https://www.facebook.com/903827100005552/

News Ganjaa, God Blessed You Hill, Monrovia (2026)

29/11/2025

Reflection

Tuan Wreh: The Journalist Who Carried Shame and Left a Legacy of Freedom

By Alexander L Redd

November 29, 2025

When people talk about democracy, they often mention ideas such as the rule of law, free press, and fair elections. These can sound very abstract. In Liberia, however, these ideas were paid for by real people who suffered, stood firm, and refused to be silent. One of the bravest among them was the late Tuan Wreh. Few Liberians paid a heavier personal price or shaped our democracy more deeply than he did.

To understand why a free press matters in Liberia today, we must look back to a terrible moment in Monrovia in 1955. At that time, Tuan Wreh was a bright young journalist and assistant editor of The Independent. He was punished not for a crime, but for speaking against President William V. S. Tubman. For what the government called “seditious libel,” he was not only jailed. Soldiers forced him to carry buckets of human waste (pupu) through the streets of the capital.

The goal was to shame him and frighten everyone else. The message was clear: anyone who challenged the “politics of force and fear” could be treated like dirt. But the plan backfired. Instead of breaking him, it turned him into a symbol of courage. That painful image of a learned man carrying filth for the state became a picture of what he did for his country. Tuan Wreh was willing to carry the heavy, dirty load so that others might one day walk in freedom.

We can see his influence in three main areas: using truth against oppression, putting freedom into the law, and opening space for real political choice.

First, Tuan Wreh showed that truth can cut through fear. At a time when many expected the press to praise the True Whig Party, he used his pen to question power. His famous book, The Love of Liberty: The Rule of President William V. S. Tubman in Liberia, is still one of the most important political books in our history. By carefully recording the abuses of that era, he did more than write history. He spoke for those who were suffering in silence. He taught that a journalist’s first duty is not to please a president, but to tell the truth. Our lively media today, where reporters expose corruption and mismanagement, stands on the ground he helped prepare through his suffering.

Second, he moved from simply protesting to helping shape the rules of the nation. As a legal scholar, Dean of the Louis Arthur Grimes School of Law, and member of the Constitutional Advisory Assembly that drafted the 1986 Constitution, he worked to put freedom into written law. The 1980s were dark years under Samuel Doe, but Wreh’s efforts helped secure principles such as civil liberties, fair trials, and checks on power. He knew that freedom cannot survive on feelings alone. It must be written, taught, and defended in the courts.

Third, Tuan Wreh understood that democracy needs real competition. Without choice, there is no true democracy. As Chairman of the Liberia Action Party during the troubled 1985 elections, he walked a very dangerous road. He had once served as a legal advisor to President Doe, but later broke away and aligned with the opposition. He showed that loyalty to Liberia must come before loyalty to any leader. By helping to build a serious political alternative in a time of arrests and killings, he strengthened the idea that many parties should compete for power. The bravery required to stand as an opposition leader in 1985 is hard to fully describe.

Tuan Wreh was not a perfect man and had his own struggles like anyone else. He lived in hard times and had to make difficult choices. Yet his life gives us a powerful example of responsible citizenship. He showed that “The Love of Liberty” is not only a motto on a banner. It is a way of life that can cost you your comfort and even your safety.

Today, when a Liberian journalist publishes a strong story without fear of being dragged through the streets, they are walking where Tuan Wreh once walked in pain. When a lawyer uses the Constitution to stand up to the state, they are using tools he helped to shape. Tuan Wreh proved that rulers may force you to carry filth, but they cannot force you to accept lies as truth. This is his lasting gift to Liberia, and it remains a firm part of the foundation on which our republic stands.

27/11/2025

Letter From Saclepea
With Musa Hassan Bility

Remembering EJS

There are moments in a nation's life when reflection becomes an obligation, not a choice. This week, as I sit quietly with the weight of all that has gone wrong in our country over the last eight years, my mind drifts unexpectedly to one person. A leader whose era many of us criticized, debated, and judged. Yet today, in the face of the chaos, decline, and institutional collapse unfolding before our eyes, her memory returns with a force I never imagined.

I remember Ellen Johnson Sirleaf not because she was perfect. No leader is. Hers was a government that began in difficulty and lived through difficulty. She governed a bruised nation. A people who had survived years of terror. A country that had fallen from grace, abandoned by its friends and feared by its neighbors. She had to rebuild both the state and the spirit of the people, and she did so through a disciplined governance approach that, looking back now, stands in painful contrast to what Liberia has become.

Under EJS, government officials could not behave with the boldness, impunity, or disregard for public decency that we witness today. Respect for the National Legislature, even with its imperfections, remained intact. There was a seriousness about running the state. A discipline. A boundary that no official dared to cross without consequence. Not because the government was flawless, but because the tone of leadership set clear expectations about behavior, accountability, and respect for institutions.

Under EJS, the Senate would not wait for a court to explain that an MDA is a financial bill and must originate from the House of Representatives. The Legislature would not openly break its own rules and walk away laughing. The Executive would not dismantle its own credibility and still expect the world to take it seriously. The very fabric of governance, fragile as it was, held together because leadership insisted that it must.

I am forced to admit, and it pains me to do so, that Liberia has taken several steps backward. So many that the twelve years of EJS now look like the golden years of our recent democratic history. That reality is not only surprising. It is heartbreaking.

This was the same government that began on a rough note. A postwar nation filled with hurt and anger. A country that still carried the fingerprints of the warlords. A people who needed peace, justice, stability, and reassurance all at the same time. EJS had to juggle everything: the law, the peace, the international image of Liberia, the expectations of a traumatized population, and the monumental burden of restoring confidence in a shattered state.

When she left office and I spoke with her, she said something that has remained in my mind: that her greatest achievement was setting Liberia on an irreversible course to progress and prosperity.

But eight years later, almost everything she built has been undone. The systems. The discipline. The respect for governance. The international confidence. The foundation for reform. All dismantled. Not gradually. Not by accident. But deliberately and consistently, in plain view of the nation and the world.

What a country. What a land.

After twelve years of EJS fighting to restore the rule of law, fighting to establish tenure for officials, fighting to strengthen the independence of each branch of government, fighting to rebuild a country that had collapsed under the weight of its own violence, we now find ourselves at the lowest point. A point I can only describe as the calm before the boiling point. A moment where everything feels fragile and uncertain.

Why have we sunk to this level? Why have we allowed the foundation she laid to be broken in her presence? Why have we watched a democracy she worked so hard to shape descend into disrespect, indiscipline, and institutional recklessness?

I remember EJS today not because of nostalgia, but because her memory reminds me of how far we have fallen. It reminds me of the pain she must feel watching a country she helped stabilize return to the brink. It reminds me of the disappointment of a people who once had hope that we were on a path that could not be reversed.

I can see her pain. I can feel her frustration. And above all, I can feel the fear of what lies ahead for Liberia if we continue on this path.

May we find the courage to confront the truth. May we find the discipline to correct our course. May we remember the Liberia we inherited after 2006. And may we reclaim the future we are now at risk of losing.

Have a pleasant week.

14/11/2025

Letter from Saclepea
With Musa Hassan Bility
The Courage to Remain Friends

A Tribute to Patriotism and Friendship

Saclepea, like most small towns, remembers everything. The laughter, the quarrels, the seasons when the rain came too early, and the faces that left without goodbye. It teaches you that relationships, like roads, are not always smooth. Sometimes they bend sharply, sometimes they disappear into the bush, but the direction they once gave you can never be forgotten.

There is a particular courage that life demands of us, the courage to remain friends. It is not the courage that fights or defends, it is the quieter one that accepts, forgives, and keeps walking with grace even when understanding becomes difficult.

Friendship, when mixed with love, purpose, and pride, becomes one of the hardest things to sustain. The same affection that brings laughter can later bring pain. The same voice that once comforted can suddenly sound like judgment. And sometimes, the distance that follows is not out of hate; it is out of self-preservation.

But when I think of what friendship really means, I realize it is less about agreement and more about memory. The good ones stay with us. They remind us of days when everything felt easy, when trust was simple, and when being together made life feel larger than it was. Those memories are worth taking insults for, because they are proof that something beautiful once existed between two human beings, unbroken by misunderstanding.

When personality collides with pride, when ego takes over where patience should have stood, love begins to produce something strange: resentment. It is a dangerous offspring of affection. And yet, it is a sign that the love was real. Only what was genuine can hurt deeply.

In my own journey, in politics, in friendship, in love, I have learned that silence is not always weakness. Sometimes, it is the last form of respect you can offer. To say nothing is not to stop caring, it is to preserve dignity, to hold on to the better parts of what was, and to keep the noise of emotion from destroying what memory still treasures.

We all carry within us a quiet war between pride and forgiveness. We all want to be right, but the heart, in its wiser moments, only wants peace. So when imagination fails, when we can no longer picture things as they once were, we must let memory do the work. Because memory, if handled gently, can still heal what time cannot.

The sun will shine again. It always does. Even over broken friendships, even over the ashes of things we thought would last forever. The test of patriotism is not only in how we love our country but also in how we love our people, even when they hurt us, even when the bond bends under pressure.

So this letter is not about loss. It is a tribute to the courage to remain friends, to the patience to remember kindly, and to the humility to let time speak where words have failed. For in friendship, as in patriotism, what matters most is not perfection, but faithfulness to the good that once was.

Written under the European skies.
Have a pleasant new week.

03/11/2025

Twelve northern Nigerian governors, senior judges, and traditional rulers could face US sanctions under a bill before Congress alleging involvement in religious persecution linked to Nigeria’s Sharia and blasphemy laws. The Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025, sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz and supported by US President Donald Trump, seeks penalties, including visa bans and asset freezes, for officials found complicit. The bill focuses on 12 northern states—Zamfara, Kano, Sokoto, Katsina, Bauchi, Borno, Jigawa, Kebbi, Yobe, Kaduna, Niger, and Gombe—accused of enforcing laws discriminatory against Christians.

Credit: DW Africa

23/10/2025

Letter from Saclepea
With Musa Hassan Bility
Written in Maryland, USA.

The Little Girl from Ganta

It was a Saturday morning in Saclepea. I was getting ready to attend the Solidarity Rally in Ganta. The day was already heavy with plans, guests to meet, people to inspire, and a movement to push forward. I climbed the stairs, debating whether to step out onto the back porch for air, when a small voice called out from behind me.

“Papa,” she said softly, “I came for you to please help me. Can you help me with something to feed my son and myself?”

She was a little girl, hardly beyond her teens, standing there with courage in her eyes and sorrow on her face. I asked her gently, “Who is the father?”

She looked down, her voice trembling. “He is gone, Papa. He left me and the baby. He is in America now.”

I froze. “Where do you live?” I asked.

“In Ganta,” she said. “But I came all the way here just to see if you could help me. I am hungry. I do not have food. I am sorry.”

Her apology pierced through me. I looked at her, her little boy restless in her arms, eyes wide open, searching the world for comfort he had not yet known. Tears welled in her eyes, and they glimmered with that strange mix of pain and hope that only the truly broken can carry.

At that moment, my entire world stopped. I was born the son of a trader and a woman who spent her whole life farming just to survive, yet I have never known a pain that struck as deep as what I saw in her eyes.

I called my niece and said, “Take this little girl and her son to your auntie, tell her to speak with her. I want us to help her.” We gave her something to eat and told her to rest while I went on to the rally. But throughout that rally, through the crowds, the cheers, the promises of change, my mind never left that little girl and her child.

When I returned, I asked Mrs. Bility about her. She told me a story too painful to imagine, a young mother living in a dark cellar, sleeping in corners, without family, without food, and without hope. Her mother was gone. Her father was also gone. The man who gave her a child had abandoned and gone to America, leaving her to face the world alone.

That night, my wife and I decided to take her into our care. Find a place for her and her baby, put them in school, and create a future for them. We promised to look after her as one of our own.

But this story, this one story, is only a fragment of a much larger tragedy. There are thousands of girls like her across our country. Hungry. Homeless. Forgotten. And each one is a reflection of our national failure to protect the vulnerable and give dignity to people experiencing poverty.

As I sat thinking that night, I realized our problem is not the absence of wealth or opportunity. It is the absence of care. We have lost the ability to see ourselves in the eyes of the suffering.

That little girl from Ganta has become the voice that speaks to my conscience. Her tears have become the mirror of our nation’s wounds. Her story has reignited in me the fire to fight for change, not the change that comes through slogans, but the change that touches lives.

Liberia must change, for her, for her son, and for the hundreds of thousands of children whose dreams are buried beneath our silence.

20/10/2025

Reflection
By Leymah R. Gbowee

Loss of Authority

Growing up in our community on the Old Road, we—the children—belonged to all the adults, especially the fathers and mothers. There were fathers around us who did not tolerate nonsense. They were not saints, but they demanded that women be treated with respect.

I remember once, a cousin of ours insulted a lady. My father asked him to apologize, but he tried to act tough. Papay came down and landed him a few slaps, after which he apologized appropriately.

There were also men like the late Boimah Massaley, who would sit on his porch at night in the dark. Whenever he saw any of us girls walking or talking with a boy, he would make sure our parents knew. Then there was Joseph Sandy, a single father who cared for his children with dignity but was also a father to all the children in the neighborhood. After my own father, I would say he was the coolest dad around.

There was also Mr. Roosevelt—the “no-problem” dad. He was calm, cool, and collected, but he could also snitch when necessary. These men I mention were the authority figures we grew up with. No one could be a fool, play a fool, or act a fool knowing they were around.

Today, when I look around most of our communities in Liberia, I recognize that we barely have authority figures anymore. The older men who should chastise and correct are often the ones chasing little girls. Many communities are without men of honor—without father figures that other children can look up to.

After we lost our dad, I read some of the comments on social media about his life and interactions. The ones that tugged at my heart the most were from childhood friends reminiscing about him being both a disciplinarian and a kind man.
Many blame the attitude of the current generation on the war in Liberia. While the war certainly played a part, I believe a vast majority of the problem stems from people equating authority with money or material wealth. As a result, many adults refuse to intervene in young people’s lives for fear of being embarrassed or disrespected. Sadly, the more we shy away from being figures of authority, the further our young people drift from lives rooted in values and morals.

Today, I pray that men of honor will step up and fill the gap created by the loss of authority in our communities.

10/10/2025

The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize goes to a brave and committed champion of peace – to a woman who keeps the flame of democracy burning amid a growing darkness.

As a founder of Súmate, an organisation devoted to democratic development, Ms Machado stood up for free and fair elections more than 20 years ago. As she said: “It was a choice of ballots over bullets.” In political office and in her service to organisations since then, Ms Machado has spoken out for judicial independence, human rights and popular representation. She has spent years working for the freedom of the Venezuelan people.

Ahead of the election of 2024, Ms Machado was the opposition’s presidential candidate, but the regime blocked her candidacy. She then backed the representative of a different party, Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, in the election. Hundreds of thousands of volunteers mobilised across political divides. They were trained as election observers to ensure a transparent and fair election. Despite the risk of harassment, arrest and torture, citizens across the country held watch over the polling stations. They made sure the final tallies were documented before the regime could destroy ballots and lie about the outcome.

The efforts of the collective opposition, both before and during the election, were innovative and brave, peaceful and democratic. The opposition received international support when its leaders publicised the vote counts that had been collected from the country’s election districts, showing that the opposition had won by a clear margin. But the regime refused to accept the election result, and clung to power.

In the past year, Ms Machado has been forced to live in hiding. Despite serious threats against her life she has remained in the country, a choice that has inspired millions of people.

Democracy depends on people who refuse to stay silent, who dare to step forward despite grave risk, and who remind us that freedom must never be taken for granted, but must always be defended – with words, with courage and with determination.

Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Corina Machado has shown that the tools of democracy are also the tools of peace. She embodies the hope of a different future, one where the fundamental rights of citizens are protected, and their voices are heard. In this future, people will finally be free to live in peace.

Read more about the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize: https://bit.ly/4o0sckV

10/10/2025

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize to Maria Corina Machado for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.

As the leader of the democracy movement in Venezuela, Maria Corina Machado is one of the most extraordinary examples of civilian courage in Latin America in recent times.

Ms Machado has been a key, unifying figure in a political opposition that was once deeply divided – an opposition that found common ground in the demand for free elections and representative government. This is precisely what lies at the heart of democracy: our shared willingness to defend the principles of popular rule, even though we disagree. At a time when democracy is under threat, it is more important than ever to defend this common ground.

Venezuela has evolved from a relatively democratic and prosperous country to a brutal, authoritarian state that is now suffering a humanitarian and economic crisis. Most Venezuelans live in deep poverty, even as the few at the top enrich themselves. The violent machinery of the state is directed against the country’s own citizens. Nearly 8 million people have left the country. The opposition has been systematically suppressed by means of election rigging, legal prosecution and imprisonment.

Venezuela’s authoritarian regime makes political work extremely difficult. As a founder of Súmate, an organisation devoted to democratic development, Ms Machado stood up for free and fair elections more than 20 years ago. As she said: “It was a choice of ballots over bullets.” In political office and in her service to organisations since then, Ms Machado has spoken out for judicial independence, human rights and popular representation. She has spent years working for the freedom of the Venezuelan people.

Ahead of the election of 2024, Ms Machado was the opposition’s presidential candidate, but the regime blocked her candidacy. She then backed the representative of a different party, Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, in the election. Hundreds of thousands of volunteers mobilised across political divides. They were trained as election observers to ensure a transparent and fair election. Despite the risk of harassment, arrest and torture, citizens across the country held watch over the polling stations. They made sure the final tallies were documented before the regime could destroy ballots and lie about the outcome.
The efforts of the collective opposition, both before and during the election, were innovative and brave, peaceful and democratic. The opposition received international support when its leaders publicised the vote counts that had been collected from the country’s election districts, showing that the opposition had won by a clear margin. But the regime refused to accept the election result, and clung to power.

Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace. However, we live in a world where democracy is in retreat, where more and more authoritarian regimes are challenging norms and resorting to violence. The Venezuelan regime’s rigid hold on power and its repression of the population are not unique in the world. We see the same trends globally: rule of law abused by those in control, free media silenced, critics imprisoned, and societies pushed towards authoritarian rule and militarisation. In 2024, more elections were held than ever before, but fewer and fewer are free and fair.

In its long history, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has honoured brave women and men who have stood up to repression, who have carried the hope of freedom in prison cells, on the streets and in public squares, and who have shown by their actions that peaceful resistance can change the world. In the past year, Ms Machado has been forced to live in hiding. Despite serious threats against her life she has remained in the country, a choice that has inspired millions of people.
When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognise courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist. Democracy depends on people who refuse to stay silent, who dare to step forward despite grave risk, and who remind us that freedom must never be taken for granted, but must always be defended – with words, with courage and with determination.

Maria Corina Machado meets all three criteria stated in Alfred Nobel’s will for the selection of a Peace Prize laureate. She has brought her country’s opposition together. She has never wavered in resisting the militarisation of Venezuelan society. She has been steadfast in her support for a peaceful transition to democracy.

Maria Corina Machado has shown that the tools of democracy are also the tools of peace. She embodies the hope of a different future, one where the fundamental rights of citizens are protected, and their voices are heard. In this future, people will finally be free to live in peace.

Credit: The Norwegian Nobel Committee

09/10/2025

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the 2025 Nobel Prize in Chemistry to Susumu Kitagawa, Richard Robson and Omar M. Yaghi “for the development of metal–organic frameworks.”

The 2025 Nobel Prize laureates in chemistry have created molecular constructions with large spaces through which gases and other chemicals can flow. These constructions, metal–organic frameworks, can be used to harvest water from desert air, capture carbon dioxide, store toxic gases or catalyse chemical reactions.

Kitagawa, Robson and Yaghi have developed a new form of molecular architecture. In their constructions, metal ions function as corner-stones that are linked by long organic (carbon-based) molecules. Together, the metal ions and molecules are organised to form crystals that contain large cavities. These porous materials are called metal–organic frameworks (M*F). By varying the building blocks used in the M*Fs, chemists can design them to capture and store specific substances. M*Fs can also drive chemical reactions or conduct electricity.

“Metal–organic frameworks have enormous potential, bringing previously unforeseen opportunities for custom-made materials with new functions,” says Heiner Linke, Chair of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry.

Learn more
Press release: https://bit.ly/4njXUtg
Popular information: https://bit.ly/42gZLGZ
Advanced information: https://bit.ly/42gZUKx

07/10/2025

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the 2025 in Physics to John Clarke, Michel H. Devoret and John M. Martinis “for the discovery of macroscopic quantum mechanical tunnelling and energy quantisation in an electric circuit.”

This year’s physics laureates’ experiments on a chip revealed quantum physics in action.

A major question in physics is the maximum size of a system that can demonstrate quantum mechanical effects. The 2025 physics laureates conducted experiments with an electrical circuit in which they demonstrated both quantum mechanical tunnelling and quantised energy levels in a system big enough to be held in the hand.

Quantum mechanics allows a particle to move straight through a barrier, using a process called tunnelling. As soon as large numbers of particles are involved, quantum mechanical effects usually become insignificant. The laureates’ experiments demonstrated that quantum mechanical properties can be made concrete on a macroscopic scale.

In 1984 and 1985, John Clarke, Michel H. Devoret and John M. Martinis conducted a series of experiments with an electronic circuit built of superconductors, components that can conduct a current with no electrical resistance. In the circuit, the superconducting components were separated by a thin layer of non-conductive material, a setup known as a Josephson junction. By refining and measuring all the various properties of their circuit, they were able to control and explore the phenomena that arose when they passed a current through it. Together, the charged particles moving through the superconductor comprised a system that behaved as if they were a single particle that filled the entire circuit.

This macroscopic particle-like system is initially in a state in which current flows without any voltage. The system is trapped in this state, as if behind a barrier that it cannot cross. In the experiment the system shows its quantum character by managing to escape the zero-voltage state through tunnelling. The system’s changed state is detected through the appearance of a voltage.

The laureates could also demonstrate that the system behaves in the manner predicted by quantum mechanics – it is quantised, meaning that it only absorbs or emits specific amounts of energy.

The transistors in computer microchips are one example of the established quantum technology that surrounds us. This year’s Nobel Prize in Physics has provided opportunities for developing the next generation of quantum technology, including quantum cryptography, quantum computers, and quantum sensors.

Learn more
Press release: https://bit.ly/42jAlZg
Popular information: https://bit.ly/4gKFvTX
Advanced information: https://bit.ly/48CSBjZ

03/10/2025

Reflection
With Cheechiay Jablasone

Are These Weah’s Actions/Decisions Indicative of Love For Country?

The embers are dying from the celebrations of the birth of former President George Manneh Weah by largely youthful people. Most of these young people believe Weah has ‘love’ for Liberia and therefore have committed to his political ambitions to an extent where they’ve made the presidency his entitlement. To prove or disprove one’s love for country can be a difficult thing. However, when it comes to Weah and the claim from his supporters that they support him more for love of country, then it leaves one to look closely at the decisions Weah has taken or is taking to discern how those decisions have helped or hurt Liberia.

Except for those who do not follow the game of football, the universe where Weah ascended to a godlike figure, you will have no clue or be in doubt that Weah is a football genius. Weah was so good a player he won the highest individual prize in the game: ballon d’Or in 1995. He’s so talented at identifying potential players that he identified local players for roles on the national team in 2000-2002 and they stood out. He was so exceptional as a manager that his team pushed a Nigerian style-studded team to the wire for qualification for World Cup 2002. During that campaign, Weah’s team, which came to be known as ‘Jorweah 11’, became the only hope many Liberians could bank on amidst the hopelessness of a government that governed over a failed state and had become a pariah.

Unarguably, Liberian youths are amongst the most talented football players on the continent. Yet these young people have not reached their potential due to lack of opportunities. A year ago, following partisans of the CDC celebrations of the former President’s birthday in his absence, he returned to the country. At one of a few low key events in his honor, a local journalist asked the former president and football genius why couldn’t he help Liberian youth by setting up a football academy? In a nutshell, the journalist was asking why couldn’t the former world best and accomplished manager of the national team help to horn the skills of his young compatriots? Mr Weah’s response was: “I am above that”.

However, recently upon his return to Liberia when thousands of young people had gone to meet Weah, he was proud to announce that he was returning to the country after successfully finding a team for his son, Tim who plays professional football. The irony is, Mr Weah doesn’t see himself being above finding a team for his son but do see himself as being above helping to make dreams come true for youths, some who could be even talented as Tim or better. Is that how to show love for a country. Is this really a love for which young people should mortgage their future?

If that’s not any worst of thing that a person can do to their country to betray their country, then consider this simple but damaging action by Weah as president. As president, Weah chose a kitchen cabinet that comprised: Emmanuel Shaw, former finance minister to Samuel Doe; Charles Bright former finance minister under Charles Taylor. But choosing Shaw was the most alarming if not disturbing decision. As finance minister, Shaw and Doe ended the nation’s oil refinery and reverted to imported refined gasoline. They created their own company, the Liberia National Petroleum Company (LNPC) and utilized the state-owned LPRC storage tanks with their company’s name painted in bold letters on those tanks. That killed off millions of dollars of refinery production.

As finance minister, Shaw also bought a presidential jet for the president, apparently using government funds. During the heat of the war, the plane flew the then president’s family to London. When the plane landed, Shaw was in London with papers to show the government of Liberia owed him millions and he needed the plane as collateral to pay off the debt. So the then finance minister took the plane, presidential jet, sold it and pocketed the proceeds. Didn’t Weah know about all this before appointing this man his Economic Advisor?

With the refinery dead and the presidential jet sold and back in government, Shaw was at it again. This time haunting the hydro electic plant. After the Weah government came to power, he partnered with a Ghanaian businessman to bring a 35million-dollar floating power plant to Monrovia to sell power. At the time the country already had a newly half-a-billion hydro electric power plant completed with aid from the US . Weah bought into the deal only to have the US, EU and ADB write the president and warning of repercussions. Only then did Weah step back. The same man who destroyed the refinery was about to destroy the hydro. No thanks to Weah but thanks to the US, EU, ADB. They stopped him this time. Weah could not. Is that a love for country?

Recently after Weah’s home on 9th Street suffered a second fire incident in two decades, he told reporters that on the night of the fire, they were going to sleep on 9th Street but his wife decided against that. A young Liberian woman read that and was shocked. Her response was: “Really, in a country where people are so poor with no place to sleep, Weah has options of homes to sleep in?”. For those living in Monrovia, Identify how many homes Weah has around Monrovia and the number of poor families without living places. Is that love for country?

Weah should’ve been a blessing to Liberia; winning the ballon d’Or, being an accomplished player and returning home and transferring his knowledge of the game to young Liberians. But as it stands, he’s a curse to the country by which corrupt politicians are refilling their bank accounts! The young people whose future are being stolen are the pipes through which these corrupt politicians are refueling.

News Ganjaa

29/11/2025

27/11/2025

14/11/2025

03/11/2025

23/10/2025

20/10/2025

10/10/2025

10/10/2025

09/10/2025

07/10/2025

03/10/2025

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share