EYEWITNESS: Circling the wagons…

0

…for “our” people

The WPA weighed in on Pressie’s unilateral appointment of Justice James Patterson as GECOM’s chairman. Your Eyewitness hoped, in the interest of full disclosure, they’d confessed they’re a member of the APNU coalition with the PNC – of which Pressie’s the leader. It would’ve at least signalled “where they were coming from” – which is, from the belly of the beast!

Wasn’t it Martin Carter who best summed up, not only the nature of that beast after the murder of Father Darke , which prefigured Walter Rodney’s, but also what should be our response: “I have at last started/ To understand the origin/ Of our vileness, and being/ Unable to deny it, I suggest/ Its nativity/ In the shame of knowledge/ Of our vileness, we shall fight.” But it’s obvious that the WPA has decided to accept the “vileness” of the PNC and join them rather than “fight”.

In terms of the WPA’s statement, we can also quote Carter’s bitter conclusion after he also had joined up with the PNC government: “But a mouth is always muzzled/ by the food it eats to live.” His lesson for the WPA is summed up in the word “but” – which isn’t called an “eraser word” for nothing. It wipes out all the excuses you may have for cooperating with the beast, to let you know the extent of your betrayal.

So what does the WPA say to this strangulation of the democratic spirit? They began with: “There was never going to be a good outcome to the appointment of the GECOM Chair without prior Constitutional Reform. This could be proven true for all appointments that require President/Leader of Opposition agreement.” But this isn’t true, is it? We’ve had FIVE appointments that produced “good outcomes”, haven’t we? Excepting when the PNC after 1997 decided to launch warfare against the state!

And imagine it was the WPA that suggested two Indians, Doodnauth Singh and Steve Surujbally, whom ACDA railed against recently. The question, of course, if those two worthies were deemed “fit and proper” then, what sin exactly did Joe Singh commit that the WPA doesn’t defend him against Pressie’s dictat?

Then if, as the erstwhile party of Rodney says, “WPA did not and indeed could not, participate in the selection process ‘as of right’ since the Constitution confines this selection, effectively to a President/Leader of Opposition procedure,” where in the same Constitution they found the clause specifying Pressie consult them when he hired and fired Rupert Roopnaraine? Last time your Eyewitness looked at Art 106, Pressie “as of right” appoints members of his Cabinet!!

Verily, it’s clear the Worst Possible Alternative has returned home!

…and closing minds

But one of the most amazing assertions by the WPA was their third “point”: “Our fundamental political position is not to be ensnared by PPP/C, on principle, in any form, guise, or manner, in their desperate efforts at revisionism/historical rewriting/opportunism/ and crude hypocrisy.” On principle? Which principle?”

If the WPA can embrace the PNC, which has rejected the findings of the Rodney Commission – not to mention its recommendations – what “principle” has the PPP violated that exceeds those enumerated atrocities? Did the PPP kill any WPA leaders? Said the COI: “Given the manner in which the country was run, coupled with the threats issued by Prime Minister Burnham to the members of the WPA, we conclude that Prime Minister Burnham knew of the plan and was part of the conspiracy to assassinate Dr. Walter Rodney”.

What about the killings of Ohene Koama, Edward Dublin and the stabbing to death, in broad daylight, of a Catholic priest, Father Bernard Darke, to name a few?
And all of this for a few pieces of silver?

…for fait accompli

And the WPA expects Guyanese to be comforted that they’ll “withdraw from the coalition” if elections are rigged?

Like with the UF in 1968, who’d care then? Boat done gone over falls!

LEAVE A REPLY

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.