Dampha:
I would like to start by conclusively stating that my opposition to the
overall manner in which the anti-APRC campaign has been orchestrated by
certain factions on the L did not originate from misplaced sycophancy, as you
subtly alluded to in your post, or rebellion. I am not very good at calling
people names or engaging in personal attacks. This you probably know by now.
So, again, let us deal with the issues and by all means try to avoid
unnecessary name calling as subtle as they might be.
First, I sincerely believe that you did not understand my point about Joke.
If my language was unclear or too winded, I apologize. But let me make
things clear once again in the hopes that, this time, my statements will not
be taken out of context.
I simply do not understand why you seem to think that Joke's support for the
APRC is not a conflicted one. In your paragraph on this issue, I could not
help but notice the use of "Yahya" and the 'APRC" in an interchangeable
manner. I believe Joke stated that Yahya should not be blamed solely for the
atrocities which have happened of late, but the APRC as a political party
should be collectively held responsible. His acceptance of the party's
wrongs makes his support for them a conflicted one in my opinion. He has
flip flopped on the issue several times since then but this does not change
the fact that he did put the blame for the recent atrocities on his party's
doorstep. I was going to use some examples to support my point, but I do not
think this is necessary at this point. Mind you, calling his relationship
with the APRC a conflicted one was not meant to justify his legitimacy in any
way whatsoever. He has views which conflict with ours. But so do many other
Gambians and Africans who are willing to deal with supposedly legitimate
regimes who violate human rights at every corner while, at the same time,
performing some governmental function. Again, I figured this would be a
point worth noting! Why? Because there will always be people like Joke and
attacking him mercilessly while neglecting more pertinent issues will not
change this fact. Is there a danger that the one you called Joke will change
the minds of the masses? I think not. So what does the overall purpose of
lambasting the man mercilessly while other more important issues are
neglected serve? Answer is it not only serves nothing but this can be
equated to a misuse of the incredible platform we have for the discussion of
more pertinent issues. Anyway, I do hope you do have a better understanding
of my point about Joke. He is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, a
diversion. KB, how does one deal with a diversion?
Now that the subject of Joke has been dealt with once and for all, lets move
on to more pressing issues. Let's talk about political strategy for a
moment. You claim to be doing work in the background with movements which
have not come out with a solid agenda for months on end. I do not intend to
criticize these groups but the proof is in the pudding, as they say. Please
let us know about your collective agendas in respect to the fast approaching
elections soon. The elections are only six months away and this secret
strategy will serve no purpose unless it is revealed very quickly. In other
words, plans need to be put into action as soon as possible to allow them to
materialize. But you say that attacking Joke will help the election fund
drive? Let me ask you a question! How much of a change have you seen in
your coffers since this attacking of the man started? Don't you think that a
more worthwhile endeavor would be perhaps trying to figure out how and where
these funds will come from? In the past, letters were drafted on the L in an
attempt to sensitize the outside World of the plight of our country.
Hopefully, we shall return to these types of strategies soon as opposed to
attacking dissenting views in the hopes of raising funds.
Finally, I will touch on the UDP and move on simply because I do not have the
time to write rolling and endless narratives about every single thing which
comes to my mind regarding this issue. You say staunch opposition supporters
should be discrete and constructive, perhaps in reference to my stinging
criticism of the opposition. Well to this Dampha, I say: "Welcome to the
real World, and the truth as much as it hurts must be told." I do not say
these things simply out of being a sycophant or because I am a rebel, but
because they were derived out of a genuine process of extended thought. What
do you think I do after work, or on the occasions when I am chilling on my
porch drinking a cold one? One cannot help but hark back to the motherland
and think of what has become of it and why? My criticism of the UDP was a
result of these 'aimless' moments of wondering and thinking.
Let me reiterate my points once again. Again, while I believe that anything
but the APRC will suffice after the next elections, I am not satisfied with
the way the UDP has conducted its affairs. I do not think there is anything
wrong with raising this grave concern, especially when the elections are
right around the corner. My discretion in raising these points would be to
assume that this is not an open secret. In other words, everyone with an
inkling of common sense should know the UDP is headed for an election loss if
things don't change very quickly. Only the UDP and her supporters can change
this possibly catastrophe, and I figured highlighting the issue for all to
see would help bring some of the following issues to the fore:
As I stated in my reply to Sanusi Owens, I think this cross-carpeting issue
is very serious. You guys tend to attribute the problem solely to
enticements in the form of money from the APRC. I refuse to be so simplistic
and instead look for other reasons for such an occurrence. One which jumps
to my mind immediately is the party's message. People also defect because
they do not subscribe to a party or state's philosophy. But you attribute
this type of thinking to sycophancy! Go figure! I hope the UDP looks into
this issue. I have already apologized to Pesseh and family for using him as
an example to make a point.
My next point is related to the above in that a clear message in the form of
literature must be extensively distributed by the UDP. Unlike Burning Issues
distributed by Foroya, the UDP does not have a publication to my knowledge
which deals with issues people need to hear about. This is probably tied to
the defection problem in that the message is not just being stated strongly
enough, or perhaps the platform is not strong enough. Either way, these two
problems (defection + message) need to be taken up by none other than the UDP
and you saying that we should blame the individuals is absolutely ridiculous.
In the same vein, blaming the recent election losses solely on vote buying
is simply not being objective enough. Again, as I stressed , there is much
more to the loss than a simplistic explantion like vote buying. I think that
assumption too is a misguided one borne out of foolish overconfidence. We
need to view the issue more objectively. Vote buying solely does not do it
for me. I hope the UDP deals with this issue.
Waa Juwara (apologies for butchering your name previously) made the wrong
move in my opinion. By making statements against people working for the
feminist movements. Contrary to my previous assertion, I do not think he is
an anti-feminist. But, lets put it this way, his statements did not help his
party's position from the viewpoint of women who make up the majority of the
voting population. He did not get asked to explain UDP's position towards
the upliftment of women, but he should have been savvy enough to realize that
his statements would be interpreted from this perspective. It's just the
nature of the beast. In this light, his statements were misguided and
politically naïve. The party regardless of spokesmans should speak
responsibly in one voice. On the APRC's record on women, I could give less
of a hoot. I am more interested in the opposition maintaining a decent
standard. As the old saying goes, two wrongs do not make a right.
To conclude, Dampha, there is nothing wrong with thinking alike. But once
this modus operandi becomes such that the truth is being obscured/ignored in
the name of thinking in unison, then there is a problem which needs to be
addressed . On solutions, I really don't have many but I do hope that my
criticism is not seen as detrimental but instead as a chance for
reevaluation, improvement and hopefully movement in the right direction.
Note: KB: One objection. I simply despise being used in the same paragraph
as Joke. (laugh)
Have a nice day!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|