I AM provoked into uncontrollable laughter via the article: “The state media have become PPP mouthpieces – WPA” (KN. July 20). And I have good reasons for this induced inclination, even outside of the content of the piece. As a preamble then, I simply ask: “Who is the WPA?” I mean, is this entity still viable? And secondly: “For whom does it speak?” Can someone show me a visible constituency? So one can see why I have to burst out in laughter. Now to the article, if you may. First, in the WPA’s calling for “…all fair-minded Guyanese to boycott the Guyana Chronicle and to take with a barrel of salt the PPP political propaganda of the National Communications Network”, it is simply arrogating to itself, way too much authority and morality.

The WPA died with Dr. Walter Rodney. Ever since the 1980s, Dr Clive Thomas and Dr. Rupert Roopnarine have been in a permanent state of moribundity. So the voice of the WPA amounts to less than a discernible whisper. This ‘barely audible’ whisper becomes very muddled, when one thinks of the unethical and immoral behaviour of the WPA.

The WPA is now further buried by virtue of an act of betrayal. It has ensconced itself with the PNCR, a guilty component in the Rodney assassination. So the WPA speaks for no one and to no one. It has reached an abysmal low of indecency. And as a footnote, APNU is not generating any kind of interest.

It is only engendering the ire of the people. Okay here is for some coverage.
APNU was launched, but it is still to find a slate. (Yes), there is the presidential candidate, but so far there is no word on his deputy. There seems to be inner fissures, as leadership ‘jealousies’ begin to burgeon. This is the climate of APNU. And maybe this is what the Chronicle and NCN should have carried.
My second contention is that of the matter of ‘mouth pieces.’ I ask a simple question: What are the roles of Kaieteur and Stabroek News? Are they fair? So the WPA simply self-debunks when it utters accusations and hurls wicked generalisations. It is involved in a dirty game of denigration, and seeks to ‘paint’ others with its practices. I suggest that the WPA remove the ‘lantern post from its own eyes, before seeking to clean the speck of dust from another’s.” I hereby rest my case.