Why does St @JasonKStearns of Goma Keep Lying About #Rwanda?


September 27, 2012 by soniauwimana

Who is paying Jason Stearns to spread misinformation about Rwanda, or is it more of a hobby?

This is not a complicated one for those who follow this blog.

AFP released a story two days ago from Brussels saying the European Union has suspended aid to Rwanda.

Stearns gleefully promoted the story via Twitter, repeating the use of the term “suspend” to describe the EU’s decision.

Yesterday, the EU releases a statement with the headline “EU aid to Rwanda has not been suspended”.

EU aid…“not suspended”. You see, the opposite of “suspended”.

Yes, that’s right. It’s in the headline the EU itself wrote in a statement specifically designed to correct the misreporting of AFP and others (including Stearns).

Last night, Stearns tweeted to one of a very small but doting band of fanboys that “AFP story has been confirmed”.

No, Jason: the AFP story was not confirmed; instead, it was directly and explicitly contradicted. And so were you. By the European Union themselves. In the headline.

But the supreme arrogance of Stearns means he expects his readership to believe an AFP story regarding aid from the EU to Rwanda even after it has been rejected as misleading by both EU and Rwanda.

This is because St Jason of Goma will not, or perhaps can not, admit when he is wrong.


9 thoughts on “Why does St @JasonKStearns of Goma Keep Lying About #Rwanda?

  1. Mass Ornament says:

    Q1: Why go to the lengths of writing numerous blog posts and tweets attacking Jason Stearns if his audience is merely a “very small but doting band of fanboys”? There is a contradiction running through much of your and others’ arguments concerning the GoE, Stearns, et al.: because you employ “everything but the kitchen sink” tactics, you end up contradicting yourselves. Specifically, you end up simultaneously deriding the person in question as not being someone who is taken seriously by many, but the fact that you seem to expend so much energy and time attacking him betrays that you clearly believe the opposite. There is a profound insecurity at the heart of these attacks.

    Q2: Why do you constantly feel the need to resort to ad personam attacks?

    As a sidenote, it’s fascinating the degree to which your rhetoric and framing strategies mirror those used in extreme right-wing radio in the United States. Food for thought.

    • soniauwimana says:

      You are clearly one of these people who says things in order to seem intelligent but who, upon review, doesn’t really make any sense at all. There is no inherent contradiction in criticizing Stearns while saying he has a small army of devoted followers. I have an even smaller army of devoted followers and people, including yourself, show no hesitation in criticizing me. As for the right wing radio analogy, be advised that stating something alone does not make it true. It is nothing more than a brainless slur. You could have made your point in one-fifth of the word count. Less is more in prose.

      • Mass Ornament says:

        What about the ad personam attacks? You didn’t address that question. Besides all the others you publish, I now count one you’ve made on me, in the first sentence of your first reply (assuming there will be others). This is a trend with your posts. Your arguments should stand for themselves. There is no need to mock or insult people.

        I don’t know about the others who criticize you. I have been following your blogs and tweets for months, however, and this is the first time I have written anything. It is not a daily occurrence the way you criticize Stearns, Hege, and others.

        Critiquing my analogy – really, it was more of an observation – by stating it is a “brainless slur” similarly does nothing to refute it. Although it does constitute something of a personal attack (make that two!).

      • soniauwimana says:

        You really need to tighten up. Far too many words given the content. How can you have been following my blog for months? It hasn’t existed for months. And the phrase you’re looking for is ad hominem. I try and write for people with a sense of humor. People without tend to enjoy my writing less and take offence instead. I guess I have to live with that; hope you can.

  2. Mass Ornament says:

    Again with the ad personam attacks! Ad personam and ad hominem are synonymous terms. Those kinds of attacks are not simply for humor’s sake. They are intended to gratuitously denigrate the person at whom they’re directed. Thankfully that style of debate and discussion doesn’t pass muster everywhere!

  3. Mass Ornament says:

    That’s right. We don’t all have to sound like Fox News.

  4. LadyLaVoix says:

    Sonia, I enjoy your writing very much … I guess I have a sense of humour, ha!
    No but seriously, it’s about time we call out those who lie about our history.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: