Saul,

I can see from your last piece that you have not abandoned your penchant for
dwelling on what is frivolous. There is no need for a lengthy discourse on
whether you are Hamjatta's sycophant or not. I simply wanted to teach you a
lesson.

You wrote in your correspondence of February 5, 2000: +ACI-In fairness to you,
you deserve the opportunity to rebut my +ACI-final thoughts+ACI- and Hamjatta's. And
if you are sincere about continuing the debate, then declare that, so that
people like Joe Sambou would not reach the wrong conclusion. It's totally
voluntary. And more important, if we are to continue this debate, let's lay
down some ground rules: You tell your sycophants to either back off, or
ADDRESS the specific issues in contention.+ACI-

You do not want to be called a sycophant for sharing certain views with
Hamjatta but you are referring to others as sycophants for expressing their
own opinions. Do you see the point?

In order to take the frivolous aside, allow me to acknowledge that you are
not Hamjatta's sycophant, and I hope you will cease referring to others who
express their own opinion of you in the same light. This ground rule is
acceptable.

What I find interesting is your evasion of one of the contentions I raised
in my last posting. I indicated that whilst you supported the coup on the
basis of trust and jumped ship only when you felt that your trust was
misconceived, I was offered a ministerial post when the coup makers took
over which I rejected on the basis of my fullest conviction that they could
not build the type of society my colleagues and I envisage. It is rather
arrogant of you to give the impression that I did not know what the
consequences would be if Jammeh or anybody, even a civilian, were to take
over the helm, who advocates the same policies that are in place today.

Needless to say, I covered the whole North Bank Division to campaign for our
presidential candidate on the basis of a party programme that was
fundamentally different from the APRC and any other party in opposition to
Jammeh's candidature.

Furthermore, I stood as a PDOIS candidate against the APRC. Is it not
ridiculous, therefore, that you try to convey the notion that I was not
opposed to Jammeh's presidential aspirations.

Lastly, after Jammeh started his present term of office, I was again offered
a ministerial post which I rejected on the basis of fundamental difference
in policies.

Suffice it to say, I have made it abundantly clear that in a sovereign
republic all citizens have the right to elect and be elected at one time or
another+ADs- that it was not our prerogative to call for the ban of any party or
person from participation in an electoral contest. This is our principle.
Can you state your own principles and then justify your own position why you
saw nothing wrong with the banning of the PPP, and why you felt that the
APRC should not have emerged? This is the point at issue. I await your reply
on this issue before I go to the next.

Greetings.

Halifa Sallah.

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

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

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