The July 26th celebrations are now behind us, but the reverberations from the one-week activity will forever be written in the annals of history. It will read like, “when we were in Minnesota, the United States of America during the great celebrations of the one hundred and fifty ninth anniversary of the independence of our country..”
We would be describing the memorable events that happened during that week. We would mention the soccer games we held to keep our young men busy and strong, to engage them in tests of strength and leadership.
We would describe the formal programs at which time our young women dressed in their best and danced and wined and men of wealth and knowledge and broad shoulders strutted in the alleys.
The most memorable though that historians and scholars would remember would be those things that stimulated our minds and made us to think. And we would discuss it for many many years.
So, it was with this year’s program that we had a former politician, former Vice President of our country, Liberia to bring us the good news. The theme of the celebrations was the past, present and the future, and though a lot of us know only a part of Liberia’s rich history, it is with open mouths you will sit if you have people of diverse backgrounds tell you how our nation was forged.
So, to dissect the speech of the Bishop, one that was heavily historical, the services of two wisemen were employed. Mr. Patrick Kugmeh and Mr. Gibson Keykpo were asked to offer their own take on the speech and this is what was journalized. This is just a summary of their perspectives.
Mr. Patrick Kugmeh
BC: Mr. Kugmeh, please tell me what you think of the speech of the Vice President.
PK: Thank you for the time, I would like to say that the Bishop’s speech was partial and contained a lot of half-truths. He did not mention the Tubman era or the unification policy but dwelled only on the Tolbert administration.
For all the good things that the Tolbert administration did, for example the mat to mattresses program in conjunction with the estate program, those projects only benefited certain people and not the masses.
He also mentioned that he was elected. He was not. He was appointed after the death of VP Greene. He talked about the money given to the Samuel K Doe regime being more than the money given to the country since 1847, there are no documentary evidence to support that premise.
Mr. Kugmeh then admonished subsequent committees to choose Non Profit managers or Project Managers or other people who will advise and provide unifying information. Politicians tend to dwell on promotion of their platforms or defend certain actions which sometimes tend to be divisive.
BC: What was the general atmosphere of the ball?
PK: It was quite disappointing that the committee allowed the song sang by a Liberian girl that was not designed for the occasion. I think that was counterproductive and not in good taste. It is also disappointing that many of the functionaries of the OLM did not attend the programs.
The Controversial Star Munah Myers
The Secretary General, Mr. Writhers Nyenie-Wea was conspicuously absent, as was Sackie Kennedy, Gboyee Seeyon, and other community leaders who should have been at the program.
Mr. Gibson Keykpo
BC: What did you think about the Bishop’s speech?
GK: The Bishop did not make a unifying statement. He quoted a lot of historic issues heavily based on US history.
Our expectations for the Bishop’s speech were off key. He made some representations in retrospect and defended the repressive regime that laid the foundation of Liberia’s slide into anarchy.
His analogy to the house of roaches and rats and other vices would have been a good example of what happened to Liberia, but right after the house got burned, he resorted to self praise and made insensitive remarks referring to certain persons as “country”.
The Bishop was quite lucky that as the speaker, he could not be challenged. The intellectually flawed representation may have caused never ending discussions, and a lot of questions that could have caused many pensive moments for him to recollect his history.
Conclusion
There were some in the audience who applauded every statement made by the bishop. And though some of the remarks were off target, he did present entertaining pieces for discussion.
Mr. Edward Carter after the speech recommended that Liberian history be re-written to reflect some of the points in the bishop’s speech. The BC tried to contact Mr. Carter to get his take on the speech to no avail.
Do you have an addition to the concerns expressed? Send in your observations now.
Do you have a burning forum question about this story? Say it now at http://www.bushchicken.com/forum.php
No comments:
Post a Comment