Guardian newspaper complicit in a Caribbean race-racketeering conspiracy? (Slavery reparations debate - pt 1)

Intelek Int'l By Intelek Int'l, 6th Nov 2015 | Follow this author | RSS Feed
Posted in Wikinut>News>Media

This article is about a petition I've started to get the Guardian newspaper to rein in its reckless reporting on the contentious, volatile issue of reparations for trans-Atlantic slavery.

A Jimmy-Savile-Shielding-Schizophrenic-Syndrome (JS4) at the Guardian?

On October 25 I created a petition calling on the Guardian newspaper to “rein in” its reckless reporting on the highly contentious issue of reparations for trans-Atlantic slavery.

I did so after discovering that an initially trusted Guardian report on a speech British prime minister David Cameron made to the Jamaican Parliament was dangerously skewed and misleading.

That report, by Rowena Mason, gives the impression that PM Cameron had not merely dodged the reparations issue which Jamaicans wanted him to address in his speech but had instead defiantly insulted Jamaican and other Caribbean reparations activists by focusing on his government’s plans to help Jamaicans build a prison to house criminals being sent back to Jamaica from the UK.

However, a transcript of PM Cameron’s speech posted on the UK’s .Gov website makes it clear that he did not even mention his government’s prison funding plan.

Yet the dangerous effect of the Guardian’s sensationalistic, possibly deliberate misinterpretation of Mr Cameron’s words is evident in the combative responses it has sparked by a number of Caribbean citizens - including two on extreme opposite ends of Barbadian nationalist traditions: prominent Barbadian Pan Africanist demagogue David Comissiong and Bishop Gerry Seale, a prominent white Barbadian Pentecostal cleric.

Seale, who is married to a black woman of Dominican descent, distinguished himself as a conciliator when he apologized for the failings of his white slave-owning and trading ancestors in 2001.

He did so to quell rising social tensions which were being stoked by Comissiong, then head of the Barbados Government Commission for Pan African Affairs, professor Sir Hilary Beckles, then principal of the Barbados-based Cave Hill campus of the University of the West Indies and other local Pan Africanists who piloted reparations for trans-Atlantic slavery onto the United Nation’s agenda.

As now, deep-seated racial sentiments were being stirred by persons arguing cases for and against reparations.

My petition, entitled "Rein-in reckless reparations reporting Guardian!" reflects my concern that the Guardian is now stoking similar racial antagonism, possibly in a race-racketeering ploy to increase or maintain its readership.

Other possible motivations range from well-meaning but misguided, ideologically-atrophied and polarised sentimentality to malicious racist aforethought.

Could someone at the Guardian have seen an opportunity here to insult Jamaican and other UK-based Caribbean citizens and have a Tory prime minister blamed for the insult?

Could this be not just a case of indirect racial aggression, but also tribal political opportunism?

I note this possibility in my petition, which is directed at the Guardian's CEO David Pemsel and Editor-in-Chief Katharine Viner.

I write, "Persons reading a transcript of the actual speech after reading Ms Mason's report could be excused for thinking that she was employed by leftist ideologue Jeremy Corbyn or that the Labour Party that Corbyn leads owns the Guardian."

I also urge Guardian reporters to "leave the politicking to the politicians, or else, state their political agenda plainly."

Being the target of what appears to be a long-running, Barbados-sown globally-grown, politically motivated media boycott myself, the Guardian's apparent demonstration of manipulative politicking, undermining its "free press" democratic duty resonates with me deeply.

I also feel profoundly aggrieved by Mason's article because of my participation with Bishop Seale, Comissiong, professor Beckles (now UWI’s vice chancellor) and other former and current Barbados government and civil society activists in the contentious, frightfully fraught process that put reparations on the UN agenda during the 2001 World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa.

As I have previously noted here and elsewhere, I firmly believe that Osama Bin Ladin and his Al Queda accomplices did not merely hijack planes in their 9/11 assault on the US.

Striking mere days after that racism Conference ended, they also hijacked, commandeered and sabotaged the process of peaceful activism to which I and other human rights activists involved in the Conference were committed.

And I have long been of the view that Comissiong's, Beckles' and other Pan Africanists’ demagoguery operates in a similarly surreptitious, hijacking manner.

And I would wager that most of the masses of Caribbean people recognize this power-grabbing, rude-representation race ruse that our black political directorate and their Asian and European-descended corporate and political allies resort to.

The masses of Caribbean people recognize that some of our most valiant and rightly revered liberation heroes were not above this colour-coding corruption.

Unfortunately, the Guardian and other ostensibly progressive publications seem incapable of engaging with this complex facet of Caribbean culture.

They seem unwilling and unable to address the compromises made by Haiti’s Toussaint Louverture, Jamaica’s Nanny of the Maroons and others who set the precedents for the kind of relative concessions (and in some instances capitulations) made by Forbes Burnham, Errol Barrow, Eric Williams and other 20th century Caribbean leaders.

They seem incapable of analysing the culpability of many Caribbean citizens who aspire to emulate the privilege that these black elites modelled without regard for their individual or collective failings of character.

Like Comissiong and Beckles, they seem content to blame all the social ills that afflict Caribbean people on the “legacies of slavery”, which roughly translates into the “evil of the white man (and woman)”.

They seem incapable of addressing and constructively engaging with the role of
Africans not just as slaves in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, but also as traders.

And this is despite the irrefutable evidence of abused and oppressed people’s capacity to abuse and oppress others, as demonstrated in the Rotherham child-exploitation and similar scandals that have outraged British public opinion.

Having initially taken Ms Mason’s Guardian article at face-value, I have now come to regard it as the work of a perverse press fantasist.

I now regard it as an example of what I called a “Jimmy-Savile-Shielding-Schizophrenic-Syndrome (JS4)” in my recently published analysis of the calculating, cynical, opportunistic, race-racketeering mind-set that seems to be “perverting the BBC’s public service ideals”.

I raised my concerns about the Guardian article with the Independent Press Standards Organization.

But their representative Simon Yip has informed me that IPSO is incapable of addressing the matter because the Guardian is not registered with and therefore accountable to them.

Yip advised that I “to complain directly to the publication” by writing directly to

I am urging all who feel as strongly as I do about the Guardian and other corporate media houses duty to facilitate responsible, balanced democratic debate to do the same thing.

I am urging all who share the Guardian’s "spiritual father" C.P. Scott’s belief that the 'primary office' of a newspaper is accurate news reporting, and that 'comment is free, but facts are sacred' to write to the Guardian, copying their complaint to me (

I have yet to receive a Guardian response to my email.

But frankly, given the possibility (or even likelihood, given the Guardian’s Labour Party links) that the Guardian may be complicit in the Barbados-sown, globally-grown media conspiracy I have mentioned above, I am not holding my breath.

Sadly, it seems clear to me that the Guardian, like the BBC and other top tier Western media houses are committed to denying the “oxygen of publicity” to some progressive causes and voices.


David Cameron, David Comissiong, David Pemsel, Hilary Beckles, Katharine Viner, Rowena Mason

Meet the author

author avatar Intelek Int'l
"I think therefore I jam"
I'm a holistic communication and education specialist, trading as Intelek International (
I write about spirituality, science, philosophy, politics, love.

Share this page

moderator Steve Kinsman moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know


Add a comment
Can't login?