The facts do not support Burnham killing Rodney

May 29, 2013 Letters

Dear Editor,
M. Maxwell’s irrational and sloppy arguments as per letter, “Posterity is always painfully cruel to dictators,” KN 25/5/2013, in response to mine “The evidence to date does not suggest Burnham was responsible for Rodney’s death,” SN 7/5/2013, exemplify the shoddiness that characterises discourses, mistaken as ‘smarts,’ and perpetuate myths as gospel.
For that writer to make a claim that my take on the Walter Rodney/Forbes Burnham issue confirms “the kind of logically suspect and morally strained analysis we suffer from with enduring constancy in Guyana and particularly, with respect to the Rodney assassination” the responsibility resides with the author of said statement to produce an honest and rational case debunking the positions I used in support of my case, which were and are:
1.     The examination of Walter Rodney’s political belief (armed revolution) using extracts from Rodney’s mentor, the world-renowned CLR James; and WPA co-leader Rupert Roopnarine;
2.     The reported statement of “an accident” by army personnel Gregory Smith regarding the device Rodney was given;
3.     The refusal of the WPA to use its muscle to bring to fruition the 2005 unanimous legislature vote to establish an independent international commission of enquiry (IICE) into Rodney’s death and;
4.     The evidence to date does not say Burnham is responsible for Rodney’s death.
Maxwell’s evident failure to address or disprove any of the listed four through diversionary tactics, irrelevance and ‘facts,’ is deserving of exposure:-
According to Maxwell, “Ultimately and unequivocally, a powerful national figure like Walter Rodney could not be killed in a closely controlled police state like the Burnham-dominated Guyana in 1980 without Burnham’s prior knowledge, or more to the point, involvement and endorsement. That is a fact.”
Is it a “fact” that Burnham was ‘involved and endorsed’ the death of Rodney? Where is evidence to prove so? Is it a “fact” that Maxwell attributed to Burnham the “involvement and endorsement” of Rodney’s death? Maxwell’s quote confirms, yes. But does Maxwell’s “fact,” absence proof (indisputably the case) or evidence makes it a “fact” that Burnham was ‘involved and endorsed’ the killing of Rodney? No!
And is it a “fact” that an IICE was voted for to provide inquiry into Rodney’s death, and the “fact” that the WPA has failed since 2005 to mount an aggressive strategy to bring to fruition the IICE? Yes, on both counts! The presence of the former and absence of the latter are public knowledge.
And to Maxwell’s other irrational take that Tacuma Ogunseye’s questions to PNCR leader David Granger become “fact” that Burnham due to a “closely controlled police state like [his] in 1980” made him ‘involved and endorsed’ Rodney’s death, how does the writer account for Roopnarine’s 2010 admission that, “We [WPA] were accumulating weapons… we were accumulating equipment of various kinds. A certain amount of that was coming from the military.”
Refer to SN, September 19, 2010 “WPA had been accumulating weapons prior to Rodney’s death.”
Or how does Maxwell account for CLR James’ 1981 statements that “Walter did not study exactly the taking of power….He was the chief person of the Working People’s Alliance (WPA)….A key problem in the face of overwhelming state power is how to arm oneself against it. In fact, the arms for a revolution are there: the police and the army have them. What you have to do is win over a section of the army, and you have arms. And you could also take away arms from the government.”
And going by Maxwell, what makes Ogunseye ‘right’ about Smith’s role, Burnham’s alleged complicity in Rodney’s death, and disregard for a book detailing Smith’s account of June 13, 1980 (Walter’s date of death), and Granger ‘wrong’ to rely on said account? No substantiated reason, only ego- i.e. because they say so, it is so!
The WPA and PPP were/are the ones that blamed Burnham for Rodney’s death, so how can the PNC be in cahoots with the PPP on the Rodney issue? Maxwell is conveniently ignoring that the WPA has not taken a strong position to commence the IICE. Its former ally, the PPP, is in government for 21 years and the vbery WPA now sits in parliament- thanks to the ‘dreaded’ PNC- as part of the opposition majority. From this scenario who is/are really afraid of the truth emerging? Clearly, it is not the PNC!
Minette Bacchus

Latest News

The facts do not support Burnham killing Rodney

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 14th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Harpy Eagles lead ahead of fourth round

Resilient Talibans survives North East to win...

Sport Ministry, NSC to meet swimming clubs today

Pouderoyen FC kicks off U13 tournament with...

Briton John wins L.F.S Burnham Memorial Cycle...

Junior Jaguars hold Costa Rica to 2-2 draw,...

Features/Columnists

I don’t remember!

CARICOM Nations Should Respond Together To new U.S. Policies

Guyana opposition parties

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

The facts do not support Burnham killing Rodney

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 14th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]