WHEN Mr. Barrington Braithwaite (of ACDA) writes, his anger is obvious and passionate. Writing in the SN of 5-26-12 under the title, “a generation of young Guyanese has been abandoned by the authorities”, he explains why he is especially disturbed over a Capitol News broadcast which dealt with “the number of youths before the magistrate‘s courts on serious criminal charges” apparently due to parental neglect. Mr. Barrington is especially riled up about “the response of lawyer Vic Puran (a PNC supporter whom he felt) simplified the matter by stating erroneously that young people don’t want to work, etc” and he was compelled to take “offence to the escapist pronouncement of Mr. Puran.”
Mr. Braithwaite further blames Mr. Puran who “was not unmindful of the process which enveloped (Guyana) in a criminal culture, that, with the complicity of the state, corrupted every positive social value system.”
Mr. Barrington goes even further and points out the abomination “in the towns and a city (Georgetown) saturated with rubbish, human filth and fallen humanity (which) seems not to be the concern of any authority.”
For all these problems Mr. Barrington blames who else: “are we not witnessing the consequences of the legacy of the era when Bharat Jagdeo was President?  Can constant blaming of each other for their problems also hinder expeditious resolution?.
For all the scarcity of jobs and the reaccumulation of garbage in Georgetown similar to what occurred under another PNC era, why shouldn’t Mr. Braithwaite be upset that the PPP/C government has not put an end to it?
Indeed the PPP/C also failed to ethnically balance our armed forces or has been slow to resolve the electricity problem after 20 years in power.  (1) Are young people just lazy or is there lack of jobs? GUYSUCO has always had an increasing demand for new agricultural workers, especially cane cutters.
So when will Mr. Barrington, the ACDA, GUYSUCO, PNC,GAWU and the Agriculture Minister all get together to ensure GUYSUCO pickup trucks are at  specific spots in black neighbourhoods early in the mornings to transport them for work? Certainly, it would be a  win-win situation for all. In fact, picking cotton during national service should have been good training for cutting sugar cane.
(2) Mr. Barrington’s anger is however seriously clouding his memory, reasoning and judgment and he needs to get his facts correctly. The criminal waves which started during the PNC era escalated with  the organized rampage of the ‘Fineman’ gang (the cause) which captured entire black villages at Victoria and (the Buxton Taliban)  birthing  the  Roger Khan reaction  period  (the effect) which  he now pinpoints  as “ legitimizing”   drug trafficking .  The Buxton Taliban massacres and robberies were politically and racially motivated while the Roger Khan response  was defensive and absolutely neither racial nor political. Get that straight. If the truth be told both groups “recruited   young men (exclusively black armed child soldiers in Buxton) on “both sides of the ‘murder fence,’ allowing some, including policemen to get rich by imposing a criminal class on the value system of this nation with rights above the law”. What exonerates Police Commissioner Mr. Winston Felix who was found complicit (he was taped) in his failure to arrest the criminal wave that Mr. Barrington bemoans?
(3) With regard to the issue that the PPP discontinued national service, Mr. Barrington cannot be more correct.  Most days national service recruits ran early in the morning to work up a good appetite, marched hither and thither, got free food, beds, boots, clothing and shelter- all at taxpayers’ expense. Their productivity required them to pick cotton all day and attend indoctrinating political lectures. What skills or training did they acquire?  Shooting and marching?   Mr. Barrington cannot blatantly ignore the raping of Indian women during national service equating it as “discipline and character moulding in the interest of national responsibility”?  What explains his fuming about national service where taxpayers’ money facilitated ethnic and cultural rape of Guyanese women?
(4) Mr. Barrington however must be credited for conceding that “parents are indeed culpable; (that) during the late 80s (during the PNC government), a negative materialism emerged with the new-found money from suitcase and marijuana trading, and the brand-name nouveau riche emerging.”
So what is one to make of his confession that “in that period (i.e.the 1980s) I gave one of my children a sum of money to purchase school items, and the child went … and bought brand-name sneakers”? The 1980s (during the PNC) “negative materialism of the brand-name nouveau riche” must have had a profound impact on him at that time; Mr. Barrington informs us that “I took my child back, demanded my money in no nice terms, while relatives and other acquaintances reproached me.
I responded ‘yard style’, directing them to do as they wish with their own children”. Can Mr. Barrington now understand why his “yard style, in no nice terms” bullying caused dismay from even his close relatives and personal acquaintances? Anger is not peculiar to anyone by race, religion, politics or nationality.  He could have gone  with the child in the first instance knowing a child’s natural proclivity to be fashionable as he himself admitted to wearing “ the proverbial ‘bush clarks,’ so there was no taunting or dress disputes ” at school.
Yet charges of genetic racism against Indians are frequently being used to constantly bully demands for shared political power. That bullying is not genetically inherent   has been obviously amplified in Mr. Barrington’s case where his relatives disapproved and rejected his crass behaviour. No sane person can seriously believe that bullying and racism are genetically inherent. Contrary to all this however is the belief advocated by the WPA/APNU’s Dr David Hinds.
In a DemeraraWaves (DW) article of    5-3-12 titled ‘the PPP/C post budget political theatre: appealing to race and pretending to be more hurt than it is”, he makes the preposterous claim that Indians are genetically racists.  Dr Hinds had no qualms in equating the PPP/C exclusively  as “particular(ly)  the Indian Guyanese community”.  Dr Hinds felt that “by projecting itself as the victim (and)  framing the opposition APNU as the “heartless” bullies and the AFC as traitors, the PPP (was)  playing to a familiar racial narrative aimed at the Indian Guyanese political reflexes. The images of the “Indian victim,” the “African bully” and the “Indian traitor”. Then confident that he is hammering nails in the coffin, he brazenly declares “one should not be surprised at the PPP’s call to race—racial appeal is in that party’s political genes.”  Howzatt for twisting straws into a shiny black gold definition of blatant racism, bullying, reverse victimhood and marginalisation?
Dr Hinds needs to explain this fantasy why in “particular the Indian Guyanese community” is automatically PPP/C as well as simultaneously AFC traitors in registering rejection of “their” PPP/C in 2011? Why would the complete return of the entire black vote to APNU   in 2011 exonerate culpability in any similar genetic black racism? Bizarre isn’t it?  Genetics or racial “numerical anomaly” cannot obviously be peculiar to Indians alone by just the way they vote if Dr Hinds is correct.  When  Dr Hinds is  justifiably accused of setting the scene for racial annihilation of Indians akin to that of Jews they must understand why rioting Indians demanded “we want Roger Khan” after the “Fineman” gang  massacre of women, men and degutting of children at Lusignan and later Bartica.
Nevertheless there is one issue where Mr. Barrington has my complete support. When he advocates  “for example, (to) let charges be laid against certain functionaries for mischief concerning public funds, conspiracy with organized crime and attempts at electoral fraud, (presumably the PNC 28 years as well as against Mr. Felix )  then I’m sure the nation will step back in line ….”; he cannot be wrong, but is on firm ground.  Step forward with the evidence as Mr. Eusi Kwayana did against Mr. David Singh and our own Mayor Green in the 1970s.

SULTAN MOHAMED
Mr. Barrington’s anger is clouding his memory, reasoning and judgment
WHEN Mr. Barrington Braithwaite (of ACDA) writes, his anger is obvious and passionate.  Writing in the SN of 5-26-12 under the title, “a generation of young Guyanese has been abandoned by the authorities”, he explains why he is especially disturbed over a Capitol News broadcast which dealt with “the number of youths before the magistrate‘s courts on serious criminal charges” apparently due to parental neglect. Mr. Barrington is especially riled up about “the response of lawyer Vic Puran (a PNC supporter whom he felt) simplified the matter by stating erroneously that young people don’t want to work, etc” and he was compelled to take “offence to the escapist pronouncement of Mr. Puran.”
Mr. Braithwaite further blames Mr. Puran who “was not unmindful of the process which enveloped (Guyana) in a criminal culture, that, with the complicity of the state, corrupted every positive social value system.”
Mr. Barrington goes even further and points out the abomination “in the towns and a city (Georgetown) saturated with rubbish, human filth and fallen humanity (which) seems not to be the concern of any authority.”
For all these problems Mr. Barrington blames who else: “are we not witnessing the consequences of the legacy of the era when Bharat Jagdeo was President?  Can constant blaming of each other for their problems also hinder expeditious resolution?.
For all the scarcity of jobs and the reaccumulation of garbage in Georgetown similar to what occurred under another PNC era, why shouldn’t Mr. Braithwaite be upset that the PPP/C government has not put an end to it?
Indeed the PPP/C also failed to ethnically balance our armed forces or has been slow to resolve the electricity problem after 20 years in power.  (1) Are young people just lazy or is there lack of jobs? GUYSUCO has always had an increasing demand for new agricultural workers, especially cane cutters.
So when will Mr. Barrington, the ACDA, GUYSUCO, PNC,GAWU and the Agriculture Minister all get together to ensure GUYSUCO pickup trucks are at  specific spots in black neighbourhoods early in the mornings to transport them for work? Certainly, it would be a  win-win situation for all. In fact, picking cotton during national service should have been good training for cutting sugar cane.
(2) Mr. Barrington’s anger is however seriously clouding his memory, reasoning and judgment and he needs to get his facts correctly. The criminal waves which started during the PNC era escalated with  the organized rampage of the ‘Fineman’ gang (the cause) which captured entire black villages at Victoria and (the Buxton Taliban)  birthing  the  Roger Khan reaction  period  (the effect) which  he now pinpoints  as “ legitimizing”   drug trafficking .  The Buxton Taliban massacres and robberies were politically and racially motivated while the Roger Khan response  was defensive and absolutely neither racial nor political. Get that straight. If the truth be told both groups “recruited   young men (exclusively black armed child soldiers in Buxton) on “both sides of the ‘murder fence,’ allowing some, including policemen to get rich by imposing a criminal class on the value system of this nation with rights above the law”. What exonerates Police Commissioner Mr. Winston Felix who was found complicit (he was taped) in his failure to arrest the criminal wave that Mr. Barrington bemoans?
(3) With regard to the issue that the PPP discontinued national service, Mr. Barrington cannot be more correct.  Most days national service recruits ran early in the morning to work up a good appetite, marched hither and thither, got free food, beds, boots, clothing and shelter- all at taxpayers’ expense. Their productivity required them to pick cotton all day and attend indoctrinating political lectures. What skills or training did they acquire?  Shooting and marching?   Mr. Barrington cannot blatantly ignore the raping of Indian women during national service equating it as “discipline and character moulding in the interest of national responsibility”?  What explains his fuming about national service where taxpayers’ money facilitated ethnic and cultural rape of Guyanese women?
(4) Mr. Barrington however must be credited for conceding that “parents are indeed culpable; (that) during the late 80s (during the PNC government), a negative materialism emerged with the new-found money from suitcase and marijuana trading, and the brand-name nouveau riche emerging.”
So what is one to make of his confession that “in that period (i.e.the 1980s) I gave one of my children a sum of money to purchase school items, and the child went … and bought brand-name sneakers”? The 1980s (during the PNC) “negative materialism of the brand-name nouveau riche” must have had a profound impact on him at that time; Mr. Barrington informs us that “I took my child back, demanded my money in no nice terms, while relatives and other acquaintances reproached me.
I responded ‘yard style’, directing them to do as they wish with their own children”. Can Mr. Barrington now understand why his “yard style, in no nice terms” bullying caused dismay from even his close relatives and personal acquaintances? Anger is not peculiar to anyone by race, religion, politics or nationality.  He could have gone  with the child in the first instance knowing a child’s natural proclivity to be fashionable as he himself admitted to wearing “ the proverbial ‘bush clarks,’ so there was no taunting or dress disputes ” at school.
Yet charges of genetic racism against Indians are frequently being used to constantly bully demands for shared political power. That bullying is not genetically inherent   has been obviously amplified in Mr. Barrington’s case where his relatives disapproved and rejected his crass behaviour. No sane person can seriously believe that bullying and racism are genetically inherent. Contrary to all this however is the belief advocated by the WPA/APNU’s Dr David Hinds.
In a DemeraraWaves (DW) article of    5-3-12 titled ‘the PPP/C post budget political theatre: appealing to race and pretending to be more hurt than it is”, he makes the preposterous claim that Indians are genetically racists.  Dr Hinds had no qualms in equating the PPP/C exclusively  as “particular(ly)  the Indian Guyanese community”.  Dr Hinds felt that “by projecting itself as the victim (and)  framing the opposition APNU as the “heartless” bullies and the AFC as traitors, the PPP (was)  playing to a familiar racial narrative aimed at the Indian Guyanese political reflexes. The images of the “Indian victim,” the “African bully” and the “Indian traitor”. Then confident that he is hammering nails in the coffin, he brazenly declares “one should not be surprised at the PPP’s call to race—racial appeal is in that party’s political genes.”  Howzatt for twisting straws into a shiny black gold definition of blatant racism, bullying, reverse victimhood and marginalisation?
Dr Hinds needs to explain this fantasy why in “particular the Indian Guyanese community” is automatically PPP/C as well as simultaneously AFC traitors in registering rejection of “their” PPP/C in 2011? Why would the complete return of the entire black vote to APNU   in 2011 exonerate culpability in any similar genetic black racism? Bizarre isn’t it?  Genetics or racial “numerical anomaly” cannot obviously be peculiar to Indians alone by just the way they vote if Dr Hinds is correct.  When  Dr Hinds is  justifiably accused of setting the scene for racial annihilation of Indians akin to that of Jews they must understand why rioting Indians demanded “we want Roger Khan” after the “Fineman” gang  massacre of women, men and degutting of children at Lusignan and later Bartica.
Nevertheless there is one issue where Mr. Barrington has my complete support. When he advocates  “for example, (to) let charges be laid against certain functionaries for mischief concerning public funds, conspiracy with organized crime and attempts at electoral fraud, (presumably the PNC 28 years as well as against Mr. Felix )  then I’m sure the nation will step back in line ….”; he cannot be wrong, but is on firm ground.  Step forward with the evidence as Mr. Eusi Kwayana did against Mr. David Singh and our own Mayor Green in the 1970s.