DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE WAS NOT WRITTEN NOR ENDORSED
BY ME JUST FORWARDING IT TO THE RIGHT ALLGAMBIAN.NET
EDITORIALS                                        





LET’S GET REAL.


Mr Editor,

Let me begin by thanking you for publishing my article
of 22 January 2006, titled ‘Stop the hypocrisy’. I
must admit it is quite interesting to see the
fascinating debate this article generated in your
medium. You know, this is fantastic. I have always
believed that everyone is entitled to his/her opinion.
So, I respect every opinion that has been expressed in
relation to my article. However, the blatant
misrepresentation of certain facts and high class
premeditated distortions on the part of Abdoulaye
Saine [I don’t suppose this is Dr Abdoulaye Saine] and
somebody who calls himself sundiata have compelled me
to write again.  

Before I begin, let me make it absolutely clear that I
never intent to be objective in my previous article.
My aim was to be subjective to the irrefutable facts
referred to therein, and that is what I consciously
did. So there is no point criticising me for not being
objective. This is not a time for diplomacy. It is a
time for straight talking, taking the bull by the
horn, calling a spade a spade and stopping people from
evading the facts to satisfy/promote their vicious
hidden conscipiracy theories. Since opinions on the
subject of NADD flagbearer are now polarised, thanks
to the vicious and flirty smearing campaign of whishy
whashy Juwara agents like Pa Nderry Mbaye, they are
not viable as a yardstick for the determination of
anybody’s eligibility for the position of NADD’s
flagbearer. This is why I proposed we use statistics,
and this is why I consciously backed by article with
statistical facts. So far, and indeed much to my
delight, nobody has come up with anything that tends
to or have the potential of discrediting my claims. I
have said that amongst the NADD contenders, Lawyer
Ousainou Darboe is the only one with a very strong and
healthy vote winning record, statistically. That is an
irrefutable fact which anybody can ascertain by
visiting the IEC website or other relevant government
sources both local and foreign. It is on the basis of
this compelling fact that I believed that Darboe’s
electoral records are a good foundation for NADD to
build on, and that he is the only one with the best
chance of leading NADD to victory. If anybody finds
this hard to swallow because of hypocrisy and
tribalism, then turf. It is simply a statistical fact,
not just my opinion. I am not saying Darboe should he
imposed on NADD. I have stated my reasons for saying
what I have said, and I will stand by my statements
regardless of what anybody said.

Abdoulaye Saine, in his article, ‘This is not the time
for Darboe to Break-away under a UDP banner’, stated
that Oj’s selection, as a presidential candidate,
cannot be contested on grounds of his electability. I
don’t think he mean to say this or he is completely
ignorant of what NADD’s Memorandum of Understanding
contains. Plainly speaking, it is completely deceitful
and absurd for anybody to say, at this point, that OJ
had been selected to lead NADD. He had only been
nominated just like Halifa and Mr Darboe. The process
of selection is still ongoing. According to the MOU,
the selection procedure should be aimed at producing
an electable/sellable candidate. Again, according to
the MOU, any such candidate must earn the unanimous
approval of all constituent parties, not individual
members of NADD executive. So what is the fuss about
Lawyer Darboe having to consult his party before
adding his voice to anybody’s nomination? He does not
own the UDP, and it is not within his margin of
appreciation to decide for the UDP on such a very
important and delicate matter. That is why it is not
left to him to decide. Despite being the leader,
Darboe can only make decisions on matters that fall
within his purview, not just any issue. On the basis
of sound advise, he can, for example, concede election
defeat if he believes the opponent’s lead is
insurmountable, that is mature politics, but he
certainly cannot decide for the UDP in this
fundamentally very important and delicate matter
because it does not fall within his purview. That is
how UDP democracy works and if anybody got problem
with that, turf. Therefore, any suggestion that Darboe
was trying to foster is personal ambition at the
expense of NADD is completely baseless, bizarrely
malicious and absurd.

As things stand now, Halifa, Mr Darboe and OJ have all
been nominated. However, none of them have earned the
unanimous approval of the constituent parties. That
also means none of them is selected as of now. I
wonder why no one is calling on Halifa to endorse OJ’s
nomination. Is it because Darboe is a Mandinka? You
know what? We need to do away with this ugly tribalism
and hypocrisy for our own good. Anyway, if this status
quo remains unchanged, the MOU provides that a primary
election be held. The MOU also and very importantly,
provides that any constituent party can pull out of
the coalition if it chooses to do so.  Therefore,
contrary to Abdoulaye Saine’s claim, the process is
nowhere near exhaustion. No one is contesting or
advocating for a change in the rules. All of us are
committed to the rules and we all want the process to
continue and if the need arises, be exhausted.
However, if we don’t want to talk about primaries or
possible pullouts, then we must stop the hypocrisies
and the tribalism, and start respecting and accepting
the UDP as the biggest opposition grouping in the
country and an indispensable partner. If we are not
able to do this, am afraid, the credibility of NADD
will have to suffer. This is a simple fact we cannot
afford to ignore. It must also be remembered that the
APRC, regardless of anybody’s opinion, has a right to
govern if they continue to be given the mandate by
Gambians. That is because they too are Gambians.

 As for Sundiata, I don’t think he even read my
article. He claimed that I live in the US. For God
sake, I have clearly stated that I am writing from the
UK. He also claimed that my article was supposed to be
against allgambian.net editorial. That is absolute
rubbish. Anybody who read that article knows that the
subject of my article is about the present NADD
stalemate. Yes, I referred to certain individuals but
that is because I was presenting a hidden background
to this ugly stalemate. Nevertheless, I can understand
why sundiata had to rant in that extra-ordinary
fashion. He is just panicking. Don’t be panic mate!
Anyway, let me address few things he talked about in
the article. He stated that the present political
consciousness of Gambian youths is largely due to
Halifa’s style of politicking. I do not accept that. I
think that is a complete hyperbole. I am sure Gambian
youths constitute more that 15% of the Gambia’s
electoral population. If we owe our political
consciousness to Halifa, then why is PDOIS, for more
than twenty years, always getting 3% or under in every
presidential election? In my book, you don’t score
until you score. Since Halifa’s politics never scored
any eye catching result for PDIOS at any given
presidential election since the formation of that
party, the only conclusion one can draw from that is,
Halifa and PDOIS are either bad politicians/teachers
[am not saying they are] or the Gambian youths are not
interested in their politics. Therefore, we cannot owe
our political consciousness to Halifa if we are never
interested in his politics neither can we do so if he
is a bad politician/teacher. Am sorry Sundiata Keita
but that statement is a complete destitute of
commonsense. It is absolutely groundless. 


He also stated that elections have always been free
and fair during the PPP era. I strongly agree with
that. Otherwise, I see no reason why the international
community would hail the pre1994 Gambia for being very
democratic. The trouble with your statement though,
Sundiata, is that your man [Halifa] never accepts
that. So when are you going to condemn yourself for
contradicting your saint? You have asked for evidence
before, now you will get it. Just visit
www.freegambia.com, click on the PPP 1992 congress
coverage and listen to Halifa’s comments on the
electoral system under the PPP.

 I do not intent to respond to Foday Samateh’s article
because in my view, it lacks substance. Foday, am not
being disrespectful but am afraid, that is my
judgement. Sorryyyyy!


On a final note, I would like to urge the UDP
leadership to immediately consider cutting-off all
ties they may be currently having with STGDP. This
maverick movement cannot be seen as an independent
facilitator of NADD’s programmes. They have a hidden
agenda that is inimical to the well being of the UDP.
The recent exposure in the allgambian.net confirms
this. If that exposure is anything to go by, their
behaviour is a complete grotesque. In my view, they
are too clandestine to be deemed genuine.

I rest my case.

SS Daffeh
Chelmsford, Essex. [UK]





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤