Thursday, June 20, 2024

When Credibility is Lost through Exaggeration: Linda Kasonde and Company



By Wilfred Sameta

When Linda Kasonde burst into the public limelight as President of the Law Association of Zambia, she won a lot of admirers. Forget the fact that she was the first female to lead the Law Association, that was just a by the way that was paled into insignificance by her plucky and admirable objectivity.

Unabashed and unashamed Bo Linda had no tolerance for intolerance.

Sadly that has changed since she left the LAZ Presidency.

In her first chapter of life after LAZ, Ms. Kasonde has been involved with an NGO called “Chapter One” which she set up to ostensibly promote Human Rights, the Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and tolerance for divergent views among other things.

However, on the evidence of her conduct during the recent Public “Discussion” on Bill 10 and an article she wrote in a tabloid a few days later; the pages of her “Chapter One” has already become smudged with the stains of intolerant partisanship, just as they have become dog-eared with a belligerent anti-establishment prejudice in the process.

During the recent “debate” co-organized by Linda, Zambians with divergent views were not allowed to freely contribute.

It is shocking how Bo Linda looked on with tacit approval at the brutal suppression and intolerance that was taking place right under her nose.

Why did she choose to turn a blind eye to the intolerance that was inescapably before her eyes?

Evidently, Bo Linda condones blatant HUMAN WRONGS in the name of “Human Rights” just as she clearly believes in the RULE OF JAW rather than the “Rule of Law”. Only those that shouted the loudest and were verbally abusive against others were allowed to speak.

And then the next day without any scruples she wrote a pharisaical article in a tabloid under the sensational headline “Who will save Zambia” wherein she points an accusing finger at Bo Edgar’s Government, charging in abstract and generally intangible terms that it is “intolerant”?

Really Bo Linda? Have you looked in the mirror lately?

Granted, Bo Lungu’s administration is not perfect (no earthly administration is) but it is not all doom and gloom either. In fact, there are many positives… but perhaps she feels that she would be embarrassing her friends and “sponsors” if she became objective and pointed them out?

Is it realistic for Bo Linda to portray that there is nothing good Bo Edgar’s administration has done in fostering good governance and constitutionalism or anything else for that matter?

It is this kind of exaggeration that takes away her credibility and lays bare her biased partisan stance.

Would the “debate” have taken place if there was gross intolerance?

If Bo Edgar and his Government were as intolerant as Ms. Kasonde would like us to believe, would they have given licenses to more than 130 Radio Stations and more than 40 TV stations… many of them openly partisan and hostile to the government?

Would the “debate” have been aired live across a number of TV stations?

Would repeats of the same have been allowed to air?

Coming to think of it, would her inflammatory article even have seen the light of day?

People like Bo Linda are willing to exaggerate and perhaps even flat-out lie with a straight face, just because they thrive in baseless accusations to further their own mischievous agendas. It would appear negativity and innuendo is their default mode.

As Stephen Richards Covey the author of “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People” appropriately put it:

“Every exaggeration of the truth once detected by others destroys our credibility and makes all that we do and say the suspect”

Bo Linda’s exaggerations are her undoing. Everything she says is now suspect.

Why? Because her credibility is now as low as a Mamba’s armpit!

If she is really objective, has she taken the time to look at Bo HH’s party constitution wherein the amended Article 70 to give himself unlimited tenure… UPND will only start counting his “tenure” whenever or if ever he enters State House.

How tolerant is that?

Who will save Zambia from the charade of Linda Kasonde and her ilk?

The Author is a Retired Journalist Tilling the Land in Central Province


  1. Oh come on! Do you really want to talk about intolerance? ‘Bo’ Linda is well within her rights to air out her opinions and frustrations, it’s what happens in a democracy, only the intolerant would see that as an attack on the establishment.

  2. I wish Zambia had 1000 women of Linda Kasonde’s caliber.
    Linda Kasonde speaks for the Zambia people.That has nothing to do with intolerance

  3. Spot on!! Linda is a upnd cadre hiding behind CSOs. Trump at Davos bemoaned the negativity he gets from the media amid all the fake news, he pointed out how they never point out his achievements. Yet the CNN business anchors admitted that statistics do point that the American economy has improved significantly under Trump.

  4. While it’s true that there was lot of intolerance at that so called debate don’t blame it on Linda, for Linda was just invited just like those other 2 debaters who were continuously booed.

  5. do u want everyone to see things through the lense of your eyes, Mr. author? it’s actually you who are closing the very door of tolerance.

  6. Linda is just a good person, as humble as Chagwa who unfortunately has failed to govern, all economic indicators are arguing with him. Linda is okay, Chagwa is the problem. Linda is very far from the abnormal price of mealie meal, haywire inflation, depleted reserves, arrogant exchange rate and poor governance. Just attack the humble failed gentleman and leave Linda out of this thing

  7. Linda has changed unfortunately for the worst. I have known her for some years. In fact we once spent 3 nights together at a cross sectional meeting on law and politics in south Africa where she was delivering a speech. We had dinner together and spoke about various topics objectively. I wonder what happened to her. Money can easily corrupt people I guess. Good luck to

  8. Linda kasonde, another Martha Mushipe groupie. No originality – just fake wannabees without real depth of thought being led on by easily identifiable social media junkies.

  9. Linda Kasonde raised legal arguments and booed no one. She did not arrange the discussion programme. I was there and the advertisement said it was open to all. I had expected the audience to listen carefully even to views they didn’t agree with because civilisation depends on that.

  10. I never liked linda from her Laz days.
    Unfortunately in Zambia once you become vocal, it’s because you’re most probably eyeing a Government job.
    But like many other national vocalists, you need to be patriotic and objective to win the hearts of men an women in the Country.
    But we are enjoying the aimless partisan noise and vibes she is manufacturing, aren’t we? Oh yes we’re! As for bill 10, we ain’t supposed to be bitter about who says what. Let democracy win. For or against bill 10, democracy will win.

  11. What I saw was just a passionate debate between two sides. Please no not misuse the word intolerance. Do not blame Linda but those who want to mitulate the constitution without consensus from people

  12. This is a useless article written by someone seeking a job. We have seen this game before, character assassinating those who oppose while not providing answers as to why we should accept a bad bill. The author is afraid of PF and he thinks by attacking those who oppose the ruling party, he will gain some favors. Let me break his heart, these koswes don’t care about you, they only care about themselves. Go out there and see how many people are crying. Tayali is complaining of hunger and singers also are complaining. Stop defending these criminals, can’t you see the damage they are causing

  13. Wilfred Sameta, you really ought to be ashamed of yourself to go to such length to smear Linda only because you cannot contend with her intellect, and all because she is a woman. that televised public “Discussion” on Bill 10 incolving Sangwa, Linda, Tutwa, the one arm chap from PF and the UPND chap was a revelation. Had I been Tutwa, I would register for a brain transplant, the man in intellectually bankrupt, he has sold his soul and all that remains is a shameless stooge ready to dance to the tune of whoever scales Plot 1. The one armed fool was even more annoying, his justification of MPs being paid even when they are away from the House was plain offensive. Even the explanation of Lungu holding power during the presidential dispute when parliament has already been disolved was…

  14. he has sold his soul and all that remains is a shameless stooge ready to dance to the tune of whoever scales Plot 1. The one armed fool was even more annoying, his justification of MPs being paid even when they are away from the House was plain offensive. Even the explanation of Lungu holding power during the presidential dispute when parliament has already been disolved was laughable when the Con Court ruled ministers were in office illegally after the desolution of parliament. This lopsided intepretation of the law to suit thy interests only exposes you to ridicule and shame. Sometimes I really think Lungu’s exposure of Zambia to a vicious brand of incompetence and kleptomania has demented the likes of Tutwa Ngulunyo, I mean, which law school did that scoundrel attend???

  15. Bo Wifred Sameta,
    Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity like you have clearly and abundantly manifested in your article above. Whence I do not blame my dear sister Linda Kasonde for showing such strong and persistent intolerance of stupidity like yours! Ifinangwa fyonse unomwaka kunya! During that debate, I could clearly see from the faces of Sangwa and Linda traits of ilithiophobia every time Ngulunyo Tutwa raved off “za butoto”, Sangwa nearly puked thinking he lectured ichikopo Ngulunyo at UNZA, what a waste of space and time that fool really is.

  16. Kaizer Zulu please just shut up, you are a mere lab technition and what really can you understand about such complex legal and constitutional matters? Know your place in society please!

  17. This chap has felt hunger. It seems the land tilling thing isn’t working as it should. So now he wants a piece of PF money.
    This cannot be called a fair article. How can he say there are many positives with the extensive damage to the economy PF has caused?

    Am objective article would not lean towards any side, especially not the side that had caused so much suffering.
    I’d!ot hungry f00l

  18. The Author of this article, useless as it is has a penchant for insulting and demeaning women, last time he was on Laura Miti. What happened at that Bill 10 discussion was anger and not intolerance, anger at what is happening to the Constitution. People are angry. The state owned and manipulated Media always projects one or monolithic view and this damn Wilfred Sameta has never written an article about it or demean the women that work there. What the organisers of that event did is supposed to be happening on ZNBC (Deadnbc) but alas. I hope the mother of this Sameta is a woman, going by the way he is attacking women I doubt it. ZNBC and the entire public Media is the definition of intolerance.

  19. we know this woman, her plans is to form a political party so let her just come out open and say the truth,haaaa haaaa infact she as been promised a post in one of the political party.Linda careful before you are finished.

  20. I really think some Zambians are sick in the head! They cannot handle a clever educated woman. Sisters like Linda and Laura threatens the living daylights out of the bollocks! They’re used to dwanzy women like Dora Slit, Nkandu Lunyo etc.

  21. Which Zambians does Linda speak for? Once you become partisan you cease to speak for all Zambians because not all Zambians belong to your party is usually not tolerant and is dictated to by its leader.

  22. Who will save us from people like this author? Please continue tilling your land. Maybe you are better at that than writing.

  23. If she was objective and a formidable player in the first instance; she would not participate in any activities that undermine s democratically elected govt.

    Always disliked this lady for her two faced fawning, and tripping over her much praised pseudo intellectual capabilities.

    An intelligent person is only as good as the way they choose to conduct themselves. Giving dignity to their image. She’s totally fake and her ambitions to be considered a power player are a total fail.

  24. @ Razor, we have problem in Zambia. It is called the talking industry. We have a horde of semi_literate individuals with no shred of integrity for themselves whose job is to scandalise other people usually people that cannot be bought or brutalized by the ruling party of the day. And you can see why this talking industry is thriving. The talkers inspite of not having a job drive SUVs, eat in expensive restaurants, fly in & out of the country etc etc. Question: where does the money for their expensive lifestyle and legal representation for their countless defamation cases come from? By the way, this dirty game did not start in PF. It started in the MMD era. This nonsense has to be brought to a STOP. These distractors shift political discourse from the real bread and butter issues from…

  25. This chap is from the dull Sund@y Ch@nda and Tayali’s school of writing articles where they talk about everything about you but the points and issues you raised, just look at how they want to smear a mere citizen ilke Princess Mumbi

  26. Another smokescreen by Sunday Chanda…

    I can see this Sondo Chanda chap winding up like Chanda Chimba III (MHSRIP).

  27. First, women and men are equal before the law. Profiling or making reference to bio-data and other such personal attributes is unacceptable. It is unethical because each individual is entitled to respect and integrity in private and in public. This is what respect of human rights and the rule of law is all about. Two, it is contradictory to expect any free individual to defend two points of view at a time. How do you possibly tolerate “intolerance” when you are defending “tolerance” other than by allowing each individual to enjoy freedom of expression? The Chapter One Foundation is consistent in upholding the rule of law, including the human rights of individuals with contrary opinions. The Foundation does not molest or insult individuals holding contrary views. If the Foundation was now…

  28. If the Foundation was now being accused of making personal attacks, then the best solution would be to take the matter to a court of law. Three, any NGO is free to operate within the confines of the law in the country regardless of personal dislikes and personal preferences. The term “ostensibly” was not accurate. It was intended to diminish the work of a law abiding corporate citizen. Take time to demean patriotic individuals. Four, the Governments defend themselves through public service employees and public institutions like the public media. It is unfair to accuse an individual who chooses to hold Government accountable to its people as being “dog-eared with a belligerent anti-establishment prejudice”. There are no awards and ranks for patriotism. The Foundation is also 100% patriotic…

Comments are closed.

Read more

Local News

Discover more from Lusaka Times-Zambia's Leading Online News Site -

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading