Vincent Alexander decides who is a rigger and what is rigging

Oct 15, 2020 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

Kaieteur News – One of the curiosities of Vincent Alexander is how this gentleman approached essential, ethical questions in Guyana’s life. Alexander harbours extremely worrying thoughts that are light miles away from freedom and justice.
Knowing Alexander, one hopes when he replies, he confronts the specific areas of accusations here rather than introduce irrelevancies. Alexander’s thoughts are dangerous because he denies the political nastiness he has created in his country. With phenomenal acrobatic skills, he puts on display his yearnings for a free, democratic society that is impossible to emerge because his hero, Burnham started the sociological nightmare and he, Alexander (and David Granger) want to see a reincarnation of Burnham’s ontology in Guyana.
Let’s examine Alexander’s political mind. Here is what he wrote in response to my criticism of his letter to the five visiting CARICOM heads and the UN during the election crisis in his capacity as chairman of the International Decade for People of African Descent – Guyana chapter (IDAPADA). I would appeal to readers to follow carefully his words because this is how a deceptive mind works and one must be on guard. Here is Alexander; “The position conveyed to CARICOM and the UN was not singularly Alexander’s. It was taken by IDAPADA. In fact I was not even present when IDAPADA came to its conclusion.”
Readers need some background information before I expose Alexander’s duplicity and dangerous mind. Alexander published a letter in the newspapers informing the nation that IDAPADA wrote the visiting CARICOM PMs to have a discussion on Guyana’s sociology that necessitates CARICOM going beyond mere election results because Guyana’s dilemma is larger than election results. Alexander further noted that there wasn’t even a response from the PMs.
I then commented on IDAPADA’s failure because the PMs must have detected an air of hypocrisy on the part of Alexander as chairman of IDAPADA. This chairman was asking CARICOM to look beyond election results because there is a bigger, problematic picture. But this same chairman would have been sitting with the PMs discussing the bigger picture while at the same time, as a GECOM commissioner, was trying to get GECOM to accept a fraudulent election result, the very result that he put to the PMs was not worthy of exigent discussion.
What relevance is there in him telling us that IDAPADA’s position was not exclusively his and he was not present when IDAPADA met to decide on writing the PMs? He is the chairman of IDAPADA. He agreed to the letter. He accepted the contents of the letter. Now here is the quote from Alexander that exposes his Burnhamite purism.
Please follow my accusation which I will repeat for emphasis. The CARICOM PMs could not have entertained IDAPADA because its chairman was doing a sick form of acrobatics in front of them. He wanted a confabulation on issues that go way beyond periodic elections but was trying to impose a rigged election on Guyana. Alexander rejects my accusation of the imposition of a rigged election. He said there was no such thing.
Here is Alexander on that issue; “My motion for Lowenfield’s first report to be tabled (for GECOM’s acceptance) predated the recount and was not in breach of any of CARICOM’s procedure or any judicial ruling.” This is downright fictional, misleading and willfully wicked. Lowenfield’s first report of Friday, March 6 was fraudulent and was rejected by the High Court that ruled against Mingo’s Region Four4 caricatured tabulation. Mingo did not adhere to the High Court’s injunction and repeated his improprieties on Friday, March 13, 2020.
The Lowenfield’s first report was always a breach of GECOM’s procedures and that is why GECOM and the courts never accepted it. The conclusion is that with minds like Alexander’s, one must understand what Guyana is facing. To sum up, he believes that there is no contradiction in IDAPADA having a discussion with CARICOM to request that CARICOM analyze the bigger picture rather than concentrate on the election results and his attempts to rig the election.
This is the same Alexander that announced to the world on a television programme with Dr. Grantley Waldron on Channel 9 that it was he, Alexander, who stopped the Chief Elections Officer, Mr. Gocool Boodhoo, from declaring victory for the PPP in 2011. Alexander said he showed Boodhoo where his calculation of seats, based on votes, was wrong. Boodhoo agreed. The PPP lost its majority. For Alexander, Mingo’s March 4 tabulation and Lowenfield’s compilation of his report of Friday, March 6 which are based on fraudulent numbers are valid for Alexander. Vincent Alexander knows about rigging election since 1973. Looking back, maybe Boodhoo should not have conceded that Alexander was right in 2011.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---