| Aired
in March of 1998 and August of 1999 on
the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation).
Starring:
 -Sarah
Polley as Catherine Chapman
(based upon former Heritage Front
activist Elizabeth Moore)
-Tanya Allen as Erina
(based upon former Heritage Front
activist Ellisse Hategan)
-Jonathan Scarfe as Ian (Chapman's
boyfriend)
(a good looking Nordic-type and probably
the boyfriend of Moore's dreams)
-Lynn Redgrave as Mrs. K
(the female version of Ernst Zundel)
Consultant: Elizabeth Moore
upon whose experiences the film is based
The made-for-tv
movie White Lies was aired on CBC
(Canadian Broadcasting Corporation which
is a publicly funded network) in March
of 1998 and in August of 1999. It claims
to be based on "a fiction
story" but is actually based upon
the experiences of Elizabeth Moore who
for a short period was an activist with
the Toronto-based pro-White group the
Heritage Front and who was also a
"consultant" for this film.
Moore's stint with the Front was
followed by a defection to the camp of
the anti-racists and it's her
experiences on both sides of the
racial/political divide that White
Lies attempts to capture. Defection
from the ranks of evil racists to that
of the racial "good guys" was
an opportunity which the
progressive-minority coalition could
simply not let pass. This opportunity
was in fact so glorious that hollywood
enlisted the services of heavyweights
such as Sarah Polley, Tanya Allen,
Jonathan Scarfe and even the venerable
Lynn Redgrave.
The Heritage Front
started in 1989 with an "equal
rights for whites" platform and
within a couple of years had managed to
hit a nerve with parts of the public who
were fed-up with the excesses of
political correctness. It wasn't long,
however, before the Front degenerated
into a street-brawling skinhead cult; a
path all too typical for such groups.
However, during the several years of its
existence there was a media frenzy of
sorts surrounding the Front, and leader
Wolfgang Droege and his group became a
virtual household bogle.
In the summer of
1994 the media reported that one of the
group's founding fathers, Grant Bristow,
was a paid CSIS (Canadian Security
Intelligence Service) informant. Bristow
was notorious for provoking the Front to
pair off with the violent anti-racist
activists, and for hacking into
answering machines, and to engaging in
various semi-illegalities. The state was
agitating the Front while the media were
watching the Front with a microscope and
reporting that "hate was on the
rise" and that "neo-nazi
groups were growing."
The Heritage Front
offered the progressive-minority
coalition both a delightful and
desparately-needed propagandistic
reference point around which they could
rally their cause (religion?) of
anti-racism. The coalition is inherently
agitational and requires a constant flow
of hysteria about the
"dangers" of White racism and
the "threat" of a
"neo-nazi" resurgence. Until
the rise of the Heritage Front they were
forced to recycle hysteria about groups
which were either defunct, inactive, or
ridiculously small. Such groups included
the Ku Klux Klan, The Western Guard, The
Sir Edmund Burke Society, the
Nationalist Party, and both small and
short-lived cells of skinheads if and
when they could be found. Hearing the
same old lines about these golden oldies
groups from the 1960's, 70's and 80's
was actually becoming laughable. The
Heritage Front provided them with
long-awaited fresh material.
The Front played
the Hollywood Nazi routine to perfection
and gave the coalition all kinds of
propagandistic arsenal. It gave their
lobby for tougher hate (censorship) laws
and anti-racism policies a shot in the
arm, it also gave them cause to
pontificate and moralize about White
racism. It also provided them with the
glorious opportunity to pounce on
whatever political crossover might have
existed between moderate supporters of
the Front who supported their
"equal rights for Whites"
dimension and more respectable right
wing groups and parties. The coalition,
in its eternal quest to apply the
"racist" label to as many
people, groups and parties as it
possibly can, sought to make links
between the Heritage Front and virtually
the entire right wing.
Such was the basis
of Warren Kinsella's 1994 best-selling
book Web of Hate. There was also
Peter Raymont's 1995 documentary Hearts
of Hate which it was stated in the
credits was based upon Kinsella's book.
Interestingly, both Kinsella's Web of
Hate (winter 1994) and Raymont's
documentary (1995) were released after
the Front had essentially ended as an
active organization in 1993. Groups
which play the Hollywood Nazi card have
very short life spans but their legacy
seemingly never dies. The
progressive-minority coalition, which is
notorious for its propagandistic
milking, does everything possible to
sustain the memory of groups such as the
Heritage Front even well after they
ceased to exist. Hence, the release of White
Lies four to five years after the
Front had been active should come as no
surprise.
The Opening
Scenes
White Lies is
rife with images, particularly evident
in the opening scenes. Clearly the
intention to spook the audience from
beginning to end.
The movie opens to
show a dark background and a shot of the
moon which then turns into a drop of
blood that falls into what appears to be
a puddle of blood. We then see paint
brush being stroked across a canvas,
forming words that are apparently
written in blood. We are then shown a
drop of blood dripping from the hand of
what appears to be a lifeless body. This
blood drop falls into another puddle of
blood and then we see a shot of a
dangling foot which extends to the leg
and then a shot of a wooden sign with
the words "Race Traitor." The
shot then returns to the body and we see
that the sign was attached to the body
which we now see hung from a rope with a
cover over the head. At this point some
opera-style singing commences which
provides an eerie, funeral-like
atmosphere.
A series of shots
follow, including one of a row of bodies
hanging from lamp posts and appearing
similar to the one in the original shot.
We are shown these bodies in various
positions and are also shown what
appears to be a young man running away.
Later, a pen in someone's and writing
words on a piece of paper, word that are
simultaneously spoken in a nervous
female voice: "Every time I turn a
corner I'm afraid they'll be there. I
don't want to be around when they kick
the door in. Now everyday is the day of
the rope."
One of the
opportunities for denigration provided
to the progressive-minority coalition,
is the tendency of fanatical pro-White
groups to worship a former terrorist
group led by the late Bob Matthews
called The Order. In the
mid-1980's The Order orchestrated a
number of bank robberies and killed
Denver talk show host Alan Berg all in
the name of "White
liberation." The Order was
inspired by a novel called The Turner
Diaries which is imagined to have
been written by a member of a
revolutionary White resistance group in
the United States. The success of this
group (so goes the story) saved the
White Majority from what seemed like
imminent destruction. Their racial
revolutionary victory remains highly
symbolic to fanatical White separatists.
Particularly appealing to them is the
chapter entitled "The Day of the
Rope" where those who had worked
against the interests of these White
revolutionaries were promptly hanged
from lamp-posts. White Lies takes
full advantage of this symbolic
lamp-post fetish. Frequently, before and
after commercial breaks, it shows
wrapped bodies hanging from ropes, with
dripping blood.
The Assembly:
Introducing Catherine Chapman
From these spooky and
macabre scenes we are taken to a packed
auditorium where an anti-racist leader
by the name of Alan Green is being given
an ovation as he is reaching the end of
a speech that is "kicking off"
this High School's "One World
Week." The Green character is to
some extent based upon Bernie Farber of
the Canadian Jewish Congress, who it is
alleged "rescued" Elizabeth
Moore from the clutches of the Heritage
Front. The crowd is multiracial and
become quiet as Green finishes his
speech with these words: "Canada is
the best place on earth in which to
live: multiracial, multicultural,
caring, tolerant. But it is that kind of
freedom which allows us to be the
world's greatest distributor of hate
literature. It is that kind of
uncomfortable truth that we must
confront in order to protect your
future."
After appearing
somewhat disturbed at Green's
"shocking" words, the members
of the audience erupts into another
ovation. He then solicits questions and
this is where we get our first look at
Catherine Chapman (played by Sarah
Polley) whose character is based upon
Elizabeth Moore. Chapman is a
thin-looking, blonde-haired teenager who
stands out because she does not appear
comfortable with what Green has said.
She is not applauding and instead folds
her arms in a defensive fashion and then
looks down. She makes a half-hearted
gesture of raising her hand, only to
change her mind, but not before Green
notices and asks her to go to the
microphone in the aisle. She tells Green
about having recently applied for a
"job at the mall" and that she
was asked whether she was bilingual, to
which she replied "Sure. I have six
years of French." The interviewer
said "Sorry. I meant
Cantonese"; which elicited a slight
laugh from the audience. We are then
shown an Oriental female who is sitting
to Chapman's right, not liking the
scene.
Green's response
to the young woman's words is: "So
you weren't qualified. Do you have a
problem with that?" Chapman then
asks: "How many languages do I need
to flip burgers?" Green replies
"Some would say the more the
better. Others would say that's a
classic racist statement. Now was that
your intention or do you just need to
think a little more about what you're
saying?" Chapman: "It's just a
question."
The question
Chapman poses is actually valid. Were we
ever told that getting an ordinary job
would require Cantonese or any other
non-official language? No we weren't.
Can any Majority member be blamed for
being concerned over such a shocking
discovery? Of course not. However, and
not surprisingly, Green's
"progressive" character
attaches the term "racist" to
Chapman's question. A sensitive question
of the kind Chapman asks commonly evokes
an insensitive answer from those who
appear to be most enlightened.
The Essay:
Christmas is Dead
After the assembly
Chapman is shown walking away from the
auditorium. She is then shown in a
classroom where a teacher is handing
back essays to students. Chapman's essay
, which is titled Christmas is Dead,
has been given an "F." Chapman
expresses shock at the result, to which
the teacher responds: "Give it
another try. You didn't quite catch the
spirit of the day." Chapman then
asks yet another excellent question:
"But what about what I was
saying?" To which the teacher
replies: "Frankly, it was
inappropriate but I'm giving you another
chance (to re-write)." Chapman
balks at the offer to be allowed to
re-write her essay and informs the
teacher that she will "take the
F."
In our
multicultural society it appears that
the Majority will not be allowed to
defend some or most
"traditions" without a
struggle and nowhere is this more
evident than in the growing controversy
surrounding Christmas. This is one issue
that clearly demonstrates the painful
realities of multiculturalism. White
Lies very effectively touches on
predicament in this regard. After
receiving the failing grade Chapman is
shown walking away from her class, and
her voice over commences: "The
other day a famous man accused me of
being 'racist' for simply asking a
question. Well I've got lots more."
As she enters a bus the voice-over
continues:
-Why is tolerance
a one-way street?
-What happened to
the golden rule? Because it seems to be
that some cultures and their
celebrations are more equal than others.
Example: At this school we can't even
sing Christmas carols anymore. Excuse
me, I mean winterfest songs. They banned
Silent Night.
-What's so
offensive about peace on earth, good
will towards men?
-We're so afraid
of offending anybody that we've dumped
on our own culture.
-If you ask me,
trading the baby Jesus in for Frosty the
Snowman is a bum deal.
-It kind of makes
you wonder: If your culture's has become
invisible maybe you have too.
These are
excellent questions and White Lies
would have been a much better film had
it made an honest attempt to answer
them. However, we are living in the New
Canadian Multicultural Order, which
ensures that the film would avoid
profiling what life is really like for
the average member of the White Majority
such as Chapman. Instead, we are treated
to yet another overworked "look at
how dangerous the far-right is"
masterpiece.
Chapman
Connects With NIM
Later that day
Chapman is shown on the internet. She is
feeling melancholy due to the day's
events, and while while online
participates in a discussion dealing
with free speech. All of the
participants express concern about
censorship. The participants are then
informed about a "contest" for
the "best letter" prize
among those feeling "burned."
The prize is $50 and Chapman submits her
Christmas is Dead essay for which
she has received a failing grade by her
teacher. She is contacted informing her
that she has won the contest and her
spirits are lifted. She meets Erina at a
pool hall. Erina's character is loosely
based on that of another former Heritage
Front activist Ellisse Hategan. Hategan,
as did Moore, defected to the
anti-racist side, and in real life the
two did establish some sort of
friendship but not to the extent
portrayed in the movie. Catherine
Chapman and Erina have a conversation
while playing pool and Ms. Chapman is
given the $50 prize money.
It turns out that
the essay contest has been sponsored by
the "National Identity
Movement" (NIM) and they are
planning to publish her article in their
organ. Chapman is thrilled. NIM is of
course equivalent to The Heritage Front.
Erina invites Chapman to a party at the
Z-Launch (obviously corresponds to be
the house of Holocaust revisionist Ernst
Zundel) where she is introduced to other
NIM members. She is astonished to
discover how many people are raving
about her essay and at receiving
celebrity-style treatment. She is then
invited upstairs where she is introduced
to Mrs. K to whom the house belongs.
Mrs. K is based upon the real life Ernst
Zundel and the gender switch in this
case is interesting. Mrs. K, along with
everyone else who has met her, is
glowing. She looks at Chapman with
almost religious admiration and tells
her "You're exactly what we're
looking for." This is one of the
movie's many hyperbolic moments.
Elizabeth Moore is a talented writer,
but Front members were much more
restrained in their appreciation than
their equivalents in the film.
Chapman is brought
into the computer/video editing room.
Shortly after a firebomb is thrown
through the window of this room.
Equipment is damaged and a NIM activist
winds up in hospital.
After seeing
anti-racist activist Alan Green on TV
justifying the bombing while at the
hospital bedside of the injured NIM
activist, Chapman recollects Green
accusing her of being "racist in
front of her whole school" and that
she now feels as if she is "walking
around with a target on her back."
In response one activist says:
"Welcome to the club." Then:
"What have they got against
you?" Erina replies: "They
don't like what we say." The NIM
leader: "That's right, our terrible
hate-filled belief that the majority
rules." Chapman: "They have to
have more against you than that to be
bombing you." The NIM leader:
"No. We're not the first people in
history to be persecuted for our ideas.
All I'm saying is that this obsession
with the rights of the minority is only
hurting the rest of us." Erina
adds: "But cross that politically
correct line and bang! you're a sexist,
or a racist, or a nazi. Once they've
labelled you they're allowed to bomb
you."
Victimhood of all
these "majoritarians" has
clearly been established. Chapman shakes
her head and comments: "It's so
twisted." The next scene shows the
NIM leader along with Erina and Chapman
standing at the edge of a cliff at
sundown. There is an exchange which ends
with the NIM leader telling Chapman:
"You have friends now." (An
ironic and artistic touch.)
At this point NIM
appears to be urging rather reasonable
concerns about political correctness,
obsession over minority rights, and free
speech. Chapman's interest in the group
doesn't seem all that unreasonable.
The Shifting
Tide: The Vilification of NIM
The image of
"victimized" pro-White
activists has been built up to be
demolished. Demolition begins when White
Lies starts to contrive the
justifications for what has happened to
NIM and to demonstrate that Chapman has
indeed been told some White Lies.
NIM's "all we
want is the opportunity to express
ourselves" lament starts to unravel
when Chapman, Erina and a very
aggressive male NIM activist are shown
doing some posturing. Shortly after they
wind up on a bus where they distribute
some flyers to passengers. The male's
obnoxious causes disturbance. The
passengers, particularly the visible
minority ones, are shaken and humiliated
by his manner. The threesome then make
their way to a skinhead concert. The
lyrics are loud and furious and feature
praise of Hitler and a refutation of the
"six million" atrocity
allegations. Ian, the singer, takes a
break and is then introduced to Chapman.
He is very handsome and is also the love
interest of Erina. He makes a crude
remark about Chapman's breasts and
Chapman snaps back: "So you figure
that six million people were abducted by
aliens?" Clearly, Chapman is not
entirely in sync with these people, and
her association with them is becoming
awkward.
The singer (Ian)
goes back on stage and along with his
band starts roaring some White power
lyrics. Both Chapman and Erina start to
dance along with everyone else and Erina
offers the following interesting remark:
"In the 60's the
kids said 'screw you' to the
Establishment. This is the 'screw you'
of the 90's." (This is a grotesque
overstatement. The countercultural
movements of the 1960's can hardly be
compared to the extremely small and
ephemeral pro-White groups of the
1990's.)
A relationship
develops between Chapman and Ian. While
at Ian's place Chapman makes a remark
about the enormous amount of nazi
paraphernalia in the singer's room. Ian
then claims that the nazis were the
"good guys", prompting Chapman
to ask: "Are you going to tell me
that Zyclon B was bug repellent?"
(In the revisionist spirit Chapman
should have asked "Are you doing to
tell me that Zyclon B was used primarily
for delousing infected clothing?) Ian
then gives Chapman his revisionist
perspective on the holocaust.
The love scenes
between Chapman and Ian, which at one
point show them wrapped in a Nazi flag,
are fitted in between
scenes of three NIM members dressed in
black clothing and wearing balaclavas.
They are preparing to bomb a synagogue.
This bombing is without question the
movie's most dramatic scene, intended to
clearly established NIM as an evil
entity. Talk about "equal rights
for Whites" and "free
speech" goes all to hell after this
horrific spectacle (a
"holocaust" of one innocent
cleaner of a synagogue).
The exploding
synagogue and the burning cleaner is
outrageous, manipulative and slanting.
There has never been such an attack on a
synagogue in Canada, and if there had
been and had someone been burned in the
process it would have generated
headlines for months. This segment of
the film shows White Lies at its
hysterical best (or worst).
Chapman's
Burning Conscience
The bombing is a
turning point for Erina, who tries to
convince Chapman that NIM is
responsible. She pleads with Chapman to
"wake up." Chapman doesn't
believe Erina and is shocked to discover
that Erina is now on the side of the
anti-racist leader Alan Green. Erina is
clearly spooked and expresses fear that
she is going to be "hung on a lamp
post."
Then Chapman
begins to realize that she has been
deceived by NIM and that they are not
simply the pro-free speech organization
she thought they were. She is present
during a night-time brawl in an alley
between NIM members and several others
during which she herself at one point
participates in the violence. This
uncharacteristic outburst of violence
deeply disturbs Chapman. She is shocked
that she could have ever done something
so drastic.
Chapman's
conscience is further disturbed when on
the way to a neo-nazi/skinhead rally she
and Ian stop to "help" a
visible minority male and his son who
are stranded on the side of the road
with their car. Ian winds up harassing
the father and he throws away some car
parts that the father is using to repair
the car. Chapman pleads with Ian
"not to do it" but he didn't
listen. This is a crude attempt at
reinforcing the image of the brutal
White racist victimizing the innocent
visible minority. It is indeed a painful
though too obviously contrived sequence.
Chapman discovers
that there are plans to make her NIM's
"new face." She has been
scheduled to do a television interview
the next week. A rally at this point
features extensive target practice on
images of Erina, who (unbelievably) is
now NIM's arch enemy. The keynote
speaker is a firebrand racial clergyman.
This rally features extensive "hail
victory" salutes, Swastika flags
and Ku Klux Klan hoods. Chapman is
honoured by the speaker and is called up
to the stage where is she given a torch
to light the large wooden cross.
The Television
Interview
Chapman debates Alan
Green on television and denies that NIM
is violent. She almost gets the better
of Green, doing extremely well. However,
her university roommates, family and
Erina are watching and she is therefore
no longer "behind the
scenes.". After the show she is
seen vomiting in the station's washroom.
Green is then savagely attacked in the
station's underground parking lot and is
hospitalized.
Shortly after,
Chapman visits one of the accused of the
synagogue bombings in jail and is
surprised to hear that he has not been
visited by anyone from NIM. The prisoner
is disillusioned and has become bitter
towards the pro-White movement. He gives
Erina credit for getting out and claims
the movement is "a joke." A
rift begins between Chapman and Ian, and
the latter throws a childish tantrum
emphasizing the essential meanness of
his character.
Ostracism Begins
Chapman's is seen vomiting again this
time in her university dorm. We then see
her Asian roommate moving out. Erina
informs Chapman that she is leaving to
"start a new life." She
encourages Chapman to "do the
same." Clearly a bond still exists
between the two young women even though
NIM has thoroughly demonized Erina.
(Undoubtedly this is a bow to the
sisterhood.) Nevertheless, Erina cannot
bear the severe and continuing
harassment. She hangs herself. (In real
life Ellisse Hategan, upon whom the
Erina character is based, did not commit
suicide and is still very much alive and
well. This is another example of White
Lies contriving propaganda for the
masses that drastically misrepresents
reality.)
The last straw for Champan's
conscience is when she attends a
Holocaust exhibit. Chapman is deeply
touched by what she sees and this is a
major turning point. She subsequently
visits the anti-racist leader Green in
the hospital and asks for his help. He
agrees to help and asks Chapman for
NIM's membership and mailing lists which
she does get for him. (Curiously,
Chapman is also shown about this time
coolly making an appointment with an
abortion clinic. Is this intended to
indicate how completely she has come to
her senses?)
The Press Conference
Chapman's defection is now complete. She
is shown standing at Green's side while
giving an outdoor press conference. The
first question posed is, not
surprisingly, "Do you believe in
the Holocaust?" Chapman: "Yes.
Yes I do. I didn't have all the facts
before. I wanted to believe them so I
accepted what they said." This of
course isn't good enough. "So
you're not a racist anymore?"
Chapman: "I agree with the person
who said you can dabble in violence and
drugs but you can't dabble in hate. I
feel like my insecurities and my anger
made me stop seeing people as
individuals." "Oh yeah? And
you do now?" Chapman: "You
know a lot of people think that if
you're white you're automatically racist
unless you struggle against it. So you
know now I'm struggling." Someone
else shouted: "Too late!"
(Well, at least this shows that racists
have no monopoly on meanness!)
A reporter asks: "Why should
anyone believe that your conversion is
real? (Use of the term
"conversion" is most
appropriate given that what is happening
at this press conference, is that
Chapman is being treated as a former
heretic being subject to a religious
interrogation by Inquisitors determined
to demonstrate that she has not truly
renounced her racial heresy.) Chapman:
"Look, I joined the movement
because (pause), they saw me. I wasn't
invisible anymore. It gave me something
to fight for. I don't know what else
there is."
From this press conference we are
brought to another hostile environment.
Chapman is shown at her university dorm
where she is making her way down the
hall after having gathered her
belongings. The other students are
staring at her as if she were some sort
of monster.
What Was The Point?
The fact that Elizabeth Moore (the real
life version of Catherine Chapman) would
bounce from one extreme (White
fanaticism) to the other (anti-racism)
indicates a deep psychological imbalance
well beyond the mere lack of confidence
and social confusion the film portrays.
The film went to great lengths to
portray Chapman as a "victim"
of seduction on the part of the NIM, but
would such a character have been so
utterly deceived by thugs? The
progressive-minority coalition does not
want an honest analysis of Canada's
multiracial experiment known as
multiculturalism. Being told one must
speak Cantonese to work in a fast food
establishment in Canada, being given a
failing grade for writing an essay
lamenting the "death of
Christmas," being subjected to
heretical treatment, are all telling
signs that something is deeply wrong
with our grand multicultural experiment.
(In this respect, the film is portraying
what is true and important.)
The transformation of society from a
predominantly White to a multiracial one
is far more significant than the antics
of marginal groups such as The Heritage
Front. Promotion of racial guilt,
demonization for being White,
censorship, political correctness,
attacks upon Majority traditions, and so
on, are far more worthy of analysis.
Things have not turned out the way
they were supposed to, and there is
nothing the White Majority would
appreciate more than a portrayal of what
it's like to live in a society where we
must accept grotesque racial double
standards that favour minorities, have
our traditions attacked as
"racist," and be forced to
function on a minefield of racial
sensitivity where the slightest word,
look or gesture might lead to a damaging
accusation of "racism."
The fact that a film with the title
"White Lies" was
actually produced for mass viewing is an
excellent example of the double standard
lamented by the Chapman character. It
would not be permissible to make a movie
with the title "Black Lies,"
or "Jewish Lies," or
"Minority Lies." The
progressive-minority coalition would cry
foul anyone ever attempted to make a
Majority equivalent of White Lies.
On the surface White Lies
seeks to shock and horrify the audience
with the horrible deeds of dreaded White
racists. However, the events that caused
the Chapman character's racial
frustration and made her ripe for a
connection with NIM were suspiciously
well done. Even if Chapman did get on
the wrong track by becoming active with
NIM, the questions she posed while
riding home from school on a city bus
were never adequately answered.
So what was the film telling us at
the beginning about what Chapman went
through? She was clearly shown to have
legitimate concerns about the double
standards and political correctness she
faced, without being portrayed as a
racist. She was at first a perceptive
and questioning teenage girl who due to
lack of confidence joined a group with
whom she never should have become
involved. This point was clearly made.
However, what if the Chapman
character had not connected with NIM?
How would she have dealt with her
concerns and frustration? Was she and is
every other member of the White Majority
in real life supposed to just grit their
teeth and accept the unfair hand which
multiculturalism has dealt them? Are we
supposed to accept the double standards,
the political correctness and perpetual
attacks on our traditions out of fear of
being labelled "racist" or
"White supremacist"? Do
we risk being subjected to trials for
heresy similar to the one that Chapman
was required to endure when she
tried to make amends after having left
NIM?
Could it be that the film has
presented such questions in code, and
then has proceeded "to do what it
had to do" with the neo-nazi stuff
in order to make the film acceptable in
a politically correct society? Possibly.
But it is as likely that, in order to
further sophisticated propaganda,
elements of the truth have been pressed
into the service of an ideological
distortion of the truth. |
