Liberia History & Information

By Tarty Teh

[Washington, DC, January 13, 2001] — When I was much younger, my threshold for sufficiency of acquired knowledge was set at what I knew; for merits and demerits, it was what I believed was wrong or right. But Iknew relatively nothing as far as formal knowledge was concerned. And while I was groping for what was expected of me as a son and a citizen, my experimentation with life guaranteed enough trouble to keep me wondering why my father required me to tell the truth, considering its consequences.

Teh

It was the requirement nevertheless. So my older brother Tual and I told the ”truth” often as a committee. But our father always knew better. Since I was younger, my father counted on me to contradict the committee’s decision when he felt it did not favor the truth. The presumption, therefore, was that my father never told a lie. It was never a question then, and I still believe it today. But my brother Tual and I struggled by shaving the truth here and there to keep from being punished. The complications of the truth, however, seemed never to have dawned on our sisters Worto and Cheegbeh. They stared blankly at Tual and me — expecting us to tell the truth — when we faced our father’s tribunal from our latest escapade that the sisters witnessed to our chagrin.

Now that I am much older, I set thresholds for people my own age who are in leadership positions. Whether they choose to be criminals, they should be able to clear certain limits as clever criminals or good citizens. But it is becoming obvious to me that the people now running Liberia are mere destroyers who hire outside help for the same destructive endeavors when thinking becomes necessary. Yet, we give them so much credit for mental acuity that we are left paralyzed. We assume that these people have greater abilities for predicting and foiling any counteractions we may take.

Contrary to our fear, what these people have done, and will do again, is very simple. They will kill for sure. And they won’t even try to be clean about it. We only have to look at the clubbing of Vice President Enoch Dogolea by President Taylor’s security details, and the insult of not allowing the Liberian people to see a death notice or certificate for his demise to prove President Taylor’s claim of natural death. Promises made in this regard by the government of President Charles Taylor were never repeated, let alone fulfilled. When such things happen, fear sets in soon enough and we begin to rationalize our inaction. These criminals expect that too.

This is why any simple-minded person can become a career criminal in Liberia through a legitimate executive, legislative, judicial or any duly sanctioned position. The acquisition of such a position often suffices (only because we are afraid) as justification for any act that would otherwise be viewed as criminal.

With this in mind, what can we make of what The News newspaper in Monrovia quoted Presidential Press Secretary Reginald Goodridge, in its January 8, 2001, edition as saying?

The paper wrote, ”Mr. Goodridge said the Executive Mansion is a sensitive area of [the] government and as such anyone resigning from there should go quietly or face some problems. He did not elaborate.”

Of course Mr. Goodridge was referring to Mr. Molly Passawe, whom The News article refers to as ”former Executive Mansion computer specialist and senior editor.” Passawe had resigned his position as Senior Editor and Computer Specialist at the Executive Mansion but insists on saying that Goodridge is a crook.

This is why Goodridge finds it necessary to remind Passawe of ”problems” ahead. These ”problems” are best left unspecified. But if Mr. Goodridge were talking about court actions, he would not have termed those actions ”problems.” Because he said ”problems,” we had better believe he means problems. That’s what Sam Dokie had. That’s what Vice President Enoch Dogolea had. And these are the permanent solutions conceived by simple minds. These are the minds that are at work in Liberia today.

Reading between the lines is now a required specialty in dealing with what comes out of Monrovia – both from victims and their predators. This could be the reason for the curious nature of what The News billed as ”Passawe’s Rebuttal to Goodridge’s Claims” which instead reads like a tribute to President Charles Taylor: ”Since I started working at the Executive Mansion in November 1998 in the Department of Press & Public Affairs never, in my capacity as Senior Editor/Computer Specialist, have I come across any incriminating file or dossier that could embarrass the Government of the Republic of Liberia. To the best of my knowledge, President Taylor and the NPP Government have nothing clandestine to hide. That is why I have persistently defended my country on the Internet against lies about Liberia’s involvement in gunrunning and diamond smuggling.”

Well, the United Nations could have saved itself a lot of trouble — not to mention money — by asking Mr. Molly Passawe if he knew of any dirt President Charles Taylor might be involved in. They didn’t, so their reports indicate that Taylor is dirty. But poor Passawe may yet land another Mansion job if his performance so far persuades Taylor that of the two men — Goodridge and Passawe — Passawe is a more useful sycophant. Again, the absence of brainpower is obvious. It seems there is enough money in the Executive Mansion, even while the rest of Liberia starves. But, at least according to Passawe, Goodridge is ”eating” the money, and, according to Goodridge, May Urey is ”eating” some. (Nothing explains embezzlement better than ”eating money” because there are shinning, round bellies to prove it.)

Even so, I am quite surprised that two days after Mr. Passawe made his statements that are wholly supportive of the Taylor government, he has not yet received a job offer from President Taylor. This is strange only because President Taylor has a well-established habit of feeding his dogs. Of course they, in turn, have to be suitably obedient.

Let’s see how Mr. Passawe did: ”[Mr. Goodridge's] admission of the existence of an incriminating file in Public Affairs is a faux pas intended to create the impression that [the] Government is involved in clandestine activities. To the best of my knowledge, having worked for nearly 3 years in the Executive Mansion’s Public Affairs Department, I know for sure this Government has nothing to hide.” Two days after saying this, still no crumbs. (Note: ”Faux pas” is the French equivalent of foot in the mouth. In both languages, the notion cannot make sense when modified by ”intended,” as Passawe has done. The result is likely – as now – to be an oxymoron.)

In Bush Grebo we have a saying, and it simply says that if you want to know whether a monkey has a tail, you should ask a tree stump. Well, that’s because the monkey often sits on it. In this case, I will side with Goodridge as being in a better position to know if Taylor is dirty because Taylor sits on him. Passawe is probably something to step on.

So, if Goodridge says there are secrets in the Executive Mansion worth protecting – secrets for which he’s urging Passawe, in essence, to ”Go gently into the good night” – I’ll say he knows what he’s talking about.