Coach:
Mr. Daffeh needs to take his guff where it belongs.
He ought to be subscribed to the list so all esteemed list members can
take turns to school him on the basics of NADD (NADD-101 if you will). Or
better yet, visit with MRDG-UK; Bahoum and his folks will show him what's
up. He might gain a few brain cells in the process.
Thanks,
-BambaLaye
On Tue, January 31, 2006 3:02 pm, Pasamba Jow said:
>
> Bamba Laye,
> This man is either totally clueless of completely dishonest. STGDP, with
> all its limitations has been and will continue to be a major force in the
> political struggle against Jammeh. It is STGDP with its compatriots,
> MRDGUK and MODD who have been financing the political campaigns of NADD up
> to this point. In fact, where was Mr. "Daffeh" when people coming together
> to organize the coalition conference or better yet putting their money,
> time and effort where their mouths are? It is always easy to question
> other people's characters when one should be asking onself, what have done
> to make the situation better?
> Pasamba Jow
>
> From: Radio Free Gambia
> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: forward: ALLGAMBIAN .NET
>
>
> From: Radio Free Gambia
> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: forward: ALLGAMBIAN .NET
> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:21:13 -0600
>>Mr. Mballow:
>>
>>Please relay the following to Mr. Daffeh:
>>
>>Mr. Daffeh -
>>
>>Your unfounded generalization of Save the Gambia Democracy Project and by
>>extension all hard working, well meaning Gambians and friends (there are
>>dedicated non-gambians actively pushing for your freedom and dignity
>>through STGDP) in that group and those who contributed their dime, time
>>and hymn to the efforts of STGDP as "having a hidden agenda that is
>>inimical to UDP..." is absord, childish and hog wash at best.
>>
>>You owe an apology to each and every one who has contributed to the
>>efforts of STGDP in any small way.
>>
>>Perhaps, you need to be schooled that STGDP is the reason you're writing
>>on this particular issue in the first place. So, to depict such a group
>> of
>>dedicated individuals and groups in such a manner shows how much you know
>>of the issue at hand.
>>
>>I bet the response you're seeking from Ousainou and UDP will come through
>>in your dreams. Keep on dreaming..... and catch up with the rest of us at
>>Sate House come October!
>>
>>-BambaLaye
>>
>>On Mon, January 30, 2006 8:29 pm, saihou Mballow said:
>> > 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]
>> > ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>> >
>>
>>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>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]
>>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
|
