It has been an amazing past weekend especially for curious observers of the so-called TEIN-NDC national conference organized by the ruling party at Winneba in the central region. Even before the end of the first day of the conference, it became apparent that it was a shambolic one with a hidden agenda. Not only that. The events of the first day also revealed that the conference was organized under the auspices of TEIN-NDC but as a cover to create a platform for vice President John Mahama to launch and project his political schemes.
Why, can John Mahama say, heart in hand, that he would have said the things he said there if others including the NDC founder Jerry Rawlings were present in that conference? I double doubt it in my books.
First, let’s examine the substance or lack of it in some of the things he said. Talking about so-called indiscipline within the NDC, he claimed that President Rawlings succeeded during his reign largely due to total discipline and unity that existed within the P-NDC. It goes without saying from that premise that President Mills is largely not succeeding because of the lack of discipline and unity within the NDC today. What the vice president failed to tell us is that President Rawlings exhibited certain leadership qualities that elicited such discipline and unity from party faithful—qualities that are woefully missing in this current government which includes John Mahama who is lamenting endlessly about indiscipline and lack of unity. Why is the veep looking at only the symptoms and disregarding the main cause of the so-called indiscipline and lack of unity? Does he think that President Rawlings would have succeeded in instilling discipline in the P-NDC if he engaged in politics of exclusion ism as they’re doing now? Would President Rawlings have succeeded if he disregarded and treated with disdain the people who put him at the helm of affairs? Absolutely not!
It even mesmerizes me the more that the veep does not realize that his usage of that TEIN platform as though it was his personally organized platform to respond to accusations put out against him by party members is the height of indiscipline. Does the veep want to tell Ghanaians that if Dr. E-spio-G and founder Rawlings and the others he accused of spearheading the internal indiscipline and disunity were present at that shambolic conference, he would have made those statements nonetheless? Again, I double doubt that because if he did, and these people also took their turn to speak and make similar remarks, the result would be absolute pandemonium. Therefore, the veep in his attempt to address the issue of indiscipline ended up grossly demonstrating such same attitude. I can remember on July 1st 2008 when President Rawlings wanted the NDC leadership to wake up from what he called their ‘anesthesia’ before the general election, he called a press conference in his house. Recently, when the founder wanted to point out internal machinations against him and his wife throughout the country, he issued a press statement. Can John Mahama and his cohorts take a cue from that the next time and stop abusing the NDC platform before their actions finally tear apart the already disintegrating NDC as a party?
Meanwhile, whoever coordinated that shambolic TEIN-NDC conference must be telling us why the entire conference was turned into a John Mahama campaign platform. They should also be telling us why articles were circulated among the audience, of people such as Dr. E-Spio-G and others whiles speakers addressed the conference. Was it meant to cause disaffection among the students for such personalities? And can the vice president tell us that that was a much disciplined thing to do? Do I need to prompt the vice president John Dramani Mahama to either try to practice what he preaches or stop pontificating?
As for John Mahama telling Ghanaians that people within the NDC are meeting every Sunday and plotting against him because he has suddenly become the greatest threat to their political ambition, he needs to come again on that! For how could a man who recently went on radio to announce emphatically that he would not contest President Mills for president suddenly perceive himself as the greatest threat to someone’s political ambition? Is he now trying to confirm to Ghanaians that his pronouncements on radio Ghana were mere gimmicks just to throw dust into our eyes? Because since he is not contesting Mills in 2012, how is he a threat to someone else who may be harboring ambitions to contest President Mills? Or is there something the vice president is not revealing to discerning Ghanaians as yet?
Vice President John Mahama took advantage of the platform created exclusively for him to give lame responses to accusations that have been put out against him. I will not address all of them—only the one that concerns me. For I stated recently in an open letter to the vice President That; He only accepted to partner Prof Mills in 2008 general election after seeing a ‘horrible health file’ of the main candidate shown him by Ato Ahwoi. I say he lamely responded to this because he merely denied seeing any such file. But who would expect anything different from him? Merely denying is a useless endeavor and does not answer the main questions raised. Namely that; during the occasion to announce him as the running mate to Prof. Mills, NDC founder Jerry Rawlings was conspicuously absent, and we know that he was not absent because he wanted to be, but because John Mahama and his co-conspirators including Victor Smith and Ato Ahwoi wanted him absent. The founder even made a last-minute effort to be there when he realized the plot against him but was too late to the event—and this is on public record. What Ghanaians would therefore expect John Mahama to be telling us is why he didn’t communicate his sudden decision to run as veep to the NDC founder, and why he didn’t want him present at the announcement even though admittedly, founder Jerry Rawlings was on his heels to take that decision? Only then can we tell between the lines. Until then, I maintain that the reason for all those machinations against the NDC founder is the ingenuity and dishonesty that culminated in that decision to run as vice President.
And why is John Mahama running away from being associated with the Mills presidency? What is wrong if people call it a Mills-Mahama presidency? The fact that it’s unprecedented doesn’t make it wrong. Or does it? So why is John Mahama complaining or rather amplifying that his name has been equated with Prof. Mills in this presidency? Could it be that he is ashamed of Mills’ leadership qualities? Shouldn’t he rather be excited over that elevation—that is if he himself is not the one trying to amplify this self elevation? He should tell us if this is all a part of his grand campaign to succeed Mills on a silver platter on the blind side of all of us.
The actions of John Mahama and his surrogates at that TEIN conference have rendered the theme of that conference meaningless and useless. Or perhaps, given it a different meaning, for how can there be unity and victory for the NDC when he decides to usurp such an important occasion for his personal benefit at the expense of other crucial NDC figures who were absent at the ceremony? Is this different from what they did in Tamale recently during the funeral of the late northern regional chairman of the NDC when as a deliberate policy and action, Haruna Iddrisu as Master of Ceremony in cahoots with others blatantly refused to openly announce the donation of the NDC founder to the family despite several promptings, and even though there was a prominent chief designated by the NDC founder to represent him at that funeral in his absence? Did John Mahama and his cohorts foster unity within the NDC at that funeral by refusing to acknowledge the presence of the NDC founder’s representative at that funeral or they promoted pettiness and divisiveness? How long can we sustain this hypocrisy of preaching virtue and practicing vice? How long?
There is no wonder that the discerning NDC students at that Winneba conference loudly protested against many of the hidden machinations to deepen the disunity and promote John Mahama. They openly protested and even disrupted the speech of P.V Obeng when articles were been circulated about other NDC people absent at the conference. They also protested and even hooted away and disallowed from speaking, a known charlatan Vincent Kuagbenu (National service coordinator) whose main purpose on that platform was to denigrate the NDC founder and wife, the former first lady—something he’s been known for doing lately. Even the incompetent NDC national youth organizer Ludwig Hlodze was booed away disgracefully when transport allowances for delegates was unexpectedly slashed down from the promised 45gh to less than enough to transport some delegates back to their home regions—an occurrence that generated a lot of dissatisfaction and confusion leading to some of them deserting the grounds in protest. So: I couldn’t be wrong if I describe that TEIN conference as shambolic.
Let’s all stop digging our own graves if we don’t want to sing our own dirges.
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(NDC youth with conviction of principle)
Monday, November 29, 2010
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Open Letter to Vice President John Dramani Mahama of Ghana
OPEN LETTER TO VEEP JOHN DRAMANI MAHAMA
Dear Veep,
I have never written to you before. And today, I have chosen to write to you because I need to get some issues off my chest, and these issues are crucial to the future of the NDC. I hear from the grapevine that you want to become President one day, and you have been cultivating that ambition for a while now. I hope it is not true because the NDC foot soldiers—who are also partly king makers—have spoken to my ‘chosen ears’ and have said that they won’t support you in such an endeavor since you don’t appreciate their contribution to your becoming vice president of Ghana. So my advice to you is; perish the thought before it gains root.
So much naked opportunism has engulfed the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) lately. A lot of what is happening today in the NDC begun long before 2008 when the party was preparing itself to return to office. Everyone is talking today of strife in the NDC but no one is tracing the history of that strife. As a keen observer, participant and a student of NDC power play, I have my own understanding of how it is that we have found ourselves in this quagmire and the negative role you as an individual have played in all of this.
There are several dimensions to the situation but I’m looking at it purely from the point of view of the pure opportunism that has led to so much subterfuge on the part of so-called senior people in the NDC—you’re not excluded. I want to believe that the politics of exclusion ism that has become a part of your government today is not a historical oddity. I’m not amazed when I hear people like you in the ‘new NDC’ boasting vainly that the NDC today can do better without the involvement of its founder. What amazes me about you really is the fact that you describe everything the former president says as ‘coup mentality’. I’m beginning to wonder if you really understand what that means. People said the same thing in 2008 when it was publicly and naively declared that the NDC founder’s involvement in the campaign will not only fail to add to the party’s fortunes but will actually take away from it. Later, no one had to be convinced that but for founder Jerry John Rawlings’ role in the campaign, the NPP would have schemed their way to the Jubilee house (now flagstaff house). After all, you will agree with me that you couldn’t pull any sizeable crowd during the campaign—not even in your own home town.
I want to believe that the subterfuge was initiated by you and aided by Ato Ahwoi, Victor Smith and others. Why, didn’t you announce to the entire world that you were abandoning your parliamentary seat in order to pursue further studies abroad? Why did you not announce again to the entire world when you changed your mind? Is it not an open secret that just like in 2004, the NDC founder also in 2008 did all he could under the Ghanaian sun to convince you to partner Prof. Mills for the general election? How did you treat the overtures from the founder Jerry Rawlings? In my books, you treated it with indignation to the extent that the founder’s efforts to convince you was misconstrued as bothering you so that you even refused to see and talk to the NDC founder in your own house at one time—an incident that has become legendary. Or are you going to deny that this ever happened?
It was first claimed by your apologists that you turned down the request and support of the founder because you were earlier rejected by Prof. Mills in 2004 despite the support of the founder. In that case, even though you may have been interested in partnering the Prof., you were unprepared to be rejected at the last minute for someone else—again. That sounds like a genuine concern but it is only a claim. There are those who want Ghanaians to believe that Founder Jerry Rawlings did not support your bid in 2008 as running mate but rather AG Betty Mould Iddrisu. These people—in my books—are not real students of NDC power play. They draw their naive conclusions from what they hear in the news or rather, they just want to cover up for your insincerity.
Sir, you will confess, if even you have just the appearance of an honest man (because I don’t believe you are an honest man) that Betty Mould Iddrisu’s name came up only after the former president had given up convincing you in his effort to suggest a perfect pair for the NDC in that election—you practically embarrassed him for it. Or did you want him to keep begging you forever as though the entire destiny of the NDC was in your hands?
Where and when did your dishonesty begin? Again, in my books, it begun when you suddenly changed your mind and lost interest in your personal development through further studies abroad—something you were initially unprepared to give up for politics. It was so sudden any keen observer had to be curious—even suspicious. I have personally tried to understand the true motivation for your sudden turn around. I have been investigating and asking questions ever since, and I have come to a firm conclusion that your primary motivation to partner Prof. Mills in 2008 was purely opportunistic—you vainly hope to succeed as President on a silver platter. And I will make that clear to you very soon.
But did we only have an issue with a running mate in 2008? There were also issues with the health status of the Prof. in 2008. There were several reports concerning his health status. In the end, some of it turned out to be untrue—not all of it. Prof. Mills himself publicly declared that he had to seek treatment in China, and later in South Africa for a sinusitis—an inflammation of the membrane lining the sinus of the skull. This health status of the Prof. became an open worry to the power brokers in the party. This is not speculation—and you know it—as senior members such as Ato Ahwoi has been heard in public announcing that he met with the founder and others over suggestions of a ‘plan B’ to deal with the uncertainties associated with the ill-health of the main candidate of the NDC for the 2008 election—Prof. John Atta Mills.
Other insiders such as Herbert Mensah, a private businessman and one of the known campaign strategist of the NDC in the 2008 general election has also been heard publicly revealing that the ill-health of the Prof. was a worry to many including Ato Ahwoi who even described him as becoming ‘delusional and hallucinating’. Therefore, the worry of the power brokers in the NDC even before 2008 over the main candidate’s ill-health is not in doubt.
Tell me sir, was there really a long term ‘plan B’ or not? Prudently, there must have been. For how could the NDC go into the General election in 2008 plagued with ill-health in its flag bearer without a ‘plan B’? And this is where your sudden change of mind to run for vice president comes to mind. Strangely, when you decided to run, you refused to do what any honest and sincere man would have done—go back and inform the NDC founder—the man who recruited you into the party—of your sudden decision to follow his initial suggestion to partner Mills—a suggestion you treated with contempt and ridicule. Rather, you clandestinely went about canvassing and lobbying to be considered by the Prof. as running mate. It has come to light, that one of the key people who held the key to that decision is Ato Ahwoi. And who brought this to light? Ato Ahowi himself. He has openly asked Prof. Mills not to appoint certain people into the new NDC government—and he hasn’t. A so-called leading member of the NDC Alhaji Bature—who also claims to be your bosom friend—is also on record to have announced openly that Ato Ahwoi is responsible for the endurance Prof. Mills put up in the run up to the 2008 election despite his ill-health. He claimed that Prof. Mills wanted to quit but was prevented solely by Ato Ahwoi. So: obviously, Ato Ahwoi had a big say in who became running mate—only next to the Prof. himself—or isn’t it?
Sir, there was a whole lot of hoo-ha in this country when the founder and his wife publicly declared their support for Betty Mould Iddrissu as running mate to Prof. Mills in 2008. Some People quickly concluded that they were doing it to oppose your bid for the same slot. But did you inform the Rawlings’ of your bid? I double doubt that! So: did you and your apologists expect founder Jerry Rawlings and his wife to support a bid they were unaware of? And is that why you connived with Victor Smith, then Aid to former President Rawlings and now Ghana’s ambassador to the Czech Republic to show ‘obscene loyalty’ to the founder? Or you think we don’t know you’re an integral part of the reason for the sudden TXT message dismissal of Victor Smith by President Rawlings?
let them who are unaware be informed that Victor Smith had knowledge of when and where you were scheduled to be out-doored as running mate to Prof. Mills but it is public knowledge that founder Jerry Rawlings arrived at that event very late and missed the entire show all because of the scheming of you and your cohorts, Victor Smith and Ato Ahwoi to keep him out of the event. The founder was misinformed with regards to the time by Victor Smith.
But why would Victor Smith go in cahoots with you and others to deceive Founder Jerry Rawlings while working as his personal aid? Was there a hidden agenda known only to Victor Smith and his collaborators which includes you? Why did you not want the founder present at your out-dooring as running mate? Could it be because the founder would have stood by his principles and attempt to expose all the subterfuge that had culminated in that event on that day? Did Victor Smith scheme with you to avoid this exposé? And if he did, did he not deserve in hundred fold the Txt Message dismissal he received soon afterwards? In my books, he deserved it doubly as much as your dishonest and disingenuous self deserved exposure.
Yes sir, we would continue to ask questions—and not just questions but draw conclusions when we get there. And one of such conclusions is that your sudden decision to run as VEEP contrary to earlier suggestions and persuasions are for purely opportunistic reasons as stated earlier. You were the real ‘plan B’ that Ato Ahwoi put in place for the uncertainty with the ailing Prof. Mills. Why, Ato Ahwoi had full access to the supposedly ‘horrible and unpromising health file’ of the candidate Mills. And he showed it to you who suddenly and vainly saw greater prospects of becoming a future president on a silver platter. Or didn’t he? I’m sure you’re disappointed that the President is still alive and kicking today. But knowing that founder Jerry Rawlings will expose your opportunism, you schemed with the obscenely loyal Victor Smith to avoid it. It is obvious and can be substantiated easily through the entire unraveling conspiracy—and you cannot even deny it. So you want to become President of Ghana on the blind side of founder Jerry Rawlings—and a scheming Victor Smith is on hand to facilitate that agenda. Isn’t it sir? Is it any wonder that Victor Smith immediately joined your campaign team and was immediately put in-charge of protocol at the presidency soon after the NDC won the election 2008 and later made ambassador to Czech Republic? Would you expect any less for his loyalty to that grand scheme orchestrated by you and your cohorts?
Or you think it is difficult to figure out why one of your most hyped visits abroad in recent times is the one to the Czech Republic supposedly to solicit engineering partnerships with the Czechs? Of course, ambassador Smith still has a role to play in making that grand scheme of you becoming a future President on a silver platter come to fruition—though from a safe distance. I want to see how this vain scheme of yours will materialize on the blind side of the NDC founder and former President of Ghana Jerry John Rawlings. Or have you apologized to the NDC foot soldiers whom you claimed on an opposition NPP platform that they lack a sense of sacrifice and have no right to demand reward for their effort in making you vice president as though your becoming a running mate to Prof. Mills in 2008 was an act of sacrifice at the expense of your further studies abroad?
Time will tell but there is no becoming President on a silver platter on the NDC ticket—again. Not this time!
Courageously yours,
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(NDC youth with conviction of principle)
Dear Veep,
I have never written to you before. And today, I have chosen to write to you because I need to get some issues off my chest, and these issues are crucial to the future of the NDC. I hear from the grapevine that you want to become President one day, and you have been cultivating that ambition for a while now. I hope it is not true because the NDC foot soldiers—who are also partly king makers—have spoken to my ‘chosen ears’ and have said that they won’t support you in such an endeavor since you don’t appreciate their contribution to your becoming vice president of Ghana. So my advice to you is; perish the thought before it gains root.
So much naked opportunism has engulfed the ruling National Democratic Congress (NDC) lately. A lot of what is happening today in the NDC begun long before 2008 when the party was preparing itself to return to office. Everyone is talking today of strife in the NDC but no one is tracing the history of that strife. As a keen observer, participant and a student of NDC power play, I have my own understanding of how it is that we have found ourselves in this quagmire and the negative role you as an individual have played in all of this.
There are several dimensions to the situation but I’m looking at it purely from the point of view of the pure opportunism that has led to so much subterfuge on the part of so-called senior people in the NDC—you’re not excluded. I want to believe that the politics of exclusion ism that has become a part of your government today is not a historical oddity. I’m not amazed when I hear people like you in the ‘new NDC’ boasting vainly that the NDC today can do better without the involvement of its founder. What amazes me about you really is the fact that you describe everything the former president says as ‘coup mentality’. I’m beginning to wonder if you really understand what that means. People said the same thing in 2008 when it was publicly and naively declared that the NDC founder’s involvement in the campaign will not only fail to add to the party’s fortunes but will actually take away from it. Later, no one had to be convinced that but for founder Jerry John Rawlings’ role in the campaign, the NPP would have schemed their way to the Jubilee house (now flagstaff house). After all, you will agree with me that you couldn’t pull any sizeable crowd during the campaign—not even in your own home town.
I want to believe that the subterfuge was initiated by you and aided by Ato Ahwoi, Victor Smith and others. Why, didn’t you announce to the entire world that you were abandoning your parliamentary seat in order to pursue further studies abroad? Why did you not announce again to the entire world when you changed your mind? Is it not an open secret that just like in 2004, the NDC founder also in 2008 did all he could under the Ghanaian sun to convince you to partner Prof. Mills for the general election? How did you treat the overtures from the founder Jerry Rawlings? In my books, you treated it with indignation to the extent that the founder’s efforts to convince you was misconstrued as bothering you so that you even refused to see and talk to the NDC founder in your own house at one time—an incident that has become legendary. Or are you going to deny that this ever happened?
It was first claimed by your apologists that you turned down the request and support of the founder because you were earlier rejected by Prof. Mills in 2004 despite the support of the founder. In that case, even though you may have been interested in partnering the Prof., you were unprepared to be rejected at the last minute for someone else—again. That sounds like a genuine concern but it is only a claim. There are those who want Ghanaians to believe that Founder Jerry Rawlings did not support your bid in 2008 as running mate but rather AG Betty Mould Iddrisu. These people—in my books—are not real students of NDC power play. They draw their naive conclusions from what they hear in the news or rather, they just want to cover up for your insincerity.
Sir, you will confess, if even you have just the appearance of an honest man (because I don’t believe you are an honest man) that Betty Mould Iddrisu’s name came up only after the former president had given up convincing you in his effort to suggest a perfect pair for the NDC in that election—you practically embarrassed him for it. Or did you want him to keep begging you forever as though the entire destiny of the NDC was in your hands?
Where and when did your dishonesty begin? Again, in my books, it begun when you suddenly changed your mind and lost interest in your personal development through further studies abroad—something you were initially unprepared to give up for politics. It was so sudden any keen observer had to be curious—even suspicious. I have personally tried to understand the true motivation for your sudden turn around. I have been investigating and asking questions ever since, and I have come to a firm conclusion that your primary motivation to partner Prof. Mills in 2008 was purely opportunistic—you vainly hope to succeed as President on a silver platter. And I will make that clear to you very soon.
But did we only have an issue with a running mate in 2008? There were also issues with the health status of the Prof. in 2008. There were several reports concerning his health status. In the end, some of it turned out to be untrue—not all of it. Prof. Mills himself publicly declared that he had to seek treatment in China, and later in South Africa for a sinusitis—an inflammation of the membrane lining the sinus of the skull. This health status of the Prof. became an open worry to the power brokers in the party. This is not speculation—and you know it—as senior members such as Ato Ahwoi has been heard in public announcing that he met with the founder and others over suggestions of a ‘plan B’ to deal with the uncertainties associated with the ill-health of the main candidate of the NDC for the 2008 election—Prof. John Atta Mills.
Other insiders such as Herbert Mensah, a private businessman and one of the known campaign strategist of the NDC in the 2008 general election has also been heard publicly revealing that the ill-health of the Prof. was a worry to many including Ato Ahwoi who even described him as becoming ‘delusional and hallucinating’. Therefore, the worry of the power brokers in the NDC even before 2008 over the main candidate’s ill-health is not in doubt.
Tell me sir, was there really a long term ‘plan B’ or not? Prudently, there must have been. For how could the NDC go into the General election in 2008 plagued with ill-health in its flag bearer without a ‘plan B’? And this is where your sudden change of mind to run for vice president comes to mind. Strangely, when you decided to run, you refused to do what any honest and sincere man would have done—go back and inform the NDC founder—the man who recruited you into the party—of your sudden decision to follow his initial suggestion to partner Mills—a suggestion you treated with contempt and ridicule. Rather, you clandestinely went about canvassing and lobbying to be considered by the Prof. as running mate. It has come to light, that one of the key people who held the key to that decision is Ato Ahwoi. And who brought this to light? Ato Ahowi himself. He has openly asked Prof. Mills not to appoint certain people into the new NDC government—and he hasn’t. A so-called leading member of the NDC Alhaji Bature—who also claims to be your bosom friend—is also on record to have announced openly that Ato Ahwoi is responsible for the endurance Prof. Mills put up in the run up to the 2008 election despite his ill-health. He claimed that Prof. Mills wanted to quit but was prevented solely by Ato Ahwoi. So: obviously, Ato Ahwoi had a big say in who became running mate—only next to the Prof. himself—or isn’t it?
Sir, there was a whole lot of hoo-ha in this country when the founder and his wife publicly declared their support for Betty Mould Iddrissu as running mate to Prof. Mills in 2008. Some People quickly concluded that they were doing it to oppose your bid for the same slot. But did you inform the Rawlings’ of your bid? I double doubt that! So: did you and your apologists expect founder Jerry Rawlings and his wife to support a bid they were unaware of? And is that why you connived with Victor Smith, then Aid to former President Rawlings and now Ghana’s ambassador to the Czech Republic to show ‘obscene loyalty’ to the founder? Or you think we don’t know you’re an integral part of the reason for the sudden TXT message dismissal of Victor Smith by President Rawlings?
let them who are unaware be informed that Victor Smith had knowledge of when and where you were scheduled to be out-doored as running mate to Prof. Mills but it is public knowledge that founder Jerry Rawlings arrived at that event very late and missed the entire show all because of the scheming of you and your cohorts, Victor Smith and Ato Ahwoi to keep him out of the event. The founder was misinformed with regards to the time by Victor Smith.
But why would Victor Smith go in cahoots with you and others to deceive Founder Jerry Rawlings while working as his personal aid? Was there a hidden agenda known only to Victor Smith and his collaborators which includes you? Why did you not want the founder present at your out-dooring as running mate? Could it be because the founder would have stood by his principles and attempt to expose all the subterfuge that had culminated in that event on that day? Did Victor Smith scheme with you to avoid this exposé? And if he did, did he not deserve in hundred fold the Txt Message dismissal he received soon afterwards? In my books, he deserved it doubly as much as your dishonest and disingenuous self deserved exposure.
Yes sir, we would continue to ask questions—and not just questions but draw conclusions when we get there. And one of such conclusions is that your sudden decision to run as VEEP contrary to earlier suggestions and persuasions are for purely opportunistic reasons as stated earlier. You were the real ‘plan B’ that Ato Ahwoi put in place for the uncertainty with the ailing Prof. Mills. Why, Ato Ahwoi had full access to the supposedly ‘horrible and unpromising health file’ of the candidate Mills. And he showed it to you who suddenly and vainly saw greater prospects of becoming a future president on a silver platter. Or didn’t he? I’m sure you’re disappointed that the President is still alive and kicking today. But knowing that founder Jerry Rawlings will expose your opportunism, you schemed with the obscenely loyal Victor Smith to avoid it. It is obvious and can be substantiated easily through the entire unraveling conspiracy—and you cannot even deny it. So you want to become President of Ghana on the blind side of founder Jerry Rawlings—and a scheming Victor Smith is on hand to facilitate that agenda. Isn’t it sir? Is it any wonder that Victor Smith immediately joined your campaign team and was immediately put in-charge of protocol at the presidency soon after the NDC won the election 2008 and later made ambassador to Czech Republic? Would you expect any less for his loyalty to that grand scheme orchestrated by you and your cohorts?
Or you think it is difficult to figure out why one of your most hyped visits abroad in recent times is the one to the Czech Republic supposedly to solicit engineering partnerships with the Czechs? Of course, ambassador Smith still has a role to play in making that grand scheme of you becoming a future President on a silver platter come to fruition—though from a safe distance. I want to see how this vain scheme of yours will materialize on the blind side of the NDC founder and former President of Ghana Jerry John Rawlings. Or have you apologized to the NDC foot soldiers whom you claimed on an opposition NPP platform that they lack a sense of sacrifice and have no right to demand reward for their effort in making you vice president as though your becoming a running mate to Prof. Mills in 2008 was an act of sacrifice at the expense of your further studies abroad?
Time will tell but there is no becoming President on a silver platter on the NDC ticket—again. Not this time!
Courageously yours,
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(NDC youth with conviction of principle)
Monday, November 1, 2010
The YFL is aware of planned and projected machinations by people in government as well as surrogates of President Mills to launch a full scale media WAR against the former first lady of Ghana and vice chairperson of the NDC Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings. We have intercepted several text messages-one of which reveals the entire plot by Ato Ahwoi who have engaged the so-called ‘Coffee shop mafia’ of ‘caricature journalists’ and also formed the group- alliance for responsible opposition (AFRO) ostensibly to thwart any plans or presidential ambitions that may be nursed by Mrs. Rawlings for 2012.
According to a ‘private and confidential’ text message sent by James Agyenim Boateng, deputy information minister to other colleagues including Nii Lantey Vanderpuye, Koku Anyidoho, inussah Fusseini Etc. Etc. he lamented about the presence of people linked to the Rawlings’ in the AFRO group which he described as ‘a group of hungry CPP guys’ he cannot trust well enough. The deputy minister says he believes that some of the AFRO boys have links with someone close to Mrs. Rawlings-a situation he describes as dangerous if the purpose of the group to thwart any ambitions that Mrs. Rawlings may be harboring towards the presidency in 2012 is to be achieved. James Agyenim Boateng went further in his message to state that the AFRO group will not achieve its purpose as ‘uncle Ato’ wants it-to scatter the ambitions of Konadu Agyeman Rawlings if things continue the same way.
He even goes on to claim that the ‘commandoes’ of the former president Rawlings are ‘sniffing around’ for some named people rooting for Nana Konadu and gathering good intelligence whiles they’re (Government) dealing with ‘hungry CPP guys’ who cannot be trusted because they may have close ties with Dr. Paa Kwesi Ndoum whom he believes could leak their plot to the NPP and cause a scandal.
The YFL also learnt from the intercepted text message sent by the deputy minister that several meetings have been held to pursue this agenda with people he described as ‘new faces’ being around during those meetings without prior notice to the rest of the team of schemers-a practice he cautioned must be stopped immediately to prevent leakages.
The YFL will like to caution all those behind this plot to be Wary of the dire consequences of their covert activities within the NDC in their attempt to impose a politics of exclusion ism on all of us. It is important for these people with blind and primitive loyalty to president Mills to be reminded that the NDC Flag is not a bona fide property of Prof. Mills and no one can be excluded from contending for the leadership of the NDC. They also need to keep in mind that the so-called ‘coffee shop mafia’ failed to bring down Prof. Mills when the NPP contracted them to do so. It would therefore be a nonstarter to depend on them to bring down Mrs. Rawlings. They shall fail again as they have always failed!
As for the AFRO group, they must be careful what agenda they pursue for their political patrons as this plot has failed even before it is executed. Those who have run out of political strategy and steam and who have resorted to these kinds of discredited intrigues must be prepared to take the blame when the NDC eventually suffers irreparable disunity among it’s rank and file since no plot or scheme of theirs will go unchallenged by we the NDC youth with conviction of principle who don’t only believe in fair play but also are a vanguard to the values and virtues that form the bedrock of the NDC. If these intrigues and politics of exclusion are a part of the ‘new NDC’, we would resist it as an alien culture that must never be tolerated and integrated into our culture as a party.
We also call on President Mills to as a matter of urgency call to book, all those people who are calling Mrs. Rawlings unprintable names because of suspicion of her involvement with recent activities of party foot soldiers in the MOVEMENT FOR KONADU 2012 calling on her to step out and contest president Mills for NDC flag bearer in 2012. These people are beating WAR drums within the NDC and if the president is worth his word and his position as party leader, he must openly denounce these unprintable statements from his henchmen whose over-zealousness could soon provoke further reprisal actions from avowed supporters of the former first lady. And that cannot douse the big hoo-hah that has been generated already in the past few weeks. But let no one-be it association of regional chairmen or a clique of compromised or caricature journalists-make an attempt to gag Mrs. Rawlings and not expect a democratic rebuttal from her equally numerous and dedicated loyalists.
Signed:
SaCut Amenga-Etego
YFL general secretary
According to a ‘private and confidential’ text message sent by James Agyenim Boateng, deputy information minister to other colleagues including Nii Lantey Vanderpuye, Koku Anyidoho, inussah Fusseini Etc. Etc. he lamented about the presence of people linked to the Rawlings’ in the AFRO group which he described as ‘a group of hungry CPP guys’ he cannot trust well enough. The deputy minister says he believes that some of the AFRO boys have links with someone close to Mrs. Rawlings-a situation he describes as dangerous if the purpose of the group to thwart any ambitions that Mrs. Rawlings may be harboring towards the presidency in 2012 is to be achieved. James Agyenim Boateng went further in his message to state that the AFRO group will not achieve its purpose as ‘uncle Ato’ wants it-to scatter the ambitions of Konadu Agyeman Rawlings if things continue the same way.
He even goes on to claim that the ‘commandoes’ of the former president Rawlings are ‘sniffing around’ for some named people rooting for Nana Konadu and gathering good intelligence whiles they’re (Government) dealing with ‘hungry CPP guys’ who cannot be trusted because they may have close ties with Dr. Paa Kwesi Ndoum whom he believes could leak their plot to the NPP and cause a scandal.
The YFL also learnt from the intercepted text message sent by the deputy minister that several meetings have been held to pursue this agenda with people he described as ‘new faces’ being around during those meetings without prior notice to the rest of the team of schemers-a practice he cautioned must be stopped immediately to prevent leakages.
The YFL will like to caution all those behind this plot to be Wary of the dire consequences of their covert activities within the NDC in their attempt to impose a politics of exclusion ism on all of us. It is important for these people with blind and primitive loyalty to president Mills to be reminded that the NDC Flag is not a bona fide property of Prof. Mills and no one can be excluded from contending for the leadership of the NDC. They also need to keep in mind that the so-called ‘coffee shop mafia’ failed to bring down Prof. Mills when the NPP contracted them to do so. It would therefore be a nonstarter to depend on them to bring down Mrs. Rawlings. They shall fail again as they have always failed!
As for the AFRO group, they must be careful what agenda they pursue for their political patrons as this plot has failed even before it is executed. Those who have run out of political strategy and steam and who have resorted to these kinds of discredited intrigues must be prepared to take the blame when the NDC eventually suffers irreparable disunity among it’s rank and file since no plot or scheme of theirs will go unchallenged by we the NDC youth with conviction of principle who don’t only believe in fair play but also are a vanguard to the values and virtues that form the bedrock of the NDC. If these intrigues and politics of exclusion are a part of the ‘new NDC’, we would resist it as an alien culture that must never be tolerated and integrated into our culture as a party.
We also call on President Mills to as a matter of urgency call to book, all those people who are calling Mrs. Rawlings unprintable names because of suspicion of her involvement with recent activities of party foot soldiers in the MOVEMENT FOR KONADU 2012 calling on her to step out and contest president Mills for NDC flag bearer in 2012. These people are beating WAR drums within the NDC and if the president is worth his word and his position as party leader, he must openly denounce these unprintable statements from his henchmen whose over-zealousness could soon provoke further reprisal actions from avowed supporters of the former first lady. And that cannot douse the big hoo-hah that has been generated already in the past few weeks. But let no one-be it association of regional chairmen or a clique of compromised or caricature journalists-make an attempt to gag Mrs. Rawlings and not expect a democratic rebuttal from her equally numerous and dedicated loyalists.
Signed:
SaCut Amenga-Etego
YFL general secretary
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Re: Konadu's evil machinations!
Re: Konadu’s evil machinations
I totally disagree with the opinion in an article written and published by Ato Kwamena Dadzie with the title ‘Konadu’s evil machinations’ on Oct. 26th 2010 and widely published here on Ghanaweb.com and many other portals.
I know that Ato Kwamena Dadzie is a natural clown. I also know he suffers from diarrhea of the mouth. What I didn’t know was that Ato also suffers from rickets of the mind. Otherwise how could Ato consider his own personal warped opinions and views as facts?
He stated in that article that, ‘But the NDC would make a big mistake to put up Nana Konadu as their presidential candidate. They are better off putting up a John Mahama or a Spio-Garbrah. Even Johnson Asiedu-Nketiah has a better chance of winning a presidential contest for the NDC than that wife of Jerry John Rawlings. They know this fact but the NDC likes to make mistakes. It seems to be one of their major learning aids’.
So Ato thinks in his mind that Mrs. Rawlings will never be president of Ghana. He also thinks in his mind that John Mahama or E-Spio-G would be better off for the NDC in 2012 or even general mozzie. For him, selecting Mrs. Rawlings would be a mistake because she and her husband run this nation for almost twenty years and took us nowhere. I have said that is gibberish because the P-NDC under former president Rawlings brought us unto a highway of progress. There are living facts to show for that-even the very fact that Ato sits on radio as a 33 year young man castigating presidents and former presidents openly and of his own free is a testament. What is more interesting about this warped and naïve view is that Ato Kwamena Dazie considers his uninformed conjecture as fact. He thinks he is entitled to his own set of facts here. But where are the facts in what he has said?
He even goes on to conjure that ‘the reason why the NDC doesn’t want to create an electoral college like the NPP has done is because the status quo affords the Rawlings loyalists one of the best opportunities to get his wife to run for the presidency’. What a sweeping statement and an excellent way to step on words and leave reason aside.
Isn’t it extremely naïve for Ato to suggest that the NDC would’ve followed the NPP with an expansion of Electoral College but has not done it because the current arrangement affords Mr. Rawlings an opportunity to get his wife elected as NDC flag bearer? Does it mean to Ato that the decision to expand or not to expand the NDC Electoral College lies in the hands of Mr. Rawlings as an individual?
Can Ato Kwamena Dadzie see how clearly his over exuberance is exposing his crushing ignorance? There hasn’t been any discussion at all in the NDC about Electoral College expansion before 2012 election. The NEC is in-charge of generating that debate and if it has not been brought up, then it only shows a lack of general interest on the part of the national executive committee concerning the subject. Ato Kwamena Dadzie must therefore educate himself and desist from touting his personal uninformed views as informed positions.
It would seem to me that Ato Kwamena Dadzie has just gained his political consciousness as he also claimed in that article that the 1992 presidential election was a sham. Was it a sham because the opposition NPP boycotted the elections? Or it was a sham because people didn’t go out to vote? He must have really been very young by then and has only depended on hearsay to draw easy conclusions characterized by indigestible thinking.
And did I read him saying that Prof. Mills has completely ignored NDC founder and former President Rawlings for close to two years-an action that has gotten Rawlings pissed off? Has Ato got his facts right and speaking based on intelligence or he is just blowing hot air with the hope that he would be believed? Does he think that he has credibility and authority to say what prompts every action within the NDC? He even called Rawlings ‘nothing if not a fighter-all brawn, little brain’. He has been biting a lot lately-and in an unchallenged manner. He is reaching a crossroads with what he has suddenly started to bite on the subject of Mrs. Rawlings. I hope he is prepared for the long haul?
When I challenged Ato to tell what makes him think that his personal beliefs can be called facts, he conveniently said to me that he knows who I am. He knows I’m one of those clamoring for Mrs. Rawlings to be president because of ‘crumbs’ from her. He boasted that he could never be compromised by Mrs. Rawlings. But the question I ask Ato is what better crumbs than what he gets for picking the stories they do on Joy fm every day? What better crumbs than what you get for killing all the relevant stories and airing only those that suits the agenda of his political patrons? What better crumbs than what you get for such a deformed journalism on joy fm?
Why would Ato twist the meaning of the statement issued by Mr. Rawlings recently by positing that the ‘we won all our election in the past in the NDC’ phrase refers to Mr. and Mrs. Rawlings alone as ‘we’ and not the entire NDC party? Has he become a conspiracy theorist specialized in reading the minds of the Rawlings? What insolence from Ato Kwamena Dadzie! Sometimes I’m tempted to think that he has joined those two most dangerous threats to our polis, the two double agents and opportunists par excellence Kwesi Pratt and Malik Kweku Baako to show ‘primitive loyalty’ to President Mills because after all ‘adzie wo fie oye’ is their philosophy.
Ghana is a democracy. The NDC is one of the main vehicles that have nurtured this culture. The NDC is a pacesetter in Ghanaian democracy and not an imitator of any other party guidelines. The NDC don’t operate by the logic of speculators and warped minds like that of Ato Kwamena Dadzie. Leadership contest is inevitable and no single person can determine who leads the NDC in the future but no one single person can also determine who could run for primaries or not. And those who think it is not time for a woman president in Ghana or that Mrs. Rawlings can never be president of Ghana are akin to those who said that Ghana was unprepared for political independence and self rule as at 1957. They are the cynics and skeptics but the greatest things in this world have never been achieved by any of such thinkers.
Or is Ato Kwamena Dadzie under the delusion that his cynicism is a strategy to prevent any natural choice that the NDC and Ghanaians would make in a woman as president? As narrow minded as he is, Ato goes on to say that he prefers Atta Mills at his ‘incompetent best’ to Mrs. Rawlings because ‘she is incompetent and vindictive’. I suspect that this Ato guy don’t understand some of the words he uses otherwise, who is more vindictive than Prof. mills who could not even forgive Dr. E-Spio-G and work with him after contesting him in the primaries. What about all the other people who contested him? Has he forgiven them and worked with them? If Ato wants to become a praise poet for president Mills, let him stop masquerading as a journalist.
I know for a fact that Ato Kwamena Dadzie and others such as Bature, Pratt and Baako are on a mission to oppose Mrs. Rawlings who is rumored to have presidential ambition. These rumors have not been confirmed neither have they been denied by Mrs. Rawlings. Supporters have come out to promote a candidature for Mrs. Rawlings with the MOVEMENT FOR KONADU 2012. Even though I am not one of those leading this campaign, I totally support the call for Mrs. Rawlings to step out and take our democracy into the next phase in 2012. After all, other leading figures in the party and government including the president and his vice have not only declared their intentions to run but are actually taking undue advantage of their positions to campaign for support.
There are also rumors that President Mills may choose not to run for president in 2012. As a result, Kwesi Ahwoi and co. are all been touted around as possible replacement for Mills. I do not see a thing wrong with the former first lady contesting in the grand scheme of things. In my books, she is more than qualified to run for president. She has the opportunity, quality and experience to make history for Ghana as first female president-a rare quality that is not found in many Ghanaian women.
All the patriarchs and male chauvinists or rather Mr. and Mrs. Rawlings haters who wish that she would never be president must only pray and hope that she does not decide to contest Mills because the outcome can only be humiliating for him. Why, only a rumor has raised the temperature levels not only at the corridors of power but also within the clique of journalists whose symbiotic relationship with the establishment is affected directly or indirectly by the possible reality of the rumor. I therefore have no doubt that if Mrs. Rawlings rises to the occasion, history would be made in Ghana.
Ato Kwamena Dadzie can therefore turn his own warped and jaundiced views into his own set of facts and delude himself. As he said in his article that Mrs. Rawlings if allowed to rule Ghana for three days would take Ghana backwards by 30years, I can only say that Ato cannot be expecting discerning listeners and readers to applaud him for saying something any namby-pamby can say. Indeed, no one needs brains to say that. In that case, Ato would have to prepare for his worst nightmare since the MOVEMENT FOR KONADU 2012 is catching up like a whirl-wind in a storm. It is a true democracy we are building and no group of journalists no matter how loud-mouthed they are can stampede the democratic process in this country-and certainly not in the NDC.
And if Ato Kwamena Dadzie and his ilk believe that the nationwide call by NDC foot soldiers for the candidature of Mrs. Rawlings in 2012 is an orchestration by former president Rawlings to get a proxy in his wife as NDC presidential candidate in order to come back to power, then they might as well tell Ghanaians that Mr. Rawlings is no more as popular as he used to be to gain spontaneous support from the people without manipulating them. People must wake up from their slumber and face the reality that the Rawlings’s are still very extremely popular not only within the NDC but among Ghanaians and still enjoys spontaneous support from the people of Ghana to the emotional displeasure of their opponents like Ato Kwamena Dadzie and his political patrons.
To Hades with their bogus conspiracy theories!
SaCut Amenga-Etego (NDC youth activist)
rassacut@yahoo.com
I totally disagree with the opinion in an article written and published by Ato Kwamena Dadzie with the title ‘Konadu’s evil machinations’ on Oct. 26th 2010 and widely published here on Ghanaweb.com and many other portals.
I know that Ato Kwamena Dadzie is a natural clown. I also know he suffers from diarrhea of the mouth. What I didn’t know was that Ato also suffers from rickets of the mind. Otherwise how could Ato consider his own personal warped opinions and views as facts?
He stated in that article that, ‘But the NDC would make a big mistake to put up Nana Konadu as their presidential candidate. They are better off putting up a John Mahama or a Spio-Garbrah. Even Johnson Asiedu-Nketiah has a better chance of winning a presidential contest for the NDC than that wife of Jerry John Rawlings. They know this fact but the NDC likes to make mistakes. It seems to be one of their major learning aids’.
So Ato thinks in his mind that Mrs. Rawlings will never be president of Ghana. He also thinks in his mind that John Mahama or E-Spio-G would be better off for the NDC in 2012 or even general mozzie. For him, selecting Mrs. Rawlings would be a mistake because she and her husband run this nation for almost twenty years and took us nowhere. I have said that is gibberish because the P-NDC under former president Rawlings brought us unto a highway of progress. There are living facts to show for that-even the very fact that Ato sits on radio as a 33 year young man castigating presidents and former presidents openly and of his own free is a testament. What is more interesting about this warped and naïve view is that Ato Kwamena Dazie considers his uninformed conjecture as fact. He thinks he is entitled to his own set of facts here. But where are the facts in what he has said?
He even goes on to conjure that ‘the reason why the NDC doesn’t want to create an electoral college like the NPP has done is because the status quo affords the Rawlings loyalists one of the best opportunities to get his wife to run for the presidency’. What a sweeping statement and an excellent way to step on words and leave reason aside.
Isn’t it extremely naïve for Ato to suggest that the NDC would’ve followed the NPP with an expansion of Electoral College but has not done it because the current arrangement affords Mr. Rawlings an opportunity to get his wife elected as NDC flag bearer? Does it mean to Ato that the decision to expand or not to expand the NDC Electoral College lies in the hands of Mr. Rawlings as an individual?
Can Ato Kwamena Dadzie see how clearly his over exuberance is exposing his crushing ignorance? There hasn’t been any discussion at all in the NDC about Electoral College expansion before 2012 election. The NEC is in-charge of generating that debate and if it has not been brought up, then it only shows a lack of general interest on the part of the national executive committee concerning the subject. Ato Kwamena Dadzie must therefore educate himself and desist from touting his personal uninformed views as informed positions.
It would seem to me that Ato Kwamena Dadzie has just gained his political consciousness as he also claimed in that article that the 1992 presidential election was a sham. Was it a sham because the opposition NPP boycotted the elections? Or it was a sham because people didn’t go out to vote? He must have really been very young by then and has only depended on hearsay to draw easy conclusions characterized by indigestible thinking.
And did I read him saying that Prof. Mills has completely ignored NDC founder and former President Rawlings for close to two years-an action that has gotten Rawlings pissed off? Has Ato got his facts right and speaking based on intelligence or he is just blowing hot air with the hope that he would be believed? Does he think that he has credibility and authority to say what prompts every action within the NDC? He even called Rawlings ‘nothing if not a fighter-all brawn, little brain’. He has been biting a lot lately-and in an unchallenged manner. He is reaching a crossroads with what he has suddenly started to bite on the subject of Mrs. Rawlings. I hope he is prepared for the long haul?
When I challenged Ato to tell what makes him think that his personal beliefs can be called facts, he conveniently said to me that he knows who I am. He knows I’m one of those clamoring for Mrs. Rawlings to be president because of ‘crumbs’ from her. He boasted that he could never be compromised by Mrs. Rawlings. But the question I ask Ato is what better crumbs than what he gets for picking the stories they do on Joy fm every day? What better crumbs than what you get for killing all the relevant stories and airing only those that suits the agenda of his political patrons? What better crumbs than what you get for such a deformed journalism on joy fm?
Why would Ato twist the meaning of the statement issued by Mr. Rawlings recently by positing that the ‘we won all our election in the past in the NDC’ phrase refers to Mr. and Mrs. Rawlings alone as ‘we’ and not the entire NDC party? Has he become a conspiracy theorist specialized in reading the minds of the Rawlings? What insolence from Ato Kwamena Dadzie! Sometimes I’m tempted to think that he has joined those two most dangerous threats to our polis, the two double agents and opportunists par excellence Kwesi Pratt and Malik Kweku Baako to show ‘primitive loyalty’ to President Mills because after all ‘adzie wo fie oye’ is their philosophy.
Ghana is a democracy. The NDC is one of the main vehicles that have nurtured this culture. The NDC is a pacesetter in Ghanaian democracy and not an imitator of any other party guidelines. The NDC don’t operate by the logic of speculators and warped minds like that of Ato Kwamena Dadzie. Leadership contest is inevitable and no single person can determine who leads the NDC in the future but no one single person can also determine who could run for primaries or not. And those who think it is not time for a woman president in Ghana or that Mrs. Rawlings can never be president of Ghana are akin to those who said that Ghana was unprepared for political independence and self rule as at 1957. They are the cynics and skeptics but the greatest things in this world have never been achieved by any of such thinkers.
Or is Ato Kwamena Dadzie under the delusion that his cynicism is a strategy to prevent any natural choice that the NDC and Ghanaians would make in a woman as president? As narrow minded as he is, Ato goes on to say that he prefers Atta Mills at his ‘incompetent best’ to Mrs. Rawlings because ‘she is incompetent and vindictive’. I suspect that this Ato guy don’t understand some of the words he uses otherwise, who is more vindictive than Prof. mills who could not even forgive Dr. E-Spio-G and work with him after contesting him in the primaries. What about all the other people who contested him? Has he forgiven them and worked with them? If Ato wants to become a praise poet for president Mills, let him stop masquerading as a journalist.
I know for a fact that Ato Kwamena Dadzie and others such as Bature, Pratt and Baako are on a mission to oppose Mrs. Rawlings who is rumored to have presidential ambition. These rumors have not been confirmed neither have they been denied by Mrs. Rawlings. Supporters have come out to promote a candidature for Mrs. Rawlings with the MOVEMENT FOR KONADU 2012. Even though I am not one of those leading this campaign, I totally support the call for Mrs. Rawlings to step out and take our democracy into the next phase in 2012. After all, other leading figures in the party and government including the president and his vice have not only declared their intentions to run but are actually taking undue advantage of their positions to campaign for support.
There are also rumors that President Mills may choose not to run for president in 2012. As a result, Kwesi Ahwoi and co. are all been touted around as possible replacement for Mills. I do not see a thing wrong with the former first lady contesting in the grand scheme of things. In my books, she is more than qualified to run for president. She has the opportunity, quality and experience to make history for Ghana as first female president-a rare quality that is not found in many Ghanaian women.
All the patriarchs and male chauvinists or rather Mr. and Mrs. Rawlings haters who wish that she would never be president must only pray and hope that she does not decide to contest Mills because the outcome can only be humiliating for him. Why, only a rumor has raised the temperature levels not only at the corridors of power but also within the clique of journalists whose symbiotic relationship with the establishment is affected directly or indirectly by the possible reality of the rumor. I therefore have no doubt that if Mrs. Rawlings rises to the occasion, history would be made in Ghana.
Ato Kwamena Dadzie can therefore turn his own warped and jaundiced views into his own set of facts and delude himself. As he said in his article that Mrs. Rawlings if allowed to rule Ghana for three days would take Ghana backwards by 30years, I can only say that Ato cannot be expecting discerning listeners and readers to applaud him for saying something any namby-pamby can say. Indeed, no one needs brains to say that. In that case, Ato would have to prepare for his worst nightmare since the MOVEMENT FOR KONADU 2012 is catching up like a whirl-wind in a storm. It is a true democracy we are building and no group of journalists no matter how loud-mouthed they are can stampede the democratic process in this country-and certainly not in the NDC.
And if Ato Kwamena Dadzie and his ilk believe that the nationwide call by NDC foot soldiers for the candidature of Mrs. Rawlings in 2012 is an orchestration by former president Rawlings to get a proxy in his wife as NDC presidential candidate in order to come back to power, then they might as well tell Ghanaians that Mr. Rawlings is no more as popular as he used to be to gain spontaneous support from the people without manipulating them. People must wake up from their slumber and face the reality that the Rawlings’s are still very extremely popular not only within the NDC but among Ghanaians and still enjoys spontaneous support from the people of Ghana to the emotional displeasure of their opponents like Ato Kwamena Dadzie and his political patrons.
To Hades with their bogus conspiracy theories!
SaCut Amenga-Etego (NDC youth activist)
rassacut@yahoo.com
Friday, October 1, 2010
Malik Kweku Baako is a corrupt journalist
Accra Ghana, Sept. 30th 2010
I have no doubts in my mind that the most compromised journalist during the Kofour regime was the editor-in-chief of the crusading guide newspaper Abdul Malik Kweku Baako who is now the managing editor of the new crusading Guide newspaper. Those who have followed our political intrigues carefully and with a sixth sense know that the new crusading guide newspaper owned and managed by Mr. Baako now is a direct outcome of the journalistic corruption in the reign of President Kufour.
Why, were we not in this country when reports were made open about the efforts by the Kwamena Bartels- led ministry of information to provide a media buffer for the NPP government through a planned and projected corruption and compromises of specific and ‘influential journalists’ in Ghana? Did the list not include Kweku Baako, Egbert Faigbile who invested his compromise in the Ghanaian Observer newspaper and Kwame Sefa Kaye of peace fm? Did the minister ever deny this story at the time? Absolutely no! And yet, there are many undocumented sources and cast iron evidence that confirm this as a fact.
As part of the projected corruption plan of the Kufour led government and executed by Kwamena Bartels, these so-called senior journalists had state of the art high speed internet infrastructure set up for them at their various operating points in Accra. Not only that, it was also reported at the time that these named journalists received an average of US$15.000 a month for the purpose of covering up the truth and serving as hatchet men of media buffer for the Kufour regime. Let the former information minister Kwamena Bartels deny that he didn’t have a policy or practice, official or unofficial at the information ministry where he specifically induced the named journalists and their hirelings with cash, presidential travels and other inducements if indeed, he believes in the truth.
And if you cannot call a man corrupt; who claims to be an Nkrumaist or a CPP but who don’t only openly work against this same group and its leadership, but actually endorses and works for its opponents, who then is corrupt? If you cannot call a man who has permanent interests without enduring principles that can stand the test of time compromised, who then is corrupt? In my books, the most compromised individual in any polity is one who acts as a ‘double agent’ for both government and opposition forces. I double doubt if Mr Baako will pass this test going through our history.
Some of us, young as we may be, find it very appalling that this publicly corrupt journalist will have monopoly over the biggest airwaves in Ghana today to pontificate and castigate others as liars. In my view, a scheming journalist who receives money, travel incentives, Ad contracts and other largesse from a government to compromise him on the truth lacks the morality to cast a stone at anyone for lying.
Let me put this into context; when former president Rawlings alleged in a speech in Ouagadougou that there were such compromised journalists in Ghana who earned US$10.000 during a certain regime, the responses from both the NPP and specifically Kwaku Baako was revealing and/or even exposing. There are a thousand and one journalists in Ghana. It will be interesting to know why it was Malik Baako in particular who was demanding that he publicly names that compromised journalist. Was it because Mr. Baako’s conscience had pricked him so hard he had to come out pratting on the airwaves? An American newspaper editor once described the media as the oxygen of democracy. If it were so in Ghana, I dare say journalists such as Mr. Baako are just simply suffocating our democracy with carbon monoxide through their lies and not oxygen. As for the reaction of the NPP as a party, it only confirmed that corruption is synonymous with their name.
There are two things, may be three that I have concluded about Kweku Baako and his obsession with Former President Jerry Rawlings. First, he is corrupt and knows that President Jerry Rawlings can expose him so he runs to town all the time claiming he will strip JJ naked whenever he feels threats of exposure. Second thing without a doubt is that it has become pretty obvious Malik Kweku Baako craves so badly for the mention of his name by Former President Jerry Rawlings. He hopes to be dignified by that singular act which he has never been able to obtain. And this has been a psychological torture for him. If not, why should he particularly out of thousands of journalist demand such naming? He had obviously come to the clear conclusion that Ghanaians understood the former President correctly and had narrowed it to his name Kwaku Baako. I remember the day the news was first aired, and the subsequent days following the Ouagadougou speech, every joint, every group of minds, in many homes, and in many cars, in offices, on the internet, majority(discerning Ghanaians) all said they’re sure that the unnamed ‘compromised Ghanaian journalist’ mentioned by former President Rawlings is Kweku Baako. Why, because it is public knowledge.
It is not a secret or rather it is an open secret that the owner of the crusading guide newspaper had to part ways with Kweku Baako because he(Kwaku Baako) was using the paper as cover to earn such colossal sums of dollars from the Kufour government without investing a penny of it into that business. Of course, that was not Mr. Baako’s legal business and he could not invest his unethically acquired dollars into the legal establishment of crusading guide newspaper. But he found a way to invest it anyway in the ‘new crusading guide’. We can all testify that there is absolutely nothing new in that newspaper for us.
Kweku Baako should not throw his weight about as if the entire history of this nation has been micro-chipped into his head under lock and key. He is one of a few journalists who have openly violated his own professed principles and ideals. He has contradicted himself so much so that he has become morally corrupted and now he walks about without any moral dilemmas. His psychological anxiety reached a zenith when he suddenly swapped faith and announced his conversion into Islam-bringing a change only to his name. If he claims to be a senior journalist-a title that is self proclaimed- and knows all the things he claims to know, then he should be doing the youth of this nation some good by committing his knowledge permanently on paper.
Because isn’t it a shame, as one of my friends put it, that the two most talking heads, the two co cofusionists, the so called senior journalists, the two most dangerous threats to our polity, Kwesi Pratt and Kwaku Baako have not written any books yet. They only carry ‘documents’. Or have they? All they do is go on radio and talk their heads off. Rather they should do like other senior journalists in other nations are doing-commit their thoughts and knowledge permanently to paper-unless they cannot do so honestly without exposing their ‘double selves’. Or are they waiting for a crazy, overly indulging, and escapading British Craig Murray to come and do that for us?
The truth is one. And according to Dr. Maulana Karenga, an African-African philosopher, the main task of history is to unearth the truth and speak it. Let’s unearth it. Let’s speak it.
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL General Secretary and NDC youth activist)
I have no doubts in my mind that the most compromised journalist during the Kofour regime was the editor-in-chief of the crusading guide newspaper Abdul Malik Kweku Baako who is now the managing editor of the new crusading Guide newspaper. Those who have followed our political intrigues carefully and with a sixth sense know that the new crusading guide newspaper owned and managed by Mr. Baako now is a direct outcome of the journalistic corruption in the reign of President Kufour.
Why, were we not in this country when reports were made open about the efforts by the Kwamena Bartels- led ministry of information to provide a media buffer for the NPP government through a planned and projected corruption and compromises of specific and ‘influential journalists’ in Ghana? Did the list not include Kweku Baako, Egbert Faigbile who invested his compromise in the Ghanaian Observer newspaper and Kwame Sefa Kaye of peace fm? Did the minister ever deny this story at the time? Absolutely no! And yet, there are many undocumented sources and cast iron evidence that confirm this as a fact.
As part of the projected corruption plan of the Kufour led government and executed by Kwamena Bartels, these so-called senior journalists had state of the art high speed internet infrastructure set up for them at their various operating points in Accra. Not only that, it was also reported at the time that these named journalists received an average of US$15.000 a month for the purpose of covering up the truth and serving as hatchet men of media buffer for the Kufour regime. Let the former information minister Kwamena Bartels deny that he didn’t have a policy or practice, official or unofficial at the information ministry where he specifically induced the named journalists and their hirelings with cash, presidential travels and other inducements if indeed, he believes in the truth.
And if you cannot call a man corrupt; who claims to be an Nkrumaist or a CPP but who don’t only openly work against this same group and its leadership, but actually endorses and works for its opponents, who then is corrupt? If you cannot call a man who has permanent interests without enduring principles that can stand the test of time compromised, who then is corrupt? In my books, the most compromised individual in any polity is one who acts as a ‘double agent’ for both government and opposition forces. I double doubt if Mr Baako will pass this test going through our history.
Some of us, young as we may be, find it very appalling that this publicly corrupt journalist will have monopoly over the biggest airwaves in Ghana today to pontificate and castigate others as liars. In my view, a scheming journalist who receives money, travel incentives, Ad contracts and other largesse from a government to compromise him on the truth lacks the morality to cast a stone at anyone for lying.
Let me put this into context; when former president Rawlings alleged in a speech in Ouagadougou that there were such compromised journalists in Ghana who earned US$10.000 during a certain regime, the responses from both the NPP and specifically Kwaku Baako was revealing and/or even exposing. There are a thousand and one journalists in Ghana. It will be interesting to know why it was Malik Baako in particular who was demanding that he publicly names that compromised journalist. Was it because Mr. Baako’s conscience had pricked him so hard he had to come out pratting on the airwaves? An American newspaper editor once described the media as the oxygen of democracy. If it were so in Ghana, I dare say journalists such as Mr. Baako are just simply suffocating our democracy with carbon monoxide through their lies and not oxygen. As for the reaction of the NPP as a party, it only confirmed that corruption is synonymous with their name.
There are two things, may be three that I have concluded about Kweku Baako and his obsession with Former President Jerry Rawlings. First, he is corrupt and knows that President Jerry Rawlings can expose him so he runs to town all the time claiming he will strip JJ naked whenever he feels threats of exposure. Second thing without a doubt is that it has become pretty obvious Malik Kweku Baako craves so badly for the mention of his name by Former President Jerry Rawlings. He hopes to be dignified by that singular act which he has never been able to obtain. And this has been a psychological torture for him. If not, why should he particularly out of thousands of journalist demand such naming? He had obviously come to the clear conclusion that Ghanaians understood the former President correctly and had narrowed it to his name Kwaku Baako. I remember the day the news was first aired, and the subsequent days following the Ouagadougou speech, every joint, every group of minds, in many homes, and in many cars, in offices, on the internet, majority(discerning Ghanaians) all said they’re sure that the unnamed ‘compromised Ghanaian journalist’ mentioned by former President Rawlings is Kweku Baako. Why, because it is public knowledge.
It is not a secret or rather it is an open secret that the owner of the crusading guide newspaper had to part ways with Kweku Baako because he(Kwaku Baako) was using the paper as cover to earn such colossal sums of dollars from the Kufour government without investing a penny of it into that business. Of course, that was not Mr. Baako’s legal business and he could not invest his unethically acquired dollars into the legal establishment of crusading guide newspaper. But he found a way to invest it anyway in the ‘new crusading guide’. We can all testify that there is absolutely nothing new in that newspaper for us.
Kweku Baako should not throw his weight about as if the entire history of this nation has been micro-chipped into his head under lock and key. He is one of a few journalists who have openly violated his own professed principles and ideals. He has contradicted himself so much so that he has become morally corrupted and now he walks about without any moral dilemmas. His psychological anxiety reached a zenith when he suddenly swapped faith and announced his conversion into Islam-bringing a change only to his name. If he claims to be a senior journalist-a title that is self proclaimed- and knows all the things he claims to know, then he should be doing the youth of this nation some good by committing his knowledge permanently on paper.
Because isn’t it a shame, as one of my friends put it, that the two most talking heads, the two co cofusionists, the so called senior journalists, the two most dangerous threats to our polity, Kwesi Pratt and Kwaku Baako have not written any books yet. They only carry ‘documents’. Or have they? All they do is go on radio and talk their heads off. Rather they should do like other senior journalists in other nations are doing-commit their thoughts and knowledge permanently to paper-unless they cannot do so honestly without exposing their ‘double selves’. Or are they waiting for a crazy, overly indulging, and escapading British Craig Murray to come and do that for us?
The truth is one. And according to Dr. Maulana Karenga, an African-African philosopher, the main task of history is to unearth the truth and speak it. Let’s unearth it. Let’s speak it.
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL General Secretary and NDC youth activist)
Monday, September 6, 2010
President Mills lack wise advisors!
I am absolutely sure of it that the biggest problem of President Mills of Ghana is lack of wise counselors or advisors. I’m even surer that he needs an inclination for that kind of desired wise counsel-an inclination the president has woefully failed to demonstrate since he became President. Why, how can any leader ever lead successfully without the benefit of such counsel? Perhaps, only in an Atta Mills Presidency can people delude themselves with such a notion.
The last time I wrote an open letter to the President, I humbly cautioned his Excellency to get his acts together as urgently as practicable before ultimately losing his core support base in the NDC. And what did I get for daring to make such a prudent suggestion? A flood of e-mail in my in-box. You can guess the content of these messages that mostly came from naïve, blind, sycophantic and avowed stomach supporters of the president. Many of them cursed me for daring to evoke one of the cardinal principles that form the bedrock of the NDC-the courage to speak the truth and stand by it no matter the cost. There were others who commended me though for speaking out openly what many of them had already been discussing privately. But one thing became clear to me after my last letter to the President-many people who call themselves NDC do not even have an appreciation of the core values of this movement-and that includes the President.
I am not one of those who have been taken aback by the abhorrent behavior of President Mills whiles in office. As for how he has treated the founder of his party, it had long been predicted. And he’s been on record to have said that he will not treat President Jerry John Rawlings differently from President Kufour. Therefore, the reparation some of us have been advocating and expecting President Mills to give to President Rawlings for the eight years of damage and denigration from the Kuffour Presidency will only remain a day dream.
The ingratitude of President Mills is legendary without a doubt.
I first learnt of this in the run-up to the 2004 general election whiles I was still a student in Cape Coast. That was an election he meekly conceded defeat and earned himself and accolade the ‘asomdwe hene’ as though that was worth it. One evening in the company of a couple of my colleague student activists, we got the greatest shock of our lives from the man whose picture boldly occupied the front of the T-shirts we regaled.
Apparently, upon his arrival at his sister’s residence in Cape Coast during a campaign tour of the central and western regions, President Mills had been ill advised by his ‘advisors’ that we were a group of opportunist students who had come to meet him and try to get from him some favors. The truth however is that, we had been given these T-shirts by his own sister who revealed to us when Prof. Mills would arrive at her residence and encouraged us to regale ourselves with them and meet him to invite him to give us a talk in school. Upon her request, we were seated that evening and waiting for Prof. Mills for several hours until almost mid-night. That night has since remained one of the most regrettable nights for me as a youth activists of the NDC.
Why, when we were finally asked to see candidate Mills, he was seated and surrounded by a bunch of ingrates who were already day-dreaming of becoming presidential aides and ill advisors. He was the first to address us-and it was appalling. He spoke totally unlike someone who even dreamt of becoming president. He said to us that he had been told that we were students who had come to his sister’s residence to seek campaign paraphernalia. Prof. Mills asked us if his sister’s residence was the party office and why we had come there.
I was not the leader of the group but I wished I was. Our leader had become instantly timid-understandably. Although we were all shocked at the remarks from the Prof. who wanted to become Ghana’s president, our leader was even more confused as he had the extra burden of responding appropriately and respectfully. As would be expected, he fumbled through his response. He could not even be coherent as he struggled to put his vocabulary together. At this point, I only wanted to do one thing-remove that T-shirt of the Prof. and throw it to his face. At the end, he said to us, that he would see what he can do regarding coming to address us in school. We left his presence immediately with disgust and full of regrets.
It became obvious to me that this Prof. was not a serious man worth my energy in campaigning for. Here was a man who was running for president. A group of student volunteers got invited by your own sister to come and meet you. And if we came to your house for party paraphernalia-and yes, it was not the party office-but in whose interest was it? Not you who is running for president? So that if the Prof’s so-called advisors ill-advised him, as a ‘presidential material’ he should have known how to handle such information better than making it sound as though he didn’t have a ‘presidential mindscape’. And as if he was going to do us a favor. But how can you blame him if he does not have that ‘mindscape’. He simply cannot fake it.
It didn’t surprise many of my comrades who know about this experience with the Prof. When I said in 2006 that the Prof. cannot rule Ghana with these same people I met with him in 2004 as his advisors and with the same inclination. With that kind of naked ingratitude shown to students rooting for him to be president, how could you expect him to show any appreciation to the foot soldiers or his financiers or even his political benefactors in the NDC? And with such ill advisors surrounding a man who already lacks the inclination for wise counsel, how would you expect him to act wisely and in the interest of consolidating power for the NDC?
This is why when people say that I criticize the president unnecessarily; I say back to them that they’re supporting a man they don’t even have an iota of knowledge about. Some of us have been observing the Prof. since 2004 to see if he will become different. That is why we gave him the benefit of the doubt after he became our flag bearer in 2006 and supported him unconditionally. Unfortunately, a leopard can never change its colors. The president has continually confirmed to all of us who have eyes to see and an open mind to think that he is not a leader that can inspire all others to follow him and work for a common goal. He is a legendary ingrate who will only learn his lesson after his reign has crumbled and there is no indelible mark left behind to show for it.
There are those avowed supporters of the President who say that President Mills’ refusal to consult and take free advice from NDC founder and former President Jerry John Rawlings is a demonstration of his independence as a president who is of his own ideas. I’m not sure if that is what Prof. Mills really thinks he is doing. But if what his supporters say is true, it will be the most naïve thing any President can do to ignore the rich counsel of the man who introduced you to politics-such a priceless boon- in a bid to demonstrate independence of mind when in reality you do not have what it takes to be independent minded in the first place. After all, does he not still take useless and destructive counsel from his bunch of ill advisors? What is independent about that? And how does this so-called independence inure to the benefit of his presidency? Did Prof. Mills become NDC leader independently? Absolutely not! So where does this independence theory emanate from? I guess it can only emanate from ill advisors whose only aim is to cover up their own bad deeds that would suffer exposure by the former President Rawlings whose commitment to the truth is equally legendary and unmatched in our political landscape.
And that is why I say President Mills is in dire need of advisors to replace the current bunch of ill advisors. Before then, let the president develop ASAP the inclination to heed to such wise counsel or consider himself a failed president. Less I forget let those who have suddenly woken up to the reality that the NDC founder is indispensible to the fortunes of our party in any present or future election-be it intra-party election or national election-know where to direct their ‘wise counsel’. Let them be talking to those ingrates in the NDC pressing the self destructive button and making sure they listen. For no one else needs counsel than President Mills and his ill advisors who have done him no single good since he became president. They even convinced him to forget that he became president because he was consecrated on June4 in Swedru where he was famously declared by NDC founder Jerry Rawlings as heir to the NDC Flag so that he now can violate the inviolable June 4.
I’m also of the opinion that it is also almost too late for the President to make any amends to assuage the King makers in the NDC to retain him as NDC leader. He would have to fight it independently. And I double doubt if independent fighting for political power has ever been a part of the ‘father for all’ president who prefers to chase after the myth called ‘floating voters’ at the expense of the real people who put him there. Has he ever heard the saying that a bird in hand is worth ten in the bush?
If I were to be an advisor to President Mills for just a day, the first thing I would tell him is that there is a different moral code in politics. That moral code is not called ‘father for all’. It involves having two faces: the man and the alpha man. Seeking retribution for injustices perpetuated by public officials for example requires the face of the alpha man. Not the meek man. Keeping your opponents far from the seat of government does not require ‘father for all’. Sustaining power does not require praise singers around you as president and espousing gentleness. It requires people who would look you in the face and tell you the truth. If it is too bitter, why chew it. Just swallow it. I will hasten to add that no single political opponent has given him applause since he declared himself ‘father for all’. If your political opponents will not applaud you for that, what do you expect from your neglected followers? Further praises? No. absolute abandonment!
And if the ‘father for all’ moral code hasn’t been prudent, why maintain it. As I have said earlier, it is one of the most naïve themes of the President to even declare himself ‘father for all’ to Ghanaians when he has woefully failed to unite his own NDC almost two years after gaining political power. He has been ‘father for all’ in the judiciary and what has been the result; a disaster in the pursuance of justice. He has been ‘father for all’ in the public and civil services, and what has been the result; sabotage and subterfuge. He has been ‘father for all’ in the media, and what has been the result; the opposition is shaping public opinion and leading the discourse-even gaining a moral high ground. He has been ‘father for all’ business men in Ghana, and what has been the result; apathy from his campaign financiers and colossal sums of money in the hands of his political opponents.
I cannot and will not believe that the Atta Mills Presidency is working with strategy. If it is, what is it called and what is its purpose? I’m sure of one thing; it is not a winning strategy, so: it is not worth it. I cannot rest my case until the NDC flag and membership ID card is taken away from this president whose values, views and ideals are anything but those of the NDC!
saCut Amenga-Etego (YFL General secretary and NDC youth activist)
The last time I wrote an open letter to the President, I humbly cautioned his Excellency to get his acts together as urgently as practicable before ultimately losing his core support base in the NDC. And what did I get for daring to make such a prudent suggestion? A flood of e-mail in my in-box. You can guess the content of these messages that mostly came from naïve, blind, sycophantic and avowed stomach supporters of the president. Many of them cursed me for daring to evoke one of the cardinal principles that form the bedrock of the NDC-the courage to speak the truth and stand by it no matter the cost. There were others who commended me though for speaking out openly what many of them had already been discussing privately. But one thing became clear to me after my last letter to the President-many people who call themselves NDC do not even have an appreciation of the core values of this movement-and that includes the President.
I am not one of those who have been taken aback by the abhorrent behavior of President Mills whiles in office. As for how he has treated the founder of his party, it had long been predicted. And he’s been on record to have said that he will not treat President Jerry John Rawlings differently from President Kufour. Therefore, the reparation some of us have been advocating and expecting President Mills to give to President Rawlings for the eight years of damage and denigration from the Kuffour Presidency will only remain a day dream.
The ingratitude of President Mills is legendary without a doubt.
I first learnt of this in the run-up to the 2004 general election whiles I was still a student in Cape Coast. That was an election he meekly conceded defeat and earned himself and accolade the ‘asomdwe hene’ as though that was worth it. One evening in the company of a couple of my colleague student activists, we got the greatest shock of our lives from the man whose picture boldly occupied the front of the T-shirts we regaled.
Apparently, upon his arrival at his sister’s residence in Cape Coast during a campaign tour of the central and western regions, President Mills had been ill advised by his ‘advisors’ that we were a group of opportunist students who had come to meet him and try to get from him some favors. The truth however is that, we had been given these T-shirts by his own sister who revealed to us when Prof. Mills would arrive at her residence and encouraged us to regale ourselves with them and meet him to invite him to give us a talk in school. Upon her request, we were seated that evening and waiting for Prof. Mills for several hours until almost mid-night. That night has since remained one of the most regrettable nights for me as a youth activists of the NDC.
Why, when we were finally asked to see candidate Mills, he was seated and surrounded by a bunch of ingrates who were already day-dreaming of becoming presidential aides and ill advisors. He was the first to address us-and it was appalling. He spoke totally unlike someone who even dreamt of becoming president. He said to us that he had been told that we were students who had come to his sister’s residence to seek campaign paraphernalia. Prof. Mills asked us if his sister’s residence was the party office and why we had come there.
I was not the leader of the group but I wished I was. Our leader had become instantly timid-understandably. Although we were all shocked at the remarks from the Prof. who wanted to become Ghana’s president, our leader was even more confused as he had the extra burden of responding appropriately and respectfully. As would be expected, he fumbled through his response. He could not even be coherent as he struggled to put his vocabulary together. At this point, I only wanted to do one thing-remove that T-shirt of the Prof. and throw it to his face. At the end, he said to us, that he would see what he can do regarding coming to address us in school. We left his presence immediately with disgust and full of regrets.
It became obvious to me that this Prof. was not a serious man worth my energy in campaigning for. Here was a man who was running for president. A group of student volunteers got invited by your own sister to come and meet you. And if we came to your house for party paraphernalia-and yes, it was not the party office-but in whose interest was it? Not you who is running for president? So that if the Prof’s so-called advisors ill-advised him, as a ‘presidential material’ he should have known how to handle such information better than making it sound as though he didn’t have a ‘presidential mindscape’. And as if he was going to do us a favor. But how can you blame him if he does not have that ‘mindscape’. He simply cannot fake it.
It didn’t surprise many of my comrades who know about this experience with the Prof. When I said in 2006 that the Prof. cannot rule Ghana with these same people I met with him in 2004 as his advisors and with the same inclination. With that kind of naked ingratitude shown to students rooting for him to be president, how could you expect him to show any appreciation to the foot soldiers or his financiers or even his political benefactors in the NDC? And with such ill advisors surrounding a man who already lacks the inclination for wise counsel, how would you expect him to act wisely and in the interest of consolidating power for the NDC?
This is why when people say that I criticize the president unnecessarily; I say back to them that they’re supporting a man they don’t even have an iota of knowledge about. Some of us have been observing the Prof. since 2004 to see if he will become different. That is why we gave him the benefit of the doubt after he became our flag bearer in 2006 and supported him unconditionally. Unfortunately, a leopard can never change its colors. The president has continually confirmed to all of us who have eyes to see and an open mind to think that he is not a leader that can inspire all others to follow him and work for a common goal. He is a legendary ingrate who will only learn his lesson after his reign has crumbled and there is no indelible mark left behind to show for it.
There are those avowed supporters of the President who say that President Mills’ refusal to consult and take free advice from NDC founder and former President Jerry John Rawlings is a demonstration of his independence as a president who is of his own ideas. I’m not sure if that is what Prof. Mills really thinks he is doing. But if what his supporters say is true, it will be the most naïve thing any President can do to ignore the rich counsel of the man who introduced you to politics-such a priceless boon- in a bid to demonstrate independence of mind when in reality you do not have what it takes to be independent minded in the first place. After all, does he not still take useless and destructive counsel from his bunch of ill advisors? What is independent about that? And how does this so-called independence inure to the benefit of his presidency? Did Prof. Mills become NDC leader independently? Absolutely not! So where does this independence theory emanate from? I guess it can only emanate from ill advisors whose only aim is to cover up their own bad deeds that would suffer exposure by the former President Rawlings whose commitment to the truth is equally legendary and unmatched in our political landscape.
And that is why I say President Mills is in dire need of advisors to replace the current bunch of ill advisors. Before then, let the president develop ASAP the inclination to heed to such wise counsel or consider himself a failed president. Less I forget let those who have suddenly woken up to the reality that the NDC founder is indispensible to the fortunes of our party in any present or future election-be it intra-party election or national election-know where to direct their ‘wise counsel’. Let them be talking to those ingrates in the NDC pressing the self destructive button and making sure they listen. For no one else needs counsel than President Mills and his ill advisors who have done him no single good since he became president. They even convinced him to forget that he became president because he was consecrated on June4 in Swedru where he was famously declared by NDC founder Jerry Rawlings as heir to the NDC Flag so that he now can violate the inviolable June 4.
I’m also of the opinion that it is also almost too late for the President to make any amends to assuage the King makers in the NDC to retain him as NDC leader. He would have to fight it independently. And I double doubt if independent fighting for political power has ever been a part of the ‘father for all’ president who prefers to chase after the myth called ‘floating voters’ at the expense of the real people who put him there. Has he ever heard the saying that a bird in hand is worth ten in the bush?
If I were to be an advisor to President Mills for just a day, the first thing I would tell him is that there is a different moral code in politics. That moral code is not called ‘father for all’. It involves having two faces: the man and the alpha man. Seeking retribution for injustices perpetuated by public officials for example requires the face of the alpha man. Not the meek man. Keeping your opponents far from the seat of government does not require ‘father for all’. Sustaining power does not require praise singers around you as president and espousing gentleness. It requires people who would look you in the face and tell you the truth. If it is too bitter, why chew it. Just swallow it. I will hasten to add that no single political opponent has given him applause since he declared himself ‘father for all’. If your political opponents will not applaud you for that, what do you expect from your neglected followers? Further praises? No. absolute abandonment!
And if the ‘father for all’ moral code hasn’t been prudent, why maintain it. As I have said earlier, it is one of the most naïve themes of the President to even declare himself ‘father for all’ to Ghanaians when he has woefully failed to unite his own NDC almost two years after gaining political power. He has been ‘father for all’ in the judiciary and what has been the result; a disaster in the pursuance of justice. He has been ‘father for all’ in the public and civil services, and what has been the result; sabotage and subterfuge. He has been ‘father for all’ in the media, and what has been the result; the opposition is shaping public opinion and leading the discourse-even gaining a moral high ground. He has been ‘father for all’ business men in Ghana, and what has been the result; apathy from his campaign financiers and colossal sums of money in the hands of his political opponents.
I cannot and will not believe that the Atta Mills Presidency is working with strategy. If it is, what is it called and what is its purpose? I’m sure of one thing; it is not a winning strategy, so: it is not worth it. I cannot rest my case until the NDC flag and membership ID card is taken away from this president whose values, views and ideals are anything but those of the NDC!
saCut Amenga-Etego (YFL General secretary and NDC youth activist)
Thursday, August 19, 2010
A dialogue between two or three political philosophers concerning justice!
The heir of this argument is a 'gentleman'. Here,we're not referring to an 'abrantie' as in Ghanaian parlance. In ancient Greece,a gentleman is one who is willing to stand up for, and defend his family and friends-not just the needs of the body. He is also concerned about defending the honor and safety of the polis (political community). He accepts the view that justice is 'giving to each what is owed' but he interprets it to mean a kind of loyalty to members of a family, friends, team or group. Doing maximum good to your friends and harm to your enemies. This gentleman see justice as a form of 'patriotic sentiment' that citizens of one polis feels for one another as opposed to others. Justice for him is devotion to one's own. And one's own is the good. One's own is the just.
Challenge from Another philosopher who thinks that:
Loyalty to a group cannot be a virtue in itself.He asked 'Do we ever make mistakes? Of course yes...Isn't the distinction between friend and foe based on a perception, a kind of knowledge on who is a friend and who is a foe? Have we ever mistaken a foe for a friend? Ofcourse yes... So how can we say that justice is doing good to our friends and harm to our enemies when we don't even know and cannot be sure who our friends or enemies are? Isn't such an unreflective attachment to one's own bound to result in injustice to others?
But the gentleman has an answer. The best polis knows who it's real enemies or friends are. The best city may be characterised by peace and harmony at home.
With such an unsatisfactory answer from the gentleman, he certainly needs some help from another who thinks he has some form of knowledge about justice and intends to teach it.
Justice he says is the interest of the stronger.Every polity is based on the distinction between the ruled and the rulers.Justice consists of the rules that are made by and for the interest and benefit of the ruling class. For him, the rulers determine the laws of justice. He believes that we're essentially beings who are first and foremost dominated by the desire for power and control. Power and domination is all we care about. This distinguishes the real man or the 'alpha man' from the slave.And what is true for the individual is also true for the collective things, states or cities.
Politics is a 'zero sum game'. There are winners and there are losers. The more someone wins, the more someone looses. And the rules of justice are simply the laws set up by the winners of the game to protect and promote their own interest.
Even as this gentleman seems to be making a good point, he has a challenge.
The question is repeated. Do we ever make mistakes? Of course yes...We agree that it is not self evident what our interests are. And if justice is truly in the interest of the ruler or strongest,then doesn't that require some kind of knowledge or reflection on the part of those in power to know what is really and truly in their interests?
The ancient Greece 'abrantie' replies that if a ruler makes a mistake concerning his true interests, then he is not a true ruler. A true ruler knows his true interests.
But he is still challenged. Justice is not power alone. Justice requires knowledge and reflection. Indeed, all virtue requires knowledge and reflection.
The gentleman refuses to give up. He replies that justice consists of convincing people to obey the rules that may interest others because of the fear of the consequences of injustice. Therefore, justice is only respected by the weak that fear injustice. A true ruler in some ways is one who has the courage to act unjustly for his own interest. A true ruler is like a shepherd with a flock but he rules NOT in the benefit of the flock but acts in his own interest. Justice is a virtue.
But what kind of justice is it to deceive andexploit other people?
Well, the ancient Greece 'abrantie' believes that a just person is a fool for obeying laws that are not beneficial to him. What do you believe Ghana 'abrantie'?
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL general secretary)
Challenge from Another philosopher who thinks that:
Loyalty to a group cannot be a virtue in itself.He asked 'Do we ever make mistakes? Of course yes...Isn't the distinction between friend and foe based on a perception, a kind of knowledge on who is a friend and who is a foe? Have we ever mistaken a foe for a friend? Ofcourse yes... So how can we say that justice is doing good to our friends and harm to our enemies when we don't even know and cannot be sure who our friends or enemies are? Isn't such an unreflective attachment to one's own bound to result in injustice to others?
But the gentleman has an answer. The best polis knows who it's real enemies or friends are. The best city may be characterised by peace and harmony at home.
With such an unsatisfactory answer from the gentleman, he certainly needs some help from another who thinks he has some form of knowledge about justice and intends to teach it.
Justice he says is the interest of the stronger.Every polity is based on the distinction between the ruled and the rulers.Justice consists of the rules that are made by and for the interest and benefit of the ruling class. For him, the rulers determine the laws of justice. He believes that we're essentially beings who are first and foremost dominated by the desire for power and control. Power and domination is all we care about. This distinguishes the real man or the 'alpha man' from the slave.And what is true for the individual is also true for the collective things, states or cities.
Politics is a 'zero sum game'. There are winners and there are losers. The more someone wins, the more someone looses. And the rules of justice are simply the laws set up by the winners of the game to protect and promote their own interest.
Even as this gentleman seems to be making a good point, he has a challenge.
The question is repeated. Do we ever make mistakes? Of course yes...We agree that it is not self evident what our interests are. And if justice is truly in the interest of the ruler or strongest,then doesn't that require some kind of knowledge or reflection on the part of those in power to know what is really and truly in their interests?
The ancient Greece 'abrantie' replies that if a ruler makes a mistake concerning his true interests, then he is not a true ruler. A true ruler knows his true interests.
But he is still challenged. Justice is not power alone. Justice requires knowledge and reflection. Indeed, all virtue requires knowledge and reflection.
The gentleman refuses to give up. He replies that justice consists of convincing people to obey the rules that may interest others because of the fear of the consequences of injustice. Therefore, justice is only respected by the weak that fear injustice. A true ruler in some ways is one who has the courage to act unjustly for his own interest. A true ruler is like a shepherd with a flock but he rules NOT in the benefit of the flock but acts in his own interest. Justice is a virtue.
But what kind of justice is it to deceive andexploit other people?
Well, the ancient Greece 'abrantie' believes that a just person is a fool for obeying laws that are not beneficial to him. What do you believe Ghana 'abrantie'?
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL general secretary)
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
Methodist Bishop's comments-Liberation theology or just a clearance of tainted conscience?
There has been great controversy over comments purportedly made by a 'man on the pulpit' in the Methodist church of Ghana during a visit to that church by opposition leader Nana Akuffo Addo of the NPP last Sunday. His comments were varied but suffice it to say that the man on the pulpit publicly declared himself a member of the opposition new patriotic party during sermon time on the pulpit whiles asking for the rejection of the ruling NDCgovernment in the next general election in 2012. Whiles many members of the NPP are gloating over what they perceive to be a political plus, many others especially the supporters of the ruling NDC have been embittered greatly by his remarks. Some have expressed disappointment in the 'man of God' for dabbling in party politics. Government spokesman and deputy information minister Okudzeto Ablakwa was the first to lament over his comments from government-expressing absolute disappointment in his 'lack of neutrality' onthe pulpit. I have also heard supporters of the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi former President of the Methodist church of Ghana say that what the man did was engaginging in 'liberation theology'.
I have my own view of this situation that has been variously observed by different schools of thought.
First, I don't believe this is the first time a 'man on the pulpit' has engaged in government criticism.And this particular man is widely known to have been an open critic of Chairman RAWLINGS during the reviving days of the PNDC. He was also reported in 2008 to have put on his cell phone a ringing tone that also served as a campaign signature tune for Nana Akuffo Addo-making him an open supporter of the opposition NPP. Just this time, he was more pronounced in his declaration of support for the opposition and indeed, his disdain for the ruling party.
Nobody can convince me that his utterances on the pulpit last Sunday represent liberation theology.
Why? What does liberation theology teach? It teaches that 'Christians must work for social and economic justice for all people'. If The Rev. Minister is really espousing a liberation theology, then he ought to be learning from Jean Bertrand Aristide of Haiti whose liberation theology led to his ex-communication from the Roman catholic church as a Salesian priest and who continually organized mass protests against the Jean Claude Duvalier regime and protecting the rights of the poor in Haiti. Better still, he could take inspiration from the Zapatistas of Mexico who in 1994 took over official buildings in the state capital and proclaiming war for the 'looting ofour natural resources'. Or again, this 'man on the pulpit' can draw some lessons from the Sandinistas in Nicaragua where some priests who professed 'liberation theology' decided to join Daniel Ortega and the urban resistance campaign to oust Anastasio Somoza in 1979. That was pure concrete liberation theology.
That is how far liberation theology has been espoused and practiced in other jurisdictions. And I do not think that the Rev. will want to begin his liberation theology only after he retired as the president of the Methodist church Ghana. Besides,where was his liberation theology when President Kuffour's NPP government proclaimed themselves 'enemies of the poor' in Ghana under a 'property owning democracy'? Indeed, liberation theology and property owning democracy are running parallel to each other. Where was his liberation theology when the military turned Ghana into an experimental state where coups had become so fashionable and poor people got poorer and social justice got buried until a certain chairman RAWLINGS came to halt it all with his version of 'liberation theology'? where was Asante Antwi when other clergy joined J.J Rawlings and his colleagues to work for economic and social justice for all in Ghana?
Having said all that, I do want to say that I have nothing in principle against any man on the pulpit actively and openly engaging in party politics like the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi. Indeed, many of them-if not all-are already engaged covertly in party politics. And as a political youth activists, I have enough experience to conclude that the real political actors aren't necessarily the ones who are loud on the campaign platform. There are many 'hidden hands' whose works for political parties are more strategic than what Chairman Rawlings, Kuffour, Atta Mills or Akuffo Addo will do on the campaign platform.
This Rev. has obviously been one of those 'hidden hands' that has influenced a lot of support for the NPP in that Methodist denomination in Ghana. Is he the only one? Absolutely no! I know one 'man on the pulpit' who used his sermon times during the 2008 general elections to campaign for the NPP. How do I know? Of course I was not in the congregation but my party member who was also a member of this church left the church in a loud protest-The church lost a member-and the NPP didn't win more votes a sa result.
As I have indicated, there are also other 'men on the pulpit' who were a part of the PNDC movement in 1979 and are still a part of it now. Just recently, a priest from east Africa-who espouses liberation theology-joined believers and adherents to the AFRC/PNDC movement to commemorate 31 years of the june4 uprising in Tamale. I didn't see anything wrong with it. Indeed, I loved it.
Severally, many lovers of our true democracy have denounced our religious leaders for hypocritically keeping mute over glaring social and economic injustice in Ghana. I have heard the former President Rawlings and many others asking the 'clergy' to not keep quiet over social injustices or during political upheavals. Interestingly, many of them have decided to make 'selective comments' as and when it suits them and their interests. And for me,that behavior by our religious leaders smacks off hypocrisy in the highest order akin to the biblical Pharisees. It will be really useful and progressive for our religious leaders to get loud on issues bordering on social and economic injustice. They must get political when the need arises but they cannot engage in the usual NPP-NDC politics and call it 'liberation theology'.They must speak against injustice whether perpetuated by NDC or NPP. After all,they're already covertly engaged in politics as I have stated already.
People will make arguments about separating church and state. Yes. Let's separate them by all means but we can only have a cosmetic separation like the one between our 'legislooters' and our executive.We all know that there is no such real separation of powers between the three arms of government in Ghana or Africa at large. And i doubt if there is any such thing in the so-called solid democracies like the US OF A and Britain. So my argument is that all the 'men on the pulpit' must begin to speak openly about what they feel or see wrong with our social,economic or political order. If for nothing at all, they will be enriching our democratic debate, plus, they will be clearing their tainted and 'pharisaic conscience'. But let no one even try to convince me that the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi, the retired Methodist bishop is pursuing liberation theology with a sycophantic praise of the opposition leader. For all you know, this man is covertly negotiating with Nana Akuffo Addo for council of state position in the unlikely event that he ever becomes president of Ghana in 2012. That will just be a prudent move by the man on the pulpit and a testimony to the nature of our 'stomach politics' in Ghana!
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL General secretary)
I have my own view of this situation that has been variously observed by different schools of thought.
First, I don't believe this is the first time a 'man on the pulpit' has engaged in government criticism.And this particular man is widely known to have been an open critic of Chairman RAWLINGS during the reviving days of the PNDC. He was also reported in 2008 to have put on his cell phone a ringing tone that also served as a campaign signature tune for Nana Akuffo Addo-making him an open supporter of the opposition NPP. Just this time, he was more pronounced in his declaration of support for the opposition and indeed, his disdain for the ruling party.
Nobody can convince me that his utterances on the pulpit last Sunday represent liberation theology.
Why? What does liberation theology teach? It teaches that 'Christians must work for social and economic justice for all people'. If The Rev. Minister is really espousing a liberation theology, then he ought to be learning from Jean Bertrand Aristide of Haiti whose liberation theology led to his ex-communication from the Roman catholic church as a Salesian priest and who continually organized mass protests against the Jean Claude Duvalier regime and protecting the rights of the poor in Haiti. Better still, he could take inspiration from the Zapatistas of Mexico who in 1994 took over official buildings in the state capital and proclaiming war for the 'looting ofour natural resources'. Or again, this 'man on the pulpit' can draw some lessons from the Sandinistas in Nicaragua where some priests who professed 'liberation theology' decided to join Daniel Ortega and the urban resistance campaign to oust Anastasio Somoza in 1979. That was pure concrete liberation theology.
That is how far liberation theology has been espoused and practiced in other jurisdictions. And I do not think that the Rev. will want to begin his liberation theology only after he retired as the president of the Methodist church Ghana. Besides,where was his liberation theology when President Kuffour's NPP government proclaimed themselves 'enemies of the poor' in Ghana under a 'property owning democracy'? Indeed, liberation theology and property owning democracy are running parallel to each other. Where was his liberation theology when the military turned Ghana into an experimental state where coups had become so fashionable and poor people got poorer and social justice got buried until a certain chairman RAWLINGS came to halt it all with his version of 'liberation theology'? where was Asante Antwi when other clergy joined J.J Rawlings and his colleagues to work for economic and social justice for all in Ghana?
Having said all that, I do want to say that I have nothing in principle against any man on the pulpit actively and openly engaging in party politics like the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi. Indeed, many of them-if not all-are already engaged covertly in party politics. And as a political youth activists, I have enough experience to conclude that the real political actors aren't necessarily the ones who are loud on the campaign platform. There are many 'hidden hands' whose works for political parties are more strategic than what Chairman Rawlings, Kuffour, Atta Mills or Akuffo Addo will do on the campaign platform.
This Rev. has obviously been one of those 'hidden hands' that has influenced a lot of support for the NPP in that Methodist denomination in Ghana. Is he the only one? Absolutely no! I know one 'man on the pulpit' who used his sermon times during the 2008 general elections to campaign for the NPP. How do I know? Of course I was not in the congregation but my party member who was also a member of this church left the church in a loud protest-The church lost a member-and the NPP didn't win more votes a sa result.
As I have indicated, there are also other 'men on the pulpit' who were a part of the PNDC movement in 1979 and are still a part of it now. Just recently, a priest from east Africa-who espouses liberation theology-joined believers and adherents to the AFRC/PNDC movement to commemorate 31 years of the june4 uprising in Tamale. I didn't see anything wrong with it. Indeed, I loved it.
Severally, many lovers of our true democracy have denounced our religious leaders for hypocritically keeping mute over glaring social and economic injustice in Ghana. I have heard the former President Rawlings and many others asking the 'clergy' to not keep quiet over social injustices or during political upheavals. Interestingly, many of them have decided to make 'selective comments' as and when it suits them and their interests. And for me,that behavior by our religious leaders smacks off hypocrisy in the highest order akin to the biblical Pharisees. It will be really useful and progressive for our religious leaders to get loud on issues bordering on social and economic injustice. They must get political when the need arises but they cannot engage in the usual NPP-NDC politics and call it 'liberation theology'.They must speak against injustice whether perpetuated by NDC or NPP. After all,they're already covertly engaged in politics as I have stated already.
People will make arguments about separating church and state. Yes. Let's separate them by all means but we can only have a cosmetic separation like the one between our 'legislooters' and our executive.We all know that there is no such real separation of powers between the three arms of government in Ghana or Africa at large. And i doubt if there is any such thing in the so-called solid democracies like the US OF A and Britain. So my argument is that all the 'men on the pulpit' must begin to speak openly about what they feel or see wrong with our social,economic or political order. If for nothing at all, they will be enriching our democratic debate, plus, they will be clearing their tainted and 'pharisaic conscience'. But let no one even try to convince me that the Rev. Samuel Asante Antwi, the retired Methodist bishop is pursuing liberation theology with a sycophantic praise of the opposition leader. For all you know, this man is covertly negotiating with Nana Akuffo Addo for council of state position in the unlikely event that he ever becomes president of Ghana in 2012. That will just be a prudent move by the man on the pulpit and a testimony to the nature of our 'stomach politics' in Ghana!
SaCut Amenga-Etego
(YFL General secretary)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)