Tweet
Where was the Observer when the PNM practised ‘ethnic stocking’?
Friday, December 14, 2012
Dear Editor,
The Jamaica Observer’s editorial of December 11, 2012 raises questions of fairness and honesty in journalism in the editorial, “The more important issue is abuse of substance”.
Why a newspaper with such a strong Caribbean tradition would stoop so low continues to bemuse me. From where does the authority to speak about ethnic stocking suddenly derive?
Where was the voice of the Jamaica Observer when ethnic stocking in its most dominant form was practised by the People’s National Movement?
In a country which boasts of many nations – one people, one would never have believed that such an august institution would decline into such stealth racism, but it seems that even across the Caribbean sensationalism seems to be the modus operandi for selling newspapers.
Where was the Observer when Senator Devant Maharaj had to go to court in order not to be passed over for promotion at the National Lotteries Control Board? Was that not “ethnic stocking”?
Where was the Observer when Ganga Persad Bissoon’s appointment as commissioner of state lands was vetoed by the then Prime Minister Patrick Manning? Was that not also “ethnic stocking”?
Where was the Observer when the Hindu Maha Sabha, having been denied a national voice for over a decade, was forced to seek justice right up to the Privy Council and still received resistance by the PNM Government? Was that not “ethnic stocking”?
For more than 30 years, not a Hindu was appointed or elected as a member of government by the PNM, and yet the Observer dares to speak about “ethnic stocking?”
The adage that cockroach should not meddle in fowl business is relevant to the Observer in this context.
That the Observer has chosen to publish this poorly researched and error-riddled piece of writing as the paper’s official opinion is pathetically disappointing and raises suspicion as to how this could have been allowed to occur.
The author clearly has a hidden agenda that transcends the decency of truth and the tenet of the journalistic profession of objective loyalty to the facts.
What the author glosses over is the fact that this Government has improved the image on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index.
Is it possible that if “ethnic stocking” is really taking place, the current preferred ethnicity may be the one to keep Trinidad and Tobago less corrupt?
But for the records, from 1956 – 1966, of the 66 PNM ministers appointed, only 18 of those were East Indians. If that is not “ethnic stocking”, then I refuse to understand what it is.
The Jamaica Observer must therefore salvage their integrity and reveal the author of the editorial.
I guess this is another one of those Jamaican attacks of the past as “T&T’s oil will pass through it as a dose of salts” — Michael Manley.
Jack Warner
Chairman
United National Congress
Trinidad and Tobago
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/lette...#ixzz2Ezlh904A
Friday, December 14, 2012
Dear Editor,
The Jamaica Observer’s editorial of December 11, 2012 raises questions of fairness and honesty in journalism in the editorial, “The more important issue is abuse of substance”.
Why a newspaper with such a strong Caribbean tradition would stoop so low continues to bemuse me. From where does the authority to speak about ethnic stocking suddenly derive?
Where was the voice of the Jamaica Observer when ethnic stocking in its most dominant form was practised by the People’s National Movement?
In a country which boasts of many nations – one people, one would never have believed that such an august institution would decline into such stealth racism, but it seems that even across the Caribbean sensationalism seems to be the modus operandi for selling newspapers.
Where was the Observer when Senator Devant Maharaj had to go to court in order not to be passed over for promotion at the National Lotteries Control Board? Was that not “ethnic stocking”?
Where was the Observer when Ganga Persad Bissoon’s appointment as commissioner of state lands was vetoed by the then Prime Minister Patrick Manning? Was that not also “ethnic stocking”?
Where was the Observer when the Hindu Maha Sabha, having been denied a national voice for over a decade, was forced to seek justice right up to the Privy Council and still received resistance by the PNM Government? Was that not “ethnic stocking”?
For more than 30 years, not a Hindu was appointed or elected as a member of government by the PNM, and yet the Observer dares to speak about “ethnic stocking?”
The adage that cockroach should not meddle in fowl business is relevant to the Observer in this context.
That the Observer has chosen to publish this poorly researched and error-riddled piece of writing as the paper’s official opinion is pathetically disappointing and raises suspicion as to how this could have been allowed to occur.
The author clearly has a hidden agenda that transcends the decency of truth and the tenet of the journalistic profession of objective loyalty to the facts.
What the author glosses over is the fact that this Government has improved the image on the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index.
Is it possible that if “ethnic stocking” is really taking place, the current preferred ethnicity may be the one to keep Trinidad and Tobago less corrupt?
But for the records, from 1956 – 1966, of the 66 PNM ministers appointed, only 18 of those were East Indians. If that is not “ethnic stocking”, then I refuse to understand what it is.
The Jamaica Observer must therefore salvage their integrity and reveal the author of the editorial.
I guess this is another one of those Jamaican attacks of the past as “T&T’s oil will pass through it as a dose of salts” — Michael Manley.
Jack Warner
Chairman
United National Congress
Trinidad and Tobago
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/lette...#ixzz2Ezlh904A
Comment