A real editor would have kept quiet and hoped that the storm would pass away soon; or apologised for a horribly insensitive and insulting headline. But the GoNad is no real editor...
The editorial replete with hypocrisy...

I really did not think he would write the editorial he has today, after all the brouhaha that a quite stupid article in his paper caused the previous day. If you think I am being too uppity and too defensive, read the headline : "SHIVA, LES JEUNES, ET LE GANDIA". Now imagine the sheer impossibility of the GoNad to approve a similar article with the headline "MOHAMED/JESUS, LES JEUNES ET LE GANDIA", or anything 'taboo' which is then associated with the Gods that other people pray to. You can't, can you? And you know why? Because our 'free and independent' press is shit scared of the reaction of those communities and have constant nightmares about the Ayatollah Mouftah, or people as boorish as him, landing outside their offices and shouting abuse or breaking one or two windows.

And it really takes an incredible amount of arrogance to then justify that stupid and insensitive article with an 'editorial' that is as crass, hypocritical, and ignorant as the chap with weird looking new glasses really is.

I need to make one thing clear here: I am not that much into God or religion, and I certainly do not make a show of my belief in public or try to ram it down the necks of others, as so many very annoyingly do on Facebook. This post is more to do with the mentality of those a***holes who act like bullies simply because they have access to what they call newspapers, and delude themselves into thinking that they are super intelligent with film star looks, and swimming in a sea of integrity and truth...

Let us look at the title of the editorial and its contents to see who is the real hypocrite: "BANDE D'HYPOCRITES", it screams and I can see only two groups of people who depend on each other for sustenance (the mutual mastur******, as I prefer to call them...), but who love to call each other hypocrites whenever one or the other goes off the prescribed route: the socio cultural tchurels and our lovely zourlanus. Ask yourselves these simple questions: Who are the people who constantly give the socio cultural tchurels the free publicity that they desperately crave? Who are the people who cannot wait for the VoH's/Javed Moioussi/Pere Gregoire's, etc stomach to start rumbling and before the fart is out, the bajaman and others have already shoved a microphone up their arses so that we can be given the full volume and flavour of their nonsense? Who gives the numpties who were trying to publicise the wonderful work of ISIS and other psychopathic bastards the free publicity that they hanker for? Who always strain their sinews to try to give the impression that only one ethnic group in this country is 'raciste' or 'communaliste', when we all know that the twin evils of racism and communalism unfortunately run through the veins of too many of our compatriots of all ethnicities, and sometimes more so in other communities than the one the 'free and independent' press often targets?

The answer, my dear friends, is our zourlanus, as if you did not know it already. Who are the people who indulged in an inexcusable orgy of violence on what they thought was the corpse of Dawood Rawat, but who now measure their words carefully when they see that the corpse is not only warm and alive but is likely to kick their butts soon? Who keeps yapping about the so called ethnic imbalance in our public sector but who refuses to disclose the horribly skewed workforce in our free and independent press against one community? Yes, our zourlanus again...

The GoNad is defending the right of the idiot who wrote that article to remain anonymous and he is right to do so. Perhaps he and people of his ilk will one day extend me the same courtesy, assuming those who pull their strings will allow them to do so.

But it is hugely hypocritical and an exercise in futile falsity for the GoNad to pretend that the article with the offensive headline is all about the obscenity of our useless drugs laws and the benefits of marijuana as opposed to the devastating impact of so called synthetic drugs, especially on our young people. Eoula! I too read our newspapers and you would have to be an absolute idiot to accept the proposition that our press has been in the vanguard of a decent fight for liberalising our drugs laws. Au contraire! You and your 'joli coup de filet' and other nonsense you publish every time you report the 'deracinement' of gandia plants but which hardly ever touches on the bigger picture: that our drugs laws are incredibly stupid, anachronistic, belong to an age when dinosaurs (real ones, not the political variety...) ruled the earth, and cause far more damage than any good they purport to bring us. Sensational headlines about someone caught with a few joints remain by far your contribution to the fight to make our drugs laws more liberal and more sensible.

How often have you read about the clear links of major drugs dealers (I am talking about heroin in the tens of kilos here, not a few pouliahs of gandia...) with our politicians? Yes, there have been a few sensational headlines lately as a result of information coming out of the Drugs inquiry. But have you ever read anything about the role of these bouncers/tapeurs around our politicians and how these same bouncers are often deeply implicated in the importation and supply of hard drugs? Have you ever read about some of our zourlanus themselves being quite partial to illegal drugs? or accused of sexual molestation at their places of work? Or writing lurid articles about homosexuality which do nothing but make homophobia acceptable even when the pretend heterosexual zourlanus have been accused of themselves being partial to tasting the mutton dagger? Of course not! Ban mari bon dimounes sa!

Mais en écoutant les socioculturels, ou en leur accordant de l’importance, comme le font, à tort, Ramgoolam ou Jugnauth, on ne progressera jamais. La nation restera toujours en construction. Et exposée aux marchands de la mort.

Haha! The GoNad pontificates when he and his colleagues are the ones who have made the socio cultural tchurels feel an importance that they simply do not deserve. And notice in that sentence the absence of the name of the one politician who knows more about castes and ethnicity than all of them put together, and who has always been very close to the tchurels: Paul Raymond Berenger. But then, Berenger remains forever the God of the zourlanus...

It is really quite weird how some zourlanus who profess to be Hindus are the ones who have made a career or a 'reputation' by writing articles on the caste system or anything that puts Hinduism in a bad light. It is as if they have been told by their non Hindu masters "Ekrir sa toi! ban la pa kapav dire ki to raciste akoz to ene Hindou toi", followed by a little chortle which pleases the zourlanus only too willing to do anything to please the master. Try finding a Muslim or a Christian writing the same nonsense about their religion and do let me know, if you can please...

For people who don't know what an Uncle Tom is, read this definition from Malcolm X and adapt it with a few alterations (esp the 'well educated', 'culture and refinement' bit...) to give you a true reflection of our 'free and independent' press:

Today's Uncle Tom doesn't wear a handkerchief on his head. This modern, twentieth-century Uncle Thomas now often wears a top hat. He's usually well-dressed and well-educated. He's often the personification of culture and refinement. The twentieth-century Uncle Thomas sometimes speaks with a Yale or Harvard accent. Sometimes he is known as Professor, Doctor, Judge, and Reverend, even Right Reverend Doctor. This twentieth-century Uncle Thomas is a professional Negro - by that I mean his profession is being a Negro for the white man.

Paul Lismore

YOUR REACTION?

Facebook Conversations