NANA ADDO’S MEN: FRIENDS OR FOES?

In recent times, the attitude put up by some New Patriotic Party (NPP) big shots who held key positions in the party’s 2012 campaign for Nana Addo has brought to the fore, the curious question on whether they were friends who whole heartedly worked for Nana Addo to win presidential victory or they were rivals who harbored the same presidential ambition he was nursing and therefore worked as foes to let him down as a matter of strategy. 

These strategic-rivals, were part of those complaining of a so-called ‘Akyem Mafia’ around Nana  Addo in 2008 and succeeded, in 2012,  in getting him to dissolve and block out some  of the key persons in the so called ‘mafia’. Interestingly, the rivals who took over the campaign did not only mafia the party members; Nana Addo himself was the worst hit casualty.

  

                                             Kofi Konadu Appraku

Dr. Kofi Konadu Appraku, a key player in the Nana-Addo 2012 campaign was speculated to be campaigning for a 2016 presidential ambition even when the Nana Addo campaign was in full swing. Though there was empirical evidence to back this claim, it could not have surfaced from ‘venus’ as a fairy tale.

The same Dr. Appraku has finally confessed he has the same ambitions Nana Addo was and is having. Dr. Appraku says he wants to be the NPP Presidential candidate for 2016. Dr. Appraku has confirmed this in a statement issued by his ‘aide’, a certain Odaimon Kwadwo Abobra.

It is curious to know how long Dr. Appraku has nursed this ambition. Even before JA Kufour became president, Dr. Appraku did not hide his interest in the presidency. Fortunately he was not pivotal in the JA Kufour 2000 campaign and Kufour won. Appraku contested Nana Addo in 2007, had some embarrassing 17 votes or less out of some 600, became key in Nana Addo’s campaign in 2008 and Nana Addo lost.

In 2012, Appraku again played a key role in Nana Addo’s campaign and again, Nana Addo lost. Then Appraku pops up and announces he wants to replace Nana Addo for 2016. And he is a friend who wanted Akufo Addo to win 2008 and 2012. Maybe he had shelved his ambition by then because Nana Addo was a friend.

This same Appraku who DOES NOT want to drag the NPP’s name into disrepute and public ridicule has told the whole world, in his press statement that some party members  had unleashed their “rented press” and  “some snake-tongued persons within the party had been hired” to detract him from his presidential agenda. Appraku says these ‘party members’ are persons who feel threatened by his decision to contest Nana Addo for the party’s flag-bearer post.

Impliedly this was done by his rivals….Nana Addo, not excluded. 

                                                        Sir John

Kwadwo Owusu Afriyie, the party’s general secretary is one ‘friend’ of Nana  Addo who in his attempt to ‘please and do Nana Addo a lot of good’, decided to compromise the neutrality of the party’s executive by going public with his unnecessary statement that Nana Addo would contest 2016. Why show your bias and make people question it when you could have done so behind closed doors?

What a friend? Until the party recently secured a place for Sir John to lay his head at night, he was lodging at the Kofi Osei Ameyaw owned Royale Mirage Hotel. The least said about the type of meetings that were held at that hotel, the better. After all it is not hidden anymore that Kofi Osei Ameyaw, himself, also has the same agenda 2016 ambition.

                                                 Kofi Osei Ameyaw

The difference is that Osei Ameyaw’s agenda 2016 is not for Dr. Appraku or Nana Addo. It is for himself!!!

That then brings into question how long Osei Ameyaw had nursed this ambition. He was part of Nana Addo’s kitchen cabinet that planned to get his allies contest for executive positions in the party. Osei wanted to be National Treasure. He did not make it and since then, little was seen of him in the 2012 campaign.

                                                      Jake Obetsebi Lamptey

Jake, a party chairman stands akimbo and silently observes with a grin the unfortunate internal party mudslinging against senior captains. Jake seem not to understand that though the ongoing attacks and counter attacks may well satisfy the petty parochial political interests of a few selfish minds,  it would also certainly have an adverse impact on the already challenged party unity.

It is this passive attitude of Chairman Jake that raises the question whether ‘there are no elders in the house’. When we ask if there is no elder in the house, we are not meaning an elder who is aged in years, we are referring to a mature brain and a concerned heart who can call the warring factions to order and drum in to their heads some common sense that party should and must be put first, before individual interests.

This is a party chairman, who instead of working towards the party’s internal unity thinks it is in Nana Addo’s interest for him to also display his bias and favoritism towards him to the vexation of several important party big shots.

He won’t even take responsibility for the party’s inability to win elections but says he wants to contest again to remain party chairman. 

                                                 Nana Akomea

Which Director of Communications who knows his left from his right would be openly contradicting and disagreeing with his party’s General Secretary right in the media.

A Director of Communications who was quick to abandon his post, even before he was asked to. As if the position was causing some injury to him so he was in a haste to relinquish. Perhaps, the chips are down now that the court case is over so there is no need to hang on. Nice Friend.

                                        TO BE CONTINUED…

The  campaign manager Boakye Agyrko who  also wants to be president, the Lord Commey who thinks the job of Campaign Director of Operations means following the candidate from village to village, the Gabby Otchere Darko who is good at strategies for Ghana’s minority elite but a disaster at understanding the language of the masses and, the vanished Boniface Sadique, the nowhere to be seen Hajia Alima Mahama  the Kennedy Agyeapong  who thinks talking loose is what sells Nana Addo would be treated in next edition.

Source: DAYBREAK

Islam Condemns Terrorism

Some people who say they are acting in the name of religion may misunderstand their religion or practice it wrongly. For this reason, it is a mistake to form any idea of that religion from the activities of these people. The best way to understand Islam is through its holy source.

The holy source of Islam is the Qur'an; and the model of morality in the Qur'an is completely different from the image of it formed in the minds of some westerners. The Qur'an is based on the concepts of morality, love, compassion, mercy, modesty, self-sacrifice, tolerance and peace, and a Muslim who truly lives according to these moral precepts is highly refined, thoughtful, tolerant, trustworthy and accommodating. To those around him he gives love, respect, peace of mind and a sense of the joy of life.

Islam Is A Religion Of Peace And Well-Being

The word Islam has the same meaning as "peace" in Arabic. Islam is a religion that came down to offer humanity a life filled with the peace and well-being in which God's eternal mercy and compassion is manifested in the world. God invites all people to accept the moral teachings of the Qur'an as a model whereby mercy, compassion, tolerance and peace may be experienced in the world. In Surat al-Baqara verse 208, this command is given:

You who believe! Enter absolutely into peace (Islam). Do not follow in the footsteps of Satan. He is an outright enemy to you.

As we see in this verse, people will experience well-being and happiness by living according to the moral teaching of the Qur'an.

God Condemns Mischief

God has commanded humanity to avoid evil; he has forbidden immorality, rebellion, cruelty, aggressiveness, murder and bloodshed. Those who do not obey this command of God are walking in the steps of Satan, as it says in the verse above, and have adopted an attitude that God has clearly declared unlawful. Of the many verses that bear on this subject, here are only two:

But as for those who break God's contract after it has been agreed and sever what God has commanded to be joined, and cause corruption in the earth, the curse will be upon them. They will have the Evil Abode. (Surat ar-Ra'd: 25)

Seek the abode of the hereafter with what God has given you, without forgetting your portion of the world. And do good as God has been good to you. And do not seek to cause mischief on earth. God does not love mischief makers.' (Surat al-Qasas: 77)

As we can see, God has forbidden every kind of mischievous acts in the religion of Islam including terrorism and violence, and condemned those who commit such deeds. A Muslim lends beauty to the world and improves it.

Islam Defends Tolerance And Freedom Of Speech

Islam is a religion which fosters freedom of life, ideas and thought. It has forbidden tension and conflict among people, calumny, suspicion and even having negative thoughts about another individual. Islam has not only forbidden terror and violence, but also even the slightest imposition of any idea on another human being.

There is no compulsion in religion. Right guidance has become clearly distinct from error. Anyone who rejects false gods and believes in God has grasped the Firmest Handhold, which will never give way. God is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. (Surat al-Baqara: 256)

So remind, you need only to remind. You cannot compel them to believe. (Surat al-Ghashiyah:22)

To force anyone to believe in a religion or to practice it, is against the spirit and essence of Islam. Because it is necessary that faith be accepted with free will and conscience. Of course, Muslims may urge one another to keep the moral precepts taught in the Qur'an, but they never use compulsion. In any case, an individual cannot be induced to the practice of religion by either threat or offering him a worldly privilege.

Let us imagine a completely opposite model of society. For example, a world in which people are forced by law to practice religion. Such a model of society is completely contrary to Islam because faith and worship have value only when they are directed toward God. If there were a system that forced people to believe and worship, people would be religious only out of fear of the system. What is acceptable from the point of view of religion is that religion be practiced in an environment where freedom of conscience is permitted, and that it be practiced only for the approval of God.

God Has Made The Killing Of Innocent People Unlawful

According to the Qur'an, one of the greatest sins is to kill a human being who has committed no fault: 

...If someone kills another person - unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the earth - it is as if he had murdered all mankind. And if anyone gives life to another person, it is as if he had given life to all mankind. Our Messengers came to them with Clear Signs but even after that many of them committed outrages in the earth. (Surat al-Ma'ida: 32)

Those who do not call on any other deity together with God and do not kill anyone God has made inviolate, except with the right to do so, and do not fornicate; anyone who does that will receive an evil punishment. (Surat al-Furqan: 68)

As we can see in the verses above, those who kill innocent human beings without a cause are threatened with evil punishment. God has revealed that killing one person is as great a sin as killing all mankind. Anyone who respected the prerogatives of God would not do harm to even one individual, let alone murdering thousands of innocent people. Those who think that they will escape justice and punishment in this world will never escape the account they must give in the Presence of God on the Last Day. So, those believers who know they will give an account to God after their death, will be very careful about respecting the limits God has established.

God Commands Believers To Be Compassionate And Merciful

In this verse, Muslim morality is explained:

...To be one of those who believe and urge each other to steadfastness and urge each other to compassion. Those are the Companions of the Right. (Surat al-Balad: 17-18)

As we see in this verse, one of the most important moral precepts that God has sent down to His servants so that they may receive salvation and mercy and attain Paradise, is to "urge each other to compassion".

Islam as described in the Qur'an is a modern, enlightened, progressive religion. A Muslim is above all a person of peace; he is tolerant with a democratic spirit, cultured, enlightened, honest, knowledgable about art and science and civilized.

A Muslim educated in the fine moral teaching of the Qur'an, approaches everyone with the love that Islam expects. He shows respect for every idea and he values art and aesthetics. He is conciliatory in the face of every event, diminishing tension and restoring amity. In societies composed of individuals such as this, there will be a higher civilization, a higher social morality, more joy, happiness, justice, security, abundance and blessings than in the most modern nations of the world today.

God Has Commanded Tolerance And Forgiveness

Surat al-A'raf, verse 199, which says "practice forgiveness", expresses the concept of forgiveness and tolerance which is one of the basic principles of the religion of Islam.

When we look at Islamic history, we can see clearly how Muslims established this important precept of the moral teaching of the Qur'an in their social life. At every point in their advance, Muslims destroyed unlawful practices and created a free and tolerant environment. In the areas of religion, language and culture, they made it possible for people totally opposite to each other to live under the same roof in freedom and peace, thereby giving to those subject to them the advantages of knowledge, wealth and position.

Likewise, one of the most important reasons that the large and widespread Ottoman Empire was able to sustain its existence for so many centuries was that its way of life was directed by the tolerance and understanding brought by Islam. For centuries Muslims have been characterized by their tolerance and compassion. In every period of time they have been the most just and merciful of people. All ethnic groups within this multi-national community freely practiced the religions they have followed for years and enjoyed every opportunity to live in their own cultures and worship in their own way.

Indeed, the particular tolerance of Muslims, when practiced as commanded in the Qur'an, can alone bring peace and well-being to the whole world. The Qur'an refers to this particular kind of tolerance:

A good action and a bad action are not the same. Repel the bad with something better and, if there is enmity between you and someone else, he will be like a bosom friend. (Surat al-Fussilat: 34)

Conclusion

All this shows that the moral teaching offered to humanity by Islam is one that will bring peace, happiness and justice to the world. The barbarism that is happening in the world today under the name of "Islamic Terrorism" is completely removed from the moral teachings of the Qur'an; it is the work of ignorant, bigoted people, criminals who have nothing to do with religion. The solution which will applied against these individuals and groups who are trying to commit their deeds of savagery under the guise of Islam, will be the instruction of people in the true moral teaching of Islam.

In other words, the religion of Islam and the moral teaching of the Qur'an are not the supporters of terrorism and the terrorists, but the remedy by which the world can be saved from the scourge of terrorism.

Credit: Harun Yahya    

Jesus Is Not A Christian

If Jesus had come today instead of 2,000 years ago, Christian pastors and bishops would also have killed him.

A man travelling from Jerusalem to Jericho was attacked by armed-robbers, stripped of his belongings and left lying on the road half-dead.  God’s providence ensured that first a priest, and then a Levite, passed by.  But instead of helping the dying man; both of them quickly moved to the other side and went away.  Finally, a Samaritan came along.  Unlike the priest and the Levite, he had compassion on the injured man, bound up his wounds, took him to the hospital and paid for his medical expenses.

The Good Samaritan

Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan is very deliberate.  It is incredible how, as Christians, we still fail to understand its full implications.  The first mistake we make is in the identity of the Good Samaritan.  When we situate the story in the contemporary setting (as we should with all scripture), we assume that the Good Samaritan is a Christian.  However, Jesus deliberately excludes that possibility by providing two characters clearly representative of the Christians of today.  The priest is easily identifiable as today’s pastor, while the Levite is easily today’s Christian layman.

Who then is the Good Samaritan?  Let me repeat this for emphasis: the Good Samaritan cannot be a Christian.  The Christian is already adequately represented.  The Good Samaritan is Jesus himself.  Jesus’ story eloquently sets forth the goodness and kindness of Christ our Saviour towards sinful, miserable and defenceless humanity.  The thief came to steal, kill and destroy, but Christ came to give life and to give it abundantly. (John 10:10).

But there is the rub.  If Jesus is the Good Samaritan then Jesus is not a Jew; for Samaritans were not accepted as Jews.  If Jesus is the Good Samaritan, then Jesus is a Samaritan.  If Jesus is not a Jew but a Samaritan, then Jesus cannot be a Christian, for it is the Jew who represents the Christian of today.

Jesus killers

By the time some Jews observed Jesus, they assumed he was not a Jew.  In the first place, he refused to be a disciple of Moses but claimed instead to have come to fulfil the law.  He did not obey the letter of Jewish laws but claimed to comply with its spirit.  He insisted pharisaic religious tradition was old wine which could not be put into the new bottles he provided for the new wine of the New Testament. (Matthew 9:17).  He prefaced a lot of his sermons with the statement: “You have heard that it was said to those of old… but I say.” (Matthew 5:27-28).

Therefore, some Jews insisted Jesus was not Jewish.  As a matter of fact, their position was that he was a closet Samaritan: “Then the Jews answered and said to him, “Do we not say rightly that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?”  Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honour my Father, and you dishonour me.” (John 8:48-49).  Note that Jesus did not contest the charge that he was a Samaritan.  But he took great exception to the allegation that he had a demon.

But if Jesus identified with the Samaritans and not with the Jews, then it becomes clear he would not identify with most of the Christians of today.  In fact, let me be so bold as to say that if Jesus were in the flesh today he would not be a Christian.  If Jesus had come today instead of 2,000 years ago, Christian pastors and bishops would also have killed him.  Like he did our forefathers, Jesus would also have exposed our ungodliness to public ridicule.

Religious irrelevancies

So if Jesus would not have been a Christian, what would he have been?  He would have simply been Jesus without any specific religious affiliation.  Today, Jesus has been replaced by theology, but the real Jesus was not religious.  Jesus established no religious institution when he was on earth.

Indeed, if Jesus were to show up physically on earth today, most Christians would not recognise him even as the Jews did not.  If he came as a woman, we would not recognise him.  If he smoked cigarettes, we would not recognise him.  If he drank whisky, we would not recognise him.  If he wore earrings and a nose ring, we would not recognise him.  If he spoke Pidgin English, we would not recognise him.  Since he did not wear trousers, we would be contemptuous of him.  We would disqualify him by religious irrelevancies instead of identifying him by his fruits.

When Jesus asked the lawyer to identify the neighbour of the man who fell among thieves, the man wisely did not say it was the Samaritan.  If he had said that, he would have been wrong.  Instead, he correctly defined him by his fruit.  He said: “He who showed mercy on him.”  He who showed mercy on him could be anybody, Christian or non-Christian, as long as he believed in Jesus and produced the fruits of his righteousness.

Merciless Christians

What then does the story of the Good Samaritan mean if, indeed, the priest and the Levite represent today’s Christians?  It means that, prophetically, it is the Christians of today who have no mercy.  We despise unbelievers, certain they are going to hell.  We speak disparagingly of them.  We condemn sinners on grounds they are ungodly.  We stone them because they are caught in adultery.  We fail to appreciate that they are hapless travellers on the road of life who have been attacked by spiritual armed-robbers and left for dead.  We conveniently forget that we used to be in the same position until we were rescued by the grace of God.

Therefore, “God is not a Christian,” declared Reverend Desmond Tutu.  “We are supposed to proclaim the God of love, but we have been guilty as Christians of sowing hatred and suspicion; we commend the one whom we call the Prince of Peace, and yet as Christians we have fought more wars than we care to remember.  We have claimed to be a fellowship of compassion and caring and sharing, but as Christians we often sanctify sociopolitical systems that belie this, where the rich grow ever richer and the poor grow ever poorer.”

One thing is certain.  Both the offending priest and the Levite must have had “compelling” reasons for not attending to the man dying on the roadside.  They probably could not stop because they were in a hurry to attend a bible study.   The priest decided that the best thing to do was to pray for the man when he got to church.  The Levite was hurrying to get to a meeting of the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria and could not afford to be late.

Jesus’ parable “kills” the self-righteous believer who thinks he is justified by calling himself a Christian and by going regularly to church.  He alerts us to the danger of assuming we are heaven-bound because of our observance of certain religious rites.  True Christianity is not legalistic.  The love of our neighbour is the emblem of our being Christ’s disciples.

“Dear friends, let us practice loving each other, for love comes from God and those who are loving and kind show that they are the children of God.” (1 John 4:7).

Source: Femi

Femi

OPEN LETTER TO NII LANTE

I have been watching with keen interest the saga surrounding Jake’s house – the GaDangme propaganda, the political twist and the arrogance of foot soldiers – and I have been sad, very sad.

I am sad because, in civilized society, it is the law and the law alone that is our guide, so that weak men and finite mortals with hands and feet of clay do not take advantage of their fellowmen.

I am sad, too, because in our religious and traditional institutions, we are further guided by deep values and spiritual laws. In both of these instances, Nii Lante is committing a serious and dangerous mistake. One: in spitting upon the Supreme Court ruling, he may be serving the short-term interests of his political patrons; in the long run, however, he might find himself a scapegoat – another Ga scapegoat, just like Josiah Aryeh.

Nii Lante, no doubt, is a young and promising politician; but he has overshot himself. To begin with, in the constituency such as the one in which he is contesting, he does not need to split hairs to pick the MP slot. It used to be a UP seat that shocked Kwame Nkrumah and subsequent military adventurers – until recently. But times do change. As the Ga adage says: “Calamities do not come flying red flags.”

Strangely, GaDangme senior citizens and religious leaders and traditional rulers in the Ga State look on; the Muslim clerics and Zongo boys in Cow Lane look on and the GaDangme Caucus in the National Democratic Congress gloat with glee, not only over the infraction of a Supreme Court decision, but also a dangerous attempt to disinherit the son of a bonafide Ghanaian and Ga personality.

I defended Nii Lante when he was accused of not being an out-and-out Ga during the last parliamentary elections. Lamptey and Lante are one name from one clan; in mere spelling, one is indigenized and the other Anglicized. Jake therefore passes for Nii Lante’s uncle. In terms of spiritual and traditional values, Nii Lante may be burning his fingers in continually deciding not to leave his uncle’s residence, citing all kinds of excuses – with party patrons looking on. It is a totally different scenario, if Jake stole the property and he Nii Lante was playing the vigilante and patriot. For all you know, however, Jake could be the only Ga in that premises. 

Additionally, there are facts about our national and political independence which Nii Lante may not be aware about. Obetsebi Lamptey, Jake’s father and member of the Big Six, drafted the petition that Sgt. Adjetey and his lieutenants were to submit to the Governor during the February 28 shooting incident. Also as a member of the Big Six, he was the only one of the Six within meters of the incident and reported back to the rest, who rallied together to push the petition to the Governor, after the incident. Before then, he had immediately confronted Superintendent Imray from the top of his car where, he was perching, just to have a bird’s eye view of the drama.

“Imray, you fired the shots. Who authorized you?” Obetsebi  Lamptey exploded. “Captain Ballantyne,” the panicky Imray confessed, whereupon Obetsebi Lamptey picked his pocket diary and noted the confession. 

At almost 90, I am finalizing my will and testament. All I can say now, before I depart, is urge Nii Lante, as part of that testament, not to listen to traitors who, in the name of GaDangme solidarity, tend to want to spinelessly score unnecessary political points on just any issue.  He must show remorse and prove critics wrong. Tamakloes and Tsikatas in the NDC will not do what you have done to a fellow Ga and relative; and Owusus and Yeboahs in the same or other parties will not do that either…Ga boys in politics must learn serious lessons… 

Remember what happened to Josiah Aryeh…in the end, you might be another embarrassing GaDangme scapegoat. I rest my case...

*Published unedited

JOSHUA ATTOH QUARSHIE,

CHEMUNAA, ACCRA.