Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 61 to 67 of 67
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: Jagdeo acquired more wealth in office than any other Guyanese President – AFC Chairma

  1. #61
    Registered User kidray is offline
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    415
    Credits
    1,300,705
    [QUOTE=Sankat;4311054]
    Quote Originally Posted by NaturalBornRidah View Post
    What do you think I meant by black laborers on estates having their crops outsold by their contemporaries.
    Indians were not chased down or prone to get arrested as convicts so they can be indentured laborers as blacks were in Guyana during the post emancipation years.

    No, Indians were bound to the estate which meant that if they left the estate and didn't have a pass they were thrown in jail which frequuently occured as managers did not want to issue passes to Indians and this kept on occuring even after their indentureship was over. Africans were allowed to leave the estate at will.

    Blacks did buy the land and thats why many of them were in free villages.

    The point is many British whites and owners of farms would rather hire a group of Indian indentured servants than Black Laborer gangs.

    Do you know why? The Indians were contractually bound to the British whites. As in slavery, the had no out save to escape to the bushes with death being the consequence. It wasn't a matter of racial preference. It was a matter of their labour being much much cheaper than what Africans (rightfully) demanded as payment.

    Who told you blacks went to cities as laborers only, isn't Anns Groove,Golden Grove,Enmore, etc villages were blacks used the black lands to labor and plant their crops.

    Now where did I say Africans ONLY went to the cities as labourers?[/QUOTE]
    Most(not all) Indian made a choice to become indenture laborer,one can argue and say they knowingly put themselves in harms way providing they knew the legacy of the British.Africans were allowed to leave d plantations because they were free.U make it sound as if Indians where thrown into "jail/killed " out of the blue.Many of them knew the legacy of the British before they were indentured.when u play with fire u will get burnt.

    Note my use of language "providing they knew the legacy of the British " Donot entertain the idea of comparing indenture ship with slavery.Some one asking me if I want to go into a lion's den vs someone just throwing me into a lions den are 2 completely different concepts.when choose is removed then labour can be classified as " slavery".

    If u were to say to me the British tricked the Indians once they got to Guyana or Trinidad I would agree with you,however one can argue and say if they knew that they were really "slaves" why did some of them resigned contracts" African worked as free man


    Blacks if allowed to buy land (note my use of language ) ,bought land at much higher price then Indians because of their race and the hatred of the whites towards them.price of labour black vs Indian was not the only factor,the plantation owners had a vendetta against blacks,if blacks had been quiet about their suffers,there would be no emancipations.No emancipation =no need for paid labour.Plantation owners had a vindictive mentality.when someone makes an informed decision to go into a shit hole u canot compared that to legitimate suffering.

  2. #62
    Registered User Seawall's Avatar Seawall is offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    4,328
    Credits
    11,321,991
    In related news...
    The real moment in the Jagdeo libel case starts this morning
    SEPTEMBER 7, 2012 | BY KNEWS | COLUMNISTS, FREDDIE KISSOON

    Today, at 9 AM in Justice Brassington Reynold’s court, Bharrat Jagdeo’s libel case against me and this newspaper resumes. But today will be the moment in this case. The defence takes the stand.
    To be featured is my 80-page research which I have documented the troubled area of discrimination in this country, a sociological anomaly that has haunted and hunted down this country since the Burnham-Jagan spilt in the fifties. The period I have dealt with does not go back that far. I examined from the Burnham presidency to the reign of Bharrat Jagdeo.
    I have been advised that it is not legally improper to discuss what the defence will be offering in court but I will restrain myself only to say that I am not the only defence witness. I have been advised to remain calm on the stand and just keep my composure intact at all times. I plan to do just that. As readers would know from the media publication of sessions gone by, only Dr. Roger Luncheon testified for the plaintiff, Mr. Jagdeo. There was a second witness. He was from the Office of the President but his task was to present previous columns of mine without any comment from him on the particular newspaper item that led to the writ of libel.
    As it stands, the libel case is only the second occasion a serving CARICOM Head has taken a citizen to court for libel. I have done the research and I didn’t find another one in the CARICOM area but I am open to correction. What I have found are many situations in which former CARICOM Prime Ministers have sued or threaten to sue for libel.
    P.J Patterson of Jamaica is currently pondering libel action. However, PM Bissesar of Trinidad has recently sent legal notice to a newspaper for retraction of a story or she will pursue libel charges. In Malta, earlier this year the PM did threaten libel but did not proceed
    In my research I have found three Prime Ministers that have gone to court over defamation – Lee Kwan Yu in Singapore; Harold Wilson in the UK and Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. The PM of Qatar had sued for libel but he was not the Head of State or the Head of Government in Qatar. In the case of Guyana, Prime Minister Burnham did sue for character damage.

    What does the paucity of libel writs from serving Heads of Government have to do with cross-examination? Once a President or Prime Minister agrees to take the stand, a brilliant lawyer may manoeuvre his way in cross-examination to bring out materials about governmental behaviour that may best be left hidden from the public. Prime Ministers and Presidents may not want to run that risk.
    As we saw in Jagdeo’s court battle, Dr. Roger Luncheon admitted under cross examination that he offered the PNC politician and then Chairman of Region Ten, Mr. Mingo a house lot in Pradoville Two. Writing on that aspect of the court proceeding, the Stabroek News editorialized that Mr. Jagdeo’s libel may have backfired on the Government.
    Of course, the published part of the trial that really stirred the nation was when in cross-examination again, Dr. Luncheon in response to a question from my lawyer, Nigel Hughes, agreed that no African-Guyanese was qualified to hold an ambassadorial post. The opposition milked that admission of Luncheon during the election campaign last year.
    When you take the Mingo house lot offer and Luncheon’s remark on the reason for the absence of African diplomats in Guyana’s Foreign Service, you can clearly see the reason why even serving Ministers and Presidents and Prime Ministers are reluctant to sue for defamation.
    Things can go badly wrong in the trial. Suppose what comes out in the trial determines the shape of forthcoming national elections? Suppose a simple libel trial causes a Prime Minister to lose his/her power in the election battle?
    So what does the defence have up their sleeves this morning? I guess it is best to wait until we take the stand. Speaking for me, my research ability and my capacity to do journalistic investigations will be on display. Was I sloppy in arriving at the presentation of facts or are the facts incontrovertible? I guess it is all up to me. But don’t forget, Mr. Hughes told the reporters at the last day before the adjournment that he has some learned witnesses who will testify. I guess you have to be in court to see and hear them.
    "Every onlooker is either a coward or a traitor." — Frantz Fanon

    “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.” Frederick Douglass

  3. #63
    Registered User Seawall's Avatar Seawall is offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    4,328
    Credits
    11,321,991
    Freddie vs Jagdeo libel case stalled
    SEPTEMBER 8, 2012 | BY KNEWS
    - Jagdeo’s lawyers absent
    The libel case brought by former President Bharrat Jagdeo against Kaieteur News columnist Freddie Kissoon was yesterday stalled when Jagdeo’s team of lawyers was not available.

    Race relations expert, Dr David Hinds, was flown into the country Thursday evening to be the first witness for the defense in the libel case. However, Jagdeo’s lead attorney Senior Counsel Bernard DeSantos had to attend a Court of Appeal matter and thus asked to be excused. Jagdeo’s other attorney Sase Gunraj, said he had no instructions to stand in the absence of the senior counsel.
    Freddie Kissoon’s attorney Nigel Hughes wanted to commence the defence. Justice Brassington Reynolds was also willing to proceed with the case for the defence. After adjourning the matter to September 27, the judge tried to get Senior Counsel De Santos on phone to inquiry whether the court could proceed in his absence, but he could not. The absence of Jagdeo’s other lawyer compounded the issue.

    Jagdeo wants $10 million from outspoken columnist Freddie Kissoon, the newspaper’s publisher Glenn Lall, and editor in chief Adam Harris. The subject of the libel case is a column written by Kissoon. It charged that the former President exercised ideological racism in performing his function as president.
    Jagdeo’s team had closed its case on July 5. And now it’s time for Kaieteur News to lead its defence and it intends to go the whole nine yards to prove that Jagdeo’s term in office was characterized by a racist ideology.
    The defense team plans to call more than a dozen witnesses, with Dr David Hinds being the first.
    Dr David Hinds is Assistant Professor of Caribbean and African Diaspora Studies at Arizona State University.
    He has written two books on race relations in Guyana
    Former President Jagdeo launched the libel case claiming that Kissoon’s article suggested that he is a racist and that “by extension, the State and Government of Guyana, practice racism as an ideology, dogma, philosophy and policy.”
    "Every onlooker is either a coward or a traitor." — Frantz Fanon

    “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.” Frederick Douglass

  4. #64
    NaturalBornRidah
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Sankat View Post

    No, Indians were bound to the estate which meant that if they left the estate and didn't have a pass they were thrown in jail which frequuently occured as managers did not want to issue passes to Indians and this kept on occuring even after their indentureship was over. Africans were allowed to leave the estate at will.
    Same thing as with blacks, many of them were arrested and worked as convicts on some of these fields as well,Africans were brought into custody for the most menial shit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sankat View Post
    Do you know why? The Indians were contractually bound to the British whites. As in slavery, the had no out save to escape to the bushes with death being the consequence. It wasn't a matter of racial preference. It was a matter of their labour being much much cheaper than what Africans (rightfully) demanded as payment.
    That's not completely true, Indians were bound to work for a certain time, and there still were loop holes and countrer claims to oust themselves out the contractl. Blacks so called convicts who would work the field were ordered to work on the fields for a period of time.



    Quote Originally Posted by Sankat View Post
    Now where did I say Africans ONLY went to the cities as labourers?[/QUOTE]

  5. #65
    Registered User Seawall's Avatar Seawall is offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    4,328
    Credits
    11,321,991
    [QUOTE=kidray;4311114]
    Quote Originally Posted by Sankat View Post

    Most(not all) Indian made a choice to become indenture laborer,one can argue and say they knowingly put themselves in harms way providing they knew the legacy of the British.Africans were allowed to leave d plantations because they were free.U make it sound as if Indians where thrown into "jail/killed " out of the blue.Many of them knew the legacy of the British before they were indentured.when u play with fire u will get burnt.

    Note my use of language "providing they knew the legacy of the British " Donot entertain the idea of comparing indenture ship with slavery.Some one asking me if I want to go into a lion's den vs someone just throwing me into a lions den are 2 completely different concepts.when choose is removed then labour can be classified as " slavery".

    If u were to say to me the British tricked the Indians once they got to Guyana or Trinidad I would agree with you,however one can argue and say if they knew that they were really "slaves" why did some of them resigned contracts" African worked as free man


    Blacks if allowed to buy land (note my use of language ) ,bought land at much higher price then Indians because of their race and the hatred of the whites towards them.price of labour black vs Indian was not the only factor,the plantation owners had a vendetta against blacks,if blacks had been quiet about their suffers,there would be no emancipations.No emancipation =no need for paid labour.Plantation owners had a vindictive mentality.when someone makes an informed decision to go into a shit hole u canot compared that to legitimate suffering.
    At one time, there was competition to prove that Indian indentureship was as brutal as slavery. Then Indian Arrival Day was made a holiday (comparable to Emancipation Day) and much of the talk died down. Next to the ruling whites, the Portuguese were treated the best, then the Chinese and Indians. Africans were at the bottom. And let us not forget the Amerindians, who (though not all tribes/groups) worked with the Europeans to "police" the plantations. Unfortunately, they have fared the worst in their own land.
    "Every onlooker is either a coward or a traitor." — Frantz Fanon

    “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.” Frederick Douglass

  6. #66
    Registered User Tha Biz is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    rack city
    Posts
    1,790
    Credits
    1,575,969

  7. #67
    Registered User Seawall's Avatar Seawall is offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    4,328
    Credits
    11,321,991
    In sweet Gt now. Cynicism runs high among the populace, but they are powerless to do anything. You drive around and you see the same questionable figures (with the right government connections) with their names on properties/businesses. People know how they got their wealth, but what are they to do. Anyway, hopefully i can go to the Miss Guyana pageant this weekend. Here sipping some cherry drink, will eat plenty of fruits fuh you up there.
    "Every onlooker is either a coward or a traitor." — Frantz Fanon

    “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.” Frederick Douglass

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •