M Rafic Soormally (guest)
Born of Hindustani parents, Idrice Soormally and Bibi Rabiah Soormally (born Chaumoo) in Curepipe, and holder of Accounting, Finance, Economics (including Politics), Marketing and Law qualifications, I have been writing since 2000. Several of my articles have been published in Mauritius, Pakistan, Iran, UK. I also write regularly for the Mauritian Abroad Magazine in the UK. Many of my articles have been posted across the web, ranging from the Washington Post to Netherlands Radio Worldwide.
The narcissism of R.A.J.
- By M Rafic Soormally (guest)
- Published 8th May, 2008
Following a French grammatical rule, I will refer to the un-named author writing under the initials R.A.J. as a he. I have read, with a certain amount of disgust, his article « April the first : When sanctimonious idiots queue up to spout nonsense », posted on the Défi Media Group website on 1st April 2008 and also published in Le Mauricien of the same date. He believes that by quoting (perhaps from a Book of Quotations) from well-known figures such as, Napolean Bonaparte, Albert Einstein, George Orwell (Eric Arthur Blair), Rudyard Kipling, Mark Twain, this would make him a big shot as he would like to think he is. He is so much in love with himself that he even quotes himself to spew out even more nonsense. His flaw is that he uses quotations as recommendations upon which he bases his own thinking and then holds them to be true for every other person. On the other hand, he denies Cassam Uteem, ex-President of the Republic of Mauritius, the right to think for himself when he insults and accuses Mr Uteem of suffering from 'thought paralysis'. [Ref. R.A.J. comments on the Défi Media Blog, 29 April 2008 : « Cassam Uteem et la nation mauricienne » of Parvez Dookhy]. In fact, by stating that Paul Bérenger should not present himself as PM at the next general elections, [Ref. Mr Uteem's interview in le Week-End 27th April 2008], Cassam Uteem does not base his thoughts by copying any author like R.A.J. tends to do incessantly. One wonders who is truly suffering from « thought paralysis »!
R.A.J. quotes Mark Twain as saying that « April 1st: This is the day upon which we are reminded of what we are on the other three hundred and sixty four. » This may be true of him and Mark Twain, but not necessarily true for other people unless he possesses the heavenly gift to reflect their minds when he admires himself. He uses this totally inappropriate quotation to attack and insult the Minister for Education Dharam Gokhool who, through a self-quote (of 229 words), R.A.J. describes as a « most incompetent and ludicrous Minister », « arrogant », « proverbial rabbit », « unsuited for the post of Minister of Education », « the young child hiding under the blankets in the hope that the nasty monster will simply vanish », and much more, all in the context of Gokhool's proposals for Star Colleges, and demanded, under anonymity, that Mr Gokhool be « removed » from office « to take him out of his misery ».
R.A.J. then uses those attacks, insults, allegations and opinions against Minister Gokhool to back his further opinion that the Minister should resign in the aftermath of the sad death of one 13 year old student as a result of the torrential rains on Wednesday 26th March 2008 which could not even be predicted by the Meteorological Office. In fact, four people sadly lost their lives in this Act of God, but R.A.J. only discriminated against Mr Gokhool by barking for his resignation and who he clearly holds responsible for the death of the student Laura Paul when he says: « Laura Paul's memory deserves nothing less than those responsible for this squalid level of incompetence to be sanctioned ». He effectively demanded that the Minister should have used his discretion and ordered the closure of all schools in the absence of a report form the Met Office forecasting torrential rains that day. But he is unable to show that the Minister acted unlawfully by not using his discretion. Surely, even though many people may be unhappy with what they regard as Mr Gokhool's inaction, R.A.J. is in no position to tell a Minister when and how to use his discretion. Who does he think he is? He is merely pushing his narcissism (love of himself) to the extreme. When he sarcastically describes the PM Dr Ramgoolam as « the astute politician he likes to think he is » when calling upon him to sack Minister Gokhool, R.A.J. was merely looking at his own reflection and believing in his ‘celebrity’ status in anonymity. In fact, the « idiocy » and « nonsense » he is talking about can only be a reflection of himself which he is trying to hide through his anonymity, the use of big words (often made up and inappropriate) and bombastic language.
R.A.J. accepts that Minister Gokhool « should not be made to carry the can on his own », but he does not single out any one else for resignation. He argues that the « opposition is rightly condemning Gokhool and the Met Office for the tragedies of last Wednesday » when, in truth, Paul Bérenger, leader of the opposition, has absolved the Met Office and held Minister Gokhool and the PM Ramgoolam solely and entirely responsible [le Mauricien 31st March 2008 « Bérenger : Gokhool et le PM seuls responsables »].
In fact, R.A.J. has misinterpreted and misapplied Mark Twain's saying, since he has done the reminding for Minister Gokhool when the Minister should have done his own reminding about himself. His delusion through his love of himself makes him believe that he can enter the mind of Mr Gokhool and do the thinking for him. It never crossed his mind that Mr Gokhool may not share Mark Twain's and his view of how people think. The un-named author couples his misunderstanding of Mark Twain by doing the reminding for Robert Mugabe and the Governor of the Bank of Mauritius as well. This is a clear attempt to link Dr Ramgoolam's government with the Mugabe's of this world, which appears to be his hidden agenda. R.A.J. has completely misunderstood the substance of Mark Twain's quotation, which is pivotal to his article, and is misleading readers in the process by writing over 2000 words of sheer drivel.
M Rafic Soormally
Spread The Word
25 Responses to "The narcissism of R.A.J." 
|
said this on 08 May 2008 9:47:22 PM MUT
Thank you Mr. Soormally for taking the time and patience in making your analysis, views and discussion displayed here on Le Defi Media Group. Too often, readers do not comprehend or ignore many articles posted. We need to be encouraged to make informed opinions based on evidence rather than "HOT WIND." An intelligent and reflective writer will give his considered analysis based on facts rather than fantasies.
Too often, Readers are faced with "laced" documentation based on philosophies and are begged to accept as facts. Unfortunately, Mr. Soormally, your responses appear lengthy because you have had to ensure that the consumers of this media is faced with the truth, nothing but the truth. R.A.J has made a habit of throwing everything for his own entertainment. He lives in a world of fantasy and perhaps derives some gratification of his needs. He really need to revisit his needs - Maslow hierarchy of needs. He may think that he is a fully self actualised individual when his basic needs have not even been met. This is where his difficulties begin. The truth always hurts. It is better to take a good evaluative measures, become reflective in your approach. Yes, there are values in knowing philosophies but misusing them for your ulterior motives is uncalled for when people are better educated now than in the 1960's. Mr. Soormally, I must congratulate you for your perseverance in ensuring that Mauritius is not made of so many fools to take everything that is thrown at us. |
|
said this on 09 May 2008 11:56:14 AM MUT
R.A.J delivers long flowery proses to satisfy the needs of the pret-a-penser clientele. In typical Berenger style, he just bandwagons on talks-of-a-town, as portrayed by our "independent" media, he packages them with a dose of anecdotes + bombastic wordings + what filters through his unconcsious biases. The sad part of it is that his identity is not that unknown in town. I have met him personally and presume that his long articles act as a therapy for a deeply frustrated personality. If one wishes to shed light on pressing issues, one would better look for the other, albeit few, alternatives available.
|
|
said this on 09 May 2008 3:33:50 PM MUT
I wonder now, whether R.A.J will come to defend these remarks. THE GAME IS NOW OVER FOR HIM IF AND ONLY IF EVERY READER WERE TO PAY ATTENTION LIKE THE FEW WE HAVE HERE.
|
|
said this on 10 May 2008 1:39:53 AM MUT
REPLY TO « Munna » AND « CitizenG »
Thank you all for your comments. R.A.J.’s identity does not really bother me as I debate with pseudonyms all the time. He is not even using a 'nom de plume' but just initials. Because he has been challenged and does not know what to say, he invokes his own shallowness. By the way he writes, he despises and looks down upon people. The real problem is that because he has found an outlet through a certain press to attack and insult people under anonymity, he believes he has become ‘ène tigitte pli tipi ki bondié’, as we say in patois. When I know the identities of others, it is all too easy to attack them when I am hiding my own. This is where identity becomes important. A name may be just a name in certain cases, but a name is an expression of identity which tells a lot about someone, and for which many people are prepared to lay down their lives. There are several clues as to R.A.J.’s identity. He can easily be found out, but who cares? I think he must have learnt his lesson by now. All he needs to do is not to hide behind his anonymity to insult and degrade others the way he has been doing for several years. He seems obsessed with Ministers’ lawful limousines, missions and per diem. If he were a Minister before and misses those perks, he just has to strive to it again just like Paul Bérenger is doing. His long embroidered articles are published ad nauseum, and readers have started to believe in much of the nonsense he is spewing out. This is clearly a fascist method to control people’s minds. I note that the said press has not yet published any effective response to R.A.J., and is boycotting those replies. One way or another, people’s voice will be heard. And, for that, we are most thankful and grateful to the Défi Media Group to allow people free expression, within certain limits, of course. Regards Rafic Soormally |
|
said this on 09 May 2008 4:22:52 PM MUT
What is the matter with you people? Why do you bother passing comments on anything if you can't even understand the original paper?? Jeez... some people will do anything to see their name in print. And such slavish admiration for all our politicians? Someone really ought to remove your tongues from the bowels of these politicians!
And don't expect R.A.J. to answer to all this nonsense. I'm sure he's got much more interesting things to look after. Roshan |
|
said this on 10 May 2008 1:44:40 AM MUT
REPLY TO « ROSHAN »
In what way do you understand the original paper which is entirely based on a quotation from Mark Twain ? If R.A.J. is unable to reply, do his own words « thought paralysis » mean anything to you ? How do you know that R.A.J. is not a frustated politician himself ? Regards Rafic Soormally |
|
said this on 09 May 2008 4:30:04 PM MUT
Very well said Roshan.
As for the others here, I would suggest the following: 1/ Please see a psychiatrist in order to resolve your unhealthy obsession with R.A.J. - failing that, many of our local "treters" would gladly help you, as you all seem stupid enough to believe any rubbish. 2/ Some of you should really spend their time smelling the fresh roses of London and enjoying the spring blossom rather than spending hours going through R.A.J.'s past papers and then some more hours drafting such ludicrous replies. 3/ Perhaps you may want to try some camomille tea..it is very good for insomnia and would enable you to sleep rather than pacing the floor thinking about new ways to deal with the problem you've created all on your own. 5/ Yours is a classic case of projection: you're ascribing all your failings and weaknesses on R.A.J. 6/ You sound like the typical 'Eden college' student who has to do anything to prove to those attending 'Star' colleges that you're just as intelligent as them. I hope that does not sound too snobbish but, smart as you are, you'll know what i mean. 7/ There were 27 replies to Dookhy's blog and the vast majority expressed similar views to R.A.J. It's therefore clear that this chap has a morbid obsession about R.A.J. Now please... give us a break. |
|
said this on 10 May 2008 1:48:00 AM MUT
REPLY TO « LIMEME »
The narcissism of R.A.J. is about his own obsession with himself, and not about other people’s alleged obsession with him. Since he is writing thousands of words of drivel, I am sure he does expect other people to refute him. If he does not want people to respond, then you should advise him to write less drivel. As I see it, he is desperately in need of advice. Anyone has the absolute right to refer to any of his previous articles (I would not call them « papers »), especially those in which he is misleading people with such impunity, and showing his obsession with Ministers’ limousines, missions and per diem. If you cannot contribute to this debate, may be you should make another posting on Mr Dookhy’s blog, not to agree with Mr Dookhy, but to agree with the poodle. Regards Rafic Soormally |
|
said this on 10 May 2008 9:19:21 PM MUT
My God! What have we got here? Someone who writes articles of less than average competence and who likes to feel so obedient towards anyone who happens to be a politician, and who is aided and abetted by his Munnabhai, someone of a similar I.Q. level and who shares his obsession with R.A.J. What is the matter with you people? Can't you understand one simple thing: if R.A.J. gets his papers published on a regular basis, it is simply because his style is on a vastly different level to yours. You can call him all the childish terms you seem to be so fond of, but one fact remains indisputable: he criticises politicians of every party, and only fools can accuse him of being partisan.
Unlike you people who want to show so much love and respect to our thieving politicians. Why shouldn't he talk about their limousines and per diem, etc. What do you want? A per diem of Rs 30,000 per day is not enough for these buffoons? Should we give them bigger limousines? As Roshan said, 'Someone really ought to remove your tongues from the bowels of these politicians!'. Aren't you ashamed to write such rubbish and then to expect R.A.J. to respond to such undiluted crap? You are so full of 'I', 'I', 'I', and 'I think': Who cares really about what you think? You are an arrogant idiot who seems to spend all his time reading R.A.J.'s papers and then armed with your munnabhai you assault us with the most incredible nonsense imaginable. There is a simple solution for you two, apart from seeing the psychiatrist that Limeme has rightly advised you to in order to cure your pathological obsession and delusion that you deserve the recognition that R.A.J. has: DON'T READ HIS PAPERS IF THEY UPSET YOU THAT MUCH! You use the word 'drivel' a lot; perhaps it is a subconscious appraisal of your own ridiculous papers. And what is 'a certain press'? Do you mean le mauricien, l'Express, Mauritius times, or le defi? they all publish his papers. Or is it just another manifestation of the nasty racism that always lurks underneath what you write? Finally, is it just a coincidence that you spewed your bile ONLY after R.A.J. passed some accurate comments on Cassam Uteem? Is there a link there somewhere Rafic Soormally? Why did you keep so quiet when R.A.J. regularly lampooned politicians of all other religions? Your latest rubbish on Gokool is simply to prevent people from making that connection. As Limeme says, please, in the name of God, give us a break from this nonsense. And change your mirror because the reflection from the one you are using is giving a really inflated but so inaccurate image of you. And don't you dare come up with your usual rubbish about this entry being made by one of R.A.J's 'people'! I do not know the man or woman known as R.A.J.; I have never met him or her. But i am glad that we have someone who is not scared to say out loud what most of us think. Except the sycophants who can never find anything wrong with our wonderful politicians. |
|
said this on 13 May 2008 4:25:09 PM MUT
REPLY TO ‘SOBAH JAWAHEER’
Given that Mr/Ms/Mrs R.A.J. is an author and a guest of this forum, he has duties and responsibilities like every one else. If he (to keep it simple) does not want people to respond to his abusive drivel, or « bile » as you put it, then he should not have it published in the first place. Once his writings are in the public domain, anyone has the absolute right to read and respond whenever one chooses. In fact, one should make it a point to read and expose him for what he is because he is poisoning people’s minds with a lot of bakwas. Whether he chooses to reply himself, or under a different pseudonym, or let others do the dirty job for him merely reflects upon him. Your personal judgement about his ‘level’ of ‘competence’ is entirely your own problem. When you say : « you assault us with the most incredible nonsense imaginable », and allege « racism », you should back it up with concrete examples and not follow this anonymous little chap’s method of making merely gratuitous allegations? Like R.A.J., you like to use words like « pathological » and « sycophant » against other people. I wonder why? Surely, you know your own pathological state more than anyone else, is it not? One contributor on this forum writing under the name of « Frantz Fanon », who agreed with my criticisms of R.A.J. in one article, said : « I must confess that I am not a great fan of politicians, of whatever shade! » Nor am I really. Nobody should be because we know what they are capable of. But where will this world be without them? Why do we vote for them? Once we have voted for them, they have to do their job. If we are not happy with them, we throw them out the next time round. If the anonymous little chappie were a Minister, do you think he would have travelled in a limousine or on a bicycle? When you talk about « thieving politicians », you must identify both the politicians and the theft. Otherwise, Mr Jawaheer, I am sorry to say that you have to keep your mouth shut. This is exactly what R.A.J. should do with all his unsubstantiated allegations and value judgements. If you think that this anonymous chap made « some accurate comments on Cassam Uteem », am I not allowed to think otherwise and respond accordingly? What link can there be? Or, are you trying to be racist yourself ? Similarly, I object to his abusive comments against Minister Dharam Gokhool, however unhappy I may be with the Minister’s glaring inaction. Why have you not referred to any ‘link’ in this instance ? Maybe he should consult what Mark Twain said about it if he can understand him, or perhaps, even your psychiatrist as you mentioned it. In this response, I have exposed R.A.J.’s misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the quotation he borrowed from Mark Twain in order to attack other people by writing over 2000 words of sheer drivel which you have decided to adopt. If you do not agree with me, the only decent thing you should do is to prove me wrong and not make silly personal attacks like R.A.J. obsessively does. His narcissism is glaring. When someone has been caught so flagrantly, he should recognise his mistake and apologise as he has misled so many people. His argument that the other person’s argument is too shallow and not deserving of a response is a classic example of his love with himself in self-defeatism. I am sure he finds your lack of argument illuminating and praiseworthy. R.A.J. cowardly hides behind anonymity and big (often meaningless) words when he cannot even understand the simple basic words of Mark Twain. Munna summarised him perfectly well when he says that « He may think that he is a fully self actualised individual when his basic needs have not even been met. This is where his difficulties begin ». Munna cannot have reached such an original and compelling conclusion lightly. He has done his homework and demonstrated a high level of IQ, while you still have to prove yourself which you will never be able to do just by joining R.A.J. in « lampooning » selected politicians through clear prejudice, jealousy and envy. Regards Rafic Soormally |
|
said this on 13 May 2008 7:43:08 PM MUT
I would start by quoting R.A.J from a previous article: 'if you are in a hole, stop digging'. Your attempts to defend yourself are boring and please stop giving us lessons about Narcissism. Looks like you just discovered the word.
Who do you think you are to impose your opinion of R.A.J on us. This guy is writing articles which are years ahead of your conciliating articles of another age. Stop being ridiculous (along with your benaam associate Munna) and learn to respect people who are better than you! |
|
said this on 14 May 2008 6:01:13 AM MUT
Carry on Rafic. You are in your rights.
Sobah, tire so manzer, belsoeuros! Li kont to montagne. Aras so lerbe. Oh by the way, yes, by the way, this R.A.J., why had he spared Nababsingh, Ruhee, Khooshiram & Juddoo when they were ministers? Why he sees no wrong with Bunwaree and Boolell? Why? Why? Why? and on Mauritius Sugar Authority? why? Ooo ... hidden agenda? caste agenda? clivage agenda? sustainability of freros in arms? Ohoho!!! INSAF surely knows something. |
|
said this on 15 May 2008 2:59:53 AM MUT
Aio, Papa, qui faire Mauriciens pas capave avoir ene debat sain et civiliser sans qui bizin attacke zotte prochain ou l'autre opinion comme etant dans l'erreur. Why all this them and us approach? Jayen, a to question: peutetre parcequi boucoup banne politiciens c'est banne freres francs maconnerie. Mo tende dire qui francs masonnerie (FM) mari plein plein dans maurice. depi Media, La cour, Parlement, sectuer priver, aio, pas cozer mo famille. Anous ena ene grand debat lors FM dans maurice. Mo esperer qui sa reponse la pour trouve lizour, enfin zotte comprend.
|
|
said this on 15 May 2008 2:08:45 PM MUT
Fantastic! Rafic, your opinion on R.A.J has succeeded in bringing about interesting issues expressed by PloumPloum, Sobah, Foreigner and INSAF.
I await your views on their comments and shall come back with more information, time permits, and webmaster tolerates. |
|
said this on 15 May 2008 4:57:00 PM MUT
Why don't you try debating on whar RAJ writes. You may be the Mauritian hero, after whom Raficcissism may be named, became obsessed with RAJ's reflection.
|
|
said this on 15 May 2008 5:24:32 PM MUT
I'm actually quite happy about Mr Rafic Soormally's article...I thought I was the only one thinking what a weird person R.A.J is. His articles reflect a bit his own state of mind. I give credit to Mr Rafic for spotting the narcissism. Probably we should add clinical depression or schizoprenia to it and some form of personality disorder than I still can't put my finger on. I have to agree his first article really impressed me because he has a euhhh different way of writing. But then the more I read of him, the more I started seeing a repetitive cynicism. It's like writing is self therapy for him. It's so obvious. Most of his articles don't make sense, he's just ranting. Take his 'A pill for every ill' article. He goes on and on about lifestyle and diet as being the ultimate cause of the nation's '2 biggest killers': diabetes and heart disease. Perhaps if he did his 'research' properly he would see that a significant proportion of these diseases are actually genetically acquired and no matter how much you diet and exercise, you would need some medication. Pfff anyway, let the poor thing rant and rant. It's obviously his sole way of relief and distraction.
|
|
said this on 14 May 2008 12:36:01 PM MUT
Dear All I joined this Forum as I have said before, to enjoy a good debate. I even went beyond my ways of actually making a polite request to Mr R Soormally to stick to issues , and dont get personal and/ or patronising. It looks like I need to repeat my request to all of you this time. Sadly it would seem, at least to me, that venoms and vitriols are very much essential parts of your posts. This is very unfortunate. Yes , I agree. Why this obsession with RAJ identity? Personally I could not care less if RAJ wear trousers or skirts or perhaps RAJ prefer to wear both!! ( My dry sense of humour!!). I am neither an admirer nor a critic of RAJ. But one thing I appreciate about RAJ's articles: Yes RAJ criticises ALL Politicians at one time or the other. RAJ comes up with information ( about Politicians mostly) that are not in the public domain or which Newspapers dont publish. Yes I think , ministers per Diem and other Mission expenses and Limousines are fair games and indeed should be scrutinised. I personally think they are morally unlawful, contrary to Mr RS. Now whether Moraliter pas plein ventre , this is another debate. I would argue , since when Moraliter inne faire pour remplir ventre!! A good example, when I read about the predicaments of the Governor of the bank Of Mauritius, how he was doing his job for a pittance, somehow I felt sympaphy for him UNTIL RAJ wrote about his per diem and other Allowances. Now, why did not any journalists wrote about it before RAJ? I particularly wish to see the crazy idea of DUTY FREE disappeared from our landscape., another issue which RAJ has hammered several times. Name me a country, where Civil Servants are entitled a Duty free car every now and then , There is no clause that as and when they re-sell the car, they do not return the loss of duties back to the State!! Finally I dont believe there is any link between RS and Cassam Uteem, it was unfair to even suggest any link. My point to all you: leave RAJ, alone, why are you so obsessed with the Current Political leadership. Their SELL BY date is long gone. These guys, are in their sixties , and you are fixated on which one among them will be the next PM! Why dont you take a stand against the crazy and dangerous idea of Shared Premiership? Can anyone tell any benefits for a Shared PM ship? PloumPloum
|
|
said this on 14 May 2008 1:13:39 PM MUT
Let light be Jayen... tell us more. I am sure you have no hidden agenda...
|
|
said this on 15 May 2008 4:45:04 AM MUT
I did take issue with RAJ's selective criticism of Dulloo on the question of per diem. His critique reminded me of some anonymous fellow who wrote negative articles in L"Express about Dulloo when he was in conflict with the Mauritius Sugar Authority about sugar industry centralization policy in 1993. At that time, Kailash Ruhee and Sithanen supported the MSA and all the ministers who backed the sugar industry barons succeeded in getting Dulloo revoked from the government.
You are right Jayen. A small clique is still ruling in Mauritius, imposing their whims and fancies on the people. |
|
said this on 15 May 2008 12:34:22 PM MUT
Insaf
Eski to croire sa small clique qui pe controle maurice la, eski zotte seulement banne BARONS SUCRIERS D'avant c.a.d banne 5 ou 6 familles Blanc Mauriciens ou bien astere la, CLIQUE la forme parti banne MEMBRES FRANC MASON QUI TIRE LA FICELLE DE GAUCHE A DROITE SURTOUT DANS ZAFER LA LOI. COMMENT TO EXPLIQUER QUI CERTAIN DIMOUNES, ( BLANCS, HINDOUS, MUSULMANS, ET GRAND CREOLES ) JAMAIS CONDAMNER LA COUR MALGRE QUI CRIMES ZOTTE COMMETRE. DAPRES MO RENSEIGNMENT, BANNE FRANC MASONS EST COMPOSE DE BANNE ELITES HINDOUS, MUSULMANS ET GRAND CREOLES- pas banne Ti Creoles de Gregoire. Pour banne elite blancs , Franc Mason nepli ene necessiter, zotte deja dans l'ultime hauteur de l'hierarchie de franc mason. Avec sa, ajoute the war on terror, cotte CIA finne faire ene lotte qualite l'entree dans Maurice qui li ti faire avant septembre 2001. Mo tende dire qui un jeune ministre tres populaire parmi ene section de la population , li tellement amoureux avec Uncle Ben qui li danser aven nimporte qui disque qui zotte metter pou li. Et a travers li, Maurice pe vinne sous control banne gros players de l'occident. Appele li Bar reform, Orange IRS , zotte donne meme resiltat. Ala Li la , si zotte envie debat. largue le course la. Ploum |
|
said this on 16 May 2008 5:33:10 AM MUT
INSAF and PloumPloum bring about interesting political elements. While Rafic is getting in motion, "let light be..." as Foreigner requests hereabout.
INSAF refers to Ruhee, Sithanen, Dulloo, Sugar Authority and sugar industry barons. For now, let's have a close look at Kailash Ruhee (KR). KR was a Gaetan Duvaliste in 1975 and a Commissaire in Curepipe, if I am not mistaken. He deserted Gaetan to join Chacha Ramgoolam (PTr) in 1976. He later became PSM, following Harish Boodhoo. In 1982, thanks to Harish Bodhoo, he got elected and became minister, when he advocated the "ABC" (assisé bez casse) in Govt service. KR left PSM in 1983 to jump on the MMM wagon. In 1993, he left MMM for RMM and was nicknamed the tea-boy of La Caverne. In 1995, KR became MSM in soul and thought. He remained MSM until the eve of the 2000 General Election when he returned to PTr. In July 2005, he directed the "opération" "lev paké allé" from the PMO and was re-baptised tea-boy but this time at PMO. KR is a practising FM and is very actively involved in selective sponsorship of some mason brothers. KR takes his orders from his pal Rama Sithanen and from his master, Jean Marc ... |
|
said this on 16 May 2008 3:17:57 PM MUT
Someone who changes parties like changing shirt ,is not a good politician,he is a banker filling own reserve.
|
|
said this on 16 May 2008 4:19:28 PM MUT
Thanks Jayen for your smashing comments, bringing back this debate into something constructive and juicy. It's great to have Ploum's and INSAF's opinions. This is the best way for politicians to understand that we are not only here to cast votes and with some chances will serve as example for the future generation of politicians to understand their limits. This is what happens in any civilized society. Thanks to 'Le Defi' for giving us this opportunity to debate.
|
Author)








