Kejau , where did I say ousainou was hindered by party-died? I made it
crystal clear that the issue was never between Alhagi Ousainou and anybody
or party but between the UDP and the other parties and Ousainou was only a
representative of the UDP and negotiating unbehalf of UDP. This was crystal
clear to all who witnessed or followed the talks.

Sidia's attempt in Oslo to make Ousainou as a person an issue when the
issue was never about Ousainou is sheer hypocrisy intended to scapegoat
Ousainou as way of providing a subterfuge to pdois's unreasonable perpetual
intransigence.
I will not respond to your so-called outline of issues for they merely
expose your ignorance about the issues that were the bone of contentions
before and during the coalition talks. Perhaps that is only because you are
such a gullible and unsophisticated ex. army Lt. You certainly have
ridiculed yourself through your outlines for the issues  concerning the
coalition have been extensively debated in almost every credible Gambian
medium and thus, providing no room for distortion or misrepresentation of
either positions, both PDOIS's and that of the UDP.

This last post of yours merely confirm my worst suspicion about you. That
is, you are not intelligent enough to differentiate a real substance
talking and a glip speech and that makes a pitiful target for a lies
peddling party like PDOIS.

And by the way, you haven't yet point out any single element of UDP's
position that Sidia said PDOIS has conceded or was willing to consider
before or during the talks. I suppose that is a gauche one for you already.

I have better ways and things to waste time and none of them is you,
lieutenant.

Daffeh

Daffeh

On 8 November 2012 23:04, UDP United Kingdom <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Kejau ,  where did I  say ousainou was hindered by party-died? I made it
> crystal clear that the issue was never between Ousainou and anybody or
> party but between the UDP and the other parties and Ousainou was only a
> representative of the UDP and negotiating unbehalf of UDP. This was crystal
> clear to all who witnessed or followed the talks.
>
> I will not respond to your so-called outline of issues for they merely
> expose your ignorance about the issues that were the bone of contentions
> before and during the coalition talks. Perhaps that is only because you are
> such a gullible and unsophisicated ex. army Lt. You certainly have
> ridiculed yourself through your outlines  for these issues have been
> extensively debated in almost every credible Gambian medium and thus,
> providing no room for distortion or misrepresentation.
>
> I
>
>
>
> On Thursday, 8 November 2012, Kejau Touray <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > Daffeh,
> >
> > How do you put a record straight by calling elder names instead of
> putting forward reasoning instead of mere statements? I may be an 'insulate
> nutcase', but am not insolent like you. You did not raise any issue that
> need explanation, and that was my point. What Sidia was said was his
> opinion and I made that clear, but you went on to talk about the obvious
> such as Ousainou different from the party and that party making overtures
> without naming any such overtures.
> >
> > You are not only insolent but also a big hypocrite, as calling Col.
> Chongan Komutan is giving him his due. Komutan means commander in Turkish,
> you fool!
> >
> > Let us talk about issues as you started now.
> >
> > 1. UDP did not follow the wish of the people was what you said not from
> me, as you implied when you said Ousainou was hindered by party die hards
> like yourself, instead of the people of The Gambia.
> >
> > 2. If UDP had no agenda, what is wrong with following the agenda's of
> PDOIS or anyone else for that matter.
> >
> > 3. You tell us what your party put forward, apart from putting Darboe
> forward without any consultation of conference that PDOIS did need to
> consider. We cannot be expected to be clairvoyant and know any of your
> party's position to even consider them. Do not be lazy, as Joe is known to
> quip. so tell us what your party wanted that needed to be considered.
> >
> > 4. PDOIS' s position was to go to conference instead of crowning Darboe,
> what was UDP'S stance again, apart from crowning Darboe?
> >
> > 5.  The insisting of PDOIS for Darboe to face the convention is
> democracy instead of UDP insisting on the crowning of Darboe without an
> convention has always been the point of contention.
> >
> > Lt. K Touray (Rtd)!
> >
> >
> >
> >> Kejau,
> >>
> >> Why would anyone want to debate with you after having proved yourself as
> >> an
> >> insulate nutcase. No wonder even a mere 'make the record straight'
> >> exercise, which is exactly what I have done, is considered by you as an
> >> insult.
> >>
> >> I know you have no alternative explanation on the issue and hence your
> >> sentimental response, which is understandable, but I expect you to be
> >> mentally mature enough to be able to distinguish 'substance talking'
> from
> >> a
> >> glib speech which is exactly what Sidia offered you in Oslo.
> >>
> >> By the way,was it not you who derogatorily referred to Ebrima Chogan as
> >> ''Komuntang'' and you still have the guts to talk about insults???
> >>
> >> I further ask; if the UDP have not considered the wishes of the people
> as
> >> you have impliedly suggested;
> >>
> >> 1. Why was it that they initiated the coalition talks in the first place
> >> and invested resources, time, intellect and emotion in trying to
> actualise
> >> the wishes of the people?
> >>
> >> 2. Why would the UDP present a proposal that was largely based on
> >> Halifa's
> >> Agenda 2011, a document the PDOIS party and Sidia endorsed, if it was
> not
> >> for their genuine desire to engender a compromised solution to the
> >> stalemate and ultimately actualised the wishes of the people??
> >>
> >> 3. Are you able to tell point out any single element of the UDP's
> position
> >> that Sidia said or would say PDOIS had conceded or was willing to
> >> even consider?
> >>
> >> 4. Do you find it reasonable that PDOIS insist on a coalition that was
> >> entirely based on their take on the issue with utter disregard and
> >> contempt
> >> for the views and positions of the UDP? If you do, then I have got a
> >> bridge to sell you in Wuli Nyakoi.
> >>
> >> 5. Do you consider PDOIS's reluctance to concede any element of the UDP
> >> positions congenial to the prospect of a coalition?
> >>
> >> 6. If Sidia can say Darboe would have won their proposed convention,
> what
> >> then was their point on insisting on a convention even if that means no
> >> coalition? Is that what you will call pragmatism because in my book,
> that
> >> is dogmatism?
> >>
> >> 7. Even if Darboe participated and won the convention, how would that
> lead
> >> to a coalition when PDOIS inherently opposed to any idea of a UDP
> >> party-led
> >> alliance in line with international standards and the spirit of the
> >> constitution while the UDP on the other hand, is opposed to the idea of
> an
> >> independent candidate for legal reason?
> >>
> >> 8. Why was Sidia keen to scapegoat Alhagi Ousainou when in fact, the
> issue
> >> was not about him but two opposing party positions?? Is it not because
> he
> >> knew gullible people like you will buy anything from the PDOIS market
> even
> >> if they appear perverse on the fact and insulting to the intelligence of
> >> the sundry?
> >>
> >> The vision of the G6 is limited in scope and therefore not necessarily
> >> something that would lead us to the dreamland. There is a lot more to do
> >> and bridges to build before we can finally achieve unity in the
> >> opposition. This is the truth and whoever tells you the contrary is not
> >> being straight with you.
> >>
> >> About the proposed legal suit, you tell me, when did PDOIS became
> >> interested in confronting the regime in court on constitutional or
> >> electoral issues? As far as records are concern, all the constitutional
> >> and
> >> electoral suits that went before our courts since the birth of the
> second
> >> republic as either in the name of UDP, NRP or a combination of both.
> PDOIS
> >> have always stayed away to the delight of the APRC regime and Halifa.
> That
> >> is the truth.
> >>
> >> As UDP supporters, we know what is expected of us and we certainly won't
> >> take any lectures from a gullible ex-lieutenant Kejau Touray. The only
> >> reason PDOIS remains adamant in the perpetuation of their
> >> unreasonable intransigence is the kind of comfort people like you are
> >> giving to such an uncompromising attitude and this has been and still
> >> remains the biggest threat to any prospect of opposition unity in The
> >> Gambia.
> >>
> >> Have a good day, pal.
> >>
> >> Daffeh
> >>
> >> On 8 November 2012 08:26, Kejau Touray <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Daffeh,
> >>>
> >>> Is it useful debating with you since you provide no reasons but just
> >>> insults? First of all, indeed UDP as a party should consider the wishes
> >>> of
> >>> the people instead of few big
>

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤