Lawyer, Doctor, my point is, he can communicate in English fool!  As said
earlier, last I had of your name was eating "minty sucurr" back Gambia.  The
only memories I still cherish of that type of mint was its sweetness and
quickness to dissolve.

Essa


>From: Dampha Kebba <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: FOOLISH KEBBA DAMPHA!! - Halifa_Sallah's_Reply_To_Ebou_Colley
>             -
>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:14:05 -0400
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Originating-IP: [204.71.174.14]
>Received: from [149.68.45.24] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBCEE3962006F4004311B95442D18108F2; Mon Jun 11 09:14:51 2001
>Received: from maelstrom.stjohns.edu (149.68.45.24) by
>maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id
><[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:14:49 -0500
>Received: from MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU by MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>(LISTSERV-TCP/IP          release 1.8d) with spool id 683653 for
>[log in to unmask]; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:14:46 -0500
>Received: from hotmail.com (216.33.237.69) by maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP
>for          OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id
><[log in to unmask]>; Mon,          11 Jun 2001 11:14:30
>-0500
>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
>Mon,          11 Jun 2001 09:14:06 -0700
>Received: from 204.71.174.14 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon,
>11          Jun 2001 16:14:05 GMT
>From [log in to unmask] Mon Jun 11 09:16:24 2001
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jun 2001 16:14:06.0135 (UTC)
>  FILETIME=[89BBF470:01C0F291]
>Message-ID:  <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender:       The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>
>Essa, I don't waste my time with ignorant boys like you. You did not even
>know that Ousainou Darboe was a lawyer and NOT a doctor. You do not know
>the
>man. Probably never seen him or heard him talk, yet you sit beside a
>keyboard and call him names and cast a vote you do NOT even have. I guess I
>was not far off when I said I pitied self-promoters that fantasize about
>future UDP atrocities. You think this is about a popularity contest? I
>sincerely hope that God grant you your wish and you never meet me. If you
>meet me, you will swallow every word you said here and I would NOT lift a
>finger against you. You are nobody to me. The only reason I am responding
>to
>you is that I do NOT want others to start forming some funny ideas in their
>heads.
>KB
>
>
>
>>From: Elow Wole <[log in to unmask]>
>>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
>><[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: FOOLISH KEBBA  DAMPHA!! -
>>Halifa_Sallah's_Reply_To_Ebou_Colley -
>>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 15:50:08 -0000
>>
>>KB,
>>You need to shut the hell up and keep on believing in your beliefs.  You
>>need to cut the bullshit and stop the name calling.  And who the hell are
>>you?  Where are you from?  Who knows you?  I hope I never see or meet
>>fools
>>like you.  Or do you think you're popular coz you've been yapping on each
>>and every posting on this forum. Talking about cyber bickering, how da
>>heck
>>do you think you can defeat the ruling party?  By wishful cyber
>>brainstorming perhaps?  Analyze this, analyze that..., ANALYZE YOU,
>>BROTHER!
>>
>>And matter of fact, shove your reply to guts, and take a long puff!
>>
>>Essa
>>
>>
>>
>>>From: Dampha Kebba <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>Subject: Re: Halifa_Sallah's_Reply_To_Ebou_Colley_-_Coup_In_The_Gambia_
>>>Six
>>>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:19:16 -0400
>>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>>X-Originating-IP: [204.71.174.14]
>>>Received: from [149.68.45.24] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>>>MHotMailBCEE2C1A00414004371595442D180D2120; Mon Jun 11 08:20:34 2001
>>>Received: from maelstrom.stjohns.edu (149.68.45.24) by
>>>maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id
>>><[log in to unmask]>; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 10:19:44 -0500
>>>Received: from MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU by MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>>>(LISTSERV-TCP/IP          release 1.8d) with spool id 681579 for
>>>[log in to unmask]; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 10:19:41 -0500
>>>Received: from hotmail.com (216.33.237.33) by maelstrom.stjohns.edu
>>>(LSMTP
>>>for          OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id
>>><[log in to unmask]>; Mon,          11 Jun 2001 10:19:41
>>>-0500
>>>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
>>>Mon,          11 Jun 2001 08:19:16 -0700
>>>Received: from 204.71.174.14 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
>>>Mon,
>>>11          Jun 2001 15:19:16 GMT
>>>From [log in to unmask] Mon Jun 11 08:21:37 2001
>>>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jun 2001 15:19:16.0608 (UTC)
>>>  FILETIME=[E105F800:01C0F289]
>>>Message-ID:  <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Sender:       The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>
>>>Mr. Colly, point well made. As numerous people have stated, no one in the
>>>Opposition wins when our leaders lash out at each other. I hope Mr.
>>>Halifa
>>>Sallah will take your explanation in good faith. I was tempted on Friday
>>>to
>>>point out to him that your main focus as far as the Meeting was
>>>concerned,
>>>was to unmask the APRC stalwarts. But I thought it would be better if the
>>>two of you settle whatever differences you might have on your own.
>>>Secondly,
>>>I had already made a private decision to stop commenting on Party
>>>Politics
>>>and the inter-party squabbles certain people are fond of engaging in on
>>>G_L.
>>>I had decided to instead focus on Yaya and his gang rather than dwelling
>>>on
>>>whether Ousainou Darboe, Halifa Sallah or Hamat Bah is a better leader.
>>>To
>>>me it does not matter who among those three leads us after October 2001.
>>>I
>>>know you feel the same too.
>>>
>>>I would still have gone ahead and refrained from commenting on our
>>>Opposition leaders after reading your piece, because I feel that you
>>>adequately explained your position to Mr. Sallah. You were merely
>>>narrating
>>>what you SAW and HEARD. You did NOT try to make up anything. But the
>>>reason
>>>I decided to comment is to appeal to you publicly to resume your
>>>invaluable
>>>narratives about the July 22, 1994 'coup'. Mr. Colly, the casual G_L
>>>reader
>>>might not know, but certain people know the efforts put in by many
>>>(including your humble self) for months to try and get the ball rolling
>>>on
>>>your narratives. It is very important that the average Gambian knows what
>>>happened to put us in the predicament we are in today. It is important
>>>that
>>>the average Gambian knows the true colors of the thugs holding our
>>>country
>>>to ransom. There is simply no one with the wherewithal or the commitment
>>>to
>>>put the record straight as you do. As you know, efforts were made in the
>>>past and continue to be made to get other soldiers to come out and tell
>>>their stories like you are doing. Some have decided to embark on other
>>>useful projects for the struggle; which is fine. You volunteered among
>>>other
>>>things to come to G_L and unmask the Devils that stole our country.
>>>
>>>As attested by (local Gambian) public reaction to your revelations, what
>>>you
>>>are saying is very important. People are eager to read 'Ebou Colly's next
>>>piece'. I mean decent people. Of course the vermin and people with
>>>skeletons
>>>in their closets do not want to read your revelations. We have to
>>>continue
>>>with the tunnel vision of getting rid of Yaya. Along the way, there will
>>>be
>>>numerous detractors with various agendas. Our task is to attribute to
>>>those
>>>distractions the contempt they deserve. I am not advocating for you to
>>>ignore attacks you think are unjustified. What I am trying to say is that
>>>those 'attacks' should not make you lose sight of the big prize. I find
>>>disturbing your willingness to suspend your exposes and instead 'engage'
>>>Mr.
>>>Sallah. Engage Mr. Sallah if you have to, but please do NOT deprive the
>>>Gambian public 'Ebou Colly's next installment'. Again, I hope everyone
>>>realize that Yaya and his cohorts are the enemy. They are the ones that
>>>are
>>>currently slaughtering innocent and defenseless Gambians. They are the
>>>ones
>>>illegally incarcerating innocent Gambians. They are the ones that are
>>>currently looting our government coffers. They are the ones that are
>>>currently disgracing the Gambians in the international community.
>>>
>>>It pains me when I see clowns and self-promoters come on G_L and
>>>fantasize
>>>about FUTURE atrocities UDP MIGHT inflict on non-Mandinkas if and when
>>>UDP
>>>wins an election in the country. But Mr. Colly, instead of anger, I feel
>>>pity for these misguided elements and I also feel sorry for our people on
>>>the ground that are suffering the brunt of Yaya's atrocities. Everyday I
>>>read G_L and other publications and talk to certain Gambians, it becomes
>>>clearer to me that our salvation lies away from the ballot box. All the
>>>more
>>>reason why you should continue on your program.
>>>
>>>I hope that Gambians will be reading 'Ebou Colly's COUP IN GAMBIA SEVEN'
>>>next Weekend. Thanks again for your invaluable contributions.
>>>KB
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>From: ebou colly <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
>>>><[log in to unmask]>
>>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>Subject: Re: Halifa_Sallah's_Reply_To_Ebou_Colley_-_Coup_In_The_Gambia_
>>>>          Six
>>>>Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 17:58:55 -0700
>>>>
>>>>MR. SALLAH
>>>>To be frank with you Mr. Sallah, I hate hurting
>>>>people's feelings for no good reason. Therefore for a
>>>>while after reading your piece on me, highlighted by
>>>>angry remarks from what you said was my distortion of
>>>>the fact you presented in the Bronx a couple of weeks
>>>>ago, I thought I should have simply written back few
>>>>statements apologizing for what I thought was mere
>>>>misunderstanding.  Anyway after a second review of
>>>>your article I came to realize that I had nothing to
>>>>apologize for after all.
>>>>In the first place, Mr. Sallah, I still don't know how
>>>>you missed it but my article was not in anyway written
>>>>to report the cause or effect of the symposium held in
>>>>the Bronx. I don't think there is a need for me to say
>>>>it but I will still go ahead and state it anyway; that
>>>>the central theme of my piece was the sixth part of
>>>>the narrative I have been writing about on the 1994
>>>>coup in The Gambia.
>>>>My presence at that meeting was of minimal
>>>>significance to what you have come to present about
>>>>your party's doctrine in the USA. Anyway I'm glad that
>>>>you mentioned Manding Darbo. He was one person who was
>>>>aware of my presence at the meeting and could
>>>>therefore bear me witness that I arrived there after
>>>>10:00 p.m. and left barely an hour later. As a result
>>>>given the fact that that was the only session of yours
>>>>I attended since your arrival, I could not have been
>>>>in that position of authority in anyway to criticize
>>>>your party's efforts to be better understood here.
>>>>When I walked into that hall that day, I found Mr.
>>>>Darbo on his feet addressing the audience
>>>>From what I understood you had, by then, already given
>>>>your keynote address. Perhaps that was the time when
>>>>you presented that comprehensive breakdown of your
>>>>party's economic strategies with regards to the
>>>>damnable economic mismanagement that has rendered The
>>>>Gambia chronically indebted and the solution you
>>>>theoretically had for it. I only read about most of
>>>>that in your piece written from an ill-conceived
>>>>judgement. Without doubt when the coalition topic was
>>>>raised you gave a protracted analysis of the important
>>>>factors to be considered against the background of
>>>>what you called a tactical instrument which was
>>>>paramount in Senegal's last presidential election.
>>>>Politically, in your discussion you certainly talked
>>>>about the coalition format of the P.S., Gibo Kah's
>>>>party and that of Niasse's all to, of course, to rub
>>>>in your point that a coalition was better ventured
>>>>into in the second and not first round of presidential
>>>>election. Economically I also heard you talking about
>>>>the disadvantage of capitalism when "11% of the labor
>>>>force in The Gambia is employed by the formal sector
>>>>comprising of the public, 'parastatals' and private
>>>>sector". To buttress your public-run enterprises you
>>>>briefly explained how a PDOI government would exploit
>>>>the fishing industry by buying fishing trawlers and
>>>>building fish-processing plants and hiring Gambians to
>>>>work there. That was all I could account for in what
>>>>you, Mr. Sallah, had said about the coalition agenda.
>>>>I will come to that later.
>>>>Anyway in that Bronx hall, after Mr. Darbo's speech,
>>>>which he delivered in English and Mandinka, it was
>>>>followed by the introduction of the executive members
>>>>of the NY movement who made the meeting possible. And
>>>>then came the question and answer time from the
>>>>audience.
>>>>  If I am not mistaken it was after one or two persons
>>>>spoke that Mr. Saul Mbenga came up with the question
>>>>of the controversial coalition. Roughly twenty minutes
>>>>later I was on my way home especially after realizing
>>>>to my great disappointment that the prospect of
>>>>opposition-party coalition for The Gambia's
>>>>presidential election, something I strongly desired,
>>>>had little chance of materializing, thanks to PDOIS'
>>>>intransigence.
>>>>So you see Mr. Sallah, you could notice that I was not
>>>>necessarily in tune with all the economic theories you
>>>>highlighted apart from the ones you mentioned in that
>>>>short period between when the coalition question was
>>>>asked and when I left the hall for home. As I said
>>>>earlier I did not hear all those grandiose economic
>>>>theories you said you discussed or argued about from
>>>>Washington to New York.
>>>>Here I would again remind you that my article was far
>>>>from a report of the Bronx meeting but the sixth part
>>>>of my series on the coup in the Gambia with the
>>>>limited mention of my experience in that hall that
>>>>day. Evidently my focal subject was the APRC loyalist
>>>>often disguised in our midst as typified by those two
>>>>elements I surely resented so much.
>>>>Anyway it certainly went beyond that when I also
>>>>decided to discuss for mainly the consumption of the
>>>>Lers what I understood to be a serious obstacle in
>>>>this issue of opposition coalition that had been a
>>>>critical subject of interest to most of them. From
>>>>what I understand, it was the dream of most of us that
>>>>the opposition parties in The Gambia will, come
>>>>October, put all their differences apart, political,
>>>>economic or philosophical and form a unified front to
>>>>get rid of Yaya Jammeh. Just like you put it in your
>>>>closing statements about the wrongs committed by Yaya
>>>>to the Gambian nation, he is definitely the worst
>>>>thing that has ever happened to our country and the
>>>>need to wipe him out should be prioritized over any
>>>>individual party's hopes or aspirations. It was
>>>>therefore our belief in the Diaspora that the
>>>>opposition parties coming together NOW would
>>>>tremendously help in this effort. Anything otherwise,
>>>>I personally feared would put the country in that
>>>>hopeless situation where we might end up with Yaya
>>>>defiantly persecuting one group of opposing forces to
>>>>the other while some others frantically search for
>>>>nonexistent answers in the prostituted constitution or
>>>>in the useless office of the chief justice. I hope you
>>>>could relate to what I am driving at.
>>>>So Mr. Sallah, I hope you now got it clear that I was
>>>>not trying to reduce all that you had said "to a
>>>>defense of a state-controlled economic system. Nor was
>>>>I showing my little respect for fact and objectivity.
>>>>By referring to those two elements against the
>>>>background of your statement that seemed to anger you
>>>>so much might be inappropriate on my side, but
>>>>certainly it did not mean that I had "little taste for
>>>>facts and much taste for fiction". I think you were
>>>>unnecessarily hard on me my friend.
>>>>It is pitiful that your party spent over D20, 000.00
>>>>for the long travel to the USA just for you to go back
>>>>with only $500.00. And too bad still that some
>>>>Washingtonians robbed you of more money by taking your
>>>>party's paraphernalia without giving you a dime. If
>>>>they really knew that the items were for your party's
>>>>fund raising but chose to ignore that, then I think
>>>>you have the right to call it a foul. But if they were
>>>>not informed by anyone then the blame should be
>>>>redirected to a different target. Anyway I don't know
>>>>why me. By the way, was it that those who invited you
>>>>to come gave you the impression that substantial
>>>>amount of money was awaiting  you to receive after all
>>>>that huge expense to come to the US? I could have
>>>>never known.
>>>>Anyhow Mr. Sallah let's move on. When I read your
>>>>piece on me, I was surprised by the degree of
>>>>sincerity you said guided your line of argument on the
>>>>subject.  "I spoke with sincerity and fairness", you
>>>>emphatically stated.  Then down the line after you
>>>>said you argued about the critical issues surrounding
>>>>the possibility of a coalition in the first round of
>>>>voting you wrote: "I did not want the discussion to
>>>>degenerate into argument. I therefore posed the
>>>>question as to what formulae Darbo had in mind for the
>>>>selection of the presidential candidate". Did that
>>>>really mean that you were not necessarily interested
>>>>in that question or its answer but only made to divert
>>>>the trend of discussion to avoid argument, as you put
>>>>it? If so then the level of our honest appreciation of
>>>>the situation must have been ludicrous.
>>>>Then you further wrote: "At that point any competent
>>>>observer would be able to read from Darbo's words that
>>>>when he was talking about an "electable" candidate he
>>>>did not have any formulae in mind for the coalition to
>>>>select its candidate".
>>>>I may be an incompetent observer but as far as I could
>>>>observe, Mr. Darbo's reaction showed me that the
>>>>selection of a presidential candidate should not be
>>>>the main obstacle to the coalition and could be worked
>>>>out after an agreement was struck in principle. After
>>>>all I don't think Mr. Saul Mbenga who asked the
>>>>original question or any of those who were listening
>>>>for answers expected you or Mr. Darbo to be fully
>>>>prepared for all the answers especially on that very
>>>>sensitive question.
>>>>Anyway up to the time I left the hall neither you nor
>>>>Mr. Darbo presented any formula for selecting the
>>>>candidate. I was however surprised to read what you
>>>>wrote here: "For example, PDOIS's presidential
>>>>candidate would easily accept being a president for
>>>>one year to restore all the constitutional provisions
>>>>that are reasonable and justifiable in a democratic
>>>>society.  Strengthening the IEC, open up the media and
>>>>then call for another presidential election after
>>>>creating the constitutional machinery for that to take
>>>>place in a year after assuming office. In that case
>>>>the people would have made an undiluted choice. Such
>>>>formulae are bases for coalition. We can go on and on.
>>>>Other parties may also come up with their own
>>>>formulae."
>>>>Now Mr. Sallah, it seemed that you were really talking
>>>>here. Although your statement tend to refer to what a
>>>>PDOIS presidential candidate would do after
>>>>immediately assuming office, my instincts, after
>>>>evaluating your last sentences here made me conclude
>>>>that this is exactly the fundamental terms and
>>>>conditions your party would want to settle for in a
>>>>coalition bid.
>>>>I did not however stay at the Bronx hall to the end of
>>>>the meeting but since you thought Mr. Darbo was
>>>>unprepared for a coalition formula while you were, I
>>>>hope by all that sincerity and honesty you had
>>>>claimed, you did present your conditions as you had
>>>>done in your article. If not, why? After all that
>>>>might have triggered Mr. Darbo into airing out his
>>>>views too. But to categorically think that Mr. Darbo
>>>>had had no formula in mind that day for the coalition
>>>>to select a candidate is absolutely baffling. Anyway
>>>>looking at the reason you said was the purpose of
>>>>asking for formulae for a coalition, the real issue
>>>>was not honestly being discussed. You said you were
>>>>merely trying to avoid things degenerating into an
>>>>argument. I did not know that the seemingly good
>>>>rapport between the two of you was that tense.
>>>>Pure capitalism and pure socialism! This is another
>>>>issue you seemed to have blown out of proportion Mr.
>>>>Sallah making it sound as if I did not know what I was
>>>>talking about. When I used the word pure here I meant
>>>>it to only emphasize my point, like you did when you
>>>>talked about undiluted choices. Anyway I know that
>>>>socialism or capitalism could not be pure or impure
>>>>equally as choices could not be diluted or undiluted.
>>>>However when in the middle of the coalition discussion
>>>>you mentioned that your party believed in socialism
>>>>while the other parties did not and even branded Mr.
>>>>Hamat Bah as a self-proclaimed capitalist with Mr.
>>>>Darbo also standing firm in the economic policy of his
>>>>party, I felt the ultimate crash in my hopes for a
>>>>coalition. My mention of the incompartibility of the
>>>>two rival systems was a derivative from what the
>>>>originators of socialist philosophy had taught mankind
>>>>about it since at the beginning. Marx, Angel, Lenin,
>>>>Mao, Kim IL Sung, Kwame Nkrumah, from the founding
>>>>fathers to the active propagators of the obsolete
>>>>philosophy, these men for ages had confidently
>>>>promoted the belief that man as a social and economic
>>>>being was in the process of evolving for the
>>>>ultimately great economic system. It was stated in
>>>>Dialectical Materialism that man's first settlement
>>>>after the roaming clan, naturally adopted the economic
>>>>system of communalism. And after a while, that system
>>>>evolved into feudalism which eventually gave way to
>>>>capitalism. And capitalism by their standards was
>>>>defined as the last stage of the old developmental
>>>>pattern, which would come to an end, not by evolution
>>>>this time but by revolution. One of the most popular
>>>>but highly erroneous concepts of the true believers
>>>>was that capitalism was going be the master of its own
>>>>destruction when its time to disintegrate had arrived.
>>>>It was said that as a result of its economic growth
>>>>pattern, the rich would continue to be richer while
>>>>the poor got poorer until a revolution by the masses
>>>>forced the few privileged ones at the top to come down
>>>>and be replaced by the dictatorship of the
>>>>proletariat. Of course the reality of the existence of
>>>>a viable middle class as part of the capitalist class
>>>>equation that would maintain the system at where it
>>>>was estimated to collapse never occurred in the minds
>>>>of those so-called great thinkers. However their
>>>>utopian economic emancipation was defined as a
>>>>wonderful society where everybody would be equal,
>>>>everyone employed, each working according to his
>>>>ability and earning according to his needs. Yet
>>>>individual difference or ability was not given much
>>>>weight.
>>>>I believe that George Owel's satirical novel, Animal
>>>>Farm showed us all the shortcomings, contradictions,
>>>>and above all the imminent failure of such an
>>>>unnatural system.
>>>>  It was a system meant to function under a
>>>>state-controlled economy with no tolerance for
>>>>anything capitalistic. Certainly the system has been
>>>>dying since the collapse of the Soviet Empire in 1991,
>>>>the first country to implement it after the Russian
>>>>Revolution of 1917 and hopelessly tried to perfect it
>>>>for decades. Nevertheless, there are still few
>>>>die-hard believers who would not give it up, perhaps
>>>>because of old chronic habits.
>>>>Therefore when Mr. Sallah stated that his party was
>>>>socialistic in principle which should be put under
>>>>consideration in the coalition issue and further
>>>>specified on Mr. Hamat Bah's capitalistic views, I did
>>>>not know that he had in mind another socialism
>>>>different from the originally prescribed order. That
>>>>was why I said that with Mr. Dardo and Mr. Hamat Bah
>>>>echoing similar sentiments in the economic system of
>>>>capitalism, they would not be able to mix with PDOIS
>>>>for those obvious reasons.
>>>>Now to my surprise again, Mr. Sallah has come up to
>>>>tell me that their socialism, which we are yet to
>>>>experience its practicability, is something else. And
>>>>he seemed to confidently think that it could solve
>>>>Gambia's economic problems just like that. Did we not
>>>>witness how nature or God interfered with the master
>>>>plan of the North Koreans, one of the most organized
>>>>socialist countries before.?
>>>>So Mr. Sallah you could see that I was not bringing
>>>>any new concepts when I mentioned pure socialism and
>>>>pure capitalism not mixing, but I also did not know
>>>>that the obsolete socialism once propagated by the
>>>>Marxists could come in another form and still being
>>>>called socialism. I would love to see that text of
>>>>yours you talked about with Saja Taal. Perhaps that
>>>>would enlighten me about the socialism you are talking
>>>>about.
>>>>Anyway how could you say that Mr. Darbo's economic
>>>>program was in conflict with what he said the other
>>>>day about subsidizing the female farmers in their
>>>>gardening projects?  I don't think capitalism forbids
>>>>state-funded projects especially when it comes to
>>>>subsidizing the ordinary farmer's efforts.
>>>>However regardless of all the denial in your spoken
>>>>and written words, at the end of the day I seriously
>>>>think that you are the very one who is anti-coalition
>>>>but don't want to admit it up front.
>>>>Listen to your self here again: "Reflecting on the
>>>>NRP-UDP Kiang coalition…do we conclude that the APRC
>>>>is popular or do we conclude that there is a need for
>>>>a third force that would be able to earn the
>>>>confidence of the people to up root the APRC"?
>>>>As far as I am concerned, the Kiang scenario does not
>>>>demand a third force as such to up root the APRC.
>>>>Instead the Kiang situation was the learning
>>>>experience for the opposition parties to be prepared
>>>>to face the APRC with all the resources and ideas they
>>>>could muster together to get rid of Yaya in the first
>>>>round. Yaya should never be allowed to win the first
>>>>round, come rain come storm.
>>>>In conclusion Mr. Sallah read what you wrote here
>>>>again: "Those who sincerely want change in The Gambia
>>>>should encourage the party of your choice to do its
>>>>best and not undermine others who are doing their
>>>>best. This is the code of conduct that all those who
>>>>want change should adopt".
>>>>I don't know how you equated our ability to read and
>>>>comprehend written words but Mr. Sallah, it is glaring
>>>>that coalition is the last thing you want to go for if
>>>>ever you would want to.
>>>>But please can you do me one favor? Can you please add
>>>>limitation of term of office for the presidency in
>>>>your host of formulae for the top seat? If I have the
>>>>opportunity to communicate to Mr. Darbo and Mr. Bah I
>>>>will ask for the same favor. It is my conviction that
>>>>transparency and accountability is still the key to
>>>>good governance; and this could only be obtained when
>>>>presidents understand in their heads that they will be
>>>>going at a known time the very day they assumed
>>>>office, preferably in a period of two terms of five
>>>>years only. Let's say ten years maximum!
>>>>If the president is genuinely accountable to the
>>>>people who elected him, everything about checks and
>>>>balances will automatically fall in its proper place.
>>>>I am not going to say bye, because I know your
>>>>endurance to go toe to toe for the final knockout; but
>>>>hey, I think I can suspend my weekly series on the
>>>>coup and engage you all the way to the last round.
>>>>So hope to hear from you soon, body.
>>>>Greetings!
>>>>
>>>>Ebou Colly.
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>>>
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>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.
>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________________
>>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>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.
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>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.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------