IN RESPONSE to Freddie Kissoon’s letter (SN, August 21, ‘No names have been supplied’). What has actually gone on too long is Kissoon’s penchant for presenting his views as reflective of others. For example he says ‘I firmly believe no one picks up on it.’ Yet he provides no statistical proof or quantitative evidence to back up a sweeping statement supposedly reflective of an entire set of people.

Kissoon goes on to state ‘ We can leave out Mr. Bisram who by now has made a mess of his reputation in Guyana’ Again this is Kissoon’s personal perspective which has not been concretely supported nor factually borne out, nor for that matter, publicly embraced, but which Kissoon presents as emanating from the majestic plural - ‘we’.

Mr. Editor, perhaps one of the most telling examples of Kissoonian generalisation is this statement ‘People are stupid’ made in a previous column. By accepting this conclusion of Kissoon’s, one must also accept that either Kissoon is not a person or that he is the only intelligent person alive. Freud would indeed be very interested in a case such as this!

In any case Mr. Editor, the reality is that Bisram’s reputation as an elections pollster remains intact for the almost 100% accuracy of his polls around the world and the fact that politicians, media and other critically substantive entities take them quite seriously. The unrelenting fact is that with perhaps one or two exception, all of Bisram’s polls have been proven correct by the subsequent election results.

So perhaps Kissoon can tell us by what logic does an almost 100% accuracy translate into a messed up polling reputation? After all, no pollster or polling entity has ever been 100% accurate.

What has also gone on too long Mr. Editor is Kissoon’s God complex that makes him convinced that others are answerable to him when in reality he has no authority of any sort - conferred, delegated or prescribed - to demand answers. In any case, Mr. Editor the names and other information Kissoon so imperiously demands are in the public domain and would be easily accessible by any columnist/reporter worth his/her salt.

Incidentally, while Kissoon loves to shoot questions at others his capacity to dodge questions asked of him is becoming legendary. For example, Kissoon is yet to coherently explain how lack of personal information about Bisram would render Bisram’s polls invalid. Besides, Mr. Editor, Kissoon’s inclination to demand personal information about others is very suspicious, especially given that some (Dr Randy Persaud and others) have expressed shock that Kissoon publicly disseminated information given in confidence.

Also Mr. Editor, there is a view that had Kissoon been allowed a controlling part in Bisram’s polls, his take on Bisram’s polls would have been positive. There is also a view that he had sought to be involved in the early polls done by Baytoram Ramharack and the Turkeyen Polling Institute and perhaps his condemnation of that entity has been influenced by his non-inclusion in that polling process.

In any case here you have a commentator who claims to be in sync with the political pulse of the nation, calling it wrong at least twice on elections. In fact, Kissoon has developed a penchant for dismissing polls that are accurate and borne out by reality while simultaneously embracing other polls that turn out to be woefully inaccurate, but which reflect Kissoon’s world view. After all, I’m sure many readers remember Kissoon’s fervent embrace of the Dick Morris’ poll prior to the last election in Guyana, which the AFC did not win as well as the dismal showing of the WPA at the 1992 elections.

In fact, Kissoon condemned pollsters who called it correctly in 1992 and in the last election and then lambasted hundreds of thousands of voters because they did not vote the way he wanted them to vote. Yet, this same Kissoon claims that he is an opinion shaper in Guyanese society!

What has also gone on too long Mr. Editor is Kissoon’s dismissing of facts because they do not fit into his world view. So let me repeat. Fact: Bisram is a teacher in New York City, and a member of the United Federation of Teachers, of which he served as chapter leader for a number off years, as I did. Fact: Bisram teaches at a school in New York City with a principal whose name is well known in the school community and beyond. Fact: Bisram has indeed been honoured by a number of entities in New York and related articles have been published in the media in New York City.

Mr. Editor, an individual’s or an entity’s rejection of facts do not negate the facts. Remember Europe once rejected the fact that the earth is round, claiming instead that it is flat? Remember George Bush’s rejection of the fact that Iraq does not have weapons of mass destruction? Remember Western Science’s rejection of telekinetics until Uri Geller? Again Mr. Editor what has gone on too long is Kissoon’s capacity to draw conclusions out of nothingness. For example he states, ‘Just imagine the nonsense to say that you can still teach and travel all over the world and you pay back the time when you are on vacation leave. So when school is out in August, Mr. Bisram who was roaming the world in April when students were preparing for the exam, gives back time to the school.’

The real nonsense Mr. Editor is this conclusion of Kissoon which is certainly not based on anything I have ever written anywhere. What, in fact, I did write is that there are ways of obtaining leave to travel while school is in session and that I, myself, have done some travel during the school year, especially to tourism conferences in the Caribbean, but also to conferences to places like the University of Guyana (at which conference Kissoon was also present) and Howard University. I also know quite a number of other teachers who have done such travel. Again an intrepid journalist would easily obtain the information.

Incidentally, for Kissoon’s enlightenment, the public school system in New York City does have a summer school session that lasts for about five weeks. So now Kissoon will know that teachers do not teach to empty classroom during the summer break. Also, for Kissoon’s enlightenment, when teachers in New York City are absent, there is a procedure in place to ensure that students’ do not miss work.

Mr. Editor, with reference to my letter and those of others, Kissoon states that ‘they find it comical’ they are obviously referring to other readers. Actually what is comical Mr. Editor is Kissoon’s automatic assumption that other readers see the world as he does and thus embrace his opinions as theirs, especially given, as, Ravi Dev pointed out some time ago, that Kissoon’s opinions are no more valid than those of others unless and until they are borne out by reality. Ironically’ in spite of being convinced that he’s never wrong, Kissoon displays a preoccupation with criticisms to the extent that he issues challenges after challenges, makes declaration after declaration, keeps repeating his opinions mantra-like, and seems unable to let go and move on. In fact, Kissoon’s SN letter of August 18, 2008, (I expect people to disagree with commentators) is the seventh instance of that esteemed gentleman referencing Annan Boodram in relation to my single letter earlier this year indicating flaws in his ‘journalistic’ output.

Mr. Editor this obsession of Kissoon’s with his critics (Harry Hergesh, Vishnu Bisram, Ravi Dev, Walter and Randy Persaud et al) is proof of Kissoon’s pathology. Among the quite obvious manifestations are an aura of infallibility (Freddie is never wrong so how dare others critique him); the writer becoming the ‘news’ (Freddie takes primacy in most of his columns and letters); personalising criticisms (and thus attacking the writer rather than dealing with the written, indicative, some analysts claim, of an individual who craves personal power), presenting his perceptions as facts (once Freddie says so it is so); random sprinkling of the names of philosophers and thinkers in his writing without making connections between their worldviews and his argumentation; misuse of words or selective application of terms such as epistemology coupled with a dismissal of other interpretations/applications as if to suggest that only Kissoon can interpret the inherent concepts and appropriately apply them and thus any other application is inaccurate. Mr. Editor, Kissoon, also has a penchant to ramble in his writings, changing topics mid column, sometimes more than once in a column. What would Freud think of this?

What is also comical Mr. Editor is Kissoon’s juvenile habit of vowing to stop writing if he’s unable to support a contention of his. Remember his declaration of a full house for his much vaunted lecture at UG? One wonders why is Kissoon still writing since he has been unable to produce the video to disprove the unbelievably poor attendance, (especially given all the pre-lecture hype), reported in the media - the same media for which Kissoon writes.

Now we await confirmation from Eusi Kwayana and the others named, about Kissoon’s assertion that ‘elected dictatorship’ exists in Guyana. So perhaps Freddie can tell us where this confirmation would be published so that we can know whether he would keep his word this time. Interestingly enough, Mr. Editor, Eusi Kwayana, himself, in a letter to the media some time ago, seemed not to remember Kissoon and referred to him as a writer.

Of course, Kissoon wants us to accept that his interpretation and application of Fareed Zakaria’s theory is the only absolutely correct one. Yet, some could very well argue that semi-liberal democracy exists in Guyana. And yet again others could argue that in pushing his ‘thesis’ for elected dictatorship Freddie is categorising the trees as the forest i.e. connecting disparate, random, issues and incidents to infer a coherent, overarching pattern, as if exemplified by regular and myriad manifestations.

Also what is comical Mr. Editor, is Kissoonian logic typified by a lack of relationship between premise and conclusion. For example he writes ‘ Mr. Ramracha told us he is the communications officer of NACTA, contradicting Bisram who told us that Mr. Ramracha was the founder of NACTA’. How does Ramracha being a founder of NACTA contradict him being the communications officer? As with organisations the world over, NACTA’s founding members were assigned positions and the concomitant tasks so that the work of the overall organisation could move forward. To use another example, Guyana Watch founder, Dr Tara Singh, served as its first president discharging specific duties, but the organisation moved forward only because others served in various executive positions with differing, but clear cut responsibilities. Perhaps in Kissoon’s world, founders remain just that and do nothing more!

And what is comical Mr. Editor, is Kissoon taking it upon himself to tell Annan Boodram and others what they should be writing about (SN August 18, 2008, I expect people to disagree with commentators, being one of many such instances) as if to suggest that everyone else should follow his lead - obsessing over the Bharrat Jagdeo government et al. Fortunately I have no reason to do so since I never aspired to any position with that government and therefore harbor no rejection syndrome.

Not that I see the government as without flaws. Not that I have not criticised them in the past. Not that I will not continue to do so in the future. Not that my personal attempts to offer assistance have not been rebuffed. For Kissoon’s information I (and some educators) had actually planned a three-week mission to provide classroom management training (in collaboration with an NGO that operates in Guyana) and were getting ready to travel to Guyana when the plug was pulled by the government with no plausible reason offered. However, rather than remain static and obsessive, I chose to move on.

Finally if Kissoon does indeed accept that others have a right to disagree with him (SN August 18, 2008, I expect people to disagree with commentators) then he should do as columnists the world over generally do - either address the issue once and/or let it be and move on. This is basic journalistic practice.

But then basic journalistic practice might be quite a stretch for Kissoon given these words of his (KN ‘Psychic Burden’, 27/09/08) with reference to Errol Arthur whom Kissoon had claimed to be a ghost writer: “I accept that he is a real person. I will not apologise for saying he was not a real person because I did not know that.”

A columnist worth his/her salt would not have made a categorical statement on the basis of ignorance. And a columnist worth his/her salt would have, at a minimum, apologised for such an abject inaccuracy. And so you have it Mr. Editor - nothing reveals the real measure of Freddie Kissoon more than this statement out of the horse’s mouth.
ANNAN BOODRAM