Skip to main content

Originally Posted by yuji22:
PNC supporters were willing to eat grass but they loved their hero Dictator and crab dawg Burnham. They defend him to this day.

indeed! . . . just like u and the other racist crab dawgs down on your knees servicing barrat and kwamee's tiefman PPP today

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:
PNC supporters were willing to eat grass but they loved their hero Dictator and crab dawg Burnham. They defend him to this day.

You don't have to post for the sake of posting, do it because you have something to add to the discussion.

What you posted above is sheer shyte coming from a hole of an arse.

 

No one is defending Burnham, they are showing what the PPP has taught the people about Burnham banning foods so the Indians would starve, is all bull shit.

cain
Originally Posted by yuji22:
A closet PNC defends his hero, a Crab Dawg Burnham.

suh yugee, how things @ de rat's bukta parties deh bai . . . do crab dawgs like u wear knee pads while on 'duty'?

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

But it was mostly Indians who were being beaten, arrested, fined and thrown in jail of "illegal" possession after the ban, not Afros.  Clearly then it shows it was more dear to Indian than to Afros, or Indians were discriminated against.  Which is it mullah bai?  Furthermore, Ban-am then established KSI which, with a PNC cyard, you can get lil "scarce" products".  Who carried around PNC cyard mullah bei, me know you did.

after spreading Goebbelsian LIES all these years on GNI about a targeted, genocidal, food-banning campaign by Burnham, alyuh now pivot pun a dime . . .'shifting' the story to a measuring of which ethnicity held the banned foods more "dear"

 

y'all got neither clothes . . . nor shame

 

oh dear

Well tell abie nah, as Caribj and Chief said, Afros were equally impacted, why then it was overwhelmingly Indians who were persecuted and prosecuted for "illegal" possession?

u know damn well what my issue is . . . and it has NOTHING to do with whether Indo-Guyanese were disproportionately "prosecuted" . . . 

 

re-read my post and respond intelligently for a change u idiot

 

btw, correlationcausation . . . look it up and learn

Well, you missed the point, or chose to miss, of my assertion.  Caribj and mullah Chief claims Afros suffer as much as Indians from these bans.  If so, then why were mostly Indians persecuted/prosecuted.  From that one can deduct:

 

1. Indians were profiled and targeted due to race or,

 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

disprove or diminish the assertion of both Caribj and Chief.

 

As I said in my first post, I do believe FCH was well intentioned, but overly ambitious and tainted with ethnic insensitivity.  In any society, when most of the people break, or are willing to break a law, then the problem is the law, not the people.

 

I believe a better approach should have been a progressive set of duties on targeted products and the duty funds be used to promote and invest in local alternatives.  It would be a slower process, but would have much less kick-back and given the nation time to absorb and mitigate.

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

But it was mostly Indians who were being beaten, arrested, fined and thrown in jail of "illegal" possession after the ban, not Afros.  Clearly then it shows it was more dear to Indian than to Afros, or Indians were discriminated against.  Which is it mullah bai?  Furthermore, Ban-am then established KSI which, with a PNC cyard, you can get lil "scarce" products".  Who carried around PNC cyard mullah bei, me know you did.

after spreading Goebbelsian LIES all these years on GNI about a targeted, genocidal, food-banning campaign by Burnham, alyuh now pivot pun a dime . . .'shifting' the story to a measuring of which ethnicity held the banned foods more "dear"

 

y'all got neither clothes . . . nor shame

 

oh dear

Well tell abie nah, as Caribj and Chief said, Afros were equally impacted, why then it was overwhelmingly Indians who were persecuted and prosecuted for "illegal" possession?

u know damn well what my issue is . . . and it has NOTHING to do with whether Indo-Guyanese were disproportionately "prosecuted" . . . 

 

re-read my post and respond intelligently for a change u idiot

 

btw, correlationcausation . . . look it up and learn

Well, you missed the point, or chose to miss, of my assertion.  Caribj and mullah Chief claims Afros suffer as much as Indians from these bans.  If so, then why were mostly Indians persecuted/prosecuted.  From that one can deduct:

 

1. Indians were profiled and targeted due to race or,

 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

disprove or diminish the assertion of both Caribj and Chief.

 

As I said in my first post, I do believe FCH was well intentioned, but overly ambitious and tainted with ethnic insensitivity.  In any society, when most of the people break, or are willing to break a law, then the problem is the law, not the people.

 

I believe a better approach should have been a progressive set of duties on targeted products and the duty funds be used to promote and invest in local alternatives.  It would be a slower process, but would have much less kick-back and given the nation time to absorb and mitigate.

baseman, there is no "point" to miss! Your "assertion" is a red herring . . . out of place as a "response" to MY post

 

when u reply to MY post, i suggest u not run from MY issues by 'forgetting' that i am neither Chief nor CaribJ

 

now, a couple of things regarding your pathetic dead fish offered up in desperate avoidance . . .

 

(i) Indians (and others) were "prosecuted," not "persecuted" for violating Burnham's laws regarding contraband . . . there is a difference, which i am constrained to point out since u tend to throw terminology around just because it sounds "nice" especially if it mek blackman look bad

 

(ii) since blackman represents a very small slice of the merchant class in Guyana, isn't that the [key] 'missing consideration' that turns your "deduct" into a monstrous FRAUD . . . hmmm?

FM
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by yuji22:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

But it was mostly Indians who were being beaten, arrested, fined and thrown in jail of "illegal" possession after the ban, not Afros.  Clearly then it shows it was more dear to Indian than to Afros, or Indians were discriminated against.  Which is it mullah bai?  Furthermore, Ban-am then established KSI which, with a PNC cyard, you can get lil "scarce" products".  Who carried around PNC cyard mullah bei, me know you did.

after spreading Goebbelsian LIES all these years on GNI about a targeted, genocidal, food-banning campaign by Burnham, alyuh now pivot pun a dime . . .'shifting' the story to a measuring of which ethnicity held the banned foods more "dear"

 

y'all got neither clothes . . . nor shame

 

oh dear

Well tell abie nah, as Caribj and Chief said, Afros were equally impacted, why then it was overwhelmingly Indians who were persecuted and prosecuted for "illegal" possession?

u know damn well what my issue is . . . and it has NOTHING to do with whether Indo-Guyanese were disproportionately "prosecuted" . . . 

 

re-read my post and respond intelligently for a change u idiot

 

btw, correlationcausation . . . look it up and learn

Well, you missed the point, or chose to miss, of my assertion.  Caribj and mullah Chief claims Afros suffer as much as Indians from these bans.  If so, then why were mostly Indians persecuted/prosecuted.  From that one can deduct:

 

1. Indians were profiled and targeted due to race or,

 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

disprove or diminish the assertion of both Caribj and Chief.

 

As I said in my first post, I do believe FCH was well intentioned, but overly ambitious and tainted with ethnic insensitivity.  In any society, when most of the people break, or are willing to break a law, then the problem is the law, not the people.

 

I believe a better approach should have been a progressive set of duties on targeted products and the duty funds be used to promote and invest in local alternatives.  It would be a slower process, but would have much less kick-back and given the nation time to absorb and mitigate.


 

(i)Indians (and others) were "prosecuted," not "persecuted" for violating Burnham's laws regarding contraband . . . there is a difference, which i am constrained to point out since u tend to throw terminology around just because it sounds "nice" especially if it mek blackman look bad

 

"In any society, when most of the people break, or are willing to break a law, then the problem is the law, not the people".


Persecuted by the likes of racist you and prosecuted under an unjust law. Didn't Sadaam's chief prosecutor got his neck broken for legally enforcing Sadaam's rules?


What is interesting,YOU and YOUR family high-tailed it out of Guyana before all this nightmare and lived high off the Guyanese backs gulping down gluttonously the very things the Guyanese (Indians) were being prosecuted for.  You are a hypocrite and a racist living off the spoils of a quasi-apartheid regime.  Isn't this criminal, you grotesque specimen?


The PNC will NEVER see the light of day to rule over Guyana again, get that in your thick skull.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
  

Persecuted by the likes of racist you and prosecuted under an unjust law. Didn't Sadaam's chief prosecutor got his neck broken for legally enforcing Sadaam's rules?

What is interesting, YOU and YOUR family high-tailed it out of Guyana before all this nightmare and lived high off the Guyanese backs gulping down gluttonously the very things the Guyanese (Indians) were being prosecuted for.  You are a hypocrite and a racist living off the spoils of a quasi-apartheid regime.  Isn't this criminal, you grotesque specimen?

 

The PNC will NEVER see the light of day to rule over Guyana again, get that in your thick skull.

finally, the naked  man yelps

 

baseman unhinged . . . ROTFLMFAO!

FM
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
  

Persecuted by the likes of racist you and prosecuted under an unjust law. Didn't Sadaam's chief prosecutor got his neck broken for legally enforcing Sadaam's rules?

What is interesting, YOU and YOUR family high-tailed it out of Guyana before all this nightmare and lived high off the Guyanese backs gulping down gluttonously the very things the Guyanese (Indians) were being prosecuted for.  You are a hypocrite and a racist living off the spoils of a quasi-apartheid regime.  Isn't this criminal, you grotesque specimen?

 

The PNC will NEVER see the light of day to rule over Guyana again, get that in your thick skull.

finally, the naked  man yelps

 

baseman unhinged . . . ROTFLMFAO!

Baseman survived on katahar and Kur BT choka.

Mitwah
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by yuji22:
PNC supporters were willing to eat grass but they loved their hero Dictator and crab dawg Burnham. They defend him to this day.

indeed! . . . just like u and the other racist crab dawgs down on your knees servicing barrat and kwamee's tiefman PPP today

I knew you couldn't resist throwing in some sex into it. That's the way your brain is wired. Burnham said that in banning wheat flour his government would be saving 25 million dollars per year. That may very well be so. But what is the point in banning flour and making the savings only to end up stealing more that that from the national treasury?    

FM
Originally Posted by Ronald Sugrim:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by yuji22:
PNC supporters were willing to eat grass but they loved their hero Dictator and crab dawg Burnham. They defend him to this day.

indeed! . . . just like u and the other racist crab dawgs down on your knees servicing barrat and kwamee's tiefman PPP today

I knew you couldn't resist throwing in some sex into it. That's the way your brain is wired. Burnham said that in banning wheat flour his government would be saving 25 million dollars per year. That may very well be so. But what is the point in banning flour and making the savings only to end up stealing more that that from the national treasury?    

The $25 mil was better spent on guns and bullets to subjugate, brutalize and intimidate the very people wanting their staple.  This is equity PNC style.

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:
PNC supporters were willing to eat grass but they loved their hero Dictator and crab dawg Burnham. They defend him to this day.

Do you see setting the record right as supportive of a dictator or is your racism so much a block to the intellect you can no longer reason?A lie is a lie. It is a lie that he selectively sought to ban products that mattered to Indians. Too long has that lie been told uncontested. Africans suffered equally at his hands with the exception of his cronies. It is that suffering from his oppressive rule that brought them out against him and left the regime to its knees available for the option of a compromise. The PPP inherited that offer but never fulfilled their promise.

FM
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
  

Persecuted by the likes of racist you and prosecuted under an unjust law. Didn't Sadaam's chief prosecutor got his neck broken for legally enforcing Sadaam's rules?

What is interesting, YOU and YOUR family high-tailed it out of Guyana before all this nightmare and lived high off the Guyanese backs gulping down gluttonously the very things the Guyanese (Indians) were being prosecuted for.  You are a hypocrite and a racist living off the spoils of a quasi-apartheid regime.  Isn't this criminal, you grotesque specimen?

 

The PNC will NEVER see the light of day to rule over Guyana again, get that in your thick skull.

finally, the naked  man yelps

 

baseman unhinged . . . ROTFLMFAO!

The truth is difficult to gulp, much less digest.  Now, go back under your little rock, you twerp.

FM

The skeletons from Crab Dawg Burnham's  closet are showing up. It is quite disgusting to see how they defend the thug and his policy to starve and exterminate Indo Guyanese.

 

They can sugarcoat as much as they want but the bitter truth remains. 

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

But it was mostly Indians who were being beaten, arrested, fined and thrown in jail of "illegal" possession after the ban, not Afros.  Clearly then it shows it was more dear to Indian than to Afros, or Indians were discriminated against.  Which is it mullah bai?  Furthermore, Ban-am then established KSI which, with a PNC cyard, you can get lil "scarce" products".  Who carried around PNC cyard mullah bei, me know you did.

after spreading Goebbelsian LIES all these years on GNI about a targeted, genocidal, food-banning campaign by Burnham, alyuh now pivot pun a dime . . .'shifting' the story to a measuring of which ethnicity held the banned foods more "dear"

 

y'all got neither clothes . . . nor shame

 

oh dear

Well tell abie nah, as Caribj and Chief said, Afros were equally impacted, why then it was overwhelmingly Indians who were persecuted and prosecuted for "illegal" possession?

u know damn well what my issue is . . . and it has NOTHING to do with whether Indo-Guyanese were disproportionately "prosecuted" . . . 

 

re-read my post and respond intelligently for a change u idiot

 

btw, correlationcausation . . . look it up and learn

Well, you missed the point, or chose to miss, of my assertion.  Caribj and mullah Chief claims Afros suffer as much as Indians from these bans.  If so, then why were mostly Indians persecuted/prosecuted.  From that one can deduct:

 

1. Indians were profiled and targeted due to race or,

 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

disprove or diminish the assertion of both Caribj and Chief.

 

As I said in my first post, I do believe FCH was well intentioned, but overly ambitious and tainted with ethnic insensitivity.  In any society, when most of the people break, or are willing to break a law, then the problem is the law, not the people.

 

I believe a better approach should have been a progressive set of duties on targeted products and the duty funds be used to promote and invest in local alternatives.  It would be a slower process, but would have much less kick-back and given the nation time to absorb and mitigate.

Baseman did you get wealthy over the banning of flour?

Prashad
Originally Posted by Prashad:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

But it was mostly Indians who were being beaten, arrested, fined and thrown in jail of "illegal" possession after the ban, not Afros.  Clearly then it shows it was more dear to Indian than to Afros, or Indians were discriminated against.  Which is it mullah bai?  Furthermore, Ban-am then established KSI which, with a PNC cyard, you can get lil "scarce" products".  Who carried around PNC cyard mullah bei, me know you did.

after spreading Goebbelsian LIES all these years on GNI about a targeted, genocidal, food-banning campaign by Burnham, alyuh now pivot pun a dime . . .'shifting' the story to a measuring of which ethnicity held the banned foods more "dear"

 

y'all got neither clothes . . . nor shame

 

oh dear

Well tell abie nah, as Caribj and Chief said, Afros were equally impacted, why then it was overwhelmingly Indians who were persecuted and prosecuted for "illegal" possession?

u know damn well what my issue is . . . and it has NOTHING to do with whether Indo-Guyanese were disproportionately "prosecuted" . . . 

 

re-read my post and respond intelligently for a change u idiot

 

btw, correlationcausation . . . look it up and learn

Well, you missed the point, or chose to miss, of my assertion.  Caribj and mullah Chief claims Afros suffer as much as Indians from these bans.  If so, then why were mostly Indians persecuted/prosecuted.  From that one can deduct:

 

1. Indians were profiled and targeted due to race or,

 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

disprove or diminish the assertion of both Caribj and Chief.

 

As I said in my first post, I do believe FCH was well intentioned, but overly ambitious and tainted with ethnic insensitivity.  In any society, when most of the people break, or are willing to break a law, then the problem is the law, not the people.

 

I believe a better approach should have been a progressive set of duties on targeted products and the duty funds be used to promote and invest in local alternatives.  It would be a slower process, but would have much less kick-back and given the nation time to absorb and mitigate.

Baseman did you get wealthy over the banning of flour?

Nah, I was never in a position to demand bribes.  Had a few relatives/friends who did well on farming, but was short lived and they became prisoners of their profession.  In the end, ebbing tide left all boats stranded.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:

Burnham made EVERY one suffer in Guyana.  Not just Indians as blacks consumed much of what was banned as well.  Bread being a vital part of the diet.

CaribNY where you the man who help Burnham to invent the rice flour roti?

Prashad
Originally Posted by yuji22:

The skeletons from Crab Dawg Burnham's  closet are showing up. It is quite disgusting to see how they defend the thug and his policy to starve and exterminate Indo Guyanese.

 

They can sugarcoat as much as they want but the bitter truth remains. 

How many Indos were starved to death buddy, tell us nuh, no one here heard any of it. You are a lying arsehole.

Too bad your stupid rass wasn't starved, you wouldn't have been here to spread your ignorance.

cain
Originally Posted by yuji22:

The skeletons from Crab Dawg Burnham's  closet are showing up.

EweG....talking about Lamumba, Kwame, Bynoe, Hamilton....and all dem House of Isreal thugs.... 

 

It is quite disgusting to see how they defend the thug and his policy to starve and exterminate Indo Guyanese.

What a Shame....all PNC Killers....

 

They can sugarcoat as much as they want but the bitter truth remains. 

They are still De Rabbai Kick-down-door Bandits...

 

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
  

Persecuted by the likes of racist you and prosecuted under an unjust law. Didn't Sadaam's chief prosecutor got his neck broken for legally enforcing Sadaam's rules?

What is interesting, YOU and YOUR family high-tailed it out of Guyana before all this nightmare and lived high off the Guyanese backs gulping down gluttonously the very things the Guyanese (Indians) were being prosecuted for.  You are a hypocrite and a racist living off the spoils of a quasi-apartheid regime.  Isn't this criminal, you grotesque specimen?

 

The PNC will NEVER see the light of day to rule over Guyana again, get that in your thick skull.

finally, the naked  man yelps

 

baseman unhinged . . . ROTFLMFAO!

The truth is difficult to gulp, much less digest.  Now, go back under your little rock, you twerp.

he he hee . . . doan fughet to share your magical "truth[s]" with neroo, druggie and yugeee regarding meh 'Saddamite' fambly and de burnam "spoils" we run to America with [and throw in lil bit magical stuff bout meh wife too] . . . dese low-functioning bais swear i'm a PPP apostate livin in florida

  

har de har har har har har har

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:
  

Persecuted by the likes of racist you and prosecuted under an unjust law. Didn't Sadaam's chief prosecutor got his neck broken for legally enforcing Sadaam's rules?

What is interesting, YOU and YOUR family high-tailed it out of Guyana before all this nightmare and lived high off the Guyanese backs gulping down gluttonously the very things the Guyanese (Indians) were being prosecuted for.  You are a hypocrite and a racist living off the spoils of a quasi-apartheid regime.  Isn't this criminal, you grotesque specimen?

 

The PNC will NEVER see the light of day to rule over Guyana again, get that in your thick skull.

finally, the naked  man yelps

 

baseman unhinged . . . ROTFLMFAO!

The truth is difficult to gulp, much less digest.  Now, go back under your little rock, you twerp.

he he hee . . . doan fughet to share your magical "truth[s]" with neroo, druggie and yugeee regarding meh 'Saddamite' fambly and de burnam "spoils" we run to America with [and throw in lil bit magical stuff bout meh wife too] . . . dese low-functioning bais swear i'm a PPP apostate livin in florida

  

har de har har har har har har

Ah, come on, you yourself admitted your parents left Guyana when you were a little boy on some "official assignment".  You hardly ever experienced local life in Guyana, and when you did, you were comfortably behind the steel shield of the PNC.  Now you want to tell Guyanese what is good for them.  You stay here and let the people there decide.

FM
Originally Posted by Prashad:

It is a good thing Baseman did not talk to Burnham about banning milk and replace it with rice milk. 

Bai, mi fadda had 12 milk cows, I was hoping milk get banned, then dem cow would become white gold.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:

Ah, come on, you yourself admitted your parents left Guyana when you were a little boy on some "official assignment" . . .

ahmmm, de fake 'QUOTE' is a nice, brazen touch . . .which 'record' are u consulting again bai?

 

baseman, u either LYING just because it is YOUR way of life, or are extremely disoriented and delusional from frequent trips to jackassland and the EXPOSURE on GNI

 

NAKEDNESS for a 'big' man with such a small penis can be traumatic . . . nah suh bai?

FM
Last edited by Former Member
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by Prashad:

It is a good thing Baseman did not talk to Burnham about banning milk and replace it with rice milk. 

Bai, mi fadda had 12 milk cows, I was hoping milk get banned, then dem cow would become white gold.

Yugi22, what you gonna do when you find out Baseman's father, a balahoo brahmin, sold his cows to the butcher. He did not kill the cows that he was supposed to protect according to Sanatan Dharma, but contracted out the killings for profit.

Mitwah
Originally Posted by Nehru:

Caribj is RIGHT, everyone was affected but it was an easy decision for Burnham given the fact that Peas, Channa, OIl and other items used largely by Indians were included.


Funny guy.  EVERY one in Guyana eats Channa.  EVERY one in Guyana ate split peas.  EVERY one in Guyana used flours, Indians for roti, others for bread.  A major defect in the Guyanese diet is the excessive use of cooking oil.  ALL GUILTY.

 

So how can one say only Indians were singled out?

 

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
.  Burnham/PNC ensured Afros at the top of the "food-chain"


How may I ask?  The state controlled distribution system had collapsed.  So it was the private, mainly Indian, though smaller numbers of Afros, who got food to people.

 

Again EVERY ONE SIUFFERED, apart from a small speculator class which included as many (or more ) Indians as blacks.

 

I assume that you know that many of the Afro women who journeyed to BGI and POS to buy supplies were bankrolled by Indians.  They fronted the cash, purchased the goods upon return, etc.

 

People from EVERY group suffered, and a minority from every groupo benefitted.

 

Indeed much of todays Indo business class owe their origins to that period.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Nehru:

Caribj is RIGHT, everyone was affected but it was an easy decision for Burnham given the fact that Peas, Channa, OIl and other items used largely by Indians were included.


Funny guy.  EVERY one in Guyana eats Channa.  EVERY one in Guyana ate split peas.  EVERY one in Guyana used flours, Indians for roti, others for bread.  A major defect in the Guyanese diet is the excessive use of cooking oil.  ALL GUILTY.

 

So how can one say only Indians were singled out?

 

Did Cheddi not support Burnham on this initiative?

Mitwah
Originally Posted by baseman:
.

But it was mostly Indians who were being beaten, arrested, fined and .


1.  KSI had NOTHING.  No black person owned a KSI store, so no black business class was developed.  A small cadre of PNC operatives benefitted.

 

2.  I assumethat you think that Walter Rodney, Darke, David Hinds and others who Burnham killed, or tried to kill, were Indians?

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

 


What do you think that blacks eat.  No flour so no bread.  No peas so no rice and peas or cook up rice.  Rice was in short supply because many had to use that instead of bread, and you know full well that the incompetence of the PNC all but destroyed that industry.

 

Maybe you had left Guyana but I do recall seeing widespraed malnutraion among ALL RACES by the early 80s when I left.

 

Baseman your issue is that being a racist you lack any empathy for blacks and so couldnt care less about how much they suffered under Linden Forbes Sampson Burnham.  And indeed by the 1973 election black support for the PNC had diminahed as wny one who was in Gtwn would have noted seeing trhat no more than 10% of the population bothered to vote.  And the popularity of Walter Rodney by the late 70s.

FM
Originally Posted by Mitwah:
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by Nehru:

Caribj is RIGHT, everyone was affected but it was an easy decision for Burnham given the fact that Peas, Channa, OIl and other items used largely by Indians were included.


Funny guy.  EVERY one in Guyana eats Channa.  EVERY one in Guyana ate split peas.  EVERY one in Guyana used flours, Indians for roti, others for bread.  A major defect in the Guyanese diet is the excessive use of cooking oil.  ALL GUILTY.

 

So how can one say only Indians were singled out?

 

Did Cheddi not support Burnham on this initiative?


YES.  You see Cheddi was so blinded by his slavish need to follow orders fromk Moscow and Havana, who told him to support Forbes Burnham who they were courting because they saw him as less bad then most of the other CARICOM govts which they saw as blatantly capitalist and Western in orientation. 

FM
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

Ah, come on, you yourself admitted your parents left Guyana when you were a little boy on some "official assignment" . . .

ahmmm, de fake 'QUOTE' is a nice, brazen touch . . .which 'record' are u consulting again bai?

 

baseman, u either LYING just because it is YOUR way of life, or are extremely disoriented and delusional from frequent trips to jackassland and the EXPOSURE on GNI

 

NAKEDNESS for a 'big' man with such a small penis can be traumatic . . . nah suh bai?

What is your fixation with his penis has to do with the discussion? But your mind is so filthy that you must throw sex into it. Again Burnham wanted to save foreign exchange. He banned food items to do so but the money he saved was squandered by him and his people. He punished his people when there was no need for it. 

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by baseman:
 

2. These products were not staple to Afros, which then

 

 


What do you think that blacks eat.  No flour so no bread.  No peas so no rice and peas or cook up rice.  Rice was in short supply because many had to use that instead of bread, and you know full well that the incompetence of the PNC all but destroyed that industry.

 

Maybe you had left Guyana but I do recall seeing widespraed malnutraion among ALL RACES by the early 80s when I left.

 

Baseman your issue is that being a racist you lack any empathy for blacks and so couldnt care less about how much they suffered under Linden Forbes Sampson Burnham.  And indeed by the 1973 election black support for the PNC had diminahed as wny one who was in Gtwn would have noted seeing trhat no more than 10% of the population bothered to vote.  And the popularity of Walter Rodney by the late 70s.

Please read in in the context of my entire post.  If that was so, then why overwhelmingly Indians were persecuted/prosecuted.  Then one can only conclude:

 

1. It was not that critical to Afros or

 

2. Afros had "legal" means to get their supplies?

 

Which was it?

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
.

Please read in in the context of my entire post.  If that was so, then why overwhelmingly Indians were persecuted/prosecuted.  Then one can only conclude:

 

1. It was not that critical to Afros or

 

2. Afros had "legal" means to get their supplies?

 

Which was it?

It is YOUR opinion that it was overwhelmingly Indians who were punished.

 

What "legal" ways did Afros have to get food, and why did few know about this. Please do not scream KSI because it would then be obvious that you never ventured into one of them.

 

What kind of food do you think blacks eat?  Air?  Because without flour it is hard for poor people to survive as meat is beyond them.  Dont say provisions because Gtwn blacks didnt totally depend on that for food.  Local production was not enough for people to not eat bread.

 

When split peas was banned then demand shifted to other peas so all who consumed peas suffered.  I do recall that split peas wa popular, maybe it was cheaper.

 

Your woe is me doesnt impress.  Burnham made EVERY one suffer or else why did blacks become as skinny as Indians?  Why did so many live on sugar water?

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by baseman:
.

Please read in in the context of my entire post.  If that was so, then why overwhelmingly Indians were persecuted/prosecuted.  Then one can only conclude:

 

1. It was not that critical to Afros or

 

2. Afros had "legal" means to get their supplies?

 

Which was it?

It is YOUR opinion that it was overwhelmingly Indians who were punished.

 

What "legal" ways did Afros have to get food, and why did few know about this. Please do not scream KSI because it would then be obvious that you never ventured into one of them.

 

What kind of food do you think blacks eat?  Air?  Because without flour it is hard for poor people to survive as meat is beyond them.  Dont say provisions because Gtwn blacks didnt totally depend on that for food.  Local production was not enough for people to not eat bread.

 

When split peas was banned then demand shifted to other peas so all who consumed peas suffered.  I do recall that split peas wa popular, maybe it was cheaper.

 

Your woe is me doesnt impress.  Burnham made EVERY one suffer or else why did blacks become as skinny as Indians?  Why did so many live on sugar water?

So then, what did Afros do for food?  From what I remember, under the PNC Afros seem better fed than Indians!

FM
Originally Posted by Ronald Sugrim:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

Ah, come on, you yourself admitted your parents left Guyana when you were a little boy on some "official assignment" . . .

ahmmm, de fake 'QUOTE' is a nice, brazen touch . . .which 'record' are u consulting again bai?

 

baseman, u either LYING just because it is YOUR way of life, or are extremely disoriented and delusional from frequent trips to jackassland and the EXPOSURE on GNI

 

NAKEDNESS for a 'big' man with such a small penis can be traumatic . . . nah suh bai?

What is your fixation with his penis has to do with the discussion? But your mind is so filthy that you must throw sex into it. Again Burnham wanted to save foreign exchange. He banned food items to do so but the money he saved was squandered by him and his people. He punished his people when there was no need for it. 


If Burnham wanted to make the country self sufficent, save US dollars and have food security he should have brought in those changes slowly and gradually not over night.  For example, so call irish potato farming could have been introduced into some areas of Guyana and gradually ease off of foreign potato imports.  This is South America we living in.  The birth place of Irish/English potatoes. 

Prashad
Originally Posted by Ronald Sugrim:
Originally Posted by redux:
Originally Posted by baseman:

Ah, come on, you yourself admitted your parents left Guyana when you were a little boy on some "official assignment" . . .

ahmmm, de fake 'QUOTE' is a nice, brazen touch . . .which 'record' are u consulting again bai?

 

baseman, u either LYING just because it is YOUR way of life, or are extremely disoriented and delusional from frequent trips to jackassland and the EXPOSURE on GNI

 

NAKEDNESS for a 'big' man with such a small penis can be traumatic . . . nah suh bai?

What is your fixation with his penis has to do with the discussion? But your mind is so filthy that you must throw sex into it. Again Burnham wanted to save foreign exchange. He banned food items to do so but the money he saved was squandered by him and his people. He punished his people when there was no need for it. 

well, lessee now mr sugrim . . . baseman brazenly attempts to defame by pulling magical 'QUOTES' out of his LYING, stinking ass and attributing them to me  . . . i call him on it . . . he runs away like a lil biatch . . . and u now, in turn, come running hay like some pimped out old ho whining that i should watch my language

 

strange creatures y'all

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×