It is coming and it is coming at a high speed Gambians everywhere must act
up for an all out civil disobedience,We cannot allow this guy to use us to
kill each other lets say no by staying at home all of us.
If yaya comes to the market and no one is there he goes to the roads and no
one is there he goes to the schools and no one is there he will
succum to the will of the Gambian people.
What does each individual hve to contribute ask your folks to stay at home
and express their anger peacefully.


>From: Ablie Jammeh <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Fwd: A washingtonpost.com article from [log in to unmask]
>Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 23:43:01 -0000
>
>Oh! "My body just died for little Gambia" I definately cannot control my
>tears at this moment. We cannot affort to go the path of Sierra Leon,
>Liberia, Guinea Bissau etc.
>
>Every hope of freedom is being dashed on daily basis - for our little
>Gambia. The news is that Bishop Telewa Johnson the IEC chaiman has been
>sacked for what is anybodies guess. Where does our hope lie now, I ask?
>
>Thanks.
>
>>From: Saihou Mballow <[log in to unmask]>
>>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
>><[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Fwd: A washingtonpost.com article from [log in to unmask]
>>Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 00:47:04 -0500
>>
>>>From: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Subject: A washingtonpost.com article from [log in to unmask]
>>>Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 00:27:54 -0500 (EST)
>>>
>>>You have been sent this message from [log in to unmask] as a courtesy of the
>>>Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com).
>>>To stay on top of the latest political headlines, live discussions and
>>>breaking news, register now for the OnPolitics email at
>>>http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/email/email.htm.
>>>
>>>To view the entire article, go to
>>>http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62656-2000Dec12.html
>>>
>>>Bush Wins 5-4 as High Court Overrules Gore Recount Plea
>>>By Dan Balz and Charles Lane
>>>Washington Post Staff Writers
>>>December  13, 2000
>>>
>>>
>>A deeply divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Vice President Gore last
>>night, overturning a Florida Supreme Court decision allowing continued
>>manual recounts across the state. The 5-4 decision effectively ended a
>>historical election dispute, apparently clearing the path to the
>>presidency
>>for Texas Gov. George W. Bush.
>>>
>>In an unsigned opinion, the justices found constitutional problems with
>>the
>>manual recounting process ordered by the Florida Supreme Court but
>>concluded
>>that there was not enough time to fix the problem and complete the
>>counting,
>>given the compressed electoral college timetable. Although there were a
>>variety of opinions issued last night, the basic split on the court was
>>the
>>same bare majority that halted the recounting process last Saturday.
>>>
>>"Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it
>>is
>>obvious that the count cannot be conducted in compliance with the
>>requirement of equal protection and due process without substantial
>>additional work," the court said.
>>>
>>The justices said that because the Florida Legislature had indicated its
>>desire to take advantage of the provision of federal law that insulates
>>state's electors from challenge so long as they are selected by Dec. 12,
>>it
>>would be unconstitutional for the court to now prolong the process.
>>>
>>"Because it is evident that any recount seeking to meet the Dec. 12 date
>>will be unconstitutional . . . we reverse the judgment of the Supreme
>>Court
>>of Florida ordering the recount to proceed," the court said.
>>>
>>Neither Bush nor Gore appeared in public after last night's decision,
>>which
>>came shortly before 10 p.m. last night. Gore chairman William Daley issued
>>a
>>statement that said, "Al Gore and Joe Lieberman are now reviewing the 5-4
>>decision issued tonight by the Supreme Court of the United States. The
>>decision is both complex and lengthy. It will take time to completely
>>analyze this opinion. We will address the court's decision in full detail
>>at
>>a time to be determined tomorrow."
>>>
>>Pressure immediately mounted on Gore to concede the election, with
>>Democratic Party general chairman Ed Rendell publicly calling on the vice
>>president to give up, saying he should "act now" to bring the election to
>>a
>>close.
>>>
>>The decision was a bitter blow to Gore, who won the popular vote
>>nationally
>>and came within a few hundred votes of winning Florida. The effect of the
>>court decision was to leave him with 267 electoral votes, three short of
>>the
>>majority needed for victory. Gore advisers believed that, if the recounts
>>would allowed to continue, he would win the popular vote in Florida and
>>the
>>presidency.
>>>
>>For Bush, the court decision ratified the results of the original count in
>>Florida on election night, a subsequent machine recount and a later manual
>>recount that twice was cut short of completion. Bush now faces the
>>challenge
>>of trying to unite the country after a bitter post-election struggle and
>>governing with a slender majority in the House and a Senate divided 50-50.
>>>
>>Former secretary of state James A. Baker III, who led the Texas governor's
>>team in Florida for the past five weeks, read a brief statement on behalf
>>of
>>the Bush campaign. Saying he had spoken to Bush and his vice presidential
>>running mate Richard B. Cheney, Baker said, "They are, of course, very
>>pleased and gratified that seven justices of the United States Supreme
>>Court
>>agreed that there were constitutional problems with the recount ordered by
>>the Florida Supreme Court."
>>>
>>Thanking the Bush team in their behalf, he added, "This has been a long
>>and
>>arduous process for everyone involved on both sides." He left without
>>taking
>>questions.
>>>
>>In its ruling the court indicated its discomfort with the role it has been
>>called on to play in determining the 43rd president.
>>>
>>"None are more conscious of the vital limits on judicial authority than
>>are
>>the members of this court and none stand more in admiration of the
>>constitution's design to leave the selection of the president to the
>>people
>>through their legislatures and to the political sphere," the court said.
>>"When contending parties invoke the process of the courts, however, it
>>becomes our unsought responsibility to resolve the federal and
>>constitutional issues the judicial system has been forced to confront."
>>>
>>The dissents from this view were pointed and in some cases angry. In his
>>dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "Although we may never know with
>>complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's presidential
>>election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the nation's
>>confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the law."
>>>
>>Seven justices agreed that there were constitutional problems with the
>>Florida Supreme Court decision. Of them, five agreed there was no way to
>>fashion a remedy that would result in the resumption of counting, given
>>the
>>limited time before the electoral college meets.
>>>
>>Those five – Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin
>>Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony M. Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor –
>>formed the controlling majority behind the unsigned the opinion of the
>>court.
>>>
>>The other two of those seven justices, David H. Souter and Stephen G.
>>Breyer, believed Florida's courts could still devise procedures under
>>which
>>constitutionally permissible recounts could proceed.
>>>
>>Justices Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not see constitutional flaws
>>in
>>the recounts prescribed by the Florida Supreme Court.
>>>
>>The majority opinion included something close to a directive to states and
>>localities to fix their voting systems to prevent the Florida debacle from
>>recurring.
>>>
>>"This case has shown that punch card balloting machines can produce an
>>unfortunate number of ballots which are not punched in a clean, complete
>>way
>>by the voter," the majority said. "After the current counting, it is
>>likely
>>legislative bodies nationwide will examine ways to improve the mechanisms
>>and machinery for voting."
>>>
>>Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas agreed with the majority but went further
>>writing in their own separate opinion. They wrote that there were
>>additional
>>grounds for reversing the Florida Supreme Court.
>>>
>>The justices said that "in most cases, comity and respect for federalism
>>compel us to defer to the decisions of state courts on issues of state
>>law."
>>But, they said, "there are a few exceptional cases in which the
>>constitution
>>imposes a duty or confers a power on a particular branch of a state's
>>government. This is one of them."
>>>
>>The justices pointed to the constitutional provision that gives full power
>>to state legislatures to determine their state's method for picking
>>members
>>of the electoral college. As a result, they said, "a significant departure
>>from the legislative scheme for appointing presidential electors presents
>>a
>>federal constitutional question."
>>>
>>In her dissent, Ginsburg protested bitterly that the court lacked any good
>>reason to second-guess the interpretation of Florida state law by
>>Florida's
>>highest court.
>>>
>>In a thinly veiled accusation of hypocrisy aimed at the court's majority,
>>who have championed states rights in past cases, she wrote: "Were the
>>other
>>members of this court as mindful as they generally are of our system of
>>dual
>>sovereignty, they would affirm the judgment of the Florida Supreme Court."
>>>
>>Ginsberg's opinion concluded: "I dissent," pointedly omitting the
>>customary
>>modifier "respectfully."
>>>
>>For their part Souter and Breyer conceded that a manual recount at this
>>stage poses problems of consistent administration. However, both argued
>>that
>>such problems could be overcome and Souther blamed the majority for
>>stopping
>>the counting in midstream and thereby creating an even greater time
>>crunch.
>>>
>>"To recount . . . manually would be a tall order, but before this court
>>stayed the effort to do that, the courts of Florida were ready to do their
>>best to get that job done," Souter wrote. "There is no justification for
>>denying the state the opportunity to try to count all disputed ballots
>>now."
>>>
>>Breyer, in his dissent, wrote, "In this highly politicized manner, the
>>appearance of a split decision runs the risk of undermining the public's
>>confidence in the court itself. That confidence is a public treasure."
>>>
>>The only justices who did not openly affix their names to any opinion were
>>the court's perennial swing voters, O'Connor and Kennedy.
>>>
>>The Supreme Court decision came hours after the Republican-controlled
>>Florida House approved a resolution authorizing a slate of electors loyal
>>to
>>Bush, with two Democrats joining the majority in the 79-41 vote. The state
>>Senate was set to take up the resolution today, but last night's court
>>decision rendered that effort moot.
>>>
>>Earlier a spokesman for the Florida Supreme Court announced that the seven
>>justices had upheld two circuit court rulings that last week rejected
>>requests to throw out about 25,000 absentee ballots in Seminole and Martin
>>counties.
>>>
>>The state Supreme Court agreed with the two lower court judges that,
>>although there had been irregularities in the handling of the applications
>>for those absentee ballots, there was no cause to throw out all the
>>absentee
>>ballots. Elimination of those ballots would have cost Bush thousands of
>>votes and given Gore the lead in Florida. Gore was not a party to either
>>suit, but was keenly interested in the outcome.
>>>
>>Staff writers James V. Grimaldi, Ruth Marcus and Peter Slevin contributed
>>to
>>this report.
>>>
>>
>>_____________________________________________________________________________________
>>Get more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download :
>>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 more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download :
>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 more from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------