Freddie the object, becomes Freddie the subject
Freddie Kissoon column
July 4, 2004
Adam Harris, for the week ending June 26, transformed me the object of abuse by a somewhat odd owner of a television station, into the subject of an investigation who must answer questions put to him and provide evidence asked of him. For the week beginning June 27, Harris continued turning Freddie the object into Freddie the subject.
He devoted his Sunday Kaieteur News column for that day to that exercise of his.
In making Freddie the object into Freddie the subject, Adam withheld information from his readers that if outlined would have given readers a more informed perspective of his adumbration. Those details would have weakened his argument. Harris also tried subtly to persuade readers that I made a false accusation. Harris used the word “embellish” but the implication was there. My column here is a clarification of issues involving me that were obfuscated by Adam in his June 27 article
Let me say upfront, I have never mentioned the names in any of my writings of three talk show hosts, two on Channel 9, and one formerly of Channel 6 (who amazingly is now the editor of a television newscast), and the owner of a certain television station who is using his money to buy the image of an intellectual but is incapable of delivering an analysis of anything. He replaces “cuss” words with opinion making.
I have been libeled by these four persons more than anyone else in the history of this society. The reason is fairly obvious. I have to be an effective opinion-maker for them to swing so violently at me with unspeakable words. They have gone to excessive lengths to libel me because they have read what I have written several times – I would not sue anyone.
The point is I may sue persons who attack me but not these four so-called media personalities. When you sue someone for libel you are telling the court that that person has damaged your character.
These four persons cannot damage anyone’s character because their views are not persuasive, pervasive and respected. I would be lying then if I told the court that they have derogated my name. How can they do that when I remain the same in the eyes of the Guyanese people? These people are not taken seriously in this country.
What really drives them round the bend is that I do not engage them in debate. I have de-recognised them and that gets them worked up. I guess I would make their day should I reply to them. When I do that I have given them recognition. They say, ‘never say never’ but that would never happen. I would never dignify their miasmic flow by replying to them.
I am replying to Adam Harris because I regard him as someone who can make a contribution to the process of intellectualisation in this country.
I must confess though that if this country had a law pertaining to criminal libel, then I would have sued them because in criminal libel, the defendant is sent to jail for slandering others. These maligning instigators should be sued for criminal libel.
Contrary to what Adam thinks, large numbers do not watch this man’s commentary. People switch when he is on. The guy uses a questionable method in order to be heard. He comes on the news as soon as the first news item is read in order to give his commentary. He knows that if it were delivered at the end of the news, he would have an empty hall as his audience. All commentaries come after the news. This is the norm in television. But to prove the point, this guy made his anti-African racist remark about me since the middle of last year and few persons in Guyana heard it.
It was only after I picked up on it in passing in one of my Kaieteur News articles that it galvanized a torrid response in others.
Now either Adam is subtly trying to placate the guy or he is being naïve or just plain mischievous. This strange station owner, who gives his commentary, told Adam that he would never do a thing like tampering with the original commentary and he doesn’t know how to load it onto the web site. Adam then accepted that explanation.
This is the same man who uses unspeakable language all the time to describe people including Adam himself; Adam featured in one of his commentaries for the week ending June 26.
The Stabroek News cartoonist, Stabroek News itself, Kaieteur News publisher, Glenn Lall and Kaieteur News itself were all verbally assaulted by this media person using very nasty words of a personalised nature. This is the man Adam said he believed would not tamper with his website.
Well if this guy is telling the truth, then I am not. But I have the original commentary in which dirty terminologies were used to describe me and strong racist remarks were made in which it was openly stated that ugliness is connected to African physical characteristics. I was about to give Adam a copy of the original commentary, which I kept in my car after the guy changed it. It was just for Adam’s own satisfaction since the issue was not of interest to me at all. But then something happened.
Adam, in the presence of Mr. Glenn Lall, Kaieteur News publisher, requested the evidence in a manner that suggested that I was the subject under discussion. It was this guy who should be the subject of an investigation by both the Advisory Committee on Broadcasting and by the society in general. He is abusive, vulgar and uses the most putrid language in his personal attacks on all those he disagrees with.
Adam must have heard some of his commentaries. People are called jackasses, idiots, monkeys, thieves, criminals etc. In his last commentary on me, I am called a rat. Yet Adam Harris wants me to provide evidence of what I said. Well I was prepared to do that but only upon request by those whom I have respect and admiration for and those that are my circle of friends and not Adam Harris.
Mr. Lall then solved the evidence quarrel. He called some senior Kaieteur News personnel and the decision was that it was this television guy who had launched an attack on me and said that I was kicked out of the universities I attended. The decision was that since Adam wanted my evidence, then he should secure the guy’s evidence on the charges he made against me. We are still to hear from Adam.
I have my evidence. I have the original commentary and would gladly give it to Adam tomorrow. This is what was said before the offending racist words were deleted. “But when an Indian ugly, he ugly fuh (“fuh was replaced by “for”) so. Freddie is the ugliest Indian because he got Black blood in him…this Freddie Kissoon is really ugly, this dark-skinned madman got to be mixed with African genes.”
The truth is that Adam can’t believe his friend would say those things. Well he did Adam, and now your eyes are opened. But do you really want them to be opened, Adam?