There are fairly uniform swings to John Mahama all over the Western region:
Suaman 4.7% to NDC
Essikadu/Ketan 3.1% to NDC
Takoradi 1.9% to NDC
Sekondi 4.5% to NDC
Shama 2.5% to NDC
It looks like Mahama’s powerful showing in the West and the North might get him home, unless Akuffo-Addo performs very well in Accra. But not much evidence in from Accra yet.
Craig,
I see that you are rattled, the thing is you have put yourself in this position.
I’ll be generous and say perhaps you are not a willing tool of Western imperialism but are simply ignorant of how it may be using you for it’s own ends, i.e. by blindly promoting both candidates and the process in what is clearly a Western ‘style’ election, fully supported materially and ideologically by the UK and US.
Perhaps all those old friends and acquaintances from the office are simply taking advantage of your gul.. good nature.
I have not lied. Anything I have said is either a fact or an opinion. Show me one single lie. If you disagree with an opinion that’s fine but I’m not a liar.
I haven’t risen to the bait of insults and instead have been diligently asking you to clarify the reason for your blind support for Ghanaian ‘democracy’ and the candidates. As you have failed to address any of my reservation I can only draw the fact based conclusions that I have
I am not interested in defending myself because that is your job on this blog and you are failing. Don’t blame me for that.
I have been searching for info about Friday’s huge demonstrations in Cairo and can find little or nothing in terms of info, footage or photos in the Guardian, Indy, AJE, PressTV, RT, al Ahram. There appears to be a conspiracy of silence in the Western, Russian, Iranian and Middle Eastern English language media. Why are they playing this down? What are they afraid of?
I had to go to the Trotskyist left news sites to get any detail. Here is an interesting article on the the complexities of the movement that is developing against the regime on the Socialist Worker site:
http://socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=30176
And here is an article on the Trotskyist World Socialist Website:
http://wsws.org/articles/2012/dec2012/egyp-d08.shtml
EXTRACT from it:
And I received this email yesterday from the Trotskyist Socialist Party:
“I am not interested in defending myself because that is your job on this blog and you are failing. Don’t blame me for that.”
Don’t you think these rules you are inventing are a little one sided?
I don’t see that anyone should have to defend themselves but if you insist on making it so at least have the decency to include everyone.
Excellent job. To hell with the IMF/World Bank. Graham Hancock (former journalist with the Economist) published a book called Lords of Poverty (Mandarin. 1991) which exposes the IMF/World Bank and its works. He begins it with this satirical poem by Ross Coggins:
And I am just reading Mark Curtis’ superb book Unpeople: Britain’s Secret Human Rights Abuses (Vintage, 2004) which is the result of his extensive research in the National Archives at Kew. He slates British academics for failing to research and publish works about what these archives contain.
Fred @4:01
I was referring to defending myself against negative comment and insults such as “you are tiresome and not very bright”, not about defending the points I’m making – the proceeding paragraph did put that in context but perhaps it was not that clear.
Posters being “tiresome and not very bright” is not an excuse for the blog owner to ignore a perfectly legitimate questions about a post made on his blog.
I think anyone who reads the thread will see that there is a very valid point I making regarding transparency and openness.
Heretic
Your posts certainly look ad hominem to me.
Craig seems to be posting a fairly unbiased report on the election in Ghana.
“Your posts certainly look ad hominem to me.”
That’s your opinion and one I would object to. Being rude or strident is not the same as insulting people and calling people names just because you can not adequately answer their questions.
Even if I were making ad hominem’s what that to you? Craig is perfectly capable of insulting people and using ad hominem’s in his posts. Given that I’m sure he can (and should) speak up for himself and explain his blind faith in Ghanaian elections and the candidates – both of which are materially and ideologically supported by the US and UK. Craig even said it doesn’t matter who wins.
He needs to show a bit more impartiality if he is to convince people his primary concern in this is ‘human rights’ and not his financial interest and friendship with the two candidates.
[Mod/Jon: posted as “Bing Bong, Ding Dong!” but in fact this is “Heretic”]
The big point here is that Craig is using this blog to give “democratic credentials” to these elections.
These blog entries will be picked up by the likes of Transparency International as evidence that the ‘perception’ of the elections was fair and just, regardless of whether they are or not, which will be like a self-fulfilling prophesy. Craig can say his investments in African minerals and energy are sound because the perception (which he helped create) is that Ghana is not corrupt.
Also, anyone that believes (like Craig) that democratic countries naturally evolve to a two party state with candidates of indistinguishable policies is a schmuck. This is clearly the most efficient way of installing a per-selected leader and convincing the people that they chose them.
[Mod/Jon: posted as “Bing Bong, Ding Dong!” but in fact this is “Heretic”]
Well now Ding Dong you seem to be reading a lot more into what Craig wrote than I have seen. It’s the fact that people are voting that makes the elections democratic and the observers who decide if they were fair. Do you have any evidence that they aren’t? Apart from the fact that whoever wins isn’t going to make too much difference to the price of potatoes that is because personally I see that as a good thing.
Craig is bloody good source of information and whoever agrees to give his testimonies credence, good work! He is supposed to keep tight lipped in case anyone takes note – hah! Bing Bong Hong Kong Phooeee!
Craig that you are an ardent Ghana lover comes through very clearly. Now if you could be a prophet enough to convince the victors to share the oil “loot” with the losers equitably, population proportions, affirmative action, oil region local rights n all, you will have saved them from a usual oil civil war, 10 years from now. A metaphysical inoculation against the oil curse is the mandatory 25% tithe prescribed on treasure buried underground. But will Chief Awon Mor-Nooky instead revert to the thousand year tradition of having one well oiled wife for each day of the month, once the loot is in full gush!!
I see that a number of Heretic’s comments have been removed to improve Craig’s position in the debate.
Of particular interest was the post where Heretic pointed out why Ghana’s ranking was unrealistic and how Craig’s posts (along with BBC news stories etc.) will directly influence Transparency International’s ranking of them, further exaggerating their position on the index.
Understand the implications of this in terms of how a ‘third world, tin-pot dictatorship’ becomes a ‘blossoming beacon of democracy’ in Africa simply by holding elections that are materially and ideologically backed by the UK and US with 2 candidates that hold almost identical positions, i.e. pro-Western.
“Ghana will be in extremely good hands in 2013-17 whatever the outcome.” – Craig Murray has either acquired the gift of foresight or has failed to heed the lessons of history and should caution against such misplaced optimism, let alone openly promote it.
Alex Thomson of Channel4News deserves credit for this blog post
http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/syria-weapon-mass-deception/3330
(of course if we were being given the truth on a regular basis, by our journalists, it wouldn’t be worth mentioning)