Moyos sickening sycophancy

jonathan_moyoIf there is one individual in Zimbabwean politics who will say anything and everything at the click of a finger simply in order to win his masters accolades, it is unsurprisingly that charlatan Jonathan Moyo (pictured).

Apparently the duty Moyo owes to his dictatorial master is one that he is prepared to fulfil even if it only serves to cheapen himself in the eyes of the people of Zimbabwe.

Surely, our hearts have to go out to the unfortunate and poor people of Tsholotsho who must certainly by now hate themselves for having elected such a weak sycophant as their parliamentary representative.

Throughout his career Moyo has developed and embraced such a sickening propensity to abruptly switch from an entirely sensible point of view to one that is totally outrageous.

Political expediency

He has only to be convinced that it is politically expedient. Everything else can be flagrantly ignored.

There is not a single person familiar with Zimbabwean politics who would honestly profess ignorance of the fact that each time Moyo has fallen out of Mugabes favour he has criticised him.

Indeed, they would equally confirm that whenever the opportunity to put a smile on the old mans face has presented itself, Moyo has profusely sung the dictators praises.

In his piece, The cancer of politics of personalities, published in The Herald on 27 May 2010, Moyo, in typically desperate fashion, took pains to pay homage to the controversial and controversially appointed Judge President George Chiweshe- apparently in an attempt to appeal to the latters ear ahead of his day in court for allegedly defaming Roy Bennett.

The truth of the matter is that Moyo has every reason to be terrified because, if brought before an impartial Judge, the case against him is a compelling one. No doubt he takes consolation from Zanu (PF)s intrinsic conviction that anything that is associated with Mugabe is beyond the reach of the law.

However, what really prompted this writer to comment on a piece otherwise deserving of no comment at all was Moyos ridiculous and patently untrue description of Mugabe as an iconic African leader with a towering global stature. Such toadyism is simply sickening.

If that is what it means to be a politician then, rather than becoming one, I would much rather stick to being a commentator committed to keeping the bastards honest!

Alarming inconsistency

A few examples will serve to illustrate Moyos alarming inconsistency.

Just before the 2008 harmonised elections Moyo went on about how Mugabe should go now because it was in his own best interest and in the national interest as well.

He argued that Mugabes standing had plummeted both in and outside the country and that his continued presence in office had become such an excessive burden to the welfare of the state and such a fatal danger to the public interest of Zimbabweans.

Moyo correctly further argued that Mugabe lacked the vision, stature and energy to effectively run the country, let alone his party.

Of Operation Murambatsvina he wrote that that evil exercise attested to the fact that Mugabe is without compassion.

One wonders what really has changed between then and now for Moyo to now consider it a privilege for anyone to serve in a Mugabe-led government.

In his recent unsuccessful attempt to sell Mugabes presidency as one that promotes and protects the rule of law, Moyo unashamedly referred to Tsvangirais justified calls for an end to Bennetts continued persecution as the most blatant and most outrageous attack on the rule of law since 1980.

If Moyo wants clear examples of what really amounts to grave attacks on the rule of law he needs only to look at his masters monstrous political record.

It was Moyos master and not Tsvangirai who arbitrarily detained, cruelly assaulted and devilishly tortured thousands of innocent Zimbabweans in Matabeleland during the years 1985 and 1986.

It was his master and not Tsvangirai who, in a 1982 speech to Parliament, said of Gukurahundi: An eye for an eye and an ear for an ear may not be adequate in our circumstances. We might very well demand two ears for one ear and two eyes for one eye.

Indeed it was the dictator and not Tsvangirai who, in perhaps the clearest expression of his contempt for the rule of law, said: The government cannot allow the technicalities of the law to fetter its hands. We shall, therefore, proceed as government in a manner we feel as fitting; and some of the measures we shall take are measures which will be extra legal.

Free speech

More recently, several Zimbabweans have either been prosecuted or threatened with prosecution for insulting the person of the President simply for exercising what is recognised elsewhere as their inalienable right to free speech.

Rule of law in its purest form envisages that no one is above the law and everyone is subject to it. It is Mugabe and his cronies who have set themselves above the law.

Accordingly, no one can take seriously anything that charlatan Moyo ever says without causing their beloved ones a great deal of anxiety about the soundness of their mind.

Mugabe has not only wrought great evil on the people of Zimbabwe but his evil has infected those around him as is evidenced when we see the keenness with which Moyo licks his masters boots.

Post published in: Opinions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *