The narcissist doesn’t care about discovery

May 02, 2019 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,

‘When you talk to people about the narcissists … it’s often the lies they focus on. … The narcissist doesn’t care about discovery, whether legal or the ordinary kind. He cares about promoting his truth even if it is a bald-faced lie and everyone will know it soon enough. And he will brook no challenges and will never admit it was a lie to begin with.’ Does this not sound like Mr. Frederick Kissoon?
Please note that in my previous letter I established that Mr. Kissoon blatantly lied to the public in relation to the present government, referring to important elements in it ‘as basic fool(s) not worthy of being part of a modern government.’ Of course, as a narcissist he doesn’t care about discovery and does not even like to think that he lies, and so did not bother to comment one way or another on this accusation!
Mr. Kissoon only cares about promoting his truth and so began his article by asking a question the answer to which is more-or-less self-evident. ‘Why would a citizen of a country who had about two decades of power, failed as an achiever, and won’t let go? He/she still contests elections and wants people to vote for him/her.’ The simple answer is that that citizen does not believe that s/he has failed and except for your persistently saying so, you have presented no credible evidence that s/he has done so. Furthermore, given your record of persistent lying to the public, attempts at character assassination, etc., why should anyone, particularly that citizen, believe you?
The matter should have rested there but it does not help him to respond to my contention that he is a narcissist, so once again he comes up with a self-serving notion of narcissism that associates it with the a belief that one has a divine right to rule and that the proof of this belief is one’s attempt to appeal to the electorate with a bad record that has left one without a constituency. He appeared to admit that a most important element in our politics that determines political empathy and the outcome of elections is race/ethnicity. But he is unable to take full advantage of this insight that serves only to allow him to throw about some names to juxtapose against Henry Jeffrey in an attempt to hoodwink the public. But his thesis remains the same: those who do not have a constituency, even within their own ethnic party, do not have one because they were failures in office over a considerable period of time. And I, Frederick Kissoon, who have repeatedly lied to the public and a failure myself know they are failures; what constituency they seek; that they do not have that constituency and it is not possible for them to win over that constituency?
If you are operating in the public domain, there is a duty to state, respond and explain your history and policy, and I have never been timid about doing so and will continue to promptly do so when the discussant is honest, but as I have clearly demonstrated in the current discourse and over many years, Mr. Kissoon is dishonest and does not believe he has to properly lay out a case and at the very least attempt to prove it: facts, Mr. Kissoon, matter!
Furthermore, much as he is now attempting, another narcissistic tactic of his is to feign victimhood in the public interest. As a result, in a letter to the press in November 2004, I stated, ‘Having a discussion with Mr. Frederick Kissoon is like pulling teeth, as he has developed a penchant for concocting and then speaking to his own documents and arguments. … I do not propose to address Mr. Kissoon’s personal comments, save to allay his fears as to my intent. I have absolutely no wish to scare Mr. Frederick Kissoon. Indeed, I am confident that I cannot for, taken generally, only the wise get scared.’

Yours faithfully,
Henry B Jeffrey

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News