"That is what is needed in Guyana today, a system which allows for some for electorial college approach, so that numbers alone should not determine the winner. Could you imagine if the country's electorial map was drawn based on geography and size of population within the geographic area. In such a system all parties will be forced to campaign and attract voters outside of their tradiitonal base."
By denobrega
Saturday, February 21, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Burnham in 64
Under the system of first past the post he was able to form the govt of the day along with the UF party.
Under such as system one can win with the most seats and not necessarily with the most votes. There was nothing illegal undemocratic about that.
Look at Israel today, the Kadima party won the most seats at the last elections,however, they will not form the govt of the day. A collection of other parties will join with the Likud party to form the govt, because combined they would have carried more seats than Kadima party.
The PNC/UF coalition was only constitutional means available then to erode the obvious racial voting by the PPP. That is what is needed in Guyana today, a system which allows for some for electorial college approach, so that numbers alone should not determine the winner. Could you imagine if the country's electorial map was drawn based on geography and size of population within the geographic area. In such a system all parties will be forced to campaign and attract voters outside of their tradiitonal base.
By llanus
Saturday, February 21, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
anansi
that was with the United Force Right D'Aguiar....by the way, is it true he is known to have stated previously that he would never live in a country ruled by a black man,,,,,i remember my grandmother saying something like that before..
By denobrega
Saturday, February 21, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Burnham in 1964
He did form a coalition government
By Anansi
Saturday, February 21, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
llanus
How was he able to win fair and square if Indians were a slight majority and as Superero posited, people voted along racial lines. Did he form a coalition another party in order to achieve this 64 win.
By denobrega
Saturday, February 21, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Question
The late Forbes Burnham did win the 1964 elections fair and square.The PPP preaches otherwise but those are the facts.
Having said that he later turned out to be a great disappointment and a despotic leader no question.However, without question he fervently moulded a sense of national identity second to none in many parts of the third world. Not too many third world nations experienced the transformation of meaningful independence that we had in Guyana.
Burnham indeed was a man of many devious faults,yet on balance we must never shy away from his ideals.Moreover, he was certainly one of the most exceedlingly brilliant leaders of his time. A fry cry from what obtains in the halls of power in Guyana. Can anyone imagine Burnham in parliament against the likes of Jagdeo,Persaud, Ramatour etc. He would clean their clock each and every moment.
Those who have interest in appreciating the utility of political struggle, must examine his political stewardship in the 50s and 60s.
By llanus
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Superero
So what did Burhnam do to maintain his power for almost two decades?
By denobrega
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: Question
The answer to your question is no if you are asking about a process that was free & fair. On the other hand, if you are asking about an apparent process the answer is yes. The "normal democratic process" did not or will not relate to Guyana unless they stop voting race and vote issues.
By supererro
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Question
Did Burhnam go through the normal democratic process to secure his post as Guyana's head of state for almost two decades?
By denobrega
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: prettykitty
The present administration is the worst guyana ever had, say what you want about LFSB, he did a better job than what guyana is now.
By amen-ra-ta
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
LFSBurnham - Dictator
An absolutely terrible president
By Prettykitty
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
.
.
By Prettykitty
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
LONG LIVE BURNHAM
Long Live Forbes Burnham, the greatest President Guyana ever had. His qualifications dwarfs that of the current Office Holder and his immediate predecessors. I use to be a fierce critic of Burnham and am still a critic of some of his policies. I believe however that we should do as everyone else does and let Charity begin at home. Burnham never got into bed with drug traffickers, make idiotic statements at press conferences, or stand in front of ethnic crowds at political rallies and make ethnicly divisive and inflamatory statements. He had too much class for that.
Burnham is hated by the other side because they have yet to produce his intellectual equal. He earned respect around the world, in comparison to the laughing stocks who parade around with their chest in the air and absolutely nothing in their heads. So hell yes, Long Live Burnham. I wish he was still President of Guyana.
By victoriaguy
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
WHEN GOD.. WHEN???
Will Guyanese people let the myth of Burnham "accomplishments" go. That man was a terrible president. We just need to deal and move on. Gaawwwdddd!
By Roses1
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
LFSB.....BORN TO LEAD!
PRESS RELEASE
86th BIRTH ANNIVERSARY OF LINDEN FORBES SAMPSON BURNHAM
Today, February 20, 2009 is the 86th birth anniversary of the Founder Leader of the Peoples National Congress, Prime Minister and Executive President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana. During his lifetime he made a significant contribution to the political and national development of Guyana and by his brilliant diplomacy ensures a place for this country in the councils of the integration process and the major international organisations which govern global affairs.
At a time when Guyana seems to be adrift politically, it would be appropriate to recall his achievements in this area of the life of the country. As a politician Mr. Burnham was deeply committed to ensuring that Guyana became a cohesive and united country whose political culture must be based on the relevant aspects of its history. In other words, he wanted a political system that was autonomous and responsive to the wishes of the people. The question of a united country was so important to him that the last years of his life were devoted to seeking a unity government with the Peoples Progressive Party. Success eluded Mr. Burnham but he left a rich legacy and foundation which could be built upon in order to ensure the unity and dignity of this nation.
Today the world is in the grip of an economic crisis. A similar crisis hit the global economy in the 1970s, which played havoc with the open and vulnerable economy that Guyana possesses. It even threatened to reverse the hard won political and economic gains of the 60s and the early 70s. And Mr. Burnham took measures to ensure that the nation would survive the crisis. In particular, Mr. Burnham believed that the nation should be self sufficient in food production and launched the successful Grow More Food campaign, which is still relevant today and which is being copied by the Jagdeo Administration. He did more by advocating a fairer economic deal for developing nations like Guyana in the main international fora such as the Commonwealth, the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations. Indeed, the idea of a new international new economic order was born in Guyana and became the subject of advocacy in these forums. Many of these ideas are still alive today and form part of the agenda of the G20 States. It should be recalled that Mr. Burnham was among the first to call for a complete overall of the global economic system at the 1975 Commonwealth Summit in Jamaica.
Mr. Burnhams achievements in the area of Foreign Policy stand by themselves and need no extensive elaboration. It would, however, be pertinent to mention some of the main ones. Mr. Burnhams Government was the first English speaking Caribbean country to recognise the Government of the Peoples Republic of China when it was not fashionable to do so and when that course of action entailed a great degree of risk. Also, he had the foresight to recognise Cuba when it was dangerous to do so, given the hostility of the main power of the region to the Fidel Castro Government. Mr. Burnham also took an uncompromising stand against the Apartheid system in South Africa and expended actual and diplomatic resources to fight for the freedom of those subject nations in southern Africa, such as Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Angola. In fact, Guyanas diplomacy was quite extensive and included relations with all of the major powers in different parts of the world, including those in Asia. The success of the diplomacy of the Burnham Administration can be measured by the fact that the nation punched above its weight in international affairs, was twice elected to the Security Council, was President of the General Assembly, and many of its representatives such as Sonny Ramphal, Rashleigh Jackson and Mohammed Shahabuddeen have all held prestigious positions in international organisations.
The Peoples National Congress Reform is therefore proud to salute its Founder Leader ever grateful and mindful of the fact that he has blazed a path in national and international affairs which the Party can follow to its benefit and which it can use as a basis for further success and development.
Peoples National Congress Reform
Congress Place, Sophia,
Georgetown, Guyana.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Visit our website @ www.guyanapnc.org
By supererro
Friday, February 20, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
familia portuguesa, que bem
sim eu falo pero meu gramatica nao es muito bem. qeu es seu appellido e de onde su familia em guyana. a familia de meu papa som de new amsterdam eu teno dos appellidos es denobrega e de souza,
By denobrega
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
s
s
By denobrega
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
denogrega: Portuguese in Guyana
What happened to the portuguese in Guyana. Many of them came to trindad to escape that mess called Guyana. My parents were part of that batch. Denobrega falas portugues?
By triniguy
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Guyanese Soca 2009
have you guys heard the 2009 soca songs from Guyana. Off the hook. Im working on choreography for Jumo's song for my dance group.
By denobrega
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Question
Should guyana police force be renamed guyana police service, which one sound better, should it be a force where they use force on the public or do their job in a forceful manner, or should service be used because they are doing a service to the public, what is your thought on this.
By amen-ra-ta
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
You're right Roses: Guyana is for Guyanese
I think I'll be going to Guyana without my colleagues this summer. When I was in Georgtown for the Christmas season, it seemed like their was a construction boom. New buildings were going up everywhere, quickly replacing the old decrepid looking Georgetown. So I'll wait until the facelift is complete before I go back home with my friends. Hopefully by then, the city would reflect the 21st century and the government would realize that the tons of trash located right outside the parliament gate and stabroek market isnt an attractive sight.
By denobrega
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: Guyana , for Guyanese
That was some funny stuff, Batowl. I feel yah Roses1, I definitely reminisce on my youthful days of Linden but Batowl's view is probably closer to reality
By Whiddon
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re:GUYANA, FOR GUYANESE
Girl stop dreaming!!! Yuh belly full or something! All dem reminiscences and as soon as something happen yuh drop Guyana like "hot****"! Dreamer, Dreamer!! Drop everything and go back! Stop waiting, stop dreaming! Gwan, run, wah holding yuh back! If you really love Linden, let nothing hold yuh back!
By batowl
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
GUYANA, FOR GUYANESE
I have to say, my very heart and soul resides in Guyana. Most of the dreams I have when I sleep occur in Guyana (Linden). When I look to my retirement, I'm in Guyana. I would love to have my son spend a year going to school in Guyana but let's not get it twisted, Guyana...for now... is for Guyanese people. I would never, ever recommend Guyana as a vacation destination for North American friends who are not Guyanese. Unless they are maybe trying to find an eco-trip. The mud streets and the market with meat and no refrigeration, the broken down homes and decrepit sports stadium, the questionable boats that get us from Mackenzie to Wismar and the pissy smelling restaurants is really not for the faint of heart.
However, I have an American friend who was dying to go Guyana because she is shall we say voluptuous and its known world wide that Guyanese men got a lot of love for big girls so I guess it depends on your reason for wanting to go.
As for me, I love that heat, I love that Guyanese men still psssssttt when you walk by, that I can find green mango with salt and pepper at a little store front shop, that rastas still sell Ital at all events and no one is afraid to eat it, I love that I can buy a fried fish with plantain chips and stand right there on the street and eat it. I love that I can go to the creek and Im not worry about how cute I look or my hair (SERIOUSLY THOUGH, What is in that creek? My hair is done for my whole vacation once I swim in the creek). I love that people say hello and old men and women know you since you were a kid. That I can go to MHS and breath in a breath of nostalgia, remembering what it was like to run out during break time and get a icicle from Icicle Man, to look so forward to seeing my friends that the next day cant come fast enough. Going out front and hearing the frontliners hustle for their money. But most of all, I love remembering just how safe a place this was to grow up, its not quite the same now but remembering brings me comfort.
Peace.
PS. What do we do about fixing it all. WHAT DO WE DO... I'M SICK OF THIS COLD.
By Roses1
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
re: amenrata
If you claim you love Linden so much, why aren't you there right now helping to build it and therefore be part of the revitalization process. Your sentiments really seem quite shallow and without true substance, no disrespect intended. But to me, if I cared about a place soooo much, I would honestly be there rounding up like minded citizens to physically and mentally work together in turning things around. Even if i failed at least i could say i tried and I wasn't just waiting on others or lady luck to return the Linden back to its past glory where everyone would want to be there again.
By denobrega
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Re: Denobrega
Denobrega although linden is depressing as you say, i prefer to be in linden anyday that georgetown, for one linden don't get flooded out like georgetown, and you and your white friends will more likely to be robbed in georgetown than in linden, and you will be shamed of yourself for taking them there, one day linden will rise to be the glory it was once was, and everyone will want to be in linden, so have your fun in disrespecting linden as you always do.
By amen-ra-ta
Thursday, February 19, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
question: where did all the Guyanese Portuguese go...........
I barely saw any Portuguese people in Guyana except for the Brazilians I saw in Georgetown. Did they all leave and go to Canada like my father and his family. Is there a large Portuguese population in New Amsterdam cause I sure did not see many in Georgetown. All the ones I met were all related to me. Just wondering..................
By denobrega
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Sorry, Linden isnt a tourist hot spot
what does linden honestly have to offer. The only reason why i visited linden during the Christmas season was because my mother's family lives there. I did feel a connection to linden/Wismar because it was where my mother was born. I got to see where my family lived in Dakama circle, where my aunt used to wash her clothes, and my great grandfathers land in Christianburg. However, there really wasnt much else to see or do. Linden was just so dead except. The only time I had fun was on Christmas night when they blocked off the street in Wismar and had a big old street party right. Oh how I felt so sorry for those who may have had to work on boxing day. Other than that, linden was boring and I tried to spend every waking moment in Georgetown and pretty much only slept at my cousin's house in linden during the nights.
By denobrega
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
TAKE THEM TO LINDEN PLZE!
YOU WOULD NOT REGRET TAKING AMERICANS TO GUYANA ESPECIALLY LINDEN TOWN...
THE FUNNY THING IS AMERICANS BELIEVE GUYANESE ARE JAMAICANS BECAUSE OF OUR ACCENT.
By silent lover
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
hey lex
Ill take them to GT eventually. I don't know about taking them to linden however....that place was depreeeeeesing.
By denobrega
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
Take your friends to Guyana
I think you should take them to Guyana, but explain to them that Guyana is not all white sand beaches. I took my husband to Guyana for the first time and he loves it there. He loves the freedom that Guyanese enjoy... doors and windows wide open, the people were nice to him in Linden and the food was different.
My suggestion is if u decide to take them to Guyana have about two other friends (local) that will be around you, just in case.
Take them to the falls, Baganara( you can spend the day here). Take a day trip to Charity, Essequibo and Berbice.
To avoid too much attention dress simple, dont be flashing expensive cameras and alot of money, but most of all be honest to your friends and tell them that there are parts of Guayna that are dangerous, and also avaid the crowd. Have a nice trip.
By Lex
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
would any of you take your american friends to guyana?
After showing my white American colleagues pictures of my trip to Guyana, and of course I only showed them pics of the nice places like City Mall, Splashmins etc, many have showed an interest in going to Guyana with me this summer. At first I glowed at the idea but now I'm thinking, will they be ready for Guyana. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely fell in love with Guyana when I went back but I don't if I'm ready to share Guyana with my upper class white colleagues whose ideas of the Caribbean center around white sandy beaches, blue waters and club mead. What do you guys think.
By denobrega
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
WITH OGRES AT THE TOP THE BOTTOM WILL REFLECT THAT MENTALITY
Roses1 Remember way back I told you about the Law that says a husband cannot be guilty of raping his wife unless they are divorced or legally separated. Recently there was a lot of furor in the press about amending the Rape Laws. I can't recall reading anywhere that they have gotten to that yet.
This is a country in which a policeman stood before a Magistrate and told her that he had confronted an infant with her molester in a Police Station immediately after the incident occured. Imagine the trauma of a an infant being put through this experience, being raped again by ignorance. I wrote two indignant letters in the aftermath to that episode and all I got in response was an ignorant jackass claiming that the Judges Rule demanded that the Police do what was done. For the sake of the record it does not, but I am not going to go into the intricasies of that now. Suffice to say that if a nation can be so unconscious and insensitive about puting infants through these kinds of experiences, expecting tolerance for diversity even though you might disagree with something, is a waste of time.
Guyana has become desensitized to that which moves the rest of the world. As referred in Stabroek News, the behaviour and attitudes of officials of the state to atrocities has wiped away whatever remnants of decency and empathy remaining in the society. Imagine in the US they will not show you dead bodies glaringly. In Guyana the front pages of the tabloids was awash with the mutilated corpses of young black men mudered by vigilantes. Their purpose was to desensitize the population to the killing of his particular demographic group. It worked better than they thought it would.
By victoriaguy
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
CRIMINAL MINDS!!!!!!!!!
The greasy palms of the law
By Staff | February 17, 2009 in Editorial
No one was surprised last week when several members of the Guyana Police Force Tactical Service Unit were arraigned before the Chief Magistrate on charges of bribery and demanding money with menace. In an exceptional, but not unexpected, expression of misplaced camaraderie, constables in the unit at Eve Leary staged a protest against the police administration for its failure to keep their colleagues out of the courts and out of the newspaper headlines.
The allegations against the policemen were not unique. This newspaper, over the years, has published numerous letters from persons who complained about having had to grease the palms of law enforcement officers for various favours. Often, the victims of everyday, roadside shakedowns are anxious only to escape from some inconvenient punishment, or to avoid some unwarranted imposition, or to expedite some service to which they were either legally or not legally entitled.
Some road-users, pulled over for a routine check and falsely accused of misdemeanours, are asked to pay a bribe to avoid prosecution. Others have had cash or property stolen from them during searches. Last month, a policeman attached to the same Tactical Services Unit was arrested after he was caught driving a stolen car. Police officers have been alleged to demand hard cash for not pursuing, or for selectively pursuing, an investigation or arrest, or for not reporting illegal activities.
Given the frequency and volume of complaints and charges, it must be admitted that corruption − aimed at obtaining illegal, personal and financial benefits − has become endemic and that the police force is suffering from an institutional culture of graft. It is easy to blame the constables for this sort of misconduct and to drag them before the courts. But it is also clear that very little has been done at an institutional level to eradicate corruption at the higher levels of the force.
The administrations ambivalent approach to allegations surrounding the involvement of senior police officers in corrupt transactions is partly to blame for the persistence of this problem. When he was informed that US courts had provided evidence that a senior superintendent of police had admitted that he had received money to do certain illegal things as an enforcer in the US Embassy visa racket some years ago, and that the US courts found certain other subordinate officers guilty of wrongdoing in the same matter, the former Minister of Home Affairs Mr Ronald Gajraj unconcernedly declared that the local police had no evidence to prosecute the culprits.
Similarly, when the present Minister of Home Affairs Mr Clement Rohee was asked about another senior police officers involvement in a narcotics scandal, he responded cheerily that the transcript of an incriminating recorded conversation between a senior police officer and a narco-trafficker made interesting reading The officer has since been promoted.
No organisation can police itself effectively. But this is exactly what the two institutions established to enforce internal discipline in the police force pretend to do. The Police Complaints Authority has no investigative capability and is obliged to refer its complaints against policemen to the same police force for investigation. The Office of Professional Responsibility, headed by a retired officer, has no independence and can investigate only those matters referred to it by the commissioner of police. Policemen have little to fear from these two weak watchdogs.
Corrupt juniors become corrupt seniors who are unlikely to correct corrupt juniors, and so on. Thats the way the wheels stay greased. Is it any wonder that the constables behave as they do when they see their superintendents and other superiors accepting backhanders with impunity?
By supererro
Wednesday, February 18, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
EACH ONE, TEACH ONE
As much as I loath to agree with what denobrega just said, unfortunately its very true. I cant believe the ignorance and hatred that comes from our people. The sad thing is that a lot of them end up in a lot of trouble when they do leave Guyana because they cant adjust. A Guyanese brotha I know went to New York and was working at a company where the boss was a gay man. He made a lot of stupid comments and thought he was in Guyana and that would be acceptable. Not only did he get his ass fired but he could not get a letter of recommendation, period. Every time he put that company on his resume and someone called them for a reference they were told he was a bigot, homophobic and violent. Oh well!
The thing is, denobrega, I consider myself an intelligent person who can contribute a lot to Guyana. I also believe that quite a bit of the skills and knowledge that I have, I acquired here in North America. There is group think in Guyana. Its difficult to think outside the box when you suck in the box with everyone in the boxs opinions and prejudices. What I think needs to happen, is that a lot of us need to go home. We need to reach back and teach those down there what is real and what is religious crap that theyve been brainwashed to think. Im not saying we need have a mass exodus back to Guyana (although Brotha Garveys idea did have some merits), Im saying we need to give part of our time. Even if its when on vacation in Guyana, take a few days to volunteer at schools. Change the minds of the kids. Take a leave of absence from your job and go for a couple of weeks, give back to the place that gave you life that needs you now. The truth is the world is a mess. Financially and emotionally, it might make sense to make Guyana a better place because you never know whats going to be happening as the rest of the world comes apart at the seams.
One.
By Roses1
Tuesday, February 17, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
yeah right amenrata
You can't even get the majority of citizens in Guyana to stop throwing trash into the drainage canals. So I doubt there will be any success in changing their attitudes toward gays. Sorry to say but Guyana is just a backward nation in so many ways and I really think its current state has to do with the fact that so many of Guyana's best and brightest have fled. I always think about my own family. Most of my relatives in Guyana had once owned businesses and were professionals yet they all left Guyana and are now contributing thier skills to Canada, America and Barbados. And my family isnt alone. I know of tons of Guyanese professionals, highly educated men and women who are doing so well in North America and I ask myself, what would Guyana be like today if they had all stayed in GT. Are we all at fault for abandoning our nation when we could have stayed to help build. Just something to ponder.
The effects of the braindrain is so evident on so many levels.
you can't even get guyanese to stop throwing trash into drainage canals let alone change their deep seated biblically ingrained biases against gays. Guyana is just a backward nation period in so many aspects. I love my country dearly but I honestly believe that the braindrain is the cause of so many of Guyana's problems. I just think back at my own family who were once so productive in Guyana: business owners, accountants, teachers who
By denobrega
Tuesday, February 17, 2009 |
|
| Reply |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
