Hamjatta:
I always enjoy reading your postings, especially your debate with Halifa. It is
also very apparant that initially you had issues and questions for Halifa: the
role Halifa played in Koro's mysterious death, entrenched clause in the
Constitution, and Halifa's tendency to enjoy a closer tango dance with Jammeh
than Jawara. These are all relevant issues and all of you have debated them well,
but on this last piece you are sounding like someone trying to find a tune for
the next round of debate, and I am beginning to loose you on the direction you
are heading. As a follower of the debate, I never thought of it as a horse race,
or a win loose situation, but rather having questions and issues to be raised and
expect answeres to those questions.
"Again it struck me odd that you who passionately
exposed the shortcomings of the 1970 Constitution and the Jawara era, would
resort to only low risk rhetorical questions as your critique of such a
fundamentally flawed constitution. Perhaps you would explain why you resorted
to such low risk critique,"
From the above quotations, which you have raised before and answeres were given,
you resorted to characterized it as "low risk critique", which rhetorically does
not mean anything.
I have finally come to the conclusion that Halifa and PDOIS, unlike me , who
easily jumped into the banwagon of change only to later realized that I was on
the wrong wagon heading in the wrong direction; are driven by principles and
political beliefs.We can disagree with them on their politcal beliefs and
idealogy, but it is evident that they have always been very consistent. I
honestly cannot see Halifa and PDOIS in the business of either liking Jammeh,
disliking Jawara or having an ulterior motive that have not surfaced. After
following this debate for the last two months, I have come to grasp how important
it is to be driven by sets of Principles and beliefs, and those are scarce
commoddities in all aspects of our Gambian lives
Musa Jeng
Hamjatta Kanteh wrote:
> Halifa,
> I have your noticed your attempts in upping the ante on your low risk
> critique of the 1997 Constitution as opposed to stridently unmasking the
> doctoring and engineering that was done to the 1997 Constitution by the AFPRC
> that we all anticipated. Yes, I've read your booklets ages ago when they
> probably first came out. Again it struck me odd that you who passionately
> exposed the shortcomings of the 1970 Constitution and the Jawara era, would
> resort to only low risk rhetorical questions as your critique of such a
> fundamentally flawed constitution. Perhaps you would explain why you resorted
> to such low risk critique, when you the fearless campaigner, who had tasted
> virtually everything save death, would balk at saying it the way you were
> saying it when Jawara was there. Another classic case of your dumping of your
> principles for blind pragmatism? Or another of your many adopted strategies?
> Just a conjecture. Fill us in, Halifa. Fill us in. I am sure members are
> dying to know why the double standards for the Jammeh and Jawara experiences.
> On your memorandum to the Constitutional Review Commission, at any rate,
> I cannot claim to have read it in it's entirety; only snippets of it in your
> paper and the endless letters you wrote during the transition and it's
> aftermath. And also having listened to you on Radio 1FM, I can imagine and
> speculate what it entails.
> Really when I came online, I was hoping to see you tore to shreds my
> contentions on the Indemnity Provisions and why you claim I've boxed myself
> in a corner and need assistance from Lawyers. Instead procrastination,
> procrastination, procrastination, to mimic New Labour speak. I hope this
> weekend we'll end this once and for all.
> Ah! You've not given up on the straw poll. Well. I have posed a question
> in my last posting to you, but you did the classic Halifa thing and danced
> your way out of it by asking questions instead of answering mine posed
> earlier. Not surprised from this end. Indeed what did irk me was your
> insinuation that those who prefer not to have their names splashed on the
> Internet because the faceless wonders of the NIA are monitoring this forum,
> are spineless. Try telling that to some 75% of the 629 members [a guesstimate
> entirely mine] who never participate in any online debate about the present
> state of the Gambia. Tell them that they are also 'spineless' for not raising
> their voices online. Anyone who cares for the truth knows that the Jammeh
> administration doesn't play according to the rules. And in this process has
> destroyed the civil service of the Gambia by expunging it of those they feel
> are not sympathetic to their cause or those who don't want to be their
> poodles/functionaries. Many of those online here are students who wish to go
> back after graduation and some of whom are on gov't scholarships with the
> intention of joining the civil service or some public corporation all of whom
> this gov't monitors vigorously to weed out what they call 'undesirables'. Are
> you going to chide them being 'spineless' for their political quietism?
> Patiently, I have told you that political quietism is as much of a virtue as
> political activism. Those who keep their silence in public do not tantamount
> to being labelled 'spineless'. I hope you get the point.
> In any case, if you are worried about your poll rating, then why not do
> the obvious: do your own poll. Oh you could also exercise patience. Soon
> elections would be here again. There is no better poll than real elections
> where real people decide. What of the grapevine talk that you are being
> touted as a possible PDOIS contender for the Chairmanship of the KMC. Surely
> you would know how your reputation has fared since your last election. For
> someone who claims he is not interested in public/political office, you
> beggar logic when it comes to your standing in public opinion. Here you are
> indifferent to political office, standing for political office and watching
> your back when it comes how you are rated in opinion polls? Perhaps you will
> explain the inconsistency in standing for elections whilst not desiring to
> win an election.
> As usual I will be anticipating your usual wiseacres.
> Hamjatta Kanteh
>
> hkanteh
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
> Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
