And what is the amendment that has them so worked up? It says that the bank officials can't stand for office. Does that seem likely to inspire this rhetoric?
The pro-CBL protesters were seen in a jubilant mood before the main entrance of the Capitol Building chanting slogans like: "That Modern Slavery, It Will Not Hold! You Are In Error! Ellen Don't Sign It! Don't Target One Person! Stop The Evil!" amongst others.
They were also seen holding placards with the inscriptions: "The Anti-CBL Bill Is Evil! We Love Dr. J. Mills Jones; Do Not Harm Him! Lawmakers Do Not Strangulate The CBL! Liberians Say No To Satanic Law! We Don't Support So-Called Bill! We Say No To The 4G Amended Bill!"
Jones has been on the job for about 8 years now, and recently stirred up quite a bit of grief when he sold off a large chunk of Liberia's US dollar reserve. This sparked a little inflation, though it wasn't clear he had much choice.
I couldn't find any hint he'd been affiliated with any of the warlords, and since he has apparently been doing a fairly decent job I doubt that he was warlord or warlord crony material. I couldn't find anything suggesting that he was starting a political party of his own, though I could very easily have missed that. If he was, that would explain the law and the support group.
Who was in the support group?
The pro-CBL supporters, who included marketers, elderly women and men, university students, and youths, amongst others, came from across Monrovia and other parts of the country.
"Youths" stand around aimlessly all around Monrovia--there are more youths than opportunities. Hiring a few hundred to do a couple of hours of chanting wouldn't be hard. And while some of the university students are hard working, it wouldn't be impossible to locate a substantial number of layabouts among their ranks.
But then again maybe Sirleaf et al are afraid of Jones. Ellen Sirleaf has done a lot for Liberia, finagling billions in debt relief, but I wouldn't put my finger in the fire to swear that she and hers have always stood up to the temptations of corruption.
If I was living in Liberia I'd be hearing a lot more of the details, but I suspect that most of them would be lies and smoke. It used to be a grand place for conspiracy theories--probably still is. It wouldn't be surprising; people have to make sense of things somehow.
Here also. I find that my first reaction when the Feds release economic statistics is "What are you leaving out?" More and more when there's some new kind of "green" initiative or education program I automatically try to figure out who is getting the goodies. That's not a nice way to think, and it is only a step or two from conspiracy-land. There have been pockets of corruption all along, but I think they're spreading.
4 comments:
Conspiracies happen all the time. It's successful conspiracies that are rare. Suspecting corruption, or that someone is in on the deal, is not especially crazy. Where it gets crazy is when the data doesn't add up, but you still believe. When the money could be more easily made another way, or the number of people who have to keep the secret grows very large, or the supposed advantage to the conspirators tends to be not much, then it is insane to keep believing.
Obama, or Bush, or Putin, or any number of people might want to do some secret and underhanded thing - but what would it take, really? One of my favorites was Big Oil keeping the price of gas low to help Bush get elected. Multiply the number of gallons of gas sold in America by, say, ten cents, and ask yourself if any business would give away that much money (I think it was $0.5B/week or something) for an entire year and you realise - they could buy more influence with 1% of that as campaign contribution.
One fellow I know was convinced a local nursing home was selling drugs onsite. I tried to explain that the real money would be in "not buying" or reselling pharmaceuticals.
Maggie's Farm, I think, had a link to a story about a con man who pretended to be some kind of cadet member of the Rockefeller family. He gave his profession as "free-lance central banker," and many of his audience apparently nodded wisely. Banking seems a completely mysterious function to many people, so maybe they object to a banker's running for office the same way they might to a wizard.
I can see that in general, but this had a lot of support from people who get reports from him regularly and should know better.
Post a Comment