The “High drama in Indonesian airspace involving the PNG Falcon jet“ which took place over more than a month ago – back in 2011, has been been made public only last week.
The Deputy Prime Minister, Belden Namah, in typical knee-jerk fashion common to PNG politicians, released a media statement on this issue, only after it was brought to the attention of the people via the front page story of The National (6/01/12).
But Mr Namah’s official statement on this incident has left me with more questions than answers.
- Why has Mr Namah been silent on this matter until it had surfaced on the papers for him to come out?
- What was the purpose of this power meeting over in Malaysia that required 3 senior MPs to travel there?
- Why was the police minister part of this troupe? Was it to go over the “security detail” for the oil palm plantations like how Rumbinan Hijau (RH) pays for members of the Royal Police Constabulary to beat the hell out of fellow Papua New Guineans?
- Why were those “oil palm investors” flown here on the Falcon jet? Seems reminiscent of the Somare regime.
– The idea of flying “investors” to and from PNG with the Falcon is becoming rather too ‘crowded’, don’t you think? Should PNG start getting ready to fork out more for a bigger jet soon if we are going to consider all the investors lining up for a free flight at tax payers’ expense?
- Would the oil palm investors from Malaysia be related to RH in any way?
– Hang on. If that were the case, I doubt it would be brought to light by The National newspaper.
– Which then begs the question as to who the Indonesian journalist is and which media outlet he/she is attached with? (This is something for The National newspaper to reply to).
– Would it be a competitor of RH then? Questions, questions and more questions…. let’s move on.
- In his statement, Mr Namah further asks us to ponder on the possible outcome of such an event if it happened to countries like “… Australia, New Zealand, America or China for that matter and it was carrying their Deputy Prime Ministers or the Vice Presidents…”
– Well for starters, would they have waited 1 month until after a newspaper report to cry foul?
– Perhaps we would better understand how they (“Australia, New Zealand, America or China“) would react if they were faced with such a crisis situation by first finding the answers to the first three points above.
- Namah goes on further to ask us to “Imagine carrying such a large amount of money on the small Falcon Jet”
– Well I have never held a million in my hands to help me to “imagine” US$250 million. In any case, one could have just as easily have US$250m in bonds, I’m sure.
– But then again, I’ll have to tag this point under the #JustSaying category. I may be accused here of speculating but I am only working on the premise of his “OK” to speculate on this incident by the line “I leave that for you to conclude.” (B.Namah).
– And of course. I’m testing the waters of freedom of expression here to see if it can stay its course and hold ground.
“Finally, it is in this kind of test that the nations must stand united forgetting their differences and upholding their pledge to their motherland. Papua New Guineans MUST now learn to be NATIONALISTIC AND PATRIOTIC. WE MUST PROTECT OUR SOVEREINGNITY. [sic]” – Belden Namah
Namah’s closing remarks as quoted above sits smugly with the rest of the statement like an unwiped ass on a hot Moresby day. It seems almost disjointed – incongruent even, from the rest of his statement. Perhaps it is the soldier in him trying to relive his glory days of rousing soldiers into action, but it falls short of hitting the target; like a punch line to a lame joke that never quite makes it. It is of course his rally call to get the Opposition MP’s to set aside their political differences, and to get the public support behind him in his pursuit to seek some redress from international bodies on this matter.
However, with no disrespect to him, I have to say that this has to be one of the most pathetically shallow attempts at inciting patriotic pride, if that was the intent. The obvious lack of detailed information on this matter, as highlighted by the seven points raised above, hang like a rainy day on a picnic. It fails to build up the crescendo it deserves, in order to make that final “call to arms” – if I may dare to call it that. In fact it falls in a heap of clichés.
One would have thought Mr Namah would have by now known better than to be hasty with his words (yea, he of the claims to “damning evidence” against the Chief Justice Injia, if one cares to recall). In fact, it is of paramount importance that any man or woman who has reached such a level of the political ladder as Mr Namah needs to be extra sensitive in their choice of words, especially now more than ever.
This is not me being unpatriotic. This is me being a realistic patriot. This is me speaking up and speaking out, asking the niggling questions that are in all thinking Papua New Guineans’ minds. This is me trying to make sound and informed judgement after understanding the underlying details surrounding this incident in order to avoid dancing to conjecture, recycled lyrics, question marks and bull shit.
This is me asking why we have to “learn to be NATIONALISTIC AND PATRIOTIC” now, when numerous calls to look into cases of border incursions previously have received very minimal attention. This is me asking why we have to “learn to be NATIONALISTIC AND PATRIOTIC” now, when we could have been so back in November 29, 2011.
This is me saying you need to protect the spelling of your “SOVEREINGNITY” so then perhaps we can really start protecting our SOVEREIGNTY.
The moral of the story is that Mr Namah needs a new speech writer to cover his tracks better.