Buharry,
The case you presented in your defence is logical, powerful and very
convincing. Why are you not therefore practicing law or is it because you
are more interested in the creative arts? I am just asking rhetorical
questions and therefore need no answer from you this time (a big laugh
please!!).
I presume Mr Darboe just misjudged the intention behind your concise answer
to Mr Jow's question which sometimes happen to all of us but both of you
meant well.

Enjoy the Easter season

BMK

>From: MOMODOU BUHARRY GASSAMA <[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:Immigration Seizes OJ's Passport (28/3/02
>Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 02:28:57 +0100
>
>  Hi Haruna!
>                       Let me first of all make one thing very clear before
>attempting to answer your charges. If you are looking for a brawl on
>Gambia-l, you are engaging the wrong person. I refuse to engage you or
>anyone in a fruitless exchange that would be characterised by name-calling
>or other forms of histrionics. The tone and nature of your post do not
>augur well for a constructive exchange of ideas. If you have any issues
>with anything I write and challenge me to justify or defend them, I will
>gladly do so. However, if you have a problem with what I write and engage
>me in the manner with which you just did, I will not even honour your
>efforts because I do not have the time to engage in such exchanges. I
>repeat, if you want to engage me on any issue that I have presented here on
>the L or want to engage me on any topic, I will gladly engage you as long
>as the tone is set for a constructive engagement which can be beneficial to
>me, you and the other members of the L. If you however want a brawl or want
>to engage in histrionics, I will not debate with you because I simply do
>not have the time and energy for such.
>
>
>
>Coming to the issues raised in your post, you wrote:
>
>
>
>"Buharry,
>
>You seem to be living in cloud-cuchoo land. Yes Passports are properties of
>Nations or states and could be withdrawn at anytime like a lot of other
>things that are properties of states. Yes there are certain fundamental
>human rights and civil rights enshrined in each state's constitution. Yes,
>there is a process and procedures to reclaim properties of a state. Men!!!
>Get a grip.
>
>I could swear that Yus was aware of all these and I would further swear
>that Yus' was a rhetorical question and not a need for answers."
>
>
>
>Who is living in cloud cuckoo land? Assuming that what is crystal clear to
>you is as such to everyone else goes beyond the boundaries of reason and
>sound logic. When you wrote that you could swear that Yus' question was
>rhetorical, you were not even sure that it was so because of the way you
>constructed your sentence. If you were sure, you would have stated it with
>more certainty. Assuming that you understand Yus' question as a rhetorical
>one, are you acting reasonably by assuming that everyone on Gambia-l
>interprets it as such? Do you remember the classic case of the half-full
>and half-empty glass interpretation? Just because you interpret Yus'
>question as rhetorical does not mean that I will interpret it as such. My
>interpretation is that Yus' asked a genuine question and I offered an
>answer. Yus wrote:
>
>
>
>"I wonder what basis the Director of Immigration is acting upon when he
>instructs for the passports of others to be seized?
>In other words, can this be justified from a legal perspective?"
>
>Does this sound like a rhetorical question to you? If it does, you are
>within your rights to interpret it as such but I am also within my rights
>to interpret it differently. You are also within your rights not to add
>anything to the question Yus asked and jump on others who do just as I am
>within my rights to offer an answer, which I thought would help answer a
>question I genuinely believed Yus was seeking an answer to. When Yus
>replied to me, he didn't write: "Buharry, I was just asking a rhetorical
>question." He wrote:
>
>
>
>"Buharry: Thanks for your clarification of this matter. I hope good reasons
>are advanced for the seizure of his passport.
>
>Happy Easter to you too and thanks again."
>
>
>
>This sounds as if Yus appreciated my effort. Since he is the one who asked
>the question, that is good enough for me. If you want to play the
>clairvoyant and guess what people mean when they ask questions and what
>people intend when they answer questions, that is your prerogative.
>
>
>
>Who is living in cloud cuckoo land? Who is writing outside the boundaries
>of logic when he wrote:
>
>
>
>"The Most important pieces of information are?
>
>  When does Statehood or Nationhood issue?
>
>When does a State or Nation cease to legally exist? and therefore forfeit
>its sequitur privileges of seizure, reclamation, and agency of its
>citizens? In other words, is a passport issued by the Government of Gambia
>in its current configuration, valid? Is the impoundment of such passport a
>valid estoppel?"
>
>
>
>What do you mean by such abstract and disjointed statements? Are you saying
>that the current passports issued by the Gambia Government are invalid? If
>you are saying so, do you really and logically mean it? Would such a
>statement stand the test of logic and reason? Who is living in cloud cuckoo
>land? The current Gambian passports issued by the Gambia Government are as
>valid as any other passports and people use them on a daily basis to travel
>all over the world. Who is being illogical denying their validity or are
>you going to come back and say you were asking a rhetorical question? The
>reality is that the passports issued by the Gambia Government are valid and
>that passports all over the world remain properties of the issuing
>authorities and may be withdrawn. No amount of argument, ranting and raving
>can change that fact as we write.
>
>
>
>Who is living in cloud cuckoo land? Who is acting unreasonably when he
>wrote:
>
>
>
>"Is the impoundment to prevent O.J. from travelling outside of Gambia? or
>returning to Gambia? or both? Is O.J. under any travel restrictions and
>why? If O.J. has cases pending, is it the courts' fault for keeping cases
>ever-open and call the calendar when defendants are out of the country in
>order to create an impression of a fleeing felon? I bet you O.J. did not
>receive prior notice of when those silly cases were to be heard."
>
>
>
>You are directing these questions to the wrong person. I am not a Gambia
>Government employee. I am not an officer of the courts of The Gambia. I am
>not a spokesperson for the Gambia Government. If you want answers to these
>questions, direct them to those who can give you authoritative answers.
>What I did was give answers based on legal interpretation of certain issues
>and in case you are wondering whether I have any knowledge of law, let me
>put your mind at ease. I have taken several law modules at both
>undergraduate and postgraduate levels and have done a lot of private
>reading. Even though I am not a lawyer by profession, I am trained in some
>aspects of law. I did not condemn or justify the withdrawal of O.J.'s
>passport. I presented a "position-less" answer. Yus asked whether the
>Gambia Government has a legal right to withdraw a person's passport. The
>reality is that it can and that was my answer to Yus. Whether there are
>procedures to follow, I do not know and that was evident in my answer.
>Whether the government violated O.J.'s fundamental human rights by
>discriminating against him because of his political beliefs and things he
>said, I do not know and that was also evident in my post. I also wrote that
>government officials are bound by the Directive Principles of State Policy
>and the Code of Conduct of Public Officers to do their jobs in a certain
>way. Whether they do it that way is another issue but if in doing their
>job, they engage in activities that violate people's rights, there are
>means to challenge such actions. That is what I said. Why are you jumping
>at me? I am NOT condoning in any manner or form the withdrawal of O.J.'s
>passport. I did not even know why it was withdrawn. How could I then take a
>position on the issue? Let me make it crystal clear here for you. I
>answered Yus' questions about what is possible from a legal perspective.
>Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to add anything to that, that is
>your prerogative. If I were to give my opinion, it would be biased towards
>O.J. because he is like a bigger brother to me. His younger brother is a
>childhood friend of mine. We were in the same club (like we used to have)
>during our school days and we spent a lot of our time at his place. Many
>people on this list can testify to that. When I was living in England, we
>used to hang out together. In fact, I just spoke to him a few weeks ago. If
>there is anyone from the old PPP who stood his ground and refused to
>succumb to greed and intimidation, it is O.J. Even if he were not like a
>brother to me, I would respect him for standing for his principles in the
>face of so much hardship. So who is living in cloud cuckoo land? Just
>because you engage in histrionics to make your points about certain
>governance issues back home does not mean that you are more concerned about
>the plight of our people back home or that you abhor injustice more than I
>do.
>
>
>
>Like I wrote earlier, if you want to debate with me, you have to do it in a
>constructive manner. I refuse to engage in histrionics. If you are
>frantically trying to find someone to attack you better try someone else
>because I would not give you the acknowledgement. That is my prerogative
>and I choose to exercise it. That said, I will not respond to any more
>posts from you on this issue. I exit the stage. If you want to engage me
>next time, do it in a manner that would make it possible for both of us to
>benefit from it. Any other way, you will not hear from me.
>
>
>
>You finally wrote:
>
>
>
>"Buharry wake up and smell the coffee, or shall I say attaaya!!!! "
>
>
>
>Since you have acted the clairvoyant, why do you find it difficult to
>decide whether it is coffee or attaya? Why should you find it necessary to
>ask for the opinion of someone living in cloud cuckoo land? But then, maybe
>you will come back and say it was a rhetorical question. On that note, I
>wish you a Happy Easter and reiterate that you have heard the last from me
>on this issue.
>
>
>                                                          Buharry.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>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 contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>[log in to unmask]
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.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
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~