Dear Editor
THIS letter is directed in response to the FITUG statement in Stabroek News, Friday, September 27 and to the confederacy of the no-confidence motion, stating ‘That President Granger has lost the legitimate right to govern.’ I must further refer to and quote the reference as cited by Ralph Ramkarran September 8, Stabroek News, pertaining to the no-confidence motion as, the ‘Shenanigans and treachery of Bharrat Jagdeo and Charandass Persaud,’ unquote– which did not achieve its intended halt of national matters as conceived by their devious and reprehensible scheme.

This directive against President Granger did not start with the no-confidence motion; it began further back, to the plot to assassinate this president, involving Nizam Khan, that was proposed to Andrif Gillard as alleged, that was orchestrated in late 2015, but was rejected by Gillard. This confederacy is driven by the pursuit of greed and the passion for ethnic dominance. This is a re-enactment of the post-emancipation onslaught to facilitate a stratagem towards who are the proprietors and the eternally subjugated employees.

As a member of ACDA and a student of ‘our Guyanese history,’ the features, posture and pretensions applied are known and easily recognised and predictable. For this reason, we had always proposed a coalition of political ideas, towards a common, cohesive ideal, which APNU+AFC has brought to the table, as a not perfect, but workable administrative body. What has followed I turn to the biblical Solomon Romance to inform the reader through the reference of 1Kings chap. 3, 16 to 28: “ A Mother had through death lost her right to motherhood, so she usurped her neighbour’s privilege and stole her child; when confronted before the King, she would not admit her guilt but hid behind props and facades of legality; so King  Solomon drew his sword and proposed to divide the child, the self-serving, wicked mother agreed to the murder of the child, while the true mother agreed to surrender her right to motherhood, to save her child’s life, and thus by moral right, the wise King gave the true mother her child.”

Twice already, the child of Guyana was fractured by self-serving political passions, 1961-64 and 1993 to 2012, again with this usurper confederacy, divisive politics behind props of legal postulations long-violated, attempted to unseat a performing government  with a no-confidence motion’ on what grounds? There were no narratives of ‘on what grounds,’ but those mentioned above. David Granger managed this invasive entity on behalf of the majority of Guyanese with tact and elegance, establishing beyond doubt his right to govern and as a result, Ralph Ramkarran highlighted that the coalition ‘Triumphed’ over the Trojan Horse. What it has done however, is expose the creatures behind the props and the deficiencies of its exclusive ‘Guyanese’ stage hands, as we proceed to the natural act 2.
Regards
Barry Braithwaite