The pathetic defence of Joe Harmon by Hinds

Apr 09, 2016 Letters

Dear Editor,
You do have patience and lots of forbearance to have published Nigel Hinds defence of Mr Harmon in garrulous style. Quite a challenge to read his weak defence via interrogatory challenges.
The commentaries by Chris Ram and Anand Goolsarran are very pertinent despite Nigel Hinds classification of verbal assaults, but as he is defending the wanderings of Mr Harmon, he would of course decry and debase any negative expression on Mr Harmon’s behaviour.
That Mr Harmon would close his eyes to the various machinations he himself is reported to have made some comments on in the past, plus the well known facts that the previous government had close ties with the two parties viz BK and Bai Shan Ling, then ‘buddy up himself’ with them, is a clear case that his mental acuity is suspect. The activities of those two parties have been a great cause of unease for the people of Guyana and even now as for example the land deals, the tax free vehicles, etc etc. Did Mr Harmon not know nor hear about the unpleasant activities of these two parties?
How come ‘everybody know’ except he?
But Nigel Hinds would want us to believe that even if Mr Harmon knew or heard of them, he, Mr Harmon, being of superior knowledge in law, psychology, business, honesty and social committment could not let any failures therein cloud his vision that he could proceed without any fear of disapproval with his actions.
Yep! the customary political blindness that the people have to accept what you do as you know best.
Well Mr Harmon is dead wrong and should be not only be scolded for his open indiscretions and political blindness, but sent packing forthwith.
I will follow Nigel Hinds numerical listings but not as many:
1. the honorific appointment of BK was foolish that when the President learned about it, he himself rescinded it to express his displeasure;
(Mr Harmon’s first X on his way out)
2. the Minister responsible for business did not know that he had a person to advise him on business;
(Mr Harmon’s second X on his way out)
3. Mr Harmon’s trip to China does not fall within his portfolio as he was the main official whereas the main officials should have been the Minister of Business and the Minister of Foreign Affairs;
(Mr Harmon’s third X on his way out)
4. Mr Harmon’s buddying up with those two persons does raise suspicions on sincerity of purpose a la “show me your company and I can tell who you are”!
(Mr Harmon’s fourth X on his way out)
5. if Mr Harmon was the politician who interfered with the scheduled seizure actions of the GRA, then like as in Macbeth “ out brief candle…out!” The nice genteel honourable thing for Mr.Harmon to do is to hand in his resignation and not wait for the axe.
Think deeply I say to him and act promptly.
Carl Veecock

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News