THE funny thing about the opposition – funny to the point of comical – is that they are as guilty as sin in many areas while their followers think otherwise.

Let’s take for example the ongoing discussion of the atrocities of Burnham and the PNC. A case in point is the murder of Dr Walter Rodney-how he was murdered and by whom? This is a very pointed question which deserves a straightforward answer. But here you have it the party hacks dancing the usual PNC dance that we don’t know who did it. Well let me refresh their memories (something the entire world knows) that they are the one’s who killed him.
It was a brutal plot planned by the master planner Burnham and executed by Gregory Smith to get rid of a man who posed the greatest threat to that party’s illegal hold on power.
Anyone, and I repeat anyone who dared to challenge Burnham was an automatic target to be mowed down. This they did with supposed dexterity and got rid of Rodney, but they forgot one thing: it will never be erased from the memories of those of us who lived through that ordeal. We would always remember the heinous way a government and party brutally ended the life of a fellow human being. They may want to forget and try all these funny excuses, but the truth can never be erased no matter how hard they try.
I would not waste much time on this discussion, but would make this suggestion. Seeing the Rodney case and the PNC’s direct involvement would not go away from the public’s domain, why not clear that party’s name in an inquiry? Call a public inquiry into Rodney’s death and get it over and done with. This wouldn’t be too difficult to accomplish, with that one-seat majority and that party having the upper hand in parliament then it would be all too easy for them to table a bill to that effect. I rest my case.

Another area where the PNC/APNU has a horrible record, but in essence they are casting an accusing finger at the government in its constant harping on how, when, where and with whom the President should make speeches and the nonsensical argument about former President Jagdeo and sitting President Ramotar making “obscene” remarks in public. Their argument is that these gentlemen should be circumspect to the point where that party wants to write his speeches while at the same time tell him where to make it.
Well, the fact is what did their illegal presidents do? Hoyte is known to have used a funeral for a known criminal to launch a scathing attack on the government, even draping the criminal’s coffin with the country’s flag as a sign of congratulating the murderer on his “good deeds.” These acts were not considered offensive at all. If Hoyte’s was not considered reprehensible then how dare tell the President how to conduct himself in public fora?