I wish to acknowledge that mails are coming to me in a filter, and I
am not getting the response of people until I opened another mail that
bears the same headline.
Now, to come to the contention that Ansu raised, I am not making any
fabrications against Mathew. This is how he comes across to me through
the many articles and opinions he has shared, that I have read. I am
the least interested about tribal politics or its insinuations, but I
can identify one when I see it.
My approach and my orientation to Gambian political issues, may be
completely different from the one that you profess; and given that now
I may be willing to respond to some of these political issues, we can
argue and debate the merits and demerits of these issues without being
acrimonious. I await your contentions and I will respond to them.
Rene
-----Original Message-----
From: Malanding Jaiteh <[log in to unmask]>
To: GAMBIA-L <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thu, Aug 11, 2011 2:43 pm
Subject: Re: [G_L] [>-<] Mathew K on Coalition and the Point Newspaper
Ansu,
Please let every G-Ler argue his/her case without being disagreeable. It
makes us a better community.
Malanding Jaiteh
On 8/11/2011 4:52 PM, Ansumana Bojang wrote:
> Rene,
>
> ".... because it (the govt) has fallen into the wrong hands (into the
hands of the JOLA minority)..." Rene
>
> Please spare us with your tribal insinuations and stick to the facts
and realities in Gambia and not your fantasies. If do not know Matthew
Jallow is no fan of UDP and Darboe. Go back to the archives and
apprise yourself of this. So, please read his article with some
objectivity and perhaps you could learn something; however little.
>
> I am sick of some of you guy's tribalism here. And you consider
yourselves the learned bunch. I wonder what your education has
benefited you if you preoccupy yourself with such ignorance and
chicanery. I have tried to ignore the many gibes that people have
taken at the Mandinkas here both directly and some subtlely. Enough is
Enough!
>
> Ansu
>
>
> Rene said:
>
> It looks like Mathews take on PDOIS is not govern by any sense
of rational inquiry, but by a desire to malign and castigate as is
always the case when he writes about PDOIS.
>
>
> It also looks like Mathew does not have a through grasp of the
dynamics that surrounds the political reality in Gambia, if so, he
would not have been making statements that runs contrary to what is
actually happening on the ground.
>
>
> When opposition to a political dispensation is not characterized
by a sense of principle and purpose; when such opposition is merely the
desire to change the leadership of the country, because it has fallen
into the wrong hands (into the hands of the JOLA minority), the
political narrative becomes an intensive campaign of vilification,
demagoguery against the status quo, and criticisms just about anything
and anyone who stands in the way of bringing down such a leadership.
>
>
> PDOIS bears the brunt of these criticisms because of its
principle stand on issues of governance; and the mission and vision it
has articulated so profusely that does not favor the "lets get rid of
them by any means possible" or "lets get rid of them now, then decide
the fate of the country later," that is being propagated by our
political pundits and diaspora intellectuals who will rationalize any
argument as a justification for their position.
>
>
> Because Mathew is so critical about anything PDOIS, he will jump
at every opportunity to make scathing statements about PDOIS or its
leadership, even if such statements are not grounded on facts or
reality.
>
>
> For how else can Mathew infer that the fate of PDOIS is
inextricably tied to the success or failure of the United Democratic
Party. This is the most lamentable statement I have ever read as a
political commentary in Gambian politics. It is neither grounded on
fact or reality. The fate of PDOIS has never been tied to the success
or failure of the UDP, and never will.
>
>
> The simple reason for this is that, the vision, mission,
principles and policies that guide the existence and survival of PDOIS
as a political party for more than three decades, just cannot be
equated with the UDP that has a different vision and mission. And If
Mathew tends to make this summation based on electoral gains, let him
be reminded that it took almost a century for the ANC to succeed in
South Africa.
>
>
> And no matter how big a political party or its following,
without a strong foundation it will come tumbling down like Humpty
dumpty. What happens to the P.P.P.? Whats happens to the N.C.P? They
were the largest and biggest political party and opposition political
party in the country prior to 1994.
>
>
> Who drives the opposition political agenda? Mathew may not
agree, but certainly it is PDOIS. They are the ones who are making the
public statements; writing the political blueprints and objective
standpoints that seek to guide the evolution of a process, that will
help eventually to bring about a change of government. What irks people
like Mathew is that they don't want a process; they want PDOIS to fall
behind the UDP and help to hand over the government to them. This is
not going to happen. All the name calling is not going to do the trick.
> "In my singular opinion, PDOIS owes it highest loyalty to
itself, and its storybook in The Gambia’s political
> landscape has been solely a marketing strategy whose aim is to
articulate by word and actions, the brilliance of the ideal; its own
> ideal, with the hope of attaining political power by whatever means
through a highly suspect and superficial political brinkmanship.
> PDOIS’s trite approach to the formation of a coalition is predicated
on its nebulous, if not Ad Nauseum subliminal references to the
leadership
> of the United Democratic Party. But the UDP does not answer to
PDOIS’s agenda nor is it obliged to fulfill what the PDOIS leadership
seems to
> characterize as the precondition to a coalition formation. For a
coalition to come into fruition, PDOIS must subordinate its authority
> to UDP without attempting to dictate the agenda, for only then will
its hope for an eventual elevation to national and international
prominence
> ever come close to becoming reality"
>
>
> Arguably the above statement is devoid of intellectual inquiry,
that has the basis to argue any of the points that enumerated.
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> 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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
|
