Dear Editor,
I refer to Freddie Kissoon’s column, captioned, “The pathetic, unbelievable, political decline of Eusi Kwayana,” published in the Kaieteur News edition, Thursday, July 02, 2020.
Mr. Kissoon. in his column. attacked Kwayana most viciously for clarifying a misrepresentation by Christopher Ram (letter SN June 13.2020) of what Ram claimed Kwayana told him. Readers are referred to Kwayana’s letter, SN July 1, 2020 captioned, “ I have no knowledge of Tacuma Ogunseye ever having a role in any violence anywhere in Guyana.” In the context of Kwayana correcting Ram, one would expect that a response would have come from Mr. Ram rather than Kissoon. Kissoon’s hostile intervention is not surprising since it is self-serving. What Kwayana stated has discredited Kissoon’s erroneous contention that Kwayana had linked me with the violence in Buxton and gunmen, something he claimed in his previous writings. Kissoon, like Ram, who was seeking to use Kwayana to justify their false narrative – now find themselves in no-man’s land. And now they have to make their case against me based on their independent information. It is this reality that Kissoon has great difficulties with.

This letter is a very limited response intended to expose Kissoon’s duplicity. He wrote, “ … Two traits in Kwayana deterred me from seeing him as a hero. One was his obsession with not divulging information. He has an obsession with keeping things secret, things which should be in the public domain.” He continued, “ Secondly, he deliberately obscures history by withholding specificities. For example, he informed us two months ago that he was at a trial each day of Donald Rodney who was convicted by “ a magistrate” (his words). I believe he intentionally withheld the magistrate ‘s identity.”

All this in Kissoon’s view is a major “sin” that denies “hero” status to Kwayana or whatever is in Freddie’s warped mind. However, my concern here is to point out that Kissoon is duplicitous, he has one standard for others and another for himself. He is on public record as claiming that the libel case I brought against him for linking me to a secret meeting with gunmen in Buxton was heard in the court and he Kissoon won the case. I have on many occasions called on him to state the court and the magistrate/judge that heard the case. To date, Kissoon has not provided this important information. Why is he withholding this critical information? Is he obsessed with secrecy which he accused Kwayana of? Is Kissoon intentionally withholding the magistrate’s or judge‘s “identity” that tried the libel case he claimed he won? The simple truth is that Freddie is a pathetic liar, and a public one. In this context, it is impossible to get him to change his ways. I think the description given by someone to Kissoon as a “Trumpian narcissist” is an apt one that is on full display with the filth that flows from this columnist’s pen.

Despite the observations above, I am giving Kissoon another grand opportunity for him to redeem himself. I call on him to make public his evidence to support his contention that I call those who were resisting in Buxton liberators or used the term “liberation movement”. Kissoon stated “ It never occurred to Kwayana that Ogunseye lied to him. But obviously, Kwayana knew that Ogunseye used the term “ liberation movement” several times. “Kissoon, you have an excellent opportunity to prove that I am a liar. Don’t give me another victory – destroy me with your bundle of evidence. The plain truth is you have no evidence.

Kissoon’s psychological condition/disorder is demonstrated in his over obsession for recognition when he cites Kwayana’s book “The Morning After” as his (Kissoon’s) path to glory. Kwayana’s recognition of his “ journalistic investigation” in relation to the East Coast violence, in Kissoon’s twisted mind, is evidence that substantiates his claim that I was in a secret meeting with gunmen in Buxton. Freddie, you are in sad place, snatching at straws.
I end by making this point. Frederick Kissoon has no moral fortitude when he takes advantage of the “dead” (Lawyer Mortimer Coddette) and attributes to the deceased whatever he pleases, knowing full well that the dead can’t contradict him as the living can.

Regards,
Tacuma Ogunseye