Dr. Prem Misir’s idea of Public Relations: use fictitious African names for letters!

Jul 24, 2011 Letters

---

Dear editor,
I refer to Francis Carryl’s letter in KN of July 19th titled, “Why haven’t we heard from Mike Persaud?”, in which he charges that my response of June 23rd titled, “We still need to hear from Dave Martindale” falls short – because, he claims, it fails to cite specific letters of his that are part of Dr. Misir’s letter writing PR campaign.
To get the details of what is being debated in this exchange of letters, I would urge the readers to google: “Kaieteur News and Dave Martindale”, as well as “Francis Carryl and Stabroek News” and all the related letters would pop up.
For many years now it has been a well known fact that Dr. Prem Misir runs a Public Relations unit of the government.
One of the main activities of this Unit is to manufacture letters by the hundreds, assign fictitious names as authors (and in some cases real names) and then send them off by e-mail to all the newspapers in Guyana.
These letters attack critics of the government as well as promote government policies and President Jagdeo personally.
My problem with Dr. Misir’s PR unit is that it has been using fictitious African names to give the false impression that African-Guyanese vigorously support and defend the government.
It is a clandestine operation. The government has never announced nor would admit that such a PR Unit exists and that Dr. Prem Misir is the head.
The impression that the Unit seeks to create is that these letter writers are real life independent readers who support the govt. – until you notice names like Dave Martindale and Rachel Bakker appearing on hundreds of letters all attacking critics or defending policies of the government.
Also, these letters invariably do follow-up work on topics first written on by Dr. Misir; they also provide arguments and details only a senior government official could have been privy to, not a layman reader; they also invariably contain the same vocabulary and phrasing as the letters first published by Dr. Misir.
I now cite Francis Carryl’s letter titled, “Rickey Singh was not exiled from Guyana” published in Stabroek News on 2/7/07 as the letter that includes all the characteristics mentioned above: indicating the author has had a collaborative working relationship with Dr. Misir’s Public Relations Unit. I shall enumerate:
(1) GINA headed by Prem Misir in 2007 launched an attack on Rickey Singh. I entered the fray with my letter titled, “The president should apologize for GINA’s unwarranted attack on Rickey Singh (SN 2/2/07). My letter provoked a response from Francis Carryl.
Here I am going after Dr. Misir, and Francis Carryl jumped in. A perceived or clear case of collaboration between Carryl and Misir’s PR operation.
(2) I cite this paragraph from Carryl’s letter: “The withdrawal of Stabroek News ads fiasco is one which is gaining some degree of currency and while a multiplicity of views will be canvassed, it is expected that truth and sanity characterize all comments”.
One of the biggest PR struggles in the last 50-years is the government’s withdrawal of ads from SN. Which side is Francis Carryl on? See if you can decode his dense verbiage.
Hundreds of letters were manufactured by Dr. Misir’s PR Unit attacking the SN, and why did Carryl get involved with this? He is borrowing the same dismissive phrase “SN ads fiasco” used by Dr. Misir. And this is all politics, yet Carryl claims he is apolitical.
(3) Rickey Singh, a political reporter in Guyana had encountered numerous problems with the Burnham-Hoyte dictatorship (reports once surfaced of him being physically assaulted by a Minister). Dr. Misir is responsible for the GINA’s attack on Rickey Singh. And, who is doing follow-up work on behalf of Dr. Misir’s GINA? You guessed it, Francis Carryl.
Tens of thousands of Guyanese who know the history of the 1960’s and 1970’s and the circumstances of Rickey Singh’s resettling in Barbados believe he went into “voluntary exile”. Only Francis Carryl and Prem Misir believe there was no pressure for him to do so.
Carryl still wants to rehash that debate from five years ago on what constitutes voluntary exile and forced exile. Now Carryl says “several persons” told him Lord Rama was “compulsorily exiled” into a forest for 14 years. (I shall take this subject up in a separate letter).
(4) Why is Carryl accusing me of having a “mischievous agenda” in both of his referenced letters? Trying to unmask Dave Martindale and Rachel Bakker is considered mischievous by Carryl. These could very well be fictitious names Mr. Carryl, used by Dr. Misir’s PR Unit. This whole operation represents ugliness and sleaze. Is it your intention to defend Misir’s PR operation?
I remain 100 percent convinced Francis Carryl has a collaborative working relationship with Dr. Misir’s sleazy Public Relations operation. And, to continue my “mischievous agenda”, I am now offering a $200 incentive reward each to Dave Martindale and Rachel Bakker to debate me on a public platform in Guyana on the subjects they have written about in their numerous letters. I urge them to contact me at [email protected]
I am particularly interested in getting Dave Martindale to defend his statement that the “United States is a vermin that has a well orchestrated policy of rape, murder, plunder and pillage in the Middle East.”
Mike Persaud

---

---