The Hon. Mathew Opoku Prempeh is reported in sections of the Ghanaian media, to have alleged that President Mahama apparently agreed to take in, as many as 15 ex-Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison detainees.
Yet, the letter said to have been written by the four Republican U.S. Senate members, states clearly that only two freed ex-detainees from the Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison, were accepted to be taken in by the authorities in Ghana.
With respect, on what basis do the Dr. Mathew Opoku Prempehs, who are members of Parliament, and therefore very important members of Ghanaian society, by virtue of that fact, make their very serious allegations?
One hopes that those who say that patriotic Ghanaians ought not to rule out the possibility that some politicians in Ghana used their contacts in the U.S. to lobby the four U.S. senators to write that letter, are wrong in what they say - for that would amount to treasonable conduct that slights our nation and invites the ridicule of right-wing politicians who are probably even contemptuous of black people.
Do those who brought the existence of that letter to the attention of Ghanaians, perhaps want the general public to infer from its contents, that Ghana is being paid U.S.$10 million for each of the two ex-Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison detainees - and by extension the same amount for any others that might also be accepted into Ghana, just to score political points, as a result of that inference?
Reading between the lines, and judging by its tone and contents, it is hard not to come to the conclusion that the letter purportedly written by the four Republican Party U.S. senators, to the chairperson of a key Senate Committee, and chairperson of one of its subcommittees, was most probably written at the behest of registered U.S. lobbyists covertly acting on behalf of Ghanaian politicians.
Apparently, the four Republican U.S. senators, Mark Kirk of Illinois, Roy Blunt of Missouri, Steve Daines of Montana and James Lankford of Oklahoma, believe that aside from the Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison, no other prison anywhere else in the world, including even the U.S. itself, can hold any of the terrorist suspects apprehended by U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq securely.
Yet they demand that Ghana should somehow guarantee that the two ex-detainees who were incarcerated for fourteen long years without any charges being preferred against them, and without being tried in a court of law by the U.S., will not escape from Ghana and harm the U.S. and its citizens (God forbid) - and they also imply that the spokesperson of the U.S. Embassy in Ghana misinformed Ghanaians about the terms and conditions of the agreement that led to Ghana accepting those two ex-detainees from the Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison.
The question Ghanaians must ponder over is: Why would U.S. senators Mark Kirk, Roy Blunt, Steve Daines and James Lankford, single out Ghana, from the long list of nations that have accepted to take in ex-Guantanamo Bay U.S. military prison detainees - and write that outrageous letter that patronises our nation so, to the chairperson of the U.S. Senate's Appropriations Committee's subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programmes, Lindsay Graham, and the chairperson of the U.S. Senate's Appropriations Committee, Thad Cochran? Who put them up to it, one wonders?
Why are some Ghanaian politicians still so quick to stab the very nation they want to rule in the back - just like their political forebears did yesterday by collaborating with imperialists and colonialists who exploited our nation's resources and people so ruthlessly during the colonial era - even though they claim to be democrats who believe in the rule of law?
Did those traitors ask their right-wing contacts in the U.S. to lobby the four Republican U.S. senators on their behalf, in order to elicit that letter - so that they could ratchet up the raging controversy in Ghana over the Mahama administration accepting to take in two ex-Guantanamo US. military prison detainees a notch higher: and score political points that way?
Why are such politicians still so treacherous - after nearly 59 years since Ghana gained its independence? It appears they will never change. Most nations that face the threat of terrorism, unite to fight them. Must we allow short-sighted, foolhardy and self-seeking politicians to divide us at a time when terrorists are attacking sister nations of ours in West Africa?
Perhaps it would be wise for discerning young generation Ghanaians to be guided by the past when listening to and evaluating such extremist politicians - some of whom have unfortunately seized control of their party from a cowed, silent majority of fair-minded and tolerant moderates - when considering who to cast votes for during election campaigns.
It ought to be pointed out to Ghana's young generation that in 1958 Ghana was a parliamentary democracy. The nation was then governed by Prime Minister Kwame Nkrumah's democratically-elected Convention People's Party (CPP) government.
Yet, a few individuals in society at the time, Modesto Apaloo, R. R. Amponsah, who was the general secretary of the National Liberation Movement, and later of the merged opposition, United Party, and Captain Awhaitey, the commandant of the Giffard Camp, known today as Burma Camp, conspired to overthrow the democratically-elected government of Ghana - despite the fact that it had the support of an overwhelming majority of ordinary people in the country.
It was an intelligence report that Dr. J. B. Daquah was overhead at a diplomatic party telling a foreign diplomat that Nkrumah would be overthrown soon, which led to the plot being discovered. The objective of their coup plot was to assassinate Nkrumah as he left for a trip to India. The Granville Sharp Commission report contains details of that coup plot.
There was yet another plot to overthrow Nkrumah in 1961. In that instance, it was the death of Brigadier Michel, one of the conspirators, in a plane crash, on 13th August 1961, which eventually scuttled their planned military coup.
The question is: Why were Dr. Danquah and Co, who said they believed in the rule of law, prepared to use such unconstitutional means to get to power?
The simple answer, is that from the very beginning, when the idea to form a new organisation that would lead the fight to rid our people of the British occupiers of our country, was mooted - by one of the wealthiest Africans then, the highly-successful self-made timber merchant, George Alfred Grant (aka Paa Grant) - J. B. Danquah and Co saw it as an opportunity for the progeny of the precolonial fuedal ruling elites, to replace the Britsh occupiers of our country.
That new nationalist organisation, the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC), established on 4th August, 1947, and which was bankrolled by Paa Grant, was the perfect vehicle to help Danquah and Co to achieve the end they sought for themselves.
When Nkrumah broke away from the UGCC to form the CPP, on 12 June, 1949, and went on to win the elections of 1951, 1954 and 1956, it put paid to Danquah and Co's long-held dream that the progeny of the precolonial feudal ruling elites would replace the British colonial regime, as the new rulers of Ghana.
They resorted to sabotaging the nation-building effort with the aim of bringing about the CPP government's downfall.
In fact physically eliminating Nkrumah became an obsession with Danquah and Co. After countless acts of terrorism (mostly exploding powerful dynamite in crowded venues) they finally succeeded in overthrowing Nkrumah in 1966 - after military and police traitors were paid U.S.$13 million by the U.S. according to declassified National Security Council (NSC) documents from the Johnson Presidential Library.
Ironically, U.S. officials, in private - according to released Johnson-era National Security Council documents - were contemptuous of the leaders of the new military regime that replaced the CPP government of Nkrumah in 1966, for toadying up to the West. Capital.
The determination of Danquah and Co to do everything possible to remove Nkrumah's CPP from power, was because in their view, a government made up of 'veranda boys with some Ntafuo in it' (to quote Dr. J. B. Danquah himself) had no business running the Ghana that they had a God-given right to dominate and rule, till the very end of time.
Alas, nothing has changed - and many of today's political progeny of Danquah and Co still feel that because they labour under the illusion that somehow they have a God-given right to rule Ghana, they are justified in whatever means they employ to enable them secure the ends they seek.
That is why like their political forebears, some of the political progeny of Dr. Danquah and Co are today busy sabotaging the nation-building effort. Today, there are extremist politicians busy undermining a government of the day - by keeping their promise to make Ghana ungovernable - to ensure that it leads to a return to power for their political party, the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
That outrageous letter signed by the four Republican U.S. senators is without a shadow of doubt the handiwork of some of the progeny of yesteryear's traitors.
Yet, a few individuals in society at the time, Modesto Apaloo, R. R. Amponsah, who was the general secretary of the National Liberation Movement, and later of the merged opposition, United Party, and Captain Awhaitey, the commandant of the Giffard Camp, known today as Burma Camp, conspired to overthrow the democratically-elected government of Ghana - despite the fact that it had the support of an overwhelming majority of ordinary people in the country.
It was an intelligence report that Dr. J. B. Daquah was overhead at a diplomatic party telling a foreign diplomat that Nkrumah would be overthrown soon, which led to the plot being discovered. The objective of their coup plot was to assassinate Nkrumah as he left for a trip to India. The Granville Sharp Commission report contains details of that coup plot.
There was yet another plot to overthrow Nkrumah in 1961. In that instance, it was the death of Brigadier Michel, one of the conspirators, in a plane crash, on 13th August 1961, which eventually scuttled their planned military coup.
The question is: Why were Dr. Danquah and Co, who said they believed in the rule of law, prepared to use such unconstitutional means to get to power?
The simple answer, is that from the very beginning, when the idea to form a new organisation that would lead the fight to rid our people of the British occupiers of our country, was mooted - by one of the wealthiest Africans then, the highly-successful self-made timber merchant, George Alfred Grant (aka Paa Grant) - J. B. Danquah and Co saw it as an opportunity for the progeny of the precolonial fuedal ruling elites, to replace the Britsh occupiers of our country.
That new nationalist organisation, the United Gold Coast Convention (UGCC), established on 4th August, 1947, and which was bankrolled by Paa Grant, was the perfect vehicle to help Danquah and Co to achieve the end they sought for themselves.
When Nkrumah broke away from the UGCC to form the CPP, on 12 June, 1949, and went on to win the elections of 1951, 1954 and 1956, it put paid to Danquah and Co's long-held dream that the progeny of the precolonial feudal ruling elites would replace the British colonial regime, as the new rulers of Ghana.
They resorted to sabotaging the nation-building effort with the aim of bringing about the CPP government's downfall.
In fact physically eliminating Nkrumah became an obsession with Danquah and Co. After countless acts of terrorism (mostly exploding powerful dynamite in crowded venues) they finally succeeded in overthrowing Nkrumah in 1966 - after military and police traitors were paid U.S.$13 million by the U.S. according to declassified National Security Council (NSC) documents from the Johnson Presidential Library.
Ironically, U.S. officials, in private - according to released Johnson-era National Security Council documents - were contemptuous of the leaders of the new military regime that replaced the CPP government of Nkrumah in 1966, for toadying up to the West. Capital.
The determination of Danquah and Co to do everything possible to remove Nkrumah's CPP from power, was because in their view, a government made up of 'veranda boys with some Ntafuo in it' (to quote Dr. J. B. Danquah himself) had no business running the Ghana that they had a God-given right to dominate and rule, till the very end of time.
Alas, nothing has changed - and many of today's political progeny of Danquah and Co still feel that because they labour under the illusion that somehow they have a God-given right to rule Ghana, they are justified in whatever means they employ to enable them secure the ends they seek.
That is why like their political forebears, some of the political progeny of Dr. Danquah and Co are today busy sabotaging the nation-building effort. Today, there are extremist politicians busy undermining a government of the day - by keeping their promise to make Ghana ungovernable - to ensure that it leads to a return to power for their political party, the New Patriotic Party (NPP).
That outrageous letter signed by the four Republican U.S. senators is without a shadow of doubt the handiwork of some of the progeny of yesteryear's traitors.
That is why the question we must pose is: Who are the traitors in our midst who used their
U.S. contacts to achieve an end they sought, for short-term political gain:
the blatant interference in our nation's politics that that outrageous letter
from those arrogant U.S. senators that patronises our nation so, represents?
Luckily, because America is an open society, it is possible to find out who actually lobbied the four conservative U.S.senators, by leveraging the following:
1) The U.S. Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 & U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.
2) The U.S. Honest Leadership & Open Government Act of 2007.
The question is: Why does a media house from one of the more responsible sections of the Ghanaian media, not to write to the New York Times, to contact the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Ethics Committee to point out the blatant interference by the four Republican U.S. senators in our nation's politics, and demand that they disclose who lobbied them to come up with that blackmailing nonsense on bamboo stilts?
If the letter said to have been written by the four U.S. senators is not a hoax, then it will not come as a surprise to some Ghanaians that members of a conservative U.S. think-tank with known links to imperialism's fifth-column in Ghana (do they refer to The Heritage Foundation, perhaps, one wonders?), might have been put up to this outrage by those in our homeland Ghana, who are continuing their tradition of constantly stabbing Mother Ghana in the back, for short-term political gain. Pity.
Luckily, because America is an open society, it is possible to find out who actually lobbied the four conservative U.S.senators, by leveraging the following:
1) The U.S. Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 & U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.
2) The U.S. Honest Leadership & Open Government Act of 2007.
The question is: Why does a media house from one of the more responsible sections of the Ghanaian media, not to write to the New York Times, to contact the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Ethics Committee to point out the blatant interference by the four Republican U.S. senators in our nation's politics, and demand that they disclose who lobbied them to come up with that blackmailing nonsense on bamboo stilts?
If the letter said to have been written by the four U.S. senators is not a hoax, then it will not come as a surprise to some Ghanaians that members of a conservative U.S. think-tank with known links to imperialism's fifth-column in Ghana (do they refer to The Heritage Foundation, perhaps, one wonders?), might have been put up to this outrage by those in our homeland Ghana, who are continuing their tradition of constantly stabbing Mother Ghana in the back, for short-term political gain. Pity.
No comments:
Post a Comment