Dancing on the ropes: pretences and a unique genre of ignorance—A reply to Samuel D. Twe’s “Red lines through Dr. H. B. Fahnbulleh, Jr.’s chatter: Debunking sophism 11.”

By H. Boima Fahnbuleh, Jr.

February 2005

The very rough contours of our recent history have forced us to constantly engage historical vagrants who want to pretend that they understand the trajectory of the historical march and are in a better position to mount the leadership of our people’s heroic struggle. What these loud mouth chest beaters do not understand and will not comprehend is that it is highly presumptuous to write a history of which you know very little and in which you have never participated. This arrogance borders not on mere ignorance but also congealed stupidity.

Frankly, we can deal with insults and tantrums from these political pygmies but what we can never accept is the childish posturing that somehow they know it all and are the new social forces that will alter the direction of our history. Here, we have boastful and ignorant juveniles throwing out empty words and beating their chests with such empty bravado that one is forced to look for a comparable situation in a circus where eunuchs chase maidens.

To begin, I doubt that the charlatan Samuel D. Twe compiled this compendium of inanities and vulgar malapropism. This piece I believe was written by those two Macbethan freaks of nature who are au courant with the internal crisis in MOJA and appended the name of this comical mickey mouse to spew such outlandish rubbish against me.

I am convinced that this Samuel D. Twe is an imposter, a guinea fowl brain of a pretender who has allowed his name to be affixed to a trashy regurgitation of the two spineless rascals who are known to me because I know that they are joined together indeceit, treachery, lies and conjugal bliss. Howbeit, since this political nonentity wants to play the role of a revolutionary interpreter of our history, I will address myself to him and expose his political barrenness and historical ignorance. This is necessary as it would be a disservice to future generations to allow quacks and yellow belly flunkeys to pollute the pages of our recent history with lies and guesswork.

Men like Samuel D. Twe are the rotten layers thrown out by the old and rotten society who want to reinvent themselves by hiding behind a simple footballer who understands nothing of the sacrifices and commitment of men and women who have devoted their lives to the struggle for social justice in our country. The Samuel D. Twes of this world are the incorrigible carpet beggars who shout the loudest about the abandonment of principles because they never had any and are too cowardly to fight for causes instead are content to hide behind the ignorance of a man who plays with his feet instead of his mind.

When dealing with wiseacre like Samuel  D. Twe—or the ghost writers if one wants to  deal in comedy—one is treated to the theater of the absurd: a character saturated with illogicalities who wants to dabble in logic; a comedian who is bereft of historical understanding but pretends that he understands historical materialism; a prolific borrower of concepts which he does not understand but tries to give the impression that he is knowledgeable about philosophical matters; a pitiful dwarf masquerading as a giant on the historical stage; and finally, a mere hustler hiding behind the popularity of a footballer to climb to heights that he can never reach on his own.

Herein lies the tragedy of our Republic—a Republic that lies naked like a battered whore at the mercy of political tricksters like Samuel D. Twe  and the many racketeers who fancy a go at her. This is why we struggle, now under different circumstances, but with the same determination to rescue our Republic from the greedy rascals who want to inherit what they have not struggled and suffered for. Samuel D. Twe and his hidden flunkeys must know that we have taken a vow before history and men to struggle for justice, dignity and the advancement of our people, even to the ‘last drop of our revolutionary blood’.

The habitual flunky accuses me of some of the most ridiculous charges that are so vapid that even an onlookerof our recent history will not conjure. This is what happens with scoundrels who are blinded by ignorance and hate that they unashamedly fabricate fables  to satisfy an audience which is searching  for explanations to the tragic occurrences in our recent history. One would have thought that Samuel D. Twe—or the ghost writers—would develop a modicum of decency when dealing with historical tragedies but it is obvious that we are dealing with slimy storytellers  who search not for truths but for comical rendition to entertain the gullible. As we are not comedians like Samuel D. Tweand his shabby handlers, we will explain history as we saw it, participated in it and understood its contours and contradictions.

Before I start, it is on the matter of contradictions that I realized this Samuel D. Twe was a pitiful neophyte playing at being a student of dialectics. This ignorant sponger does not know that contradictions are inherent in most phenomena but they do not necessarily alter the shape of those phenomena neither are they antagonistic to each other in their evolution. For example, feudalism existed within the bowels of slavery as capitalism existed within the belly of feudalism and as imperialism—incipient globalization—existed within the guts of capitalism.

These are all antipodes, contradictory phenomena but their interaction never brings qualitative changes.  Here is the Hegelian dialectics that your minders read about scantily at Legon University but did not grasp and which they forced you to spew out like a toddler chocking on tasteless morsels. You accused me of being a bundle of contradictions without comprehending the meaning of contradictions in the Hegelian context. Your elementary assertion of thesis, antithesis and synthesis says nothing about the intrinsic ingredients of contradictions that make them historical assertions.

It is not mere contradictions that hasten or delay societal transformation as you upstarts  would like to believe but the unity and struggle of opposites. To argue that Fahnbulleh is full of contradictions  and therefore he helped damage a smooth historical evolution is to say that you know very little of the unity and struggle of opposites and why it was necessary for Fahnbulleh to struggle with certain social forces at different times in our history although he condemned them at various stages.

Thus, it is not contradictions—thesis, antithesis and synthesis—that you must study and understand, but the concept of the unity and struggle of opposites and how their interaction lead to a higher form of existence without the putrid leftover of the old forms. In undergraduate school, I learned somewhere that Marx turned Hegel on his head, transiting from mere idealism to historical materialism.  Here, I am not turning you and your handlers on your heads but forcing you all to sit on your backsides and understand simple reasoning. This is the most I can do for you empty braggarts and if after all this you all are impervious to logic, then we can only wait for your rotten corpses to give up the smelly gas from your ignorant brains after you perish.

The sponger Samuel D. Twe argues that his regurgitated rubbish “then sets the final stage for purifying the intellectual air by disinfecting emerging minds of his intellectual stench, denying the perch from which he has purveyed the ceaseless chatter of grapevine hearsay dressed as analysis.” And how does this simpleton go about this? By purveying to the uninitiated lies and fables that he got from his handlers and the other scoundrels who see history as a mechanical contraption where men and women are simple cogs in a machine of fortune telling.

This is where we see the nonsensical rewriting of history to suit an ignorant puppet and his equally blind followers.  My so-called “intellectual stench” derives from praxis that comes with my participation in the recent history of our country. I get my interpretation from the mixture of blood, sweat, fear and apprehension of courageous men and women who fought when cowards like you hid to protect your miserable lives.

My understanding of courage and the duty to our Republic come from the prison cells of South Beach and the Post Stockade at BTC where young men and women, just understanding and appreciating life, were ready to give up everything for the honour and glory of the homeland. This is patriotism! This is dignity!! This is the charged battery of nationalism that can never be made flat by idiots like you who pontificate without having the guts to put your wretched lives on the line for sacred causes.

What analysis can you give when you do not even understand simple contradictions? Who will follow a cowardly braggart like you who stands for nothing because you believe in nothing? Your goal is to get into the cookies jar behind a simple fellow who does not understand what political imbeciles like you are made of. He has no understanding of how historical tricksters like you are wont to gatecrash the historical itinerary to feather your nests and dance to the banks! Tomorrow, you and the other modern day pirates will exploit his ignorance to accumulate with such reckless speed that the people will see through the historical scam before long—this is if you all ever get the chance to ride this political donkey to power! For the sake of our Republic and Africa, we hope this never come to pass!

We are constantly treated to the vulgar invectives that make lumpen elements think they are very smart and courageous. Listen to this daft individual dabbling in crude verbosity without saying anything of substance. In reference to me he avers: “He waste considerable energy and space in attacking my person, spending scant efforts on adequately addressing the exposed contradictions, which have now drawn his venomous ire. This man is nothing more than an insult-pelting scalawag zonked in a stupor of self-importance.”

Here is someone I do not know, have never given any thought to his pathetic being and doubt whether he is the writer of the garbage he purveys as historical truths, asserting that I did not address issues. The issues I addressed are the ones you will never understand as you have no knowledge of the occurrences that you pontificate about. I do not deal with shallowness and empty bravado, and frankly, my contempt is heightened by the realization that you are being used because of a very narcissistic peculiarity.  This is indeed sad for a young man who claims to be in graduate school. Words carry weight depending on the source from whence they come.  A buffoon spewing out inanities is a laughable display of comedy. Wisdom is respected because it comes from a mind that meditates and reflects.  It is obvious that you do not fall in the latter category!

As for self-importance, it is alien to my person as a revolutionary. I struggle, not because I am in need  but because I have the conviction that the people have the right to live as human beings and bequeath to their children a Republic of honour and dignity. No one who believes in putting his life on the line for sacred causes is inflated with “self-importance.” It is nonentities like you who dream of wealth, powerand influence behind the back of a popular footballer who are conscious of being self-important.  This is the only way some of you can undo your wretched existence and pretend to be what you are not—selfless revolutionaries. We know your kind in the recent history of our country and thus we have developed contempt for morons like you.

To interpret history, you must first understand it and I see that you lack the basic understanding of a history of which you were only a by-stander, if you were standing at all! We know your kind who genuflects with the wind and beat their chests when danger passes. It is the same old story in prehistory where cowards and reprobates become courageous after events. You want to know what happened in our history?You have not yet developed the intellectual tools to decipher the occurrences but yet you think that you have the weight to interpret for the younger generation what transpired  in this pitiful land of ours?

Where did you get such arrogance from? It can only be from those ghost writers who are noted for publishing vicious lies on the Perspective website under false names. Take it from me: we know them and have interacted with them over the years.  We know what they are capable of and have been able to neutralize their treachery in certain countries in West Africa. They will use shallow scoundrels like you to take their iron from the fire. You are being conned Samuel D. Tweand too stupid to understand this simple truth and yet you have the audacity to want to interpret our history? What mockery!

The man spews his outrageous venom in the form of innocence: “Our people need serious answers to the many puzzles of our history. They are asking the hard questions. What went wrong in Liberia? Why did more than 300,000 people have to die? Who are those responsible for this mayhem? Who can our people trust to interpret our history? Are they to trust “historians” and “pundits” who themselves contributed to our tragedy?  Who can they entrust with the future leadership of the country given all that has happened?” Here, in a nutshell is the abundance of that pervasive ignorance which these clowns spew with reckless abandon. You do not know what went wrong in our country? Have you not read the horrifying history of the subjugation and pacification of the hinterland? Has no one told you of the callous massacre of the heroic chiefs and elders throughout our country in past centuries? Are you so dumb that you do not know that these historical grievances were never resolved amicably but swept under the carpet of ignorance and pretense and thus allowed to fester for centuries? What stupidity is this that assumes historical tragedies are easily forgotten simply because people wish them away? How much of this history do you know Samuel D. Twethat the people must reject “historians” and “pundits” who allegedly “contributed to our tragedy?” Can you imagine this little roach trying to interpret history from behind the muddy boots of the footballer?

The people are better off in history when they entrust leadership to those who have a history of struggling for noble causes. It is always incumbent upon the makers of history to explain to the people the trajectory of the march and not leave such monumental undertaking to rascals and political nonentities who are totally bereft of historical understanding and downright dishonest about the facts.  This man who beats his chest in self-adulation wants us to believe that his myopic understanding of Liberia is enough for his kind to be given power.

He feels that he can better contribute to the advancement of the people when he has not given serious thought to the tragedy of our recent history. On this score, I do not have to educate Samuel D. Twe. I would suggest you ask the undergraduate students in history at the University of Liberia and Cuttington University to help you out.  But understand one simple fact: the “historians” and “pundits” who you and other guinea fowl  brains assume were “responsible for this tragedy” were themselves hapless victims of a history that E.W. Blyden and other great minds warned us about.

This was a history of subjects and objects; of masters and servants; of makers of history— who wrote about it and stuffed it down your gluttonous throats—  and “hewers of woods and drawers of water” who suffered the indignities, humiliation and bestiality because they were a conquered people.  It would do you good to read about the tragedy of colonial imposition, not from academic texts which may confuse your little brain but from a brilliant novelist called James Ngugi.  His trilogy of subjugation and resistance of the Kenyan peasants and their subsequent betrayal  by the new African elite should help clarify some simple historical truths about the Liberian dilemma.

Do you know why the people of South Africa entrusted power to the African National Congress? Do you have the vaguest idea of why the people of Mozambique gave power to FRELIMO? Do you understand or are you capable of understanding why the people of Angola entrusted power to the MPLA against the background of the deadly power play by certain big powers? Do you know how many perished in these wars of African resistance?

Can you conceive of a situation where these gallant African people, understanding and appreciating the sacrifices and struggles of the liberation fighters would have abandoned them and entrusted power to yellow bellies?  Revolutionary struggles, especially those intertwined with the class struggle, educate the people to understand simple historical truths: patriots and nationalists are those who put their lives on the line in the fight for freedom, justice and dignity. It is always about those who understand history from the position of praxis and not empty wind bags who spew clichés borrowed from abstract theorizing! This is where we leave you and your kind: in the gutter of your silly imagination and the bosoms of your puppet masters!

On the Taylor issue, this wretched rodent called Samuel D. Twe lies through his filthy teeth and spews lies and gossip that make us question his sanity. Here is what happens when you are a mere onlooker to historical occurrences and then bask in the gossip of historical peeping toms. He writes with such asinine gusto that: “the truth is because Fahnbulleh and others hobnobbed with Taylor at the outset of his NPFL insurrection, they like to imagine everyone else did.

In order to conceal all possible connections with Taylor, he feigns an extreme hate for the rebel, engaging in a Taylor bashing that is merely a façade.”  And this dullard thinks he understands our motive?  Let me tell you something that you can never imagine in your confusion. I can never hate Charles Taylor. He was my friend and remains my friend even after many disagreements. As a matter of fact, I do not hate individuals but ideas. I am the first to acknowledge that circumstances in life alter the perception of men and women. I admire Taylor for his courage, his determination and stamina in confronting a ruthless tyranny.  His bravado was not empty and childish like this smelly mouse called Samuel D. Twe who has crept out of the sewage and now wants to interpret history of which he knows very little.

My critique of Taylor was done because I honestly felt that he was in too much of a hurry and had not trained cadres to control the appetite and anger of the fighters under him. The lumpen elements are known for indiscipline and unleashing them on a frightened people would spell disaster. I told him this to his face in Tripoli and warned him against adventurism.

However, I was never a part of his NPFL outfit. There are fighters who are alive and can vouch for this fact. One of such men is Prince Y. Johnson. I have heard about him but have never met him. He knows the facts and I am sure at the right time he will divulge the truth. I am not worry about the verdict of history because I participated against the tyranny with a clear conscience but never as a part of Taylor’s group—neither at the beginning nor at the end.

Had I been with Charles Taylor, I would have informed the Liberian people. Again, my disagreement with this courageous individual came about from my resentment of the ideas he espoused  and the attitude he adopted when implementing those ideas.  In history, we encounter different personalities; some with strange ideas that we detest; others with no ideas at all but with the arrogance  that they know it all when in reality they know and understand nothing! For the latter, I only have contempt as I am demonstrating here as regards this scumbag called Samuel D. Twe.

I could write about getting to know Charles Taylor; the courage he demonstrated during the early days of the PRC; his infectious humour; and his kindheartedness to friends he trusted. I can write about his ordeal, his saga in life, but that would be carrying me away from dealing with this little imposter called Samuel D. Twe. I will write about Taylor one day and it will be the story of a very courageous man who faced death many times and survived; who faced imprisonment because of his reckless courage and adventurism; and who did not understand that when dealing with great powers one must rely on conscious and courageous people to survive.

This is the lesson of history! It is never about the strong individual and his ability to survive under difficult circumstances, but about the consciousness of the people and their understanding of historical truths and how their existence is tied up with the honour and dignity of their Republic.  The leader who teaches them about this and endures with them the hardship and privation in the process of transformation earns their trust and their willingness to see that he survives with them and for them.  This is where the minds of men play such a key role in history.

A leader must be a reader and student of history; he must teach his people from his understanding of their history and make them comprehend that the struggle is for themselves and their children and not for the glorification of an individual or a class. There have been two men in our contemporary history who had the opportunity to change Liberia totally for the betterment of the mass of the people, breaking down old structures and institutions, and casting aside taboos that hold the people in superstition and material poverty.

The two were Samuel Doe and Charles Taylor. They both failed not so much because of their personalities but because of the system they inherited and which they did not understand.  A system like ours needs men and women who understand the stranglehold and taboos on the minds of the people; men and women who then develop the stamina and courage to change it for the better. This was the tragedy of these two men. They were practical men with limited ideas of social transformation. They failed, because in history, ideas are the catalysts that spur men on to unimaginable heights. They are the propelling forces that drive the people to super human efforts. Without ideas to move history, the people can only loiter in the temporary chamberof mere existence and not in the arena of historical and enduring living.

But again to the issue under discussion! It would seem that this Samuel  D. Twe has a penchant for turning serious business into idiocy. In case this clown is fond of comedy, he must be told that he has come to the wrong person. I do not stomach fools gladly! On my interaction with Charles Taylor in Libya, this jerk of a comedian avers: “Very good! You were thrown out of Libya because of a bandit.  Could you not develop the hate at the moment and undermine the bandit?” How does one undermine a process that is supported by powerful international actors when one does not have the power to confront and defeat these powerful actors? But wait a minute. This dullard called Samuel D. Twehas his own formula. He says: “You left Libya knowing Taylor was an ‘adventurer’ who had ‘openly expressed contempt for the masses. What did you do then? Did you inform Samuel Doe or some others that an adventurer was preparing to loot and pillage the country.”

Imagine such rubbish! I, as a revolutionary, informing the tyranny that people were about to attack it! Samuel D. Twe, I am convinced you are not only stupid and naïve but grossly dishonest. For your information, revolutionaries do not betray those who adopt different methods to deal with a tyranny. Informing Samuel Doe? Who do you think I am– a hustler like you? Read our history and try for once to understand. The historical tide was against Samuel Doe after the rigged elections.

I would have been a shameless counter-revolutionary to inform on courageous brothers who had dedicated themselves to smashing a ruthless tyranny. My duty was to stop them from taking state power by pre-empting them with our seizure of state power, but there were powerful forces that aborted this. How and by what means, we will tell at the appropriate time in history.

Samuel  D. Twe, you must disabuse your little mind that we are sellouts and frightened rabbits like you and your kind.  It is not in our nature to betray others who were struggling against tyranny and infamy! We are not yellow bellies to condemn a tyranny and then inform on those who were preparing to do battle! And because I did not undermine the fighters by betraying them to Samuel Doe you say: “this is the burden of history under which you must grunt. This is the historical albatross which you must bear.” Really? To do what you have suggested would be the typical attitude of a sewage rat like you who pretends to be what he is not.

You are no fighter for freedom and dignity. Your predisposition in life is that of a crafty conman who dabbles in intrigues and treachery. Now, if this is your interpretation of history, I certainly have no need to worry. Historical falsification is the last refuge of pitiful scoundrels. I am a revolutionary and I wear my conviction with pride. I feel no weight of history by your definition. You are not in the position and will never be in one to determine my role in the struggle of our people.

Your lies and trashy gossip are for the trashcan and not the history books.  For you and others, the innocent footballer is your instrument to power and glory. For us, we struggle, not knowing whether we will survive the ordeal; but struggle we must so that in the final analysis, other patriots move to the forefront in this battle against greedy imbeciles, historical quacks, and shameless opportunists! But let me ask you two simple questions: in case history drops the footballer out of the equation, where will you be? Can you stand on your own and fight or must you continue dancing on the ropes, a pitiful puppet waiting for the signals from your spineless masters?

The man writes of himself so glaringly when he opines that “you belong to that class of feckless bandits, who, callous in their greed for political power, have formed the shabbiest of unholy  alliances with brigands of the goriest strips, collapsing our people into mayhem. “ And exactly what are you doing behind the footballer with his assortment of drug dealers, con men and black money peddlers? Who are the people you talk about from the figment of your imagination? Samuel  D. Twe, unlike you who comes from nowhere and are now determined to push your way to significance, I could have joined the True Whig Party had I been one of your “feckless bandits , who, callous in their greed for political power, have formed the shabbiest of unholy alliances with brigands….” For your information, no man leaves certainty for uncertainty except he is irrational.  It would have been easier and less harmful for me to have joined those who were already in power. Only revolutionaries gamble with their lives in order to change bankrupt systems.  This, you will never understand as you belong to that group of modern day pirates, itching for a piece of the pie. And how do you do it? The answer is simple for unconscionable tricksters like you:  by pushing an ignorant and ill-prepared young man to take on a task far above his limited ability. You see nothing wrong with this because like all political prostitutes you dance with whosoever offers the filthy arena in which you will dance with your emasculated manhood.

On my defense of madam Sirleaf, this imp argues: “Who determines when circumstances alter? Is it Fahnbulleh? Is it Tweah? My determination might be different from his, consequences derived thereof might vary considerably.”  What rubbish is this under the guise of logic? This lousy jerk does not understand historical reality in its simplest form. It is not you Mr.Pretender nor Fahnbulleh “who determines when circumstances alter.”

It is objective reality which cannot be personalized.  It has nothing to do with your interpretation or mine but with the concrete reality as when one watches water boiling and turning into vapor. One can condemn Charles Taylor but when the reality is that the aggrieved people welcome and hail him as a “hero,” it would be foolhardy to condemn the shortsightedness of the people.

Also, one can criticize madam Sirleaf, but when the people decide that she is the right person at a particular stage in history, one becomes a raving lunatic to oppose her and allow nonentities to take over the Republic simply because there were political differences in the past. A revolutionary who does not understand tactics and strategy in the struggle for transformation is a hopeless caricature living on borrowed time!

Again and again, we tried to see where this imposter is coming from with his threadbare arguments but find it difficult to understand his reasoning. He argues that”people do not grow up from a sweeping denunciation of an entire political class and revert to celebrating this class when nothing can be proven to have changed.” And so the individual madam Sirleaf constitutes a “class” by the reckoning of this perfidious simpleton. No, Samuel D. Twe, your entire understanding of what constitutes a class is laughable. You purveyed this rubbish again and again, quoting me out of context without understanding that to interpret historical realities, one has to contextualise the events and circumstances.  With reference to my argument that “leaders of the opposition imposed Doeon the Liberian people,” the guinea fowl brain asked: “How come suddenly we do not know with certainty how and with whose help Doe came to power? “ On the imposition of Doe on the Liberian people, I was referring  to the aftermath of the rigged elections and the role of the opposition groups in helping to proscribe the two mass based parties—LPP and UPP.  There was a piece I did on the “old order” under the pen name GeddeboSie. You need to read this for your enlightenment.  On those who helped Doe to come to power, you need to study the intrigues of great powers in the third world from the tragedy in the Congo to the overthrow of Nkrumah, Modibo Keita and Surkano of Indonesia. It is possible that your little brain will comprehend the reality of the cold war at a certain stage of history. Perhaps!!

On the question of the progressives and the class formation in our country, the renegade asked rhetorically: “How can our learned professor Fahnbullehimply that progressives do not necessarily constitute a political class?” Does this Samuel D. Twe understand the definition of a class in its social-economic and political context or does he only want to impress those who do not know, including himself? Samuel D. Twe, a class can only be understood by its connection to the means and relations of production in any given society. It is not an abstract concept but firmly rooted in economic realities. This is where your shallowness protrudes like the filthy garment of a despicable tramp. Frankly, you are empty. And thus we must start from the beginning to enlighten pompous fools like you. There is nothing you can offer in terms of serious debate on the trajectory of our country’s history. You are locked in the dark recesses of ignorance, lies and pretenses. You do not understand the basic literature on social and economic categories. No wonder you think our Republic is to be kicked around!

In any historical struggle Samuel D. Twe, “one chooses one side and sticks with it.” At a very young age, I chose the side of the people and there I have always remained come hell or high water! I have never considered you Samuel D. Twe  and the other loud mouth nonentities as the embodiment of our people’s struggle. You are nothing but a cunning schemer, hiding behind jargons and reckless bravado. You are only a little script writer who vomits what has been given to him. I am constrained to inquire: which side are you on? Listen to yourself and curse the day you decided to allow your name to be used in such damnable tirades that the blood of the innocent will drown you at the appropriate time. You write as regards the execution of the thirteen officials of the True Whig Party: “Given the influence and clout Fahnbulleh and his cohorts exerted on Doe during the initial days of the PRC, had they voiced vociferous opposition to any attempt to eliminate the former officials, Doe would have obliged. During the early days of the PRC, Doe leaned heavily on progressives for direction given his initial inexperience.” Who fed you with this childish garbage?  Now you understand why I think you are singing from a hymn sheet prepared by your masters? Who gave you this distorted version of the early history of the PRC?A Samuel D. Twe grieving over the hasty execution by nervous soldiers of thirteen former officials of the True Whig Party?

What about the over 200 young  souls butchered in cold blood and dumped in mass graves after the rice demonstration? Have you no historical shame on the issue of proportionality? We lost over two hundred young men and women but you do not cry to high heavens over this senseless butchery of the people’s sons and daughters but whine like an alley cat over the execution of thirteen former officials which we tried to stop at the time. You really believe we had clout over Samuel Doe? This shows your total ignorance of the reality during the early days of the coup.

You really believe that those who orchestrated the coup would have allowed ‘progressives’ to take control of Samuel Doe in the initial phase? Please stick to gossip and fairy tales and leave historical analysis to those who have a better comprehension of certain realities.

You asked the question: “Did they not sense that the death of those thirteen would lay the basis of Doe’s eventual dictatorship.” No, Samuel D. Twe,  it did not! This is why we have tried to educate you and others about class alliances and betrayal in the two pieces I wrote, “on the old order” and “the struggle for democracy in Liberia.” But then again, you and your masters have your own interpretation based on convoluted lies and deliberate distortion. This political pimp called Samuel D. Twe asked: “Why did he not resign if he really believed in the sanctity of human life and the inviolability of the rule of law he now appears to champion? His departure from the PRC on those grounds would have marked him as a true democratic and revolutionary hero. “ What claptrap of nauseating idealism is this?

Fahnbulleh, the revolutionary, resigning because of an unfortunate historical accident while the bodies of over 200 cadres rot in unmarked graves? And this senseless coward called Samuel D. Twe expects to be taken seriously by conscious patriots and nationalists! This craven rascal, a disgusting fifth columnist of the bankrupt old order shows his true colors in the air brushing of the sons and daughters of the people from the bloody history of the repression of the True Whig Party! This snail has reached the clear opening of our incisive search light. We have taunted the idiot to reveal himself and his sympathies and behold this silly political toddler comes bearing his filthy hands with the flag engraved with the elephant: a True Whig Party flunky who has now jumped ship.

No, Samuel D. Twe, we were never charity workers or idealistic evangelists to abandon ship at the first obstacle. We were at the barricades where heroic men and women fell because they believed in the ideals of justice and equality! No, we did not resign and reject your stupid ahistorical trust that “ashamed of his guilt in the death of those thirteen he would ask, ‘ why this selective bereavement after twenty-five years  of massacre, murder, mayhem, death and destruction.’”

Fahnbulleh ,” ashamed of his guilt?” You have to be the most stupid stool pigeon in the movement of the younger generation and your lousy boast that you are “prepared to do battle; to trade word for word; insult to insult, rhetoric to rhetoric; scouring intellectual grounds and erecting bulwarks to secure the vanguard marchof the patriot George Manneh Weah and other new generation revolutionaries…” rings hollow in the face of which side you are really on.

This is where your opportunism exposes itself in all its fanciful pretense. You are nothing but a pitiful fifth columnist, being used and now using the simplicity of gullible young men and women to advance your appetite in the forefront of a galloping movement which may end in the frustration of rising expectations that you do not have the experience, fortitude and commitment to tackle. You resemble the little rat that will nimble at the cheese even when it is surrounded by ants and detritus.

You Samuel D. Twe is a careless and reckless desperado dancing on the edge of a volcano, feeding the lumpen masses with borrowed concepts and slogans whose impact you do not understand. Your mindset is that of a gluttonous satrap who eats voraciously after his masters have finished, only to vomit the accumulated garbage from his stomach. You do not impress me Samuel D. Twe. I do not admire spineless cowards who when the battle lines are drawn, hide behind the popularity of a simple man who does not understand what he is getting into. Here is another tragedy waiting to happen!!!

(Visited 160 times, 1 visits today)

Comments

comments

About Cholo Brooks 11651 Articles
Joel Cholo Brooks is a Liberian journalist who previously worked for several international news outlets including the BBC African Service. He is the CEO of the Global News Network which publishes two local weeklies, The Star and The GNN-Liberia Newspapers. He is a member of the Press Union Of Liberia (PUL) since 1986, and several other international organizations of journalists, and is currently contributing to the South Africa Broadcasting Corporation as Liberia Correspondent.