An insight into Bisram’s real agenda

Jan 11, 2015 Letters

Dear Editor,
I see that Mr. Vishnu Bisram is engaged in his latest blitz in the letter columns and says the following of himself “ I am a person of integrity adhering to journalistic ethics…” (KN of 7th January , 2015). In view of his polling inclinations and his frequent pronouncements on the Guyanese reality it is important that readers assess his statement of self-praise.
In my letter of October 9 (KN) I had asked Mr. Bisram to support the following claim of his: “As I stated four decades ago and repeated umpteenth (sic) times since then, it was wrong for Burnham and the PNC to persecute Indians, Amerindians, Portuguese (driving them out of Guyana) and others. It cannot be right now for any group to dominate another group, even if elected in free and fair elections.”
I drew to his attention the meaning of the word “persecution” (implying an active program to target especially an ethnic group) and what the absence of African Guyanese from his list meant. I presented him with 10 questions including the main one which was how would he distinguish between the natural result of each party providing jobs for its members in a situation where the vast majority of its members are of one particular ethnic group and a deliberate policy of ethnic exclusion of the non-members. I pointed out that as a pollster, he was a social scientist, and could not be in the business of promoting perceptions to the status of persecution.
Mr Bisram’s response to me (KN of November 4, 2014) was that (a) I was trying to make black white (so to speak) as I was the only one who did not know that the PNC drove out many businesspersons, especially Indians. (b) as was being brought out in the current Rodney commission, the persecution was there for all to see. What Mr. Bisram either dishonestly or incompetently did ,was to make his own claim and answer it. He did a Jarge Peetaytay (the apocryphal dunce policeman of the 50’s who couldn’t spell Urquhart Street and took the offender over to Water street which he could spell.
I never made a case that the PNC did not harass anyone who it deemed as deserving harassment – Indian, Portuguese, or African. Similarly, as I pointed out, the PPP will harass anyone it feels it must target for whatever reason crosses its mind. A bona fide social scientist cannot represent harassment and murder of political opponents as persecution of an ethnicity and compound his dangerous folly by misrepresenting his challenger’s position.
If it was incompetence, then the reader should now know how to take his polls when next he releases one. If it was dishonestly, then the reader should know how to assess his claim that “ I am a person of integrity adhering to journalistic ethics…”. As the Madame Justice reminded us at the TIGI dinner, there is no partial integrity. One either has integrity or one does not.
In case you missed it in his letter, please note that in an issue where he is challenged on the basis of his claim that the PNC “persecuted Indians”, meaning that they (and in addition to the Portuguese and others – no blacks) were persecuted perhaps for the benefit of Africans, there were no Africans listed in the persons to whom he spoke. His bias comes out immediately. An independent researcher would ask all the candidate emigrants.
But most of all, Mr. Bisram has the chutzpah to name an inquiry into the murder of an African and the harassment of a number of his mostly African supporters in order to make his case that the PNC persecuted Indians to the exclusion of blacks (Remember, if he includes blacks it makes nonsense of his case).
In order for readers to get a clearer example of how a professional would respond to a challenge , I direct them to Dr. Suresh Narine’s response to Mr. Vieira which is current. Dr. Narine answers Tony Vieira’s questions head on.
The reader should note that it is not the first time Mr. Bisram would be accused of dishonesty. In his letter of January 24th 2014, Mike Persaud made the same observation referring to Bisram’s response to his by saying “Misrepresenting your opponent’s position (it is called a straw person’s argument) is a cheap trick.”
The Americans have a saying that “If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck”. Mr Bisram ducks like a quack.
Of course, a read of Mike Persaud’s letter of January 1, 2014 in KN gives the reader an insight into Bisram’s real agenda.
Frederick W. A. Collins

Latest News

An insight into Bisram’s real agenda

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport endorses Mashramani Street...

Guyanese boxers shine in IBA World Rankings ahead...

Motie returns for Day/Night affair, as fired-up...

Daniel Singh pockets East Bank Pool crown

Khalil, Pollard and Barker reign supreme as BCQS...

Cricket West Indies passes historic governance...

Features/Columnists

Guyana’s silence represents a shocking neglect of its national interest

OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus

Corruption – at epidemic proportion

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

An insight into Bisram’s real agenda

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 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 […]