Debate, they say, is an exercise in persuasion, wit and rhetoric. And argumentation aims to elicit the consent of the audience rather than deducing consequences from given premises. But it seems that the former National Security Advisor and LPRC Managing Director under Charles Taylor’s government, who has a demonstrable penchant for political posturing, would rather go for the jugular. He seems to enjoy the embrace of this enterprise – this time, aimed at appealing to the pity of an assumed undecided, indifferent and uninformed Liberian public – feeding off their frustration and exploiting their ignorance, where possible. Ah ha, that’s politics Liberian style.
He often does so by selectively referencing and ignoring facts, drawing pseudo analogies and generalizations, engaging in circular arguments and unnecessarily cleaving to complex questions in a rather pedestrian and pedantic attempt to furtively project relevance; and for good measure, some soul, however belatedly. He is joined in the latest salvo by his colleague – another confidant, a former LPRC Managing Director too, rumored to have an over-inflated ego. But who would have thought, really, that attempts at faking redemption without contrition would be in the offing so soon.
Let me state my bias right up front before we get started. I see people who have colluded in the destruction of our nation in one way or the other and made no contrition, as inauthentic tarnished entities lacking the moral authority and track record to lecture anyone about democracy and bad governance. Our deeds must match up to our words. However, I certainly appreciate when such people can have the proclivity for freedom and dreams in a protected environment. And they should participate in the national dialogue – even pontificate, as they often do, on any number of issues. We too should exercise our freedom to determine whether they have made a rationally developed argument to persuade us or chosen the recourse to propaganda – one-side, tendentious appeals, often to the passions rather than reason.
Before setting forth to scrutinize the former Taylor National Security Adviser rabble-rousing, relevance-seeking and unintended avowal, let me give the fellow his credit for a number of assertions he made in his “response.”
First, the brother gets praise for making a good emotional appeal that got twisted when he veered into the ethical sphere. That is, if you accept, as he conveniently projects, that he has heretofore not played any major role in wasting our land. Whether those colorful sentences mean much to the enlightened mind is totally another matter.
Second, he admits on more than three occasions that Liberia currently has a “fledging democracy” – quite an admission considering what they offered poor Liberia during their reign of terror.
Third, by exercising his right to free speech, however recklessly peevish at times, he implicitly admits that free speech is protected in current day Liberia.
Fourth, he correctly argues that “the employment of state resources and the seizure of entire government to merely further an individual’s political aspiration would have been wrong then and is wrong now” (what a revelation).
Fifth, he insists that the sheer force of democracy can force leaders to bend to the will of the people (no wonder they were afraid to let it flourish under their reign). That, to me, means as long as we all agree that we now have something in the making called democracy, however fledging, we can have hope of exercising our power through the ballot box and forcing our leaders to bend to our will.
Sixth, that we have emerged from dark days which we must guard against returning to. (Who off the lights?) Seventh, that CHARACTER matters when he writes that ”After all, some have argued - albeit disingenuously – that promises are made to be broken, even if they testify to the character of the leader.”
So before I am attacked for ad hominen, let me simply state that I will be taking Taylor National Security Advisor up on his assertion that character matters because I am in total agreement. As for the other former LPRC Managing director, I will just ignore him for now and let him enjoy his moment of fame – however diminished. He had little to offer beyond mouthing that the president was “out of order”. So here we go.
As an opening act, the Taylor National Security Adviser claims that “No President, since the foundation of our Republic, has so diminished and disfigured the Office of President and desecrated the sacredness of the duties thereunto assigned like President/Candidate Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf” I am assuming the fellow was so consumed and mesmerized by his own sense of self-worth when he made this patently FALSE statement to begin unraveling his own motive – something he would later reveal in his closing comments. Regardless of the real or perceived short-comings of the Sirleaf government – and there are many – the defilement of the Liberian presidency by the fellow’s benefactor, Charles Taylor, is unmatched in every respect in our recent history.
The fellow further argues, and correctly so, that “the employment of state resources and the sequestration of the entire government to merely further an individual’s political aspiration would have been wrong then and is certainly wrong now.” Who would have thought! I totally agree. But the problem is that his assertion is coming many years late after his principle had been yanked off the backs of the Liberian people for an eventual date with destiny. Where was this new “guardian of Liberian democracy” when he allegedly colluded with his benefactors to used state resources for purposes that accrued no benefit to the Liberian people -- when his benefactors used state resources to butcher, unlawfully incarcerate and rain insults on peaceful citizens for having the audacity to dissent and demand adherence to the tenets of democracy? Why didn’t he speak up when his benefactor used the bully pulpit to call opponents “roaches and rats” and used executive mansion stationary paid for by taxpayers, to write a press release declaring an “independent newspaper” a “dissident paper” for simply having the nerve to be objective and true to creed?
All through it, the “now-reformed” former confidant acquiesced and benefitted, immensely too, I am told, without ever speaking out for the values he claims to espouse today. That is what debasement, or should I say, assisted-debasement of a presidency actually is. And the Liberian people know ruination of a presidency when they see one – it looks like the presidency the fellow served as a National Security Adviser – the Taylor presidency, if you can even call it that.
So despite the unsubstantiated pedestrian attempt to label the announcement of a reelection bid during a state of a nation address as debasement of a presidency, however self-serving that announcement may have been, it pales in comparison to the adulteration of the presidency exacted by the fellow and his colleagues. Where was his character then? What was the quality of his judgment at that time when he could have spoken truth directly to power? With time, he may have experienced an epiphany, I don’t know. But he certainly would like us to believe that the light switch has been turned on in his head. Too bad it wasn’t switched on much sooner when his words and advocacies could have mattered most – saved lives and our dear country, maybe.
The former Taylor National Security Adviser in his exuberance made another one of his many evidence-free exaggerations when he posited that the mere announcement of a “naked quest for political power is disrespectful, is insensitive, and it testifies to the exercise of inferior judgment unassociated with responsible presidential leadership.” Fair enough. His opinion! But can this fellow, on the strength of a single incident of lapse judgment, as he claims, label the president as someone having inferior judgment? Well, if we were to apply the same standards to him and the presidency he advised, would it not be fair to characterize them as bunch of dim-witted, unpatriotic, narcissistic posse for several inferior judgments: as when they pursued an ill-advised April 6,1996 and September 18, 1998 fighting in Monrovia for purely selfish reasons – two clearly avoidable wars that caused the unwarranted deaths of thousands of Liberians; for appointing high school dropouts to positions (LPRC and FDA. among others) that require one to have the ability to think logically; the staged murder of perceived enemies (Sam Dokie and family) and the killing of former war-time enemies and labeling them “armed robbers?” The misappropriation and misapplication of the national resources; and the debasement of all sort of values in our society by their mere conduct? And I can go on and on.
Mr. Taylor National Security Adviser, this is what lapse in judgment really is; and you actively participated or chose to remain silent on these matters. Yet, you have the nerve to question the judgment of others for a statement made purely for political reasons, however unfair, and use same as a political fodder to launch your campaign to wrest control of the “opposition alliance,” I am told. If that is the only lapse in judgment you see is this president, and I don’t quite agree, then I can live with it without qualms. Because like you and I, in what is now a democracy, we can engage in these mental exercises -- and in your case, call the president derogatory labels -- without fear of drugged gangsters (SOD, ATU) whisking and hauling you off to jail. What you enjoy today is exactly what we wished for then, but you and the gang were too consumed by self-interest to consider the “supreme interest of the nation” – an interest you are suddenly concerned about protecting. I so wish your character and “superior judgment” had not failed you then!
Mr. Taylor National Security Adviser, where was this line of thinking when you worked in the inner circle and could have “under our especially difficult circumstances [obtaining at that time, impressed on] a responsible leader [to] endeavor further to persuade an [traumatized, abused], apathetic and skeptical nation, that what [was] quickly becoming a fading dream of a better tomorrow of shared prosperity, of genuine reconciliation, of peace and of equal opportunity for all Liberians, [was] still possible and realizable,” with the exercise of a slightly better, but less than superior judgment, the dream of peace and equal opportunity would have still been possible.
Instead, you and company ripped the heart of what was yet to be described as an “infant democracy” by the overt and tacit sanctioning of unlawful killings and harassment of advocates of all sorts by charges of the regime, the pillaging of the national coffers and the escalated erosion of values in our society. But even at that, we remained faintly hopeful, that at some point, your motley crew, particularly your chief benefactor, Charles Taylor, would stop vandalizing the presidency and give us back our rights to dream again and reclaim some of our dignity. Unfortunately, what we got was the continuous unchecked idiocy that rendered governance impossible even at your own very low governance standards. Imaging cohesion within your own incompetent setup called government was impossible -- so we dare not dream of cohesive government. At least in your case, current conditions allow for you to dream and be realistically hopeful that tomorrow can be better. That is all we asked for then; and that is what you all proved so incapable of providing. Where was the “superior judgment associated with responsible presidential leadership?”
But the poor fellow, in reckless haste to make a political point, claims, that by a single act of “poor judgment” ala the announcement of a reelections bid, it automatically becomes “difficult or impossible to govern.” Really! If this single political play is sufficient to render governance difficult and impossible for the reminder of the president’s term, then, using your own “superior judgment,” I can now appreciate why it was so difficult for you Taylor bunch of common breed to transform the infamous NPFL killing machine into a truly functioning NPP political organization capable of governing. Fear, discord and dysfunction were all that reign and you call that superior thinking? No wonder President Sirleaf is struggling so hard to clean up the mess triggered by the NPP disastrous and reckless stewardship of our nation.
This statement, however gimmicky, also presupposes that everything in Liberia is so political – so about getting reelected – so about unseating the UP government -- that folks working in all branches of government will renege on their constitutional responsibilities and compromise the “supreme interest of the nation”
What else would so moved a man to label the Legislature as a group needing to defend “what residue there may be of the hollowness and sanctity of the Legislative Dias”, and going on to contemptuously challenge them to prove to him that they have spines by saying “It is left to be seen what courage members of the Legislature will summon not simply to halt the cascading public impression with which their reputations have unfortunately come to be associated but also whether they can even muster the will to retain a modicum of self and institutional respect about what used to be popularly referred to as the First Branch of our government.” The statement implies several things. first, that the writer concurs with whatever imaginary public impression he conjures up that the body has a soiled reputation, second that it would take his bellicose tantrum to whip the body into an irrepressible frenzy to engage in the fellow’s brand of “superior thinking associated with responsible legislative posturing,” maybe akin to the one practiced by the legislature during the bankrupt NPP regime.
For a bit of comic relief, Ghankay National Security Adviser goes on blabbing about the body’s fiduciary responsibility to their “successors to not just keep the institution that is the Legislature unsoiled by the effects of negative influences but also to bequeath a respected august body, undiminished both in substance and in character, as those before them sacrificed so that they may inherit what really is the crown of our republican form of democratic government. We can only hope that they will equal the responsibilities they owe to themselves, to their heirs, and to their various constituencies.” Clearly, the Taylor National Security Adviser by the above insolent overreach passes himself off as a compromised and possessed entity in total denial of his recent past. Again, he has implied that successive legislatures, including the one from the decadent regime he served, were “bequeathed undiminished both in substance and character” to succeeding bodies. A blatant falsehood! He then goes on to lecture the body about the responsibility they owe to themselves and their various constituencies. First of all, at the very least, the legislature from the Taylor regime was corrupted and influenced negatively by the NPP regime and therefore bequeathed to their heirs, a body that was so soiled and “diminished in both substance and character” that they had to unlearn the ways of the predecessors. I am inclined, on the evidence of this posturing, to believe that the fellow may have participated in hastening the corruption of the August body just as he is attempting to do now.
Additionally, he implies that he has always “equaled his responsibilities to his constituencies;” and therefore now has earned the moral high ground to lecture others about such responsibilities. This is exactly the kind of behavior that is making reconciliation and forgiveness impossible in our poor country. Pretentious people continue to take the unsuspecting Liberian people for fools. Forgiveness is preceded by penitence, I am told. As far as I am aware, none of these folks have admitted guilt for their roles in decimating our country and sought forgiveness. Yet, with reckless abandon, they take the Liberia masses for fools – at the ready to be driven into drunken stupor to satisfy the ambition of some “latter day messiah” yet again.
Indeed, our country has a problem when people of specious reasoning and checkered background see themselves as keepers of the Liberian faith; and their ideas and deeds as ones grounded in the finest traditions of Liberian history -- when such people assume the right to tell us when and what to get excited about and what our interest is at a given time.
Here is where it really hits me in the gut when the Taylor National Security Adviser could not resist the temptation for self-interested political calculation to confess that “many of our young people are consumed by alcohol and are overtaken by drugs. We are on the doorsteps of raising a generation of beggars and incompetents who believe that it is naïve to be honest, okay to cheat, and who are obviously incapable of competing in the global market place. The above statement is so true that I almost wanted to say, Sir, you didn’t just say so, but he really did. Here is the problem though. When the kids were being drugged and used as killing machines to benefit the gang’s enterprise, did anyone exercise superior judgment in considering the kind of life they would ultimately lead; did anyone think that a social problem of unimaginable scale was in the making when these kids gave their lives so that a few misguided narcissistic folks could get rich destroying our country? Did anyone, during the reign of the rouge regime, consider the plight of these kids that were used and abused so that selfish people could live in extreme opulence in a sea of poverty? Did anyone not know that guns only train killers and killing and wars always end – did anyone consider that only schools train capable and resourceful people and not war – and that after several wasted years, learning become difficult, if not impossible for the young and undeveloped mind as the effect of war lingers?
Why should the former Taylor National Security Adviser pretend that these problems are not of their making --- what did he do for these kids that wasted and risked their lives to make he and company lord over them and our country? The convenient thing to do was kick the can down the road and hope for the opportunity to blame the malaise on somebody else. Behold the opportunity! Since when the fellow and cohorts cared about our youth and what did they do to secure their future while in the corridors of power and wealth - what are they doing today - to better their lot? What a joker!
And in one final feeble attempt to fake relevance, he reveals his true purpose by using unsubstantiated claims of vote buying to enjoin an imaginary opposition to eschew mutual suspicion and mistrust and embrace unity. He then continues with the following standard boilerplate statement:
“…that each succeeding generation need not be poorer than the next; that our governance ought not to be dominated by partisanship, favoritism and nepotism at the behest of competence; that our national appetite ought not to be fed only with short term gains and maneuvers but sustainable long term initiatives as well; that corruption ought not to infest our bureaucracies ceaselessly and cancerously, leaving our hospitals shamefully without drugs and beds, and our schools without the learning tools to improve the quality of education offered to our children; that we cannot be governed by the same laws; that our citizenships cannot apportion the same rights and privileges; that a few ought not to make more for the same work; that we ought not to support Liberian businesses and encourage Liberian entrepreneurship; that we cannot broaden the base of participation of the people in the decision-making process; and that we ought not to settle for the development of a so-called elitist class system. Enough, they said, is enough. We did not imagine that this message would have been unheeded by this administration.”
True, but whom is this chap kidding? Can the former Taylor National Security Advisor and one time chief negotiator honestly in good conscience, tell the Liberia people that the tragedy of a government he served loyally not practiced and entrenched these very vices he’s speaking against today? Was he blinded then or too self-centered to exercise “superior judgment”? O, what a difference time makes.
I will not waste my time discussing his pitch to the “opposition” because it is evidently as self-serving as it appears despite his attempt to couch it otherwise by bloviating about how tire the Liberia people are. Sir, they were tired ten years ago when you all ruled the land! Even if the Liberian people are tired now, would they really entrust their future into the hands of individuals with no track record of national stewardship worthy of emulation?
Concerning the selective used of the World Bank and other international grading on various progress measures in Liberia; I will not even dignify such publicity stunt for two reasons. There are ample metrics from the same sources that can prove otherwise. Second, the only metric that should matter is a tangible and measureable improvement in the livelihood of the people on the ground and not some statistics from an international institution. Not that they can’t be useful, but I know how sampling and inference work in statistics or can be used.
Consumed by the urge for heated propaganda, the fellow laid bare his inability for common decency and some level of truthfulness, when he could not admit that conditions in Liberia have improved considerably compared to the mess they made of it; that press freedom is protected despite the few brushes with the authority; that some semblance of order has returned to Liberia, despite the high crime rate; that the government is making strides against corruption with the activities of the GAC and Commission of Corruption despite the occasional incidents of malfeasance in pubic office; that government is making efforts to address unemployment as it facilitates private sector investment and Foreign Direct Investment, despite the current unacceptable level of unemployment in the country. And I can go on and on about pockets of progress in the country and areas of challenge too. Again, I don’t expect Taylor National Security Adviser to see any progress, for to do so would be to undermine his own selfish motive.
So, YES, Mr. Taylor National Security Adviser, character does matter. To earn the right to be listened to on an issue, you must own the issues and show a track record of having advocated these issues in the past when you were perched high and could have more effectively done so within the walls of power. And if you are reformed, you must show us how and why you experience the epiphany and perhaps teach other to make peace with the demons of their past. Don’t’ get me wrong, I believe you, like anyone else, have the right to speak about all issues that affect our common patrimony. I just don’t believe what you say no matter how plainly or colorfully you say it because I see motive, opportunism and political gamesmanship. The opposition should watch out for you.
So like you, I like to admonish the Liberian to be very weary when they see anyone who mortgaged his/her reputation for short term gain by propping up a brutal dictatorship and profiting from it pretending to be purveyor of democracy and change. The Liberian people should be very concern when they hear a former driver, despite his glaring limitations, talk about abuse of power and corruption; they should check for motive and opportunism. The Liberian people should questions any and all staged reform initiative from all politicians who claim the right to decide our interest, and hold all of them to account for their past deeds because integrity and history matter and should matter in our national discourse. I have come to know that opportunists and hustlers are just who they are and will be just who they are, baring some divine intervention, which is rare in this day and age.
I caution Liberians to be very weary of blowhards coming yet again to manipulate our social division to divert our attention from our common interest. Our differences will always remain, but they can be managed within the context of our social contract to help make our country – the common space we must all inhibit – a place that enables us to leverage our differences instead of making them obstacles to our progress; address our problems instead of using them to make uncontrollable demons; and making peace with ourselves and our brethren instead of living in perpetual enmity as our cynical manipulators would want us to do so that they can feed off our blood and sweat yet again. We should expose their foibles and say to them never again will we become pawns in the game of death... NEVER AGAIN, WE SAY!
Copyright Liberian Observer - All Rights Reserved. This article cannot be re-published without the expressed, written consent of the Liberian Observer. Please contact us for more information or to request publishing permission.
.JPG)
Updated: February 7, 2010 - 3:50pm
Debate, they say, is an exercise in persuasion, wit and rhetoric. And argumentation aims to elicit the consent of the audience rather than deducing consequences from given premises. But it seems that the former National Security Advisor and LPRC Managing Director under Charles Taylor’s government, who has a demonstrable penchant for political posturing, would rather go for the jugular. He seems to enjoy the embrace of this enterprise – this time, aimed at appealing to the pity of an assumed undecided, indifferent and uninformed Liberian public – feeding off their frustration and exploiting their ignorance, where possible. Ah ha, that’s politics Liberian style.
He often does so by selectively referencing and ignoring facts, drawing pseudo analogies and generalizations, engaging in circular arguments and unnecessarily cleaving to complex questions in a rather pedestrian and pedantic attempt to furtively project relevance; and for good measure, some soul, however belatedly. He is joined in the latest salvo by his colleague – another confidant, a former LPRC Managing Director too, rumored to have an over-inflated ego. But who would have thought, really, that attempts at faking redemption without contrition would be in the offing so soon.
Let me state my bias right up front before we get started. I see people who have colluded in the destruction of our nation in one way or the other and made no contrition, as inauthentic tarnished entities lacking the moral authority and track record to lecture anyone about democracy and bad governance. Our deeds must match up to our words. However, I certainly appreciate when such people can have the proclivity for freedom and dreams in a protected environment. And they should participate in the national dialogue – even pontificate, as they often do, on any number of issues. We too should exercise our freedom to determine whether they have made a rationally developed argument to persuade us or chosen the recourse to propaganda – one-side, tendentious appeals, often to the passions rather than reason.
Before setting forth to scrutinize the former Taylor National Security Adviser rabble-rousing, relevance-seeking and unintended avowal, let me give the fellow his credit for a number of assertions he made in his “response.”
First, the brother gets praise for making a good emotional appeal that got twisted when he veered into the ethical sphere. That is, if you accept, as he conveniently projects, that he has heretofore not played any major role in wasting our land. Whether those colorful sentences mean much to the enlightened mind is totally another matter.
Second, he admits on more than three occasions that Liberia currently has a “fledging democracy” – quite an admission considering what they offered poor Liberia during their reign of terror.
Third, by exercising his right to free speech, however recklessly peevish at times, he implicitly admits that free speech is protected in current day Liberia.
Fourth, he correctly argues that “the employment of state resources and the seizure of entire government to merely further an individual’s political aspiration would have been wrong then and is wrong now” (what a revelation).
Fifth, he insists that the sheer force of democracy can force leaders to bend to the will of the people (no wonder they were afraid to let it flourish under their reign). That, to me, means as long as we all agree that we now have something in the making called democracy, however fledging, we can have hope of exercising our power through the ballot box and forcing our leaders to bend to our will.
Sixth, that we have emerged from dark days which we must guard against returning to. (Who off the lights?) Seventh, that CHARACTER matters when he writes that ”After all, some have argued - albeit disingenuously – that promises are made to be broken, even if they testify to the character of the leader.”
So before I am attacked for ad hominen, let me simply state that I will be taking Taylor National Security Advisor up on his assertion that character matters because I am in total agreement. As for the other former LPRC Managing director, I will just ignore him for now and let him enjoy his moment of fame – however diminished. He had little to offer beyond mouthing that the president was “out of order”. So here we go.
As an opening act, the Taylor National Security Adviser claims that “No President, since the foundation of our Republic, has so diminished and disfigured the Office of President and desecrated the sacredness of the duties thereunto assigned like President/Candidate Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf” I am assuming the fellow was so consumed and mesmerized by his own sense of self-worth when he made this patently FALSE statement to begin unraveling his own motive – something he would later reveal in his closing comments. Regardless of the real or perceived short-comings of the Sirleaf government – and there are many – the defilement of the Liberian presidency by the fellow’s benefactor, Charles Taylor, is unmatched in every respect in our recent history.
The fellow further argues, and correctly so, that “the employment of state resources and the sequestration of the entire government to merely further an individual’s political aspiration would have been wrong then and is certainly wrong now.” Who would have thought! I totally agree. But the problem is that his assertion is coming many years late after his principle had been yanked off the backs of the Liberian people for an eventual date with destiny. Where was this new “guardian of Liberian democracy” when he allegedly colluded with his benefactors to used state resources for purposes that accrued no benefit to the Liberian people -- when his benefactors used state resources to butcher, unlawfully incarcerate and rain insults on peaceful citizens for having the audacity to dissent and demand adherence to the tenets of democracy? Why didn’t he speak up when his benefactor used the bully pulpit to call opponents “roaches and rats” and used executive mansion stationary paid for by taxpayers, to write a press release declaring an “independent newspaper” a “dissident paper” for simply having the nerve to be objective and true to creed?
All through it, the “now-reformed” former confidant acquiesced and benefitted, immensely too, I am told, without ever speaking out for the values he claims to espouse today. That is what debasement, or should I say, assisted-debasement of a presidency actually is. And the Liberian people know ruination of a presidency when they see one – it looks like the presidency the fellow served as a National Security Adviser – the Taylor presidency, if you can even call it that.
So despite the unsubstantiated pedestrian attempt to label the announcement of a reelection bid during a state of a nation address as debasement of a presidency, however self-serving that announcement may have been, it pales in comparison to the adulteration of the presidency exacted by the fellow and his colleagues. Where was his character then? What was the quality of his judgment at that time when he could have spoken truth directly to power? With time, he may have experienced an epiphany, I don’t know. But he certainly would like us to believe that the light switch has been turned on in his head. Too bad it wasn’t switched on much sooner when his words and advocacies could have mattered most – saved lives and our dear country, maybe.
The former Taylor National Security Adviser in his exuberance made another one of his many evidence-free exaggerations when he posited that the mere announcement of a “naked quest for political power is disrespectful, is insensitive, and it testifies to the exercise of inferior judgment unassociated with responsible presidential leadership.” Fair enough. His opinion! But can this fellow, on the strength of a single incident of lapse judgment, as he claims, label the president as someone having inferior judgment? Well, if we were to apply the same standards to him and the presidency he advised, would it not be fair to characterize them as bunch of dim-witted, unpatriotic, narcissistic posse for several inferior judgments: as when they pursued an ill-advised April 6,1996 and September 18, 1998 fighting in Monrovia for purely selfish reasons – two clearly avoidable wars that caused the unwarranted deaths of thousands of Liberians; for appointing high school dropouts to positions (LPRC and FDA. among others) that require one to have the ability to think logically; the staged murder of perceived enemies (Sam Dokie and family) and the killing of former war-time enemies and labeling them “armed robbers?” The misappropriation and misapplication of the national resources; and the debasement of all sort of values in our society by their mere conduct? And I can go on and on.
Mr. Taylor National Security Adviser, this is what lapse in judgment really is; and you actively participated or chose to remain silent on these matters. Yet, you have the nerve to question the judgment of others for a statement made purely for political reasons, however unfair, and use same as a political fodder to launch your campaign to wrest control of the “opposition alliance,” I am told. If that is the only lapse in judgment you see is this president, and I don’t quite agree, then I can live with it without qualms. Because like you and I, in what is now a democracy, we can engage in these mental exercises -- and in your case, call the president derogatory labels -- without fear of drugged gangsters (SOD, ATU) whisking and hauling you off to jail. What you enjoy today is exactly what we wished for then, but you and the gang were too consumed by self-interest to consider the “supreme interest of the nation” – an interest you are suddenly concerned about protecting. I so wish your character and “superior judgment” had not failed you then!
Mr. Taylor National Security Adviser, where was this line of thinking when you worked in the inner circle and could have “under our especially difficult circumstances [obtaining at that time, impressed on] a responsible leader [to] endeavor further to persuade an [traumatized, abused], apathetic and skeptical nation, that what [was] quickly becoming a fading dream of a better tomorrow of shared prosperity, of genuine reconciliation, of peace and of equal opportunity for all Liberians, [was] still possible and realizable,” with the exercise of a slightly better, but less than superior judgment, the dream of peace and equal opportunity would have still been possible.
Instead, you and company ripped the heart of what was yet to be described as an “infant democracy” by the overt and tacit sanctioning of unlawful killings and harassment of advocates of all sorts by charges of the regime, the pillaging of the national coffers and the escalated erosion of values in our society. But even at that, we remained faintly hopeful, that at some point, your motley crew, particularly your chief benefactor, Charles Taylor, would stop vandalizing the presidency and give us back our rights to dream again and reclaim some of our dignity. Unfortunately, what we got was the continuous unchecked idiocy that rendered governance impossible even at your own very low governance standards. Imaging cohesion within your own incompetent setup called government was impossible -- so we dare not dream of cohesive government. At least in your case, current conditions allow for you to dream and be realistically hopeful that tomorrow can be better. That is all we asked for then; and that is what you all proved so incapable of providing. Where was the “superior judgment associated with responsible presidential leadership?”
But the poor fellow, in reckless haste to make a political point, claims, that by a single act of “poor judgment” ala the announcement of a reelections bid, it automatically becomes “difficult or impossible to govern.” Really! If this single political play is sufficient to render governance difficult and impossible for the reminder of the president’s term, then, using your own “superior judgment,” I can now appreciate why it was so difficult for you Taylor bunch of common breed to transform the infamous NPFL killing machine into a truly functioning NPP political organization capable of governing. Fear, discord and dysfunction were all that reign and you call that superior thinking? No wonder President Sirleaf is struggling so hard to clean up the mess triggered by the NPP disastrous and reckless stewardship of our nation.
This statement, however gimmicky, also presupposes that everything in Liberia is so political – so about getting reelected – so about unseating the UP government -- that folks working in all branches of government will renege on their constitutional responsibilities and compromise the “supreme interest of the nation”
What else would so moved a man to label the Legislature as a group needing to defend “what residue there may be of the hollowness and sanctity of the Legislative Dias”, and going on to contemptuously challenge them to prove to him that they have spines by saying “It is left to be seen what courage members of the Legislature will summon not simply to halt the cascading public impression with which their reputations have unfortunately come to be associated but also whether they can even muster the will to retain a modicum of self and institutional respect about what used to be popularly referred to as the First Branch of our government.” The statement implies several things. first, that the writer concurs with whatever imaginary public impression he conjures up that the body has a soiled reputation, second that it would take his bellicose tantrum to whip the body into an irrepressible frenzy to engage in the fellow’s brand of “superior thinking associated with responsible legislative posturing,” maybe akin to the one practiced by the legislature during the bankrupt NPP regime.
For a bit of comic relief, Ghankay National Security Adviser goes on blabbing about the body’s fiduciary responsibility to their “successors to not just keep the institution that is the Legislature unsoiled by the effects of negative influences but also to bequeath a respected august body, undiminished both in substance and in character, as those before them sacrificed so that they may inherit what really is the crown of our republican form of democratic government. We can only hope that they will equal the responsibilities they owe to themselves, to their heirs, and to their various constituencies.” Clearly, the Taylor National Security Adviser by the above insolent overreach passes himself off as a compromised and possessed entity in total denial of his recent past. Again, he has implied that successive legislatures, including the one from the decadent regime he served, were “bequeathed undiminished both in substance and character” to succeeding bodies. A blatant falsehood! He then goes on to lecture the body about the responsibility they owe to themselves and their various constituencies. First of all, at the very least, the legislature from the Taylor regime was corrupted and influenced negatively by the NPP regime and therefore bequeathed to their heirs, a body that was so soiled and “diminished in both substance and character” that they had to unlearn the ways of the predecessors. I am inclined, on the evidence of this posturing, to believe that the fellow may have participated in hastening the corruption of the August body just as he is attempting to do now.
Additionally, he implies that he has always “equaled his responsibilities to his constituencies;” and therefore now has earned the moral high ground to lecture others about such responsibilities. This is exactly the kind of behavior that is making reconciliation and forgiveness impossible in our poor country. Pretentious people continue to take the unsuspecting Liberian people for fools. Forgiveness is preceded by penitence, I am told. As far as I am aware, none of these folks have admitted guilt for their roles in decimating our country and sought forgiveness. Yet, with reckless abandon, they take the Liberia masses for fools – at the ready to be driven into drunken stupor to satisfy the ambition of some “latter day messiah” yet again.
Indeed, our country has a problem when people of specious reasoning and checkered background see themselves as keepers of the Liberian faith; and their ideas and deeds as ones grounded in the finest traditions of Liberian history -- when such people assume the right to tell us when and what to get excited about and what our interest is at a given time.
Here is where it really hits me in the gut when the Taylor National Security Adviser could not resist the temptation for self-interested political calculation to confess that “many of our young people are consumed by alcohol and are overtaken by drugs. We are on the doorsteps of raising a generation of beggars and incompetents who believe that it is naïve to be honest, okay to cheat, and who are obviously incapable of competing in the global market place. The above statement is so true that I almost wanted to say, Sir, you didn’t just say so, but he really did. Here is the problem though. When the kids were being drugged and used as killing machines to benefit the gang’s enterprise, did anyone exercise superior judgment in considering the kind of life they would ultimately lead; did anyone think that a social problem of unimaginable scale was in the making when these kids gave their lives so that a few misguided narcissistic folks could get rich destroying our country? Did anyone, during the reign of the rouge regime, consider the plight of these kids that were used and abused so that selfish people could live in extreme opulence in a sea of poverty? Did anyone not know that guns only train killers and killing and wars always end – did anyone consider that only schools train capable and resourceful people and not war – and that after several wasted years, learning become difficult, if not impossible for the young and undeveloped mind as the effect of war lingers?
Why should the former Taylor National Security Adviser pretend that these problems are not of their making --- what did he do for these kids that wasted and risked their lives to make he and company lord over them and our country? The convenient thing to do was kick the can down the road and hope for the opportunity to blame the malaise on somebody else. Behold the opportunity! Since when the fellow and cohorts cared about our youth and what did they do to secure their future while in the corridors of power and wealth - what are they doing today - to better their lot? What a joker!
And in one final feeble attempt to fake relevance, he reveals his true purpose by using unsubstantiated claims of vote buying to enjoin an imaginary opposition to eschew mutual suspicion and mistrust and embrace unity. He then continues with the following standard boilerplate statement:
“…that each succeeding generation need not be poorer than the next; that our governance ought not to be dominated by partisanship, favoritism and nepotism at the behest of competence; that our national appetite ought not to be fed only with short term gains and maneuvers but sustainable long term initiatives as well; that corruption ought not to infest our bureaucracies ceaselessly and cancerously, leaving our hospitals shamefully without drugs and beds, and our schools without the learning tools to improve the quality of education offered to our children; that we cannot be governed by the same laws; that our citizenships cannot apportion the same rights and privileges; that a few ought not to make more for the same work; that we ought not to support Liberian businesses and encourage Liberian entrepreneurship; that we cannot broaden the base of participation of the people in the decision-making process; and that we ought not to settle for the development of a so-called elitist class system. Enough, they said, is enough. We did not imagine that this message would have been unheeded by this administration.”
True, but whom is this chap kidding? Can the former Taylor National Security Advisor and one time chief negotiator honestly in good conscience, tell the Liberia people that the tragedy of a government he served loyally not practiced and entrenched these very vices he’s speaking against today? Was he blinded then or too self-centered to exercise “superior judgment”? O, what a difference time makes.
I will not waste my time discussing his pitch to the “opposition” because it is evidently as self-serving as it appears despite his attempt to couch it otherwise by bloviating about how tire the Liberia people are. Sir, they were tired ten years ago when you all ruled the land! Even if the Liberian people are tired now, would they really entrust their future into the hands of individuals with no track record of national stewardship worthy of emulation?
Concerning the selective used of the World Bank and other international grading on various progress measures in Liberia; I will not even dignify such publicity stunt for two reasons. There are ample metrics from the same sources that can prove otherwise. Second, the only metric that should matter is a tangible and measureable improvement in the livelihood of the people on the ground and not some statistics from an international institution. Not that they can’t be useful, but I know how sampling and inference work in statistics or can be used.
Consumed by the urge for heated propaganda, the fellow laid bare his inability for common decency and some level of truthfulness, when he could not admit that conditions in Liberia have improved considerably compared to the mess they made of it; that press freedom is protected despite the few brushes with the authority; that some semblance of order has returned to Liberia, despite the high crime rate; that the government is making strides against corruption with the activities of the GAC and Commission of Corruption despite the occasional incidents of malfeasance in pubic office; that government is making efforts to address unemployment as it facilitates private sector investment and Foreign Direct Investment, despite the current unacceptable level of unemployment in the country. And I can go on and on about pockets of progress in the country and areas of challenge too. Again, I don’t expect Taylor National Security Adviser to see any progress, for to do so would be to undermine his own selfish motive.
So, YES, Mr. Taylor National Security Adviser, character does matter. To earn the right to be listened to on an issue, you must own the issues and show a track record of having advocated these issues in the past when you were perched high and could have more effectively done so within the walls of power. And if you are reformed, you must show us how and why you experience the epiphany and perhaps teach other to make peace with the demons of their past. Don’t’ get me wrong, I believe you, like anyone else, have the right to speak about all issues that affect our common patrimony. I just don’t believe what you say no matter how plainly or colorfully you say it because I see motive, opportunism and political gamesmanship. The opposition should watch out for you.
So like you, I like to admonish the Liberian to be very weary when they see anyone who mortgaged his/her reputation for short term gain by propping up a brutal dictatorship and profiting from it pretending to be purveyor of democracy and change. The Liberian people should be very concern when they hear a former driver, despite his glaring limitations, talk about abuse of power and corruption; they should check for motive and opportunism. The Liberian people should questions any and all staged reform initiative from all politicians who claim the right to decide our interest, and hold all of them to account for their past deeds because integrity and history matter and should matter in our national discourse. I have come to know that opportunists and hustlers are just who they are and will be just who they are, baring some divine intervention, which is rare in this day and age.
I caution Liberians to be very weary of blowhards coming yet again to manipulate our social division to divert our attention from our common interest. Our differences will always remain, but they can be managed within the context of our social contract to help make our country – the common space we must all inhibit – a place that enables us to leverage our differences instead of making them obstacles to our progress; address our problems instead of using them to make uncontrollable demons; and making peace with ourselves and our brethren instead of living in perpetual enmity as our cynical manipulators would want us to do so that they can feed off our blood and sweat yet again. We should expose their foibles and say to them never again will we become pawns in the game of death... NEVER AGAIN, WE SAY!
Nyekeh Forkpa
Providence, Rhode Island, USA
nyekeh33@yahoo.com