You have indeed read extensively about Nkrumah and most of our African leaders. Can honestly tell me what the meaning of independence is and whether Ghana and other African countries gained total colonial freedom? Why was the ... read full comment
You have indeed read extensively about Nkrumah and most of our African leaders. Can honestly tell me what the meaning of independence is and whether Ghana and other African countries gained total colonial freedom? Why was the west forcing and still forcing All African states to practice democracy? You should understand that most African countries gained their independence right in the middle of the cold war era. Patrice Lumumba was assassinated and before that was beaten live on Tv for all to see by the Americans and mobutu's soldiers. But for what? Because he sought army assistance from the Soviets to put his in order? Patrice Lumumba had called on the UN earlier on but the UN soldiers did nothing to solve the crisis. He was assassinated for only that reason. Although the Belgian government was working hand in hand with the UN to keep control of the mineral rich region...but that's a long story. You should know that Nkrumah himself believed in socialism and communist governance. His theories and books were widely based on Marxist-Leninist-Maoist theories and projections. The assassination plots and overthrow were all engineered by the CIA as you rightly said. Nkrumah learned extensively about tactics of the imperialists and Western powers. That's why he had to fight to keep Ghana as a single party state because it would leave no room for the West to plot against ruling government through the opposition parties or opponents. Let's not forget that, this was the same way that made the west first engineered the African tribes into ethnic conflicts while they settled in to establish their rule. So, Nkrumah knew the west was after him because of his close relationship with the Soviet at that time. The west were bribing Nkrumah's executive and signing unnecessary deals because Nkrumah was preoccupied with idea of achieving total African unity. Planning assassinations or using propagandas for a greater good is nothing new especially in the west....America itself went through great lengths to keep the states union and also emancipate slaves through civil war that killed a lot of them...The US government kept sending $several millions in the form of USAID to Congo every now and then until the early 1990s when the cold ended. And that was really just about the time most African countries gained total independence including Ghana when we actually had to vote and practice real democracy. Don't forget Mugabe also was assassinated for his zeal to achieve a United Africa. There are so many players in African politics than just the President and their ministers you see. So we should stop pointing fingers and shifting blames but just pray for a United Africa. And guess what, the west are actually funding most of these political parties so they end up getting what they want and keep Africans disintegrated. Nice article. Kudos
Shabi 10 years ago
Future President, I believe you must be new on this platform. I discern this from your graceful attempt at educating a person who is decidedly contemptuous of both common-sense and the true facts of history. To put it succinc ... read full comment
Future President, I believe you must be new on this platform. I discern this from your graceful attempt at educating a person who is decidedly contemptuous of both common-sense and the true facts of history. To put it succinctly, this Okoampa guy has reduced himself to the depths of merely presenting himself as the most ludicrous clown of the platform.
He takes sadistic delight in putting truth on its head and as a consequence, conversely takes masochistic pleasure in having himself pilloried by one and all for his weird outlandish observations.
Your 'civilized' approach towards attempting to educate Okoampa by your contribution only reminded me of the saying about "casting pearls unto swine".
Whilst rebuking him to think straight one must of course also apply the necessary doses doses of 'shock therapy' that will encourage him to get in line within the ranks of normal people.
But all said and done, what do you expect from a contemptible bugger?
Kwei Nmetey 10 years ago
Okoampa's style of writing sometimes puts me off reading his articles, because his use of words often tends to get in the way of the ideas he is trying to convey, I feel. On this occasion however, I think he is spot on. His ... read full comment
Okoampa's style of writing sometimes puts me off reading his articles, because his use of words often tends to get in the way of the ideas he is trying to convey, I feel. On this occasion however, I think he is spot on. His basic premise, that we must not romanticise iconic leaders of the past for the sake of it, is not only correct but wise. We need to realise that leaders of the past were human beings just like we are today - warts and all; that they dealt with real human situations just like the leaders of today; that, like most leaders, they made mistakes in their efforts to prosecute their ideas, sometimes very bad ones whose consequences are felt years into the future. Not to recognise these fundamental truths in our fervour to adulate them for their good deeds is a form of laziness which is unacceptable and dangerous for posterity.
G. K. Berko 10 years ago
If the Professor accepts our common human fallibility, which encompasses the attributes of his political idol, Danquah, as well, why then would he pursue a campaign of endless vilification of Nkrumah as some devil incarnate, ... read full comment
If the Professor accepts our common human fallibility, which encompasses the attributes of his political idol, Danquah, as well, why then would he pursue a campaign of endless vilification of Nkrumah as some devil incarnate, while never discussing any limiting human frailty in Danquah and others the Don adores? He always sees Danquah as some saintly figure, and Nkrumah as some falling angel.
I bet the reason why the Professor produced this piece was not because he wanted to point out the neutrality of our common fallibility of which Nkrumah was also culpable but rather because Nkrumah was designated for the pointed model of the leaders Professor P. L. O. Lumumba was referring to in his Speech. The slightest praise of Nkrumah offends Kwame Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr..
All enlightened, fair-minded adults recognize the imperfections in our leaders, but it is also with these imperfections that the analysts calibrate the achievements of those leaders, and make vital distinctions as to who made what efforts to improve our lives.
If P. L. O. Lumuba had rather chosen, say, Danquah, to make his point in that Speech, Professor Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr. would surely have come up with a totally different point of view on Professor Lumuba's piece.
Any authentic and fair judgment of the contributions of our past leaders should be on the bases of their special circumstances, ranging from the prevailing local and external limitations, or impediments to the opportunities they had to accomplish what they achieved.
In assessing the impact of these leaders on the lives of their fellow Citizens and others beyond our borders, the personal character of these leaders often get a secondary focus. It is not therefore unusual to hear analysts condemn, say, a personal trait of philandering by a leader, but still accord that leader a top mark on his social and political role that leaves a lasting impact on the Nation. This suggests that unless an analyst simply has an ulterior motive to disparage a leader, no matter what that leader achieved for his or her Nation, the personal character of the leader always takes a backbench. It is the larger picture as to what the leader achieved or failed to do so for his or her Nation that most folks care about. Yet, Professor Okoampa-Ahoofe, Jr. would rather trample on the personal and moral fabric of Nkrumah's being and project that into the late Leader's professional or political engagements. As much as we all know and understand that the personal character of a person often influences what he or she does publicly, if we would like to use that as part of the measuring rod for assessing that individual's total achievements, then we must be equipped fully with authentic knowledge of the person's character and a generally acceptable moral guide to do so. We cannot let our personal biases be in the way, and call our assessments fair.
It is in consideration of such human fallibility that even dictators like Lee Kuan Yew could be forgiven and appreciated for their achievements. Nevertheless, the honest analysts recognize that Lee, for instance, did not experience the same hounding by external powers for his dictatorship as Nkrumah did, simply because he played to their whims.
Moreover, it is most disingenuous to conveniently pick and choose, based on personal biased sentiments, which impediments confronting the leaders while attempting to govern ought to be considered challenges worthy of credit when these leaders overcome such impediments.
Romanticizing iconic leaders come with our recognition of their achievements in the midst of their contemporary difficulties. That is not the same as overlooking their frailties. The prevailing circumstances under which these past leaders achieved what they did are what we lay side by side our current situations to assess how our peers leading us today have been faring.
The builder that digs the foundation and raises the walls often sets the tone for the completion of the structure. But if the structure does not have proper roofing and finishing to complete, and suffers deterioration, we shouldn't blame the foundation layers. At best, we would have to judge the two groups based on degree of difficulty on what they had to build.
Surely, a weak foundation would lead to a crumbling edifice. But so also would an improperly built roof and/or pillars. our past Leaders built a solid foundation for us. We blew it building upon it. Period!
Touching on Professor Okoampa-Ahoofe's particular reference to the late Leader of Congo, Patrice Lumumba, the Professor exposed his limited knowledge, or deliberate pass of the cogent facts on his role and victimization.
Patrice Lumumba was popularly elected with overwhelming margin of victory by an electorate that transcended tribal lines in Congo. In fact, he is believed to have been the only Congolese leader who could galvanize all the tribes to favor him. Yet, he was not allowed to rule beyond a couple of months. He ruled for barely two months! What criteria, then, does the Prof. adjudge Patrice Lumumba by to be included in the don's list of 'despicable African leaders after whom the inept generation of today take'? (My paraphrase).
In a recent documentary, one of the interviewee, who happens to be among the Belgian Agents sent to orchestrate Lumumba's Murder with the CIA in Congo, confessed that the only reason the Belgians wanted him dead was that Lumumba insulted their King... the murderous, spoilt, brutal King Leopold II.
This alleged insult by Lumumba was nothing more than a bold enumeration of all the atrocities the Belgians had inflicted upon his people in a Speech that he was not expected to give. In that event, the Belgian Colonial Power had deliberately denied Lumumba, the newly elected Premier a Platform to address his folks. So, upon his advisor's counseling, Lumumba chose to rise, uninvited, of course, to lay down the moral reasons for which his people deserved their freedom.
The later claim by the West that the reason they assassinated him was because he was courting the Soviets to take over the resources of Congo that the West depended upon was a bogus cover. Lumumba even traveled to the USA to seek both technical and financial assistance for Congo's development but was disrespectfully denied access to meet with President Eisenhower. The US Authorities and their Belgian Counterparts derogatively mocked him as the 'Jungle Premier' who didn't deserve Eisenhower's personal attention.
The presence of the Soviets in Congo at the peak of the crisis brewed by the Belgians and the CIA to wjustify Lumumba's assassination was upon the specific advice of the USA to the United Nations to bring a semblance of neutrality and balance to the Conflict. The Soviets did not just jump in there and were not invited by Lumumba, necessarily. They were part of the UN Peace-keeping outfit.
Why did the 'honorable' Professor Okoampa-Ahoofe, not count Tshombe and Mobutu among his list of horrible past African leaders? Were these two good enough for the Professor?
And where is the Professor's proof that Nkrumah ordered the assassination of any foreign Leader, including Olympio? The case of Kenyatta is even more ridiculous. When Tom Mboya stood up to Kenyatta, it wasn't at Nkrumah's behest. Yet, Mr. Mboya was assassinated and no one in particular accounted for it. I guess the Prof. who claims to be a believer in the rule of law did not think Mboya deserved any. Huh?
Please, we may not have PhD.s appended to our names. But that does not make us empty-headed imbeciles who know nothing, and can't handle the truth. The last time I checked Kenyatta was one of those iconic past leaders Kenyans and many other Africans now honor immensely. Was he a saint or savage?
Our adulation of our deserving past leaders is necessary to inspire us and the young to aspire for greater success. I don't see laziness in that. I don't even think we have done that enough, and across Party lines. What reflects laziness here is the sect of intellectuals who re-write History to suit their addicted parti pris, palate without properly researched facts, or spew pure mendacity to flummox the unsuspected Public. It is amazing how the Professor whines about excessive adulation of our leaders, especially Nkrumah, but has never stopped we accord Danquah the same adulation.
Long Live Ghana!!!
Kwabena Danso,Gbawe-Accra 10 years ago
Don't forget Mugabe also was assassinated for his zeal to achieve a United Africa
Don't forget Mugabe also was assassinated for his zeal to achieve a United Africa
Nana Kwaku 10 years ago
If Nkrumah was so corrupt as the West would let us believe,how come his children that he left behind do not have any property to lay their hands on?Nkrumah may have his faults but we can't put him in the same bracket as of hi ... read full comment
If Nkrumah was so corrupt as the West would let us believe,how come his children that he left behind do not have any property to lay their hands on?Nkrumah may have his faults but we can't put him in the same bracket as of his contemporaries.Nkrumah's main problem is his inability to put a succession plan,also his inability to handle his opponents in a civilized way.Also I don't think political ideologies are at the moment working,if so how come Communist China is doing so well economically and soon will be beating mighty USA.Locally capitalist NPP did better in our social problems than socialist NDC.
United Ghana 10 years ago
Socialist NDC? Ha ha ha haaaaaa.
Socialist NDC? Ha ha ha haaaaaa.
profferlio 10 years ago
Massa u are best. U know ur history. Ghanas downfall is all the fault of npp. Their sooo bitter that, their allowed the cia to work through them. Now look at mother gh striped naked for everybody to see. Until blacks will rea ... read full comment
Massa u are best. U know ur history. Ghanas downfall is all the fault of npp. Their sooo bitter that, their allowed the cia to work through them. Now look at mother gh striped naked for everybody to see. Until blacks will realse thrir identity, will be useless till thy kingdom come
Kodjo 10 years ago
A neo colonialist and imperialist stooge who is in the pocket of western interest who are determined to keep the people of Africa down through lost souls like Ahoofe.Shame on him.
A neo colonialist and imperialist stooge who is in the pocket of western interest who are determined to keep the people of Africa down through lost souls like Ahoofe.Shame on him.
REAL AFRICAN 10 years ago
It is so sad Ahoofe cannot comprehend any sensible message.
It is so sad Ahoofe cannot comprehend any sensible message.
KB 10 years ago
Okoampa evidently hates himself.He's such a weird character.
Okoampa evidently hates himself.He's such a weird character.
Malit 10 years ago
I read a lot about the ideology of Kwame Nkrumah and his vision for the black race in general and find him to be just and credible although he is human and may be faulted but in terms of assessment against this voodoo leaders ... read full comment
I read a lot about the ideology of Kwame Nkrumah and his vision for the black race in general and find him to be just and credible although he is human and may be faulted but in terms of assessment against this voodoo leaders we have today he is incomparable and way ahead in reasoning and vision.
United Ghana 10 years ago
True. That's why some people will try to rewrite history to paint Nkrumah in bad light
True. That's why some people will try to rewrite history to paint Nkrumah in bad light
Atia 10 years ago
You are a pathological liar and a disgrace to academia. There were many attempted coups because your predecessors sold their conscience collectively to the colonualist
You are a pathological liar and a disgrace to academia. There were many attempted coups because your predecessors sold their conscience collectively to the colonualist
Kaboro 10 years ago
Quote: One only has to undertake a casual study of the regimes of the likes of Messrs. Nkrumah, Lumumba,..."
So how long did Lumumba's "regime" last?
You new moniker is : Freaking FBRK8R!
Quote: One only has to undertake a casual study of the regimes of the likes of Messrs. Nkrumah, Lumumba,..."
So how long did Lumumba's "regime" last?
You new moniker is : Freaking FBRK8R!
kofi mensah 10 years ago
Perhaps Nkrumah was a dictator...but his achievements in nine years of his administration is evident. He envisioned to irrigate the Accra plains for large scale farming before his overthrow in February 1966. Today, we prefer ... read full comment
Perhaps Nkrumah was a dictator...but his achievements in nine years of his administration is evident. He envisioned to irrigate the Accra plains for large scale farming before his overthrow in February 1966. Today, we prefer to import rice worth 600 million US dollars annually and expect our local currency to stabilise. This is absolute absurdity. Indeed l agree with Pro. Lumumba that current generation of politicians have failed Ghana.
kwesi mintah 10 years ago
The maxim crab does not beget bird is of Ga origin but akan has your claimed
The maxim crab does not beget bird is of Ga origin but akan has your claimed
FACTS 10 years ago
Only a professional lair of epic proportion like Ahoofe can write such a worthless article. Your visceral hatred for Nkrumah hangs in the air,thereby blocking oxygen to your brain and thinking processes. I will reproduce an ... read full comment
Only a professional lair of epic proportion like Ahoofe can write such a worthless article. Your visceral hatred for Nkrumah hangs in the air,thereby blocking oxygen to your brain and thinking processes. I will reproduce an article Kwasi Adu wrote years ago as a rebuttal.
No NPP member would accept election results declaring the NPP as losers where the number of votes for their opponents is more than the number of registered voters. In 2008, I remember seeing Peter Mac Manu on television threatening to protest against results in the Volta Region, because according to him, there had been violence against their party agents in that region. In order to justify that claim, some NPP members planned to deposit dead bodies in the Volta Region to justify their claim of NDC violence and rigging.
The question then arises as to why the same NPP now expects Laurent Gbagbo to accept election results in which, in several places, the number of voters exceeded the number of registered voters, and where independent observers had declared that there had been massive incidents of ballot box snatching, beatings and killings of Gbagbo’s party agents etc.
The problem of the NPP is that they keep “bobbing and jiving” around the issues of free and fair elections, democracy, human rights, and rule of law without really meaning it.
If they were genuinely committed to all these freedoms, then they need to explain why they and their predecessors love Houphouet-Boigny of Cote d’Ivoire so much. They harangued and continue to harangue Dr. Kwame Nkrumah for what they describe as Nkrumah’s abuse of freedoms. While they were doing these, they continued to see the Houphouet-Boigny government as a beacon, which everyone should emulate.
President Houphouet-Boigny, in his time in Cote d’Ivoire, did not respect any of the freedoms to which the NPP claim to adhere. Houphouet set up a one-party state. I remember that when I was young and used to travel to Cote d’Ivoire, it was almost a crime for any Ivoirians not to have in their possession the PDCI Party card. Whenever they stopped a vehicle, the Ivoirian gendarmes were more merciful on Ghanaians travelling without passports than on Ivoirians who did not have the PDCI card. The PDCI was Houphouet’s party- the only legal party. His hatred of fundamental freedoms was so intense that he even banned the studying of Political Science in educational institutions in the country. In spite of these, the NPP and their predecessors loved him to bits.
The question then arises why the NPP would lambast Nkrumah for introducing a one-party state in Ghana while at the same time, they adored Houphouet-Boigny who also had instituted the same? In 1982 when people such as Gbagbo were agitating for multi-party politics, free expression, etc, the NPP people were the greatest friends of Houphouet-Boigny. Abidjan became their Mecca where they regularly congregated and consorted. They even had a shadow army with which they were planning to invade Ghana. In the end, Gbagbo had to go into exile, leaving the country for the NPP people and Houphouet-Boigny.
Indeed, during the reign of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, the forebears of the NPP regularly plotted with Houphouet-Boigny with the sole objective to overthrow the Nkrumah government. It did not register with them, at the time, that they were asking a one-party government to overthrow another one-party government. It is therefore safe to say that when the NPP say that they abhor “dictatorship”, that is not what they really mean. What they really mean is that they are not the ones in charge of the dictatorship.
It is also safe to say that the NPP and their forebears never really care(d) about free and fair elections, as a process for achieving political power. They never liked it when they lost the 1951 elections; so they started slashing people with cutlasses and burying pregnant women alive. What happened next was appalling. They asked the colonial government to organise another elections, hoping that by 1954, they would have terrorised CPP supporters into the bush. When they lost that one too, they called for the Ashanti region to secede from Ghana. They then sent a delegation to the Queen, to ask the British government not to grant independence to Ghana. In effect, they did not want independence if that independence was not going to result in them being the rulers. They were not interested in the will of the people as expressed in the 1954 elections. From then on, the “Matemeho” people refused to attend any meeting to discuss independence.
When the colonial Governor went to Kumasi to mediate between them and the CPP, they pelted him with stones. When the third elections were held in 1956 and they lost that one as well, they then resorted to attempts to overthrow the new government. By 1958, R.R. Amponsah, the General Secretary of the UP went and bought hundreds of military attires and accoutrements from London to come and stage a coup.
In the history of Ghana, the NPP and their people have accepted only three elections results: the 1969 one, which Afrifa cooked for them; the 2000 one and the one in 2004 when they declared themselves winners. The similarity between the NPP and Ouattara’s RDR were becoming clearer.
Firstly, they both believe that in any society, only the elite should have privileges. That is what made them regard CPP supporters as “veranda boys”. That is also what their friend, Houphouet believed in. Left with Houphouet-Boigny alone, Ouattara would have been a perfect choice to replace him to continue with his “legacy” of elitist government.
They do not respect election results if they are not the ones who are declared the winners. Look at the mayhem that they unleashed in this country between 1951 and 1966. In 1992, the rejected the election results and wrote “The Stolen Verdict”. According to one of the members of the NPP’s Council of Elders, Mr. Appiah-Minkah, the NPP planned to plunge the country into a civil war when they lost the elections in 1992 (see Africa Watch; June 2010). In 2008, in spite of the massive intimidation of voters in the Ashanti Region, they were, in addition, looking for dead bodies to deposit in the Volta Region in order to have the election results in those parts annulled. When Ouattara was disqualified from contesting the elections in the 2000, he retreated to the “North” and declared war with the Forces Nouvelles. It is not for nothing that he became known as “Father of the Rebellion”.
Another common factor shared between Ouattara’s Rally of the Republicans (RDR) and the NPP is that whenever they do not win the political argument, they retreat and come back with guns blazing - and machetes shining - under the ethnic flag.
The forebears of the NPP, after losing the 1951elections, wrapped themselves in the ethnic flag, and came fighting as tribalists. They formed the National Liberation Movement (NLM) in Ashanti, the Ga Shifimo Kpee in Accra, the Togoland Congress in the Volta Region, and the Northern Peoples Party (NPP) in the north, when they wreaked acts of terrorism throughout the country. Ouattara found solace in rallying around people from the north of Cote d’Ivoire when he realised that it was his only hope of winning power. They do these things although when it comes to the crunch, they do not give a damn to the interests of the poor among the tribes on whose shoulders they rely to get the political power.
The NPP prefer Ouattara mainly because, in reality, his party (the RDR) is part of the marriage of convenience between him and Konan Bedie, called the “Rally of Houphouëtistes”. Just the mention of the name, “Houphouet”, is enough to make the mouths of NPP people water.
It has not been lost on me that in 2009, during the parliamentary vetting of President Mills’ nominees for ministerial appointments, the NPP Minority Leader asked one of them: “Politics is about sharing the national cake, you get me”? It is obvious, from the way that they shared among the NPP elite executive government bungalows and lands meant for government offices, that in the estimation of the NPP, all that matters in politics is the grabbing of state assets. That is why they are so desperate to win power “by all means”. At least, this is what their flag bearer, Nana Akufo Addo has stated. Mr. Abayifa Karbo, the NPP National Youth Organiser has clarified that “By all means” when he stated that the NPP shall turn Ghana into Afghanistan if the do not win the elections in 2012. That is typical Ouattara style. We should all brace ourselves.
In the end, the NPP’s claim to democracy, rule of law, human rights etc is what Henry Fielding describes as “an endeavour to avoid censure by concealing our vices under an appearance of their opposite virtues”. He was describing hypocrisy.
You have indeed read extensively about Nkrumah and most of our African leaders. Can honestly tell me what the meaning of independence is and whether Ghana and other African countries gained total colonial freedom? Why was the ...
read full comment
Future President, I believe you must be new on this platform. I discern this from your graceful attempt at educating a person who is decidedly contemptuous of both common-sense and the true facts of history. To put it succinc ...
read full comment
Okoampa's style of writing sometimes puts me off reading his articles, because his use of words often tends to get in the way of the ideas he is trying to convey, I feel. On this occasion however, I think he is spot on. His ...
read full comment
If the Professor accepts our common human fallibility, which encompasses the attributes of his political idol, Danquah, as well, why then would he pursue a campaign of endless vilification of Nkrumah as some devil incarnate, ...
read full comment
Don't forget Mugabe also was assassinated for his zeal to achieve a United Africa
If Nkrumah was so corrupt as the West would let us believe,how come his children that he left behind do not have any property to lay their hands on?Nkrumah may have his faults but we can't put him in the same bracket as of hi ...
read full comment
Socialist NDC? Ha ha ha haaaaaa.
Massa u are best. U know ur history. Ghanas downfall is all the fault of npp. Their sooo bitter that, their allowed the cia to work through them. Now look at mother gh striped naked for everybody to see. Until blacks will rea ...
read full comment
A neo colonialist and imperialist stooge who is in the pocket of western interest who are determined to keep the people of Africa down through lost souls like Ahoofe.Shame on him.
It is so sad Ahoofe cannot comprehend any sensible message.
Okoampa evidently hates himself.He's such a weird character.
I read a lot about the ideology of Kwame Nkrumah and his vision for the black race in general and find him to be just and credible although he is human and may be faulted but in terms of assessment against this voodoo leaders ...
read full comment
True. That's why some people will try to rewrite history to paint Nkrumah in bad light
You are a pathological liar and a disgrace to academia. There were many attempted coups because your predecessors sold their conscience collectively to the colonualist
Quote: One only has to undertake a casual study of the regimes of the likes of Messrs. Nkrumah, Lumumba,..."
So how long did Lumumba's "regime" last?
You new moniker is : Freaking FBRK8R!
Perhaps Nkrumah was a dictator...but his achievements in nine years of his administration is evident. He envisioned to irrigate the Accra plains for large scale farming before his overthrow in February 1966. Today, we prefer ...
read full comment
The maxim crab does not beget bird is of Ga origin but akan has your claimed
Only a professional lair of epic proportion like Ahoofe can write such a worthless article. Your visceral hatred for Nkrumah hangs in the air,thereby blocking oxygen to your brain and thinking processes. I will reproduce an ...
read full comment
Kwasea!!