What The Papers Say
People's Daily Graphic, Ghana, 18 Dec, 1985
Certain standards
We of the journalistic profession, whilst we have our differences of opinion, have also a feeling of solidarity with our colleagues whether they are in the public or private press.There are constraints, bottlenecks and frustrations which we all share. At the same time, however, we keep a critical eye on each other.
There have been times in Ghana's journalistic history, when one of our colleagues went as far as to suggest to government that another publication be banned.
For the avoidance of any doubt, let us state here that we have no wish to be misrepresented as gloating over the misfortune of another paper.
Indeed it is with considerable hesitation that we approach the subject at all, knowing that there will be some who will be all too ready to seize upon and twist what we say.
It is against this background that we feel obliged to respond to the many comments and queries which we have picked up from members of the public, since the Ministry of Information's withdrawal of the licence of the CATHOLIC STANDARD was announced.
Such an action, we perceive, is a very difficult decision for any government to take. And more so when the publication concerned is owned by a religious body that has a large following, even among members of the government itself.
The action could be misrepresented not only as a curtailment of the freedom of the press, but also it could be misrepresented as a curtailment of religious freedom.
Those behind the CATHOLIC STANDARD who have forced this decision upon the Ministry of Information are sophisticated enough to know that a large part of Ghana's reading public has been conditioned by an educational system founded on colonialism to regard the printed word as gospel truth.
They also know the power of the church hierarchy to feed unquestioning minds with instructions and ideas which may not be debated. Used for the good, this could be a very powerful unifying force. But used as a divisive tool in a calculated political effort to sow doubt and distrust in the minds of sincere believers in Christ's message, it becomes something else.
Something which is far more ugly than an ordinary newspaper which expresses ideas meant to undermine the path of progress, because in that case people are free to agree or disagree according to their awareness of reason and truth.
But in the case of the STANDARD, the combined power of the printed word and the strict and unquestioning obedience of the faithful has been knowingly used for a purpose which has no connection with religion.
Instead it has been used to attempt to block any change which threatens the influence, values and privileges of a very small minority of Ghanaian Catholics who have very little appreciation of the needs and aspirations of the majority on whose behalf they purport to direct the affairs of the church.
"PNDC Get Out" was its first message. When that did not appear to be going down very well, the crisis of 1983 provided ample material for innuendos about the economic incompetence of the government.
Then came the "Human Rights" phase without considering the rights of those who had been denied the basic necessities of life by selfish economic saboteurs.
Of late, the paper has gone through the beginnings of an election campaign, knowing fully well that there are STILL those process of social transformation backwards and return us to a state of inaction and dependency. Side by side with this, there have been letters and small news items filled with sneering and snide references to personalities connected with the revolutionary process.
The "Graphic" certainly holds no brief for anyone who would say that such persons should be automatically painted in glowing terms. But neither should they be systematically sniped at solely for the purpose of undermining the confidence and regard in which the people hold them.
The "Graphic" feels sorry that a paper with a reputation for journalistic ability and respectability should have fallen into such ways. Had it been some sensationalist rag, we would not have wasted our space in commenting on the matter.
But when a paper of the status of the STANDARD stoops to cleverly underhand politics whilst castigating some of its own church members for involving themselves in the political education of the people of this nation, it becomes too much to be accommodated. One may agree or disagree; we are done.
Ghanaian Times, Ghana, Jan 6, 1986
Why the US hates Libya
The United States Government is trying hard to create the impression worldwide that Libya is a pestilential busy-body supporting 'terrorism' and causing trouble all over the world. The Administration is also trying hard to force the world to accept that it is convincing no one with its efforts to stigmatize Libya and its leader Muammar Al-Qathafi, because every knowledge- able person knows the real reasons why the US Administration keeps on vilifying Qathafi and threatening the Jamahiriya.Everyone knows that the basic cause of the US Administration's dangerous and aggressive attitude to Libya is that Libya stands opposed to America's leadership of and spokesmanship for world imperialism in almost all its aspects.
The reasons and their implications are clear. The US is the strongest supporter of the racist apartheid regime in South Africa; Libya stands against this and is committed to the ending of this regime. The US is opposed to all liberation movements which are struggling to free their countries from oppression - Libya, in fact, currently provides material and moral assistance to at least 100 liberation movements all over the world.
The US uses its CIA to get a hold on the government of other countries or to subvert progressive leaderships. Libya opposes this as a violation of the freedom of nations and as much as possible Libya seeks to assist governments to free themselves from such stranglehold of the CIA.
Libya stands critically opposed to the stationing of US naval ships in the Mediterranean on the grounds that their presence puts countries in the region under constant fear for their security.
Libya has committedly opposed and condemned US military support of Israel as the only reason why the zionist regime continues with its bloody expansionist policy in the Middle East. Libya was instrumental in the fiasco of the American Marines adventures in the Lebanon.
There are several other respects in which Muammar Al- Qathafi and the Great Al-Fateh revolution constitute a thorn in the flesh of the US. All these should be dutifully, unemotionally revealed and analysed so that no doubt may be left about the truth that the US regards the subversion or destruction of Libya as a necessity, in pursuance of which the US Administration has engaged in an acrimonious and vicious campaign of denigration against Libya to prepare the minds of the international com- munity to accept whatever it is plotting against the Jamahiriya.
America's definition of terrorism as the only correct one. What this Administration should also do is to try hard to understand
