Yanks,
Trust me, I feel uncomfortable to belabor this issue any
further; but, if the knowledge base is ideological, it has never been
baseless. It is premise on sound intellectual reasoning.
It started with a concept; the idea of a sovereign Gambian
identity that goes far beyond the frontiers of our partisan or ethnic
dispositions, to carve the destiny of a nation that we all proudly call
our home.
Second, it has a mission to awaken the conscience, and arouse
the intellectual curiosity and consciousness of our soverieign Gambian
reality; so much so that we will be able to fathom not only with what
is wrong with what we do, but also how best we can do it better.
Third, it has a vision to build a strong democractic culture;
promote the rule of law; civil liberties; freedom of speech and
expression; independence of the judiciary and legislature; a viable and
sound economic policy and a political structure the engenders
presidential term limits, and give opportunity to every Gambian to
serve his/her country on the basis of what he or she can deliver,
rather that what or where he or she belongs.
Now, what is baseless in harboring such laudable ideals?
Rene
-----Original Message-----
From: yanks dabo <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, Feb 17, 2010 6:27 pm
Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
Rene wrote:
"There has been a consistent knowledge base in the approach that PDOIS
sympathizers address issues; and it all falls within the contours of
what PDOIS has
been arguing for years. That is why it would be difficult to separate
how Halifa thinks with what Modou writes".
I hope with hindsight the PDOIS would have detached itselves from such
a baseless
ideological knowledge base, that yielded no fruit for the party, except
to boost egos
of certain individuals in it into thinking that they masters of the
earth!
Furthermore, the only reason why one can't separate the thinking of
Halifa and Modou
Nyang is that both have proven to be very deceitful with truth. Where
as Halifa
misrepresented elections figures to prove his point; Modou Nyang
misrepresented
Halifa into some hero like person, who saved the Gambians from Yahya
Jammeh's
witch hunters. When that has not been the truth.
I still can't believe that this Nyang Mr stated what he stated. In fact
since Jammeh pardon
Halifa about the witch craft saga issue, the topic had become a taboo
for Halifa, until
Mr Nyang started it. Yet Nyang misrepresented him as the hero who saved
the day.
Even that truth about Nyang, you folks wish to see him as some hero
presenting the the
truth here.
You guys must be kidding!
Nyang is a liar, simple!
Nemesis Yanks
> Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:06:25 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Bailo,
> I have had a series of private exchanges with Modou, and I can
> also detect his sharp intellect and wit. It is not surprising,
though,
> given that he has been a journalist with foroyaa. There has been a
> consistent knowledge base in the approach that PDOIS sympathizers
> address issues; and it all falls within the contours of what PDOIS
has
> been arguing for years. That is why it would be difficult to
separate
> how Halifa thinks with what Modou writes.
>
> Rene
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wed, Feb 17, 2010 1:45 pm
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
>
> Modou,
>
> I ought to point out that you are so articulate in your
contributions
> that some of our fellow G-Lers think that Halifa is the one
writing for
> you. It is really funny. That's a credit for you. Keep it up.
>
> I also highly appreciate your role of sharing with us Foroyaa
articles
> that ever focus on pertinent Gambian issues.
>
> Finally, I must also commend you for not reciprocating against the
> Halifa-haters by bashing their preferred candidate. That said,
> everybody reserves the right to...................................
>
> Bailo
>
> --- On Wed, 17/2/10, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wednesday, 17 February, 2010, 18:07
>
> Koto Bailo, thanks again for your wise counsel. This approach is
not
> the most desirable especially at this time and period of our
troubles.
> Nonetheless, sometimes trashing out issues is necessary in an
attempt
> to find a common ground. What i am doing now is the least i had
> expected to be involved in rather it is the opposite that
interests me
> the most.
> However, i cannot just watch a gang of few spreading lies and
rumours
> in such respectable foras with many a senior citizens of ours. And
to
> your question, NO, i do not see my self as having any influence in
any
> decision whatsoever at this period. I just happen to have some
opposing
> views to what is being paraded as the best solution to our
problem.
> May be i am wrong too.
>
> Nyang
>
> --- On Wed, 2/17/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 11:22 AM
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> I don't know whether you realised that you are still going round
in
> circles. If a united opposition stance against the dictatorship
> depended on you, then the dictator is at greatly at ease. Please
tell
> me you have near zero influence in this regard.
>
> While you are still going round and round, the incumbent is busy
> misusing our public funds buying the loyalty of unsuspecting
Gambian
> voters. Please let us instead give emphasis to alerting our
friends and
> relatives that all these donations by the dictator is merely to
buy to
> entrench his tyranny over Gambians. Abdoukarim, you and Banka need
to
> work on Brufut.
>
> I could already hear some political pundit telling us that since
any
> future Government in the Gambia is likely to resort to such
tactics
> albeit on a lower scale, then it is no big deal. It is indeed a
big
> deal.
>
> All said and done, it remains the right of every qualified Gambian
who
> wishes to contest for political office to do so. Therefore no
person
> should be maligned into supporting another's candidate. That's
> coercion! It is both uncivilised and unacceptable. I expect the
> leadership of the UDP or NADD alliances not to resort to or fall
for
> this.
>
> Halifa is not the barrier to the realisation of Ousainou's
presidential
> ambitions, nor is Ousainou the obstacle to the fulfilment of
Halifa's
> Agenda 2011. Let us therefore stop feigning that such is the case.
>
> Finally, I urge you all to leave my niece, Kumba Gaye out of this
> discussion; she is just 12 and have no interest, whatsoever in
> politics. Let the writer try another pen-name.
>
> Bailo
>
>
> --- On Wed, 17/2/10, yanks dabo <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: yanks dabo <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wednesday, 17 February, 2010, 13:25
>
>
> Suntu
>
> Who does this Modou Nyang thinks he is; asking you to call "Darboe
and
> ask him
> whether they have reached the decision that the only alliance he
Darboe
> and the
> UDP would be a part of is one which endorses his candidature for
the
> 2011
> Presidential elections".
>
> Maaaaaaaaaan!!! Tell this Ndokey Nyang not to play with us! Who
does he
> thinks
> we are; his errand boys!!
>
> As for his claim that he wants "to be fair to the UDP leadership.
I
> know they are
> matured people and know what is at stake. We are dealing with the
> future of the
> Gambia and I do not want to judge the UDP by the words of its
> sycophants".
>
> He seems too late for to reckon that fact, as he had already
> been unfair to the UDP
> leadership and judged the UDP leadership in his reaction to the
UDP
> UK's rejoinder.
> Less that reaction had not been written by Nyang but by his Halifa
> Sallah; to make
> him not to realise his errors.
>
> One other point for Mr Nyang, is that we wait for his article
about why
> UDP's strategy
> will fail, which he promised to publish on Freedomnewspaper. I'm
sure
> his knows it will
> no go unchallenged.
>
>
> Yanks
>
>
>
>
>
> Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 09:07:24 +0000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Suntou, one more thing before I come Daffeh’s way. This just came
to me
> while scribbling in response to Sonny. Because you are the
coordinator,
> I saw your photo with Darboe during his visit to the UK, you look
good
> bro, however that still does not make put you in major decision
making
> position in the party especially with regards to opposition unity.
> And when I wrote to Uncle Haruna the following: "If you want to be
> Darboe’s Press Secretary could you give us the UDP position on the
way
> forward instead of pouring venom on Halifa for being bold enough
to
> come up with concrete proposals?", Yanks tried to take ownership
of it.
> But I am not interested in his ranting but only for the part he
quoted
> Daffeh as thus: "Halifa Sallah and his PDOIS Party should put
their
> personal pride, egos and idealism aside and immediately embrace a
UDP
> led alliance without any obnoxious precondition whatsoever". This
is
> where I want to tackle Daffeh.
>
> But before that I need your help first. I want to be fair to the
UDP
> leadership. I know they are matured people and know what is at
stake.
> We are dealing with the future of the Gambia and I do not want to
judge
> the UDP by the words of its sycophants. Before I write I would
want you
> to call Darboe and ask him whether they have reached the decision
that
> the only alliance he Darboe and the UDP would be a part of is one
which
> endorses his candidature for the 2011 Presidential elections.
>
> I am still not convinced that the UDP leadership will be calling
on
> people to give it money so that it prepares for failure. That is
> political suicide and any body who helps them in that venture must
be
> seen to be either driven by nepotism, tribalism or opportunism.
Only
> people who are infected with such disease could reason in the
> irrational manner Sonny Daffeh chose to do. The issue that the UDP
> Sycophants refuse to look at is how to bring about change.
>
> Suntou, please do this for the sake of our country. I know you
were
> with Darboe not long ago but you can talk to him again at least
one
> more time. Agreed? Good, and thank you. I will be expecting you
within
> the next 24 hours to give a reply and I will then prove to you
that it
> is the positions you take which makes Agenda 2011 the best option
> available so far for those who want change.
>
> That is why you are focusing on hate messages against Halifa and
not
> showing why the agenda is unworkable. I am using my real name but
you
> people are hiding to a point of using the name Kumba Gaye to
attack me
> for exposing the bankruptcy of your position.
>
> Nyang
>
> --- On Mon, 2/15/10, suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Monday, February 15, 2010, 8:50 PM
>
> Modou, I can see that you are desperate to tag me with every
negative
> jargon. Bring them on. What you are failing to notice is that, the
way
> UDP dominate in terms of support on the ground, is the same right
where
> you are. So hold your horse on the negativity, it doesn't bother
me.
> KKK, we know who the real ones are.Suntou and his UDP fellow
members
> are focus on what matters, exposing the dubious political
propaganda by
> Halifa is just a small part of our work. Don't get affected to the
> level you are willing to stoop low as some of your coward
colleagues.
> Halifa should also stop writing stuffs for you, people can tell
the
> difference. It is making me cringe, in as much as wish to see him
do
> the right thing, taking unnecessary disastrous route is something
i
> don’t recommend he will do.Wherever Suntou is confirmed a KKK,
Modou
> Nayan and his friends will be loyal members too.Too cheap
friendSuntou
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Modou Nyang
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Uncle Haruna, I got you loud and clear. You do not want to wade
into
> political mathematics and you are not the Press Secretary of the
UDP.
> There is nothing for us to debate. I will then go back to the UK
club.
>
> However I must tell you that I have noticed in your writing that
there
> is a generation gap between us. This is why you cannot identify
some of
> my cultural symbolism's. Even though it is out of place for a
nephew to
> give advise to an uncle I do see the desire in you to do something
> constructive for the Gambia. I therefore hope that you will give
up the
> posture which gives you the image of a person who want to be on
top of
> every body else.
>
> I really could not understand what problem you have in the
provisions
> of the constitution being disseminated in a practical and relevant
way
> ad infinitum. It is our national document and we need to know it
to
> promote the rule of law. I also could not understand why you felt
that
> those who give birth to educated children cannot understand
government
> budgets if explained in their own language. The problem of the
Gambia
> is not the people but those who claim to know but are illiterates
in
> our local languages. Hence they cannot communicate what they have
> learned to the grass-roots.
>
> Certain kinds of information are meant for the goose and another
to the
> gander. I certainly wanted to challenge you on your comments
regarding
> the Brufut donations but now I think I will leave you alone.
However, I
> will not close my chapter with you for the moment without
expressing my
> disappointment at your comment that you did not read Agenda 2011
but
> used it as toilet paper.
>
> Please don’t be a partner to Suntou’s friend whose Ku-Klux-Clan
and
> Rush Limburg attitude is so full of hate and prejudice that does
not
> allow him to see good in anyone who does not bow down to his
wishes.
> Uncle Haruna Halifa and those in their fifties belong to the last
> group of the generation of people who have now reached retirement
age
> and you the people in your 40s (am guessing, as you informed me
that
> Sam was your teacher) belong to the first group who should be
leading
> our generation. I feel ashamed that those of us in our 30s could
be
> reading such vulgar words from people who should be our role
models.
>
> You must promise that any time you speak again you will do so as
a
> responsible elder who aims to inspire the generation just after
you. If
> we follow the footsteps of Suntu and the haters Gambia is in
trouble
> for a long time to come. I will now devote my time to them to
prevent
> them from misleading themselves since they can mislead no other
person
> in the world. There intolerance is already becoming apparent. Even
> Jeggan is now PDOIS even though he is advocating for a primary
that
> include people who are not members of political parties. What
could be
> more democratic than that? To them it must be their leader or no
one
> else. We are now beginning to see who the real sycophants are.
>
> Nyang
>
> --- On Mon, 2/15/10, Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>
> From: Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Date: Monday, February 15, 2010, 1:24 PM
>
>
> Yanks, Thanx for sharing. Although I don't know the man, but I
liken
> Daffeh to Carl Rove and James Carville. The man is simply
excellent.
> You would wish UDP/NRP had a 1000 Daffehs, Karambas, SUntous,
Ansus,
> and Yankses.
>
> Aaaaaaallleeeeeh! Haruna.
>
> ----Original Message-----
> From: yanks dabo <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Mon, Feb 15, 2010 12:40 pm
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
>
>
>
> For the attention of Modou Nyang, Pa Samba Jow (Coach), Halifa
Sallah,
> and the rest of the anti-UDP
> Movement!
> I bring to your attention this article culled from
freedomnewspaper,
> though with a slight change to its heading!
>
> NADD Should Have Done Better
>
> By Sonny Daffeh, UK
> Mr Editor,
> Please allow me space to respond to Jeggan Grey-Johnson’s article
of
> 9th February 2010 which was published in your well established
medium
> under the heading; ‘‘Agenda 2011; The Opposition Leaders Must Do
the
> Right Thing.’’
>
> While I agree that the opposition should get it right this time
around,
> I do not however agree that Agenda 2011 is the right basis for
this.
> This is an ill-conceived theory that was propounded by a
disingenuous
> political ideologue on the basis of two premises namely; that the
NADD
> alliance did not work because it was unable to gather significant
> amount of votes in the 2006 presidential elections, and also that
the
> UDP led alliance did not work because it had registered a drop in
votes
> from their 2001 electoral standing. While I agree with the former,
I
> beg to differ with the latter. That premise is not only flawed, it
is
> also fraught with the propounder's very own personal prejudice
against
> a possible UDP led alliance in 2011.
>
> Although, it is true that the UDP registered a drop in votes from
their
> 2001 standing, this however cannot be attributed to the type of
> alliance [party led alliance] they adopted in 2006. As was rightly
> indicated in the UDP- UK rejoinder of 1st February 2010, UDP’s
drop in
> votes resulted from two things; their own lack of adequate
preparation
> thanks to their prior membership of NADD, and the unprecedented
low
> voter turnout [58.58%] that was witnessed in 2006 which when
compared
> to the 2001 voter turn-out [89.71%], indicates a drop of 31.13%
and
> this is notwithstanding the fact that the national voter register
had
> been updated with 219,630 new voters in 2006. Going by the results
of
> 2006 presidential election, it doesn’t appear that these voters
had
> voted for a different party rather than the UDP. They just didn’t
vote.
> Otherwise, why is it that NADD barely crossed over the 5%
threshold?
>
> Some might argue that the low voter turn-out was a direct result
of
> opposition disunity. While this may be true, it does not however
lend
> any credence to Agenda 2011 as there is no evidence which suggests
that
> this was a specifically directed protest against the UDP led
alliance.
> Even if the connection between opposition disunity and the voter
> turn-out is validly made and I am not saying it is not, it would
appear
> that the situation would still have been the same irrespective of
> whatever type of alliance any party might have chosen to adopt, be
it
> party led alliance, the so-called umbrella party or indeed a grand
> coalition. Therefore, it is not the nature of party led alliance
that
> is the issue here but the factors that inhibited the realisation
of its
> full potentials in 2006. That is what folks with genuine interest
in
> opposition unity want to talk about, not some kind of superficial
> political theories that are specifically invented to circumvent
the
> rules of conventional politics in furtherance of a particular
> individual’s selfish agenda. A grand coalition as spelled-out in
Agenda
> 2011 is pretty much akin to the NADD coalition - the only
difference
> being the name - and would be vitiated with the same problems that
> eventually led to the breakdown of NADD. Hence, it is not an
option. It
> is just a mere but crude academic exercise. Therefore and instead
of
> asking the leaders to commit the same mistake and somehow expect a
> different result or levelling false accusations against the
leadership
> of the United Democratic Party – accusing them of paying a lip
service
> to the call for unity -, Jeggan should have been bold enough to
ask
> Halifa Sallah and his PDOIS Party to put their personal pride,
egos and
> idealism aside and immediately embrace a UDP led alliance without
any
> obnoxious precondition whatsoever. That is the only thing that has
> never happened before and it is about time history is made.
>
> The UDP has proven itself over and over of being the dominant
force in
> Gambia’s opposition politics. Any future alliance/coalition of all
> opposition parties must therefore be built around them. This is a
> sacred principle of any democratic political dispensation and no
amount
> of spinning and hypocrisy will be allowed to circumvent it. The
earlier
> the fringe parties recognise this, the better for our chances of
> forging a unified alliance of all opposition parties against the
ruling
> APRC in 2011. This is not about helping someone to become an elite
as
> Halifa would say. It is about adhering to the rules of
conventional
> politics; coalitions are usually led by the biggest party in the
group.
> Jeggan’s suggestion of a primary election as a mechanism for
selecting
> a candidate for a possible coalition of all opposition parties is
both
> misplaced and untenable. Primaries are normally an internal party
> contest where individuals contest for the leadership/candidature
of a
> given party in a forthcoming general election. Coalitions of
> independent sovereign political parties don’t contest primaries to
> determine who their leader should be. That is normally determined
by
> the results of the preceding general election. This is what we
have
> seen in Israel, Germany and Italy just to name a few. There is no
> reason why this should not apply to the opposition in the Gambia.
> In 2006, 127,473 electorates voted for the opposition combined.
Out of
> this, 81% voted for the UDP candidate and 19% for NADD – the
so-called
> PDOIS and PPP-OJ coalition – This exhibits a clear expressed will
of
> the Gambian people which is valid for five years – it expires only
> after the 2011 presidential election – and have therefore
effectively
> rendered the whole idea of a primary utterly obsolete as a
legitimate
> candidate can easily be determined from these statistics.
> Jeggan’s claim that PPP-OJ and PDOIS coalition [NADD] registered
an
> increase of 100% in their 2006 score is really laughable. I
couldn’t
> stop asking myself whether he is in his trees. This shows that our
dear
> friend is detached from both the facts and the political reality
on the
> ground. PPP and PDOIS never contested a general election together
as an
> alliance prior to the 2006 presidential election. Hence, there is
no
> prior statistics that could be used to determine whether they have
> registered an increase or a decrease in 2006. What is however
crystal
> clear is that this alliance or whatever they chose to call it, is
not
> fit for purpose for it is an extremely weak one. Out of
forty-eight
> constituencies, they had 1,000 or more votes in only five
> constituencies. In thirty-three constituencies, they had less than
1000
> votes and in ten constituencies less than 100 votes. I see no
potential
> in such a diabolical electoral performance.
>
> As for who leads the UDP, that is a matter for the general
membership
> and if Jeggan doesn’t like the current leader, he should join the
party
> before its upcoming congress and fight from within. Otherwise, he
> should, frankly speaking, shut up.
>
> I hope he will do more research next time before going to the
press.
> SS Daffeh
> Essex, UK
>
>
> Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 09:09:55 +0000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> "...The issue is in fact not so much about the figures but the
> ludicrous claim that they somehow indicates a manifestation of
> electoral shun on the nature of alliances adopted by both NADD and
UDP
> led alliance prior to the 2006 presidential election i.e. party
led
> alliance and the so-called umbrella party. That is absolute
nonsense.
> Although there may have been a degree of voter discontent over
> opposition disunity or the incumbent’s employed harassment and
> intimidation tactics,-depending on which side of the story you
want to
> believe- there is absolutely no evidence that the low
voter-turnout
> seen in 2006 was as a result of the types of alliance adopted by
either
> NADD or the UDP. This defeats the whole essence of Halifa’s agenda
2011
> and that is exactly what UDP-UK rejoinder was all about..."
>
> Suntou, with your above statement I am done with you and your
other two
> guys. I will focus on Uncle Haruna. And when I return you and your
> friends might have solved their invented puzzle of who is chatting
with
> them.
>
> Uncle Haruna, do not worry much about Coach understanding your
posting.
> I am with you all the way. Just bear with me a little I will be
back.
>
>
>
>
> --- On Sat, 2/13/10, Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Saturday, February 13, 2010, 5:49 PM
>
> Suntou,
>
> I take your counsel into advisement. Pa Samba is a dear friend. He
and
> I will come to understandings. It takes a little nudging and
> explanation for him but it shall come to pass. I am not a novice
at
> conflict resolution.
>
> Here is what I advise of you though.
>
> Today, today. If Halifa for some reason went into a trans and
declared
> - Let us have a total opposition union and let UDP/NRP lead it,
wIll
> you and UDP/NRP waste your times to join
> PDOIS??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>
> This is the question I want you and UDP/NRP and even GMC to
ponder.
> After you do, you will throw away Agenda-2011 and focus on
building
> your parties and alliances. As I can see, both UDP/NRP and GMC
have
> shortcomings in party administration that leave a lot to be
desired.
> Simple tasks take days or months to complete if at all. When your
> leader is busy defending Femi Peters, the party's entire
activities
> stop. WHY???? If Ousainou is not free, the party's executive
committee
> need to ensure the continued functioning of the party. WHY is
that?
> Some due-diligence does not require money. Organising and visiting
with
> your supporters regularly as far away as Koina and Jimara and
> cultivating new supporters should be done all the time, Ousainou
or no
> Ousainou. NADD/PDOIS has the same problem or worse. But the time
you
> partisans spend on chatter could be better used developing your
> parties. The way I see it, none of the parties is capable of
governing
> Gambia in this state. And if you should dream about forming a
singular
> union, you will have multiplied the inefficiencies ten-fold.
>
> So focus your time and energies on value - building and
strangthening
> your parties. We are not interested in a United Opposition any
more. At
> least we will not depend on that idea as the means to remove
Yahya. So
> don't feel burdened to form a united opposition on account of the
> people.
>
> Thank you and may DaarManso continue to bless all of you in your
> self-interests.
>
> Haruna.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sat, Feb 13, 2010 5:05 pm
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
>
> Haruna, your comments are simple, logical and straight forward.
But the
> sad facts is that, some people cannot even think for themselves
without
> Sallah telling them how. Halifa's attempt to be Jack of all trade
meant
> that, he did injustice to himself and UDP/NRP analysing absent
voters
> and the synergy effect with him being a mortal man could'nt
quantify.
> Halifa should display his formula of his cirtic of the UDP/NRP not
> adding the absent voters to the pool. Absent voters affected all
the
> parties, including PDOIS and NDam.
> Haruna, your efforts are honourable and honest. Where you
criticise me
> and my attempts, i recognise the reasoning in them. When we send
our
> rejoinder, Halifa's few fans in American made all sorts of noise,
some
> saying:
> Halifa is under attack, we should stop all talks
> Now who did we responded to? The wind or Halifa? Did this people
> actually read anything Halifa wrote?
> My hunch is they don't. But when Mr Grey-Johnson again repeated
Halifa
> mistakes, i didn't hear this people who nearly went into coma
when we
> their patron, when Darboe was branded power hungry etc by a
misguided
> bigoted partisan.
> The two face mentality is the real reason Halifa is continuing
what he
> doing. Behind his back his own guys are dissolution with him,
among
> people, they defend his ideas even after knowing they don't make
sense.
> And as for Pasamba, true peace will come to pass when you are bold
> enough to confront Halifa. But for now, it will be a dream.
> Haruna, keep writing.
> Suntou
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Haruna Darbo
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Olfactor you can't help but take a swipe at yours truly. What is
wrong
> with you men? I'll have you know you can't have a better friend
than
> Haruna. I just got off the phone with a friend. He tells me
president
> Clinton is doing marvelously and with our continued prayers, he
should
> be back up, straight up, to continue to assist in Haiti and
Northern
> Ireland. I told him I have a friend in Dublin who could hold the
torch
> for Ireland as the president recovers. So I messed up your
hibernation
> long before you perceived it. SOmeone will be looking for you over
> there to lend all Ireland a hand as she works through devolution.
Won't
> you do Ireland a good turn? Migrant worker or not, you still live
in
> Ireland. So why go into hibernation on account of your
friend Haruna
> when you could be working for Northern Ireland???? Learn to not
take,
> take, take. Learn to give, give, give. Besides I did not hear
where you
> tried to get our mutual friend Demba out of box. I know your life
has
> some value. I just gotta figure it out for you. I still love you.
>
> Now then Dad, you did a marvelous job in amicus of Halifa's
electoral
> arithemetic which you inform us was the basis for Agenda 2011. You
must
> be commended for this. It is what mortal man can expect of a
partisan.
> I totally admire your zeal and sport. I guess it is not necessary
> therefore for me to read Agenda 2011 afterall. I will share some
notes
> with you and they will be brief.
>
> In my view, Halifa's un-intended dishonesty does not lie in
> the arithemetic adduand. As a philosopher and sociologist par
> excellence, Halifa must have been taught that linear arithemetic
is not
> terribly valuable for philosophers and sociologists. That is why
linear
> algebra and additional math were introduced in those years where
> sociologists and philosophers shared their agonies in explaining
human
> conditions and considerations. Throw in the philosopher and
sociologist
> who wishes to use politics to solve the landmark equations of
social
> engineering. Why do people vote? Why do they vote the way they do?
>
> Let me be the first to share with you that the adduand exclusively
> should not be considered in electoral arithemetic. You cannot
explain
> the distributive and associative properties only by using addition
> alone, addition and subtraction alone, Or addition, subtraction,
and
> multiplication alone. Electoral arithemetic must include the use
of
> addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, the operations of
> integral and derivative science are a complex use of these four,
and
> they cannot even begin to tackle electoral mathematics. Secondly,
you
> must endeavour to include the time value of elections and votes
and the
> time value of human considerations. That is where the accountant
comes
> to the aid of the philosopher/sociologist/politician. Even
further,
> electoral calculus contains some intractable variables such as
personal
> considerations of the voter that are a function of his/her state
of
> mind at the time of voting. What you must not do under any
> circumstance, is to extrapolate or compare votes of different
periods
> or periodic elections. Your quandry is not complete even after you
> satisfy the foregoing. There comes the matter of vote-buying,
> vote-selling which Halifa himself was at pains to convince us
happens
> during the elections in Gambia. Well throw in the mix of the
Gambian
> voter's problems of Yahya's intimidations, electoral riggings, and
> ballot stuffings, why you have just thoroughly discombabulated
yourself.
>
> In essence, the dishonesty displayed by Halifa, though unintended,
is a
> result of using a dishonest formula. Now when you skew that
formula to
> portray another opposition party as incapable to win future
elections,
> you burden straightforward dishonest calculus with odious bias. If
the
> premise therefore of AGENDA 2011 is the result of such
arithemetic,
> well you know the rest of the story.
>
> Therefore, I urge Halifa to apologise to the readers of Agenda
2011 and
> all other opposition parties, and when we work on a roadmap, to
cease
> redefining past elections in Gambia. Past election results in
Gambia
> will not afford any valuable or meaningful discernment for any
> opposition party. And Foroyaa, based on such arithemetic wishes
> opposition parties to go back to the drawing board. For
what?????????
> We are all unduly mesmerized by the sanctity of a total opposition
> union. I advise sobriety and caution against disingenuity and
pretense.
>
> I commend you nonetheless for efforting amicus of Agenda 2011 and
> Halifa.
>
> Olfactor, any minute now you'll hear a knock on your door. Nobody
> hibernates in Ireland anymore. She invests enormous amounts to
market
> herself as a lively tourist destination. You should help her in
that
> regard. I love you all.
>
> Haruna.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Modou Mboge <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Sent: Sat, Feb 13, 2010 4:54 am
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
>
> Nyang,
>
> Keep up the good work, however dealing with grouchy
> characters is difficult, for reason and reality is not their
forte. Let
> me go back to my hibernation as our grouch par excellence here has
> snorted at people who have decided to ignore his incessant and
> vapid rambling. I do not want to be splattered by his grotty
stuff, so
> hibernation here we come.
>
> Nyang once again keep the fire burning and keep helping me out of
my
> hibernation with your good work. Thanks for a very well written
> piece.
>
> Best,
>
> Mboge
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Modou Nyang
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Suntu,
>
>
> How Many times am I to prove that you do not do your homework
well? I
> can see that you are trying to get allies from all those People
with
> hate messages. This is weakening your course. Such hate messages
cannot
> isolate any one.. We have seen those types of people here in the
US
> during Obama’s campaign. They cannot explain why they hate him.
>
> Consequently their hate messages worked out very well for Obama.
Here
> too you are giving Halifa more publicity than he has asked for.
The
> worse thing that you did to your self is to raise issues which led
to
> the challenge for Halifa to explain the role he played in NADD. I
am
> still waiting to read part 3 so that things will be clearer since
your
> camp is still trying to distort the truth even though no NADD
leader
> had come out in public to do so.
>
> Your last hope to discredit Halifa is your claim that he distorted
the
> result of the 2001 Presidential elections just to prove that the
UDP
> lost more votes than it really did, when compared to 2006 so that
its
> leadership would be discredited. In my reaction to your rejoinder
I
> decided to skip the issue of the exact number of votes your party
the
> UDP had in the 2001 election in order to do a proper research on
it. I
> have now scanned the results of the 2001 Presidential elections
with
> the signature of the then Chairman of the Independent Electoral
> Commission Gabriel Roberts.
>
> However, before going into your distortion of the results I would
want
> to help one of your friends to understand what I meant when I said
> Darboe was not brave enough to tell his colleagues what he wanted
and
> stuck by it before they ventured to form NADD. He misunderstood me
> completely and strayed into accusing Halifa of promoting that a
brave
> person should be selected to lead an opposition alliance. My
position
> is that if Darboe is strongly convinced that he should lead and
others
> should follow. He should simply declare that for all to understand
and
> then proceed to sell his agenda to the people. Whoever wants to
join
> him would do so and those who would not want to join him would go
on
> with their own programmes. Since UDP is not ready to compromise on
> leadership it should make that clear and stand by that decision
and
> should not join any arrangement where leadership would have to be
> negotiated with other stakeholders.
>
> let me now deal with the results of the 2001 Presidential
elections.
> Halifa made it clear in his Agenda 2011 that UDP had 149448 votes
in
> 2001 while NRP had 35,671 votes. Please read the Agenda again. You
will
> get the real figures rather than approximations. If you want a
copy of
> the Agenda i will mail it to you electronically.
>
> Halifa indicated that the two parties formed an alliance in 2006
along
> with GPDP and had votes numbering 104,808 votes..Halifa concluded
that
> compared to the 2001 figures the two parties lost 80,301 votes.
Where
> then has Halifa gone wrong?
>
> Could you not do simple addition and subtraction? Add 149,448
votes to
> 35,67. You should get 185,119 votes. Subtract 104,808 from
185,119.
> What is your answer? Is it not 80,301 votes. Halifa is dead
correct and
> you the members of the UDP camp in the UK are dead wrong.
>
> I have investigated and got the results a long time ago. I wanted
to
> check whether you have leaders who would guide you to know the
truth.
> The fact that you are still persisting in claiming that Halifa’s
> figures are wrong has forced me to request for a scanned
declaration of
> results signed by The Chairman of the IEC and I hope you will now
> apologise to Halifa for your misleading statements. I am surprised
by
> the fact that you are still clinging to the view that Halifa
quoted
> wrong figures even though your leaders in Banjul should be able to
tell
> you the truth instead of leaving you to humiliate yourselves
before
> world public opinion. I have decided to share the copy of the
> declarations of the 2001 election results with the online media
for all
> to see for them selves since I cannot directly place it here
unless as
> an attachment.
>
> Furthermore Suntou, you claim that it is the UDP who enabled
Halifa to
> win his Serrekunda Central Seat. Let us look at the results of the
> elections in Serrekunda since the UDP was put up by the three
major
> parties of the first Republic, that is, the PPP, the NCP and the
GPP.
>
> In 1997, the UDP campaigned against Halifa Sallah in Serrekunda
East
> and put up a major PPP supporter, Bakary Manneh, as their
candidate in
> order to exploit OJ’s popularity as the MP at the time of the
coup. The
> results were as follows Halifa had 8, 529 votes, The UDP had 8,
> 067votes and the APRC had 9, 575votes. Contrary to your position
that
> the UDP put up a candidate against Halifa in the 2007 National
Assembly
> elections to humble him while it left Sidia Jatta’s seat
uncontested
> since he was a humble PDOIS leader, Halifa did not stand as a
> Presidential Candidate in 1996. It is Sidia Jatta who stood as a
> candidate against the UDP. And in the 1997 National Assembly
elections,
> the UDP also put up a prominent NCP supporter in Wuli against
Sidia
> Jatta. Alhamdu Conteh who stood as The UDP candidate had 1,098,
Mamadi
> Karlo Jabai of the APRC had 4, 641 and Sidia Jatta of PDOIS had 5,
499.
> Sidia won despite UDP"s attempt to contest the seat.
>
> In the 2002 National Assembly elections, the UDP boycotted the
> elections and called on all its members to stay away from the
polls. In
> Serre Kunda Central, Halifa had 5, 563 votes as a PDOIS Candidate
while
> the APRC candidate had 5, 143 votes. Halifa won.
>
> In the 2005 by election in Serre Kunda Central, Halifa had 5, 911
votes
> as a candidate of the alliance while the APRC had 3, 984 votes.
Ther
> alliance added only 348 votes to the 2002 votes Halifa had as a
PDOIS
> candidate. As a NADD candidate Halifa had 4, 302 in the 2007
National
> Assembly elections, UDP had 1, 548. and the APRC had 6, 386.
>
> It should be clear that Sidia and Halifa both won their seats as
PDOIS
> candidates irrespective of the UDP. UDP made a big mistake in
> contesting the Serrekunda central seat. It did not spoil anything
for
> Halifa. It spoilt its own name. Many young people started to
describe
> it as a party that pours the sand in the porridge if it is not
invited
> to share in the eating. UDP UK is also doing more harm to the UDP.
I
> will take up this issue later.
>
> Suntu you concluded that: "The UDP U.K knows very well, Halifa's
> students will come trying to defend the indefensible. They will
again
> continue to twist the facts and try to blame others for Halifa's
> inability to convince Gambian voters. What the UDP propose which
is
> respectfully talked by sincere Gambians, Halifa don't want to pay
> attention to that. What he want is to talk directly to Gambians,
the
> civil society, the NGO's etc and then create a cadre of people who
will
> later chose him as their saviour."
>
> This is your allegation. This is your fear. You do fear that
Halifa
> could convince the Gambian voters. Your objective therefore is to
> prevent this through premeditated character assassination. You
claim
> that I am trying to distort facts. What facts are we trying to
distort?
> If Halifa cannot convince the Gambian people then why is he your
> headache. Halifa is not Darboes problem and Darboe is not Halifa’s
> problem. The problem of the Gambian people should be our problem
.Allow
> me to quote what Halifa said recently.
>
> "Interestingly enough, in 2001 the APRC candidate had 242, 302
votes
> when it forged no alliance with the NCP. At that time there were
501,
> 304 registered voters. Suffice it to say, even though the number
of
> voters increased by 169, 032, by 2006 the votes of the APRC could
only
> increase by 22,102 votes. The UDP candidate had 149,448 votes in
2001.
> Even though it developed alliance with NRP, which had 35,671 votes
in
> 2001, its votes went down 104,808 votes in the 2006 elections,
despite
> the increase in the number of registered voters by 169, 032
voters."
>
> "Foroyaa: What is your advise?"
>
> "It is therefore necessary for political leaders to go back to the
> drawing board and map out a new way forward. How is the opposition
to
> attract the 542,055 voters who did not vote for them is the
subject at
> hand. This is what Agenda 2011 is all about. Even though I am not
> excluding acceptance of candidature, I have already declared that
the
> best option is to select a neutral candidate who will be able to
run a
> non partisan transitional cabinet for a period of 2 to 5 years and
then
> step aside after a genuine multi party contest. It is left to
Gambians
> to decide whether they have a better way forward."
>
> Please ask Darboe to state his proposal for a way forward so that
we
> know what the UDP want for the Nation. That is better than endless
> bickering by the spokesperson of the party in the UK .
>
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 2/10/10, suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>
> From: suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 4:12 PM
>
>
> Bailo, good to know your ears are wide open. I thought you
understood
> the famous English saying "one man's meat is another man's
poison".
> What you believe to be crap from Suntou is a gem to some and vice
verse.
> I have always been a fan of politics Bailo, however it
doesn't dominate
> my life. I reveal here last year that, i was reading and
consulting
> with some Gambian opposition parties. trying to know certain
aspects of
> their politics and also to maintain how i can relate to them.
> It was after this period, i decided the best option out there is
the
> United Democratic Party. Hence my joining their ranks.
> I appreciate your boldness in stating on several occasion that a
party
> led coalition is the solution. Not every PDOIS member wish to
accept
> this fact, but in life we have to accept and politely disagree.
> The situation for us all are very similar. Our central concern
is to
> see that a government comes to power that will respect the rule of
law
> and adheres to good governance. And also a government that will
abide
> by term limits and allow for diaspora Gambians to come home
anytime and
> stand for election without any restriction like it it is now.
> UDP/NRP all agrees with this principles and also PDOIS. Therefore
the
> deliberate error some people are throwing about saying that,
Ousainou
> will not abide by term limits is the biggest nonsense.
> Ousainou is selected by the UDP at there annual party congress to
lead
> the party, yet Jeggan is complaining that Ousainou didn't hand
over to
> someone. Who is the new expert to lecture the UDP on how to select
a
> party leader?
> Let Halifa hand over the leadership of PDOIS to Sam Sarr before he
too
> passes the required age. After all, the American system seems to
be if
> you cannot get the presidency, you pass it on. Let Sam step up.
Jeggan
> can lecture his PDOIS members but not us.
> The annoying thing in all this exchanges is that, those who cry
baby
> when we reacted are all in hibernation, this world.
> No wonder truth is relative. Bee kaa foo ila bori leya, tiw tiw (
each
> person shout for your runner). Things are moving, albeit slowly.
But
> progress is been made. Ajarama, and Ibalen jam. Ya Allah dandu
meen
> foof kata e katato. Ameen.
> Suntou
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:56 PM, bailo jallow
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Suntou,
>
> I heard you loud and clear. But we gotta move on and not get stuck
to
> the past.
>
> As for the NIA, they are everywhere in the Gambia. Recently a
young man
> was pulled out of a public bus at Denton bridge and merciless
beaten to
> a vegetative state by our so-called security forces. His crime?
The bus
> in which he was travelling was like all vehicles on the road at
the
> time ordered off the road because the Presidential motorcade was
> expected along it. The wait was apparently long and this young man
made
> the mistake of telling someone he was was speaking with on his
mobile
> that they were waiting for the for the convoy of our stupid
president
> to pass. An NIA informant overheard his indiscretion and decided
to
> teach him a lesson. When the bus reached Denton Bridge; the
informant
> ordered the driver of the bus to halt the bus, the young chap was
> pulled out and his alleged crime reported to the security forces.
Their
> immediate reaction was to beat him to a vegetative state for his
> indiscretionary words against the President.
>
> It is therefore ordinary private citizens who are paying a higher
price
> under the status quo than public personalities like Ousainou,
Halifa,
> OJ, Seedia and the rest, the immense sacrifice of the latter
category
> nothwithstanding.
>
> Honestly, I am not a strong moslem as you. Evidence suggests that
are
> not a taleban otherwise the only technology you would approved of
is
> the killing machines. I guess you own a tv and even a computer. As
such
> If you were a taleban, your fellow talebans would have been
seeking to
> publicly flog for your deviation. So you cannot be a taleban!
Though I
> must confess that sometimes I tend to mis-consider you as one very
> angry ayatollah who considers so-called PDOIS fanatics like myself
as
> supporters of the great Satan. I sincerely hope that is not so.
> Remember, you cautioned us sometimes ago that politicians are not
to be
> trusted. Your transformation into one within this short space of
time
> is amazing. Who and what is primary motivation? I suppose Halifa
is not
> the one.
>
> Anyway, keep up the good work for your party and the Gambia in
general
> and please leave the crap out. I concur that you reserve the right
> to.........................
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> Bailo
>
>
>
> --- On Sun, 7/2/10, suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Date: Sunday, 7 February, 2010, 12:10
>
>
> Bailo, your spin was well intention albeit your inability to
accept the
> facts of your Messiah's calamity. He cannot hide neither run away
from
> his mistakes. We are all willing to move on and try to talk as
> brothers. But what we cannot leave alone the continuous blame game
> Halifa attributed to others leaving his own saintly person out.
> Politics is not a career for saints Bailo, the sooner Halifa
recognises
> that the better. And the gang mentality his supporters manifest is
a
> turn of for even his supporters, ganging up against those who
speak
> about his politics will only cause Halifa less cloud.
> I also notice that, some of his guys start calling me Taliban,
> extremist and what have you. If they are willing to stoop so low
in
> their misunderstanding of politics, my body feel for them.
> Bailo, you are strong a muslims brother who actively partake in
islamic
> actvist, those that make you a Taliban? I know some of your
Islamic
> commitments, but I also accept that, as Muslims, we should be
> interested in politics, science, literature, acceptable art,
> philosophy, just anything we can enhance our minds with.
> But alas, the gossip that Suntou is intolerant pumped up by the
PDOIS
> boys has reached me a long time. Some of this liers are even in
cahoot
> with the Foroyaa establishment providing them with equipment and
the
> like.
> My Islam allows me the privilege to be an enterprising citizen
wherever
> I live. I am a Muslim by choice and will practise Islam to the
best of
> my ability and will put across the little I know God-Willing. I
respect
> the laws of the land i reside in. But If my comments on Halifa
incense
> some to the extent that, they are willing to vilify and attribute
> nonsensical tags to me, then I am vindicated.
>
> Let us see how things pan out, we standby our findings and
whenever it
> becomes necessary, we shall respond to all false analogies on UDP.
For
> those who wish to be taken seriously including you Bailo, distant
> yourself from errors, no matter who commits them, only then people
will
> accept your subsequent cries.
> Modou's abysmal response require no countering from us. he place
> Halifa in even more serious doubts hence putting across Halifa's
line.
> He is the brave soldier and others not. The facts speaks
different.
> Ousainou's office is man regularly by NIA agents, doing all they
can to
> deter him from actively politics. His clients harassed, his
associated
> harassed, yet the foroyaa guys go about their business selling
papers
> and earning yet claiming to be sacrificing more than others. It
make me
> laugh mate.
> Suntou
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 2:01 PM, bailo jallow
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Comrade Modou,
>
> Your clarification efforts are highly appreciated. Let us now move
on
> and chart a new course towards helping bring about unity within
the
> opposition movement. In our unity is our strength. However, I
strongly
> believe that the general opposition movement would again fail to
> realise our common goal of achieving a new Gambia for all if we
> continue to rely on already tried and tested counterproductive
> strategies of destructive criticism aimed at promoting one's
candidate
> while vigorously attempting to tarnish that of another's. Some may
> argue that come on, this is merely politics at play. I personally
> consider such tactics as a smear campaign. Anyone on the frontline
of
> our national politics conscientiously opposing the retrogessive
> policies and actions of the unjust APRC regime deserve nothing but
> support and encouragement from everyone craving and campaigning
for
> positive changes in the Gambia. Ousainou Darboe, Halifa Sallah,
Femi
> Peters, Seedia Jatta, Mai Fatty and many others like them
therefore
> only deserve our genuine respect and good advice. I had concluded
long
> time ago that under the current poliitcal dispensation in in our
> beloved country the easiest and most convenient resort for any
person
> seeking only their own personal interest would be to join the APRC
> Party.
>
> Our primary objective should be towards ensuring that the
leaderships
> of the UDP-led Alliance and the remnants of NADD coalition would
both
> sooner rather later pursue a strategy of meaningful co-operation
with
> one another towards achieving an over-due united front against the
> incompetent and callous APRC regime. That way, the doubters would
have
> been confounded and hope lost by the silent majority of Gambians
would
> be restored.
>
> Let confidence building measures between all sides of the
opposition be
> pursued in earnest from now on as time is precious sliding away.
>
> Please try to help get your dear uncle bailed out after being
found
> guilty and sentenced yesterday for making a wrongful attribution
to our
> dear colleague, Halifa. Coincidentally, the amount payable which
is
> any, should be envoyed to him in jail for the benefit of good
Gambian
> causes he has been diligently campaigning for.
>
> Finally I wish to commend organisations such as the STGDP and GDP
who
> have been focussing on just that. Let us not be daunted nor
depair;
> ultimate victory is assured for the cause of any struggle for
justice,
> freedom and respect for human dignity.
>
> Let us turn a new constructive page. Let all good works go on.
Amen!
>
> Bailo
>
>
>
> --- On Sat, 6/2/10, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC
TOUR
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Saturday, 6 February, 2010, 3:50
>
> Bailo,
>
> Uncle Haruna understands Halifa very well. This is why he prefers
to
> rely on the issue of credibility and not the election statistics
which
> Halifa relied on to draw his conclusion. My uncle is among those
who
> say that politics is about numbers. In fact the other camp rely on
this
> so much that they refer to some parties as fringe parties. They
know
> what Halifa is talking about but like the proverbial ostrich they
> prefer to bury their head in the sand.
>
> You see, some of these people do not care whether there is change
or
> not. What they are interested in is the change they want. If they
> cannot get it they prefer to join Jammeh. They should not fool the
rest
> of us. Where is Waa who used to criticize Halifa. He accepted the
post
> of a governor while Halifa rejected the post of a Minister. This
is the
> difference between him and his critics. He wants genuine change
for the
> long suffering Gambian people.
>
> Halifa has made it quite clear that the lowest common multiple in
> politics is numbers and concluded that the numbers which rejected
both
> opposition and ruling party are so overwhelming that none could be
> considered credible if that is the yardstick of measuring
credibility.
> He therefore concluded that those who want change should go back
to the
> drawing board. He offered a proposal and called on others with
better
> proposals to offer their own. Where is the bickering? All honest
> Gambians have seen the light and cannot be deceived any more. They
know
> who is power hungry and those who want to empower the people.
>
> Nyang
>
>
>
> --- On Fri, 2/5/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC
TOUR
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 6:41 AM
>
> Please note that perspective does not always represent reality is
what
> I intended to express in my previous contribution.
>
> Bailo
>
>
> --- On Fri, 5/2/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC
TOUR
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Friday, 5 February, 2010, 11:22
>
> Please note that perspective does not always represent reality is
I
> intended to express in my previous contribution.
>
> Bailo
>
> --- On Fri, 5/2/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC
TOUR
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Friday, 5 February, 2010, 11:12
>
> Haruna tendered "So here Evian you will notice that my notes were
in
> response to your notes and I encourage you to read your notes
where you
> re-presented what Halifa said."
>
> This is how I represented Halifa's statement: "You seem to be in
denial
> but that is sadly the truth. The APRC is far from credible and
from the
> perspective of the potential electorate, neither exists a more
credible
> alternative. Otherwise, the opposition would have won last time."
>
> Please note that perspective does always represent reality.
>
> The truth isI did not misrepresent Halifa; you did. Instead of
> acknowledging your error, you are trying to shift it elsewhere.
That's
> absolute dishonesty!
>
> Bailo
>
> --- On Fri, 5/2/10, Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> From: Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC
TOUR
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Friday, 5 February, 2010, 0:55
>
> What i will do Evian is to leave my comments close to yours and
> Halifa's in order that the proximity may yield further
comprehension
> where cacophany meddles.
>
>
> [-----Original Message----- From: bailo jallow
> [log in to unmask] To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Thu, Feb 4, 2010 12:20 pm Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA
> SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
> Sheikh Haruna, The following is exactly what Comrade Halifa was
> reported to have stated (emphasis mine):
>
> “Some supporters of the APRC said that the opposition parties in
the
> Gambia are not credible. They should also add that the ruling
party is
> not credible. Their assessment of Gambian politics as it stands
would
> then be correct and balanced."
>
> And this is how you interpreted it:
>
> "As to which party official speaks for the other parties, Halifa
shared
> with us that there is no credible opposition or ruling party. What
he
> should have said was that his party PDOIS was not credible. Then
he
> would have been speaking for himself because he is more intimately
> aware of PDOIS' credibility. i think he was echoing
Waa's assertions
> that there is no credible opposition. The problem is instead of
> focusing on his party's credibility, he attempted to match Waa's
> cluelessness. In so doing he admitted Waa may be right."
>
>
>
> So here Evian you will notice that my notes were in response to
your
> notes and I encourage you to read your notes where you
re-presented
> what Halifa said. Then come back here and read the entire quote as
it
> appeared in the Foroyaa note, undoctored by you. What you will
conclude
> is that even given your sophomoric representation, my comment (Not
> interpretation) here does capture the cluelessness of PDOISards
> fantastically. You see the APRC supporters are smart people
compared to
> Halifa. They are not interested in selling the demerits of the
ruling
> party because that is who they support. Now Halifa advising them
to
> ALSO say that there is no CREDIBLE RULING PARTY, in addition to
There
> is no CREDIBLE OPPOSITION PARTY, and that they will have been both
> CORRECT and BALANCED is where he put his foot in his mouth.
Implicitly,
> Halifa agrees with their supposition that there is no CREDIBLE
> opposition party as CORRECT. Because there is more than PDOIS in
the
> opposition parties, Halifa is thereby speaking for other parties.
That
> is the reason I shared the advice about when in court and accused
of
> theft, your defense ought not be that not only are you a thief in
> agreement with your accuser, your accuser is also a thief. The
grander
> picture Bailo is when you consider you are an independent voter.
And
> you hear Halifa utter such. How does it make you feel about him
and his
> incredulous party PDOIS. Forget NADD at this time for there is
really
> nothing in NADD besides PDOIS. Please let me know if this is still
not
> clear to you.
>
> [So now let us focus on separating the chaff from the grain:
Halifa
> reported that "some supporters of the APRC said that the
opposition
> parties in the Gambia are not credible." This is factual. It is
APRC
> supporters like Waa Juwara as you conceded who are claiming the
above;
> it is not Halifa as you wrongly asserted. Halifa is merely a
messenger
> who conveyed the message. What Halifa opined in response is "They
> should also add that the ruling party is not credible. Their
assessment
> of Gambian politics as it stands would then be correct and
balanced."]
> Evian.
>
>
> Inutile.
>
> [I hope you would therefore accordingly revise your interpretation
of
> Halifa's statement to reflect the reality of what he expressed.]
Evian.
>
> I was not interpreting anything. I was translating. And there is
no
> further revision necessary.
>
> [You aso wrote:
> "I would encourage you to read Halifa's quotation again because I
think
> you misunderstood it. Not that it makes any significant difference
> whether you understood it or not. It just throws your analysis of
that
> part off quilter a bit. That is the bit about "Not excluding
acceptance
> of candidature". There Halifa is speaking of himself and not the
> candidature of other. Share with us your renewed understanding."]
Evian
> regurgitating what Haruna shared.
>
> [As you encouraged, I referred again to the relevant statement of
> Halifa as follows (emphasis mine):
> "Even though I am not excluding acceptance of candidature, I have
> already declared that the best option is to select a neutral
candidate
> who will be able to run a non partisan transitional cabinet for a
> period of 2 to 5 years and then step aside after a genuine
multiparty
> contest. It is left to Gambians to decide whether they have a
better
> way forward."] Evian repeating.
>
> [My understanding of the statement remains the same even though I
admit
> that Halifa did not qualify whose candidature he meant.] Evian.
>
> Halifa did not need to qualify whose candidature he spoke of. The
> English is sound and very good. If it were you or Mams I would
have
> asked for further clarification.
>
> [He did not indicated either "my" or "any" to give us precision of
> reference to candidature.] Evian.
>
> Bailo, the MY is implicit. That happens all the time in
conversations
> in English. Just for fun, let us replace MY with ANY just before
> candidature. That would not have been the best sentence structure
but
> it still tells you Halifa is speaking of himself. This is
because MY is
> the ownership litmus but ANY goes to the quality of the
candidature and
> not domain. Hey Allah, I hope you understand me. So let's extend
the
> semantic game further; Let us say Halifa meant Ousainou, OJ,
Hamat, or
> Waa's candidature, and insert any of these names just before
> candidature. Now you will agree with me that Halifa does not have
the
> purview of accepting other's candidature. Do you agree? If you
don't
> just ask yourself where is the authority for Halifa to ACCEPT a
> dog-catcher's candidature????? He can ascend to their candidatures
when
> they accept accept it themselves and the way he does that is by
voting
> his desire or ascension. These are some of the games Shaky Shaky
plays
> with English in order to improve himself. Please let me know if
you
> need further ideas on these and others.
>
> [In essence, he might have been referring to his own candidature
or
> someone else's.] Evian.
>
> Unless he is retarded, he could not have been referring to any
other's
> candidature.
>
> [It is for him to help clarify.] Evian.
>
> I don't need Halifa to clarify and I am certain most of our
coleagues
> don't need any further clarification of the statement. Let us save
> Halifa the mental gymnastics where he could try to manufacture
> extraneous meaning. That will be a bigger problem for the man.
>
> [Whatever he meant, I know that either interpretations are
possible.]
> Evian.
>
> You do the tests and convince yourself either way. It is easy. You
can
> do it Bailo.
>
> [In conclusion, I think you have mistakenly fallen for that
proverbial
> saying of comparing apples and oranges in the following statement
of
> yours: "Halifa endorsing Ousainou's candidature will be equal to
you or
> me endorsing Ousainou's candidature or Halifa's candidature at
this
> point in time. There is not much basis for that."] Evian repeating
what
> Haruna shared.
>
> [In order words, you have over-rated yourself and me at to be at
par
> with Halifa;] Evian.
>
> No. I am not at par with Halifa. Just ask him. We are of different
> mettle and polarly opposite ambition.
>
> [the latter is a political known and both you and me are virtual
> political unknowns.] Evian.
>
> Well. Do you want to be a political known Bailo????? I can make
your
> arse famous in a jiffy. You might not like what you become famous
for
> though. Political known. I have not heard such cacamayme since
Moussa
> Camara shared Mbaranbirinbiring with me in 1982 in Kuntaur.
>
> [Therein lies the difference between us Halifa's endorsement of
any
> candidature.] Evian.
>
> I see.
>
> [Cheers] Evian.
>
> Cheers to you too. And don't try to be cute with your Grand Pa
again.
> If you know what is good for you, you'll turn in your PDOIS
armband.
>
> I still love you though.
> Haruna.
>
> --- On Thu, 4/2/10, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>
> From: Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Thursday, 4 February, 2010, 0:41
>
> Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR, NO
CREDIBLE
> RULING PARTY NO CREDIBLE OPPOSITION A NEW WAY FORWARD NEEDED
>
> After the completion of the APRC tour, Foroyaa approached Halifa
Sallah
> for comments.This is what he said:
>
> “Political leaders should tell their supporters the truth. A
political
> vacuum exists in the Gambia. Some supporters of the APRC said that
the
> opposition parties in the Gambia are not credible. They should
also add
> that the ruling party is not credible. Their assessment of Gambian
> politics as it stands would then be correct and balanced. Some
leaders
> who do not want to be honest to their supporters are trying to
give the
> impression that the statistics I have been putting out are over
> statements. They are not telling their supporters the truth.
Political
> leaders should tell the truth. For only the truth shall set us
free. I
> have relied on empirical evidence to conclude that at this very
moment
> we do not have a credible ruling party or opposition party. We
have a
> duty to create both. Those who are offended by this statement are
not
> prepared to do what is necessary to save Gambian politics from
being an
> exercise in mediocrity.
>
> After the presidential elections in 2006, I wrote a pamphlet in
which I
> quoted the statistics to confirm my assertion. Gambians have to be
> reminded these statistics to awaken each from our political apathy.
>
> According to the IEC, 670, 336 voters were registered prior to the
2006
> presidential elections. When the results were delivered the IEC
> indicated that the APRC candidate who was also supported by the
NCP had
> 264,404 votes. If this is subtracted from the total number of
> registered voters it would mean that 405,932 voters did not vote
for
> the APRC candidate. The UDP candidate who was also supported by
NRP and
> GPDP had 104,808 votes, while the NADD candidate had 23,473 votes.
The
> total votes of the opposition amounted to 128,281 votes. If this
is
> subtracted from the total number of registered voters it would be
> apparent that 542,055 voters did not vote for the opposition.
Wherein
> lies the credibility of the ruling party and the opposition party
if
> politics is reduced to its lowest common denominator as contest
based
> on the number of votes.
>
> Interestingly enough, in 2001 the APRC candidate had 242,302 votes
when
> it forged no alliance with the NCP. At that time there were
501,304
> registered voters. Suffice it to say, even though the number of
voters
> increased by 169032, by 2006 the votes of the APRC could only
increase
> by 22,102 votes. The UDP candidate had 149,448 votes in 2001. Even
> though it developed alliance with NRP, which had 35,671 votes in
2001,
> its votes went down 104,808 votes in the 2006 elections, despite
the
> increase in the number of registered voters by 169032 voters.
>
> Foroyaa: What is your advise?
>
> It is therefore necessary for political leaders to go back to the
> drawing board and map out a new way forward. How is the opposition
to
> attract the 542,055 voters who did not vote for them is the
subject at
> hand. This is what Agenda 2011 is all about. Even though I am not
> excluding acceptance of candidature, I have already declared that
the
> best option is to select a neutral candidate who will be able to
run a
> non partisan transitional cabinet for a period of 2 to 5 years and
then
> step aside after a genuine multiparty contest. It is left to
Gambians
> to decide whether they have a better way forward.
>
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
>
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
> Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
> Do you want a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤To
> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the
Gambia-L
> Web interfaceat: 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-lTo
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 interfaceat: 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-lTo
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 interfaceat: 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-lTo
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 interfaceat: 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-lTo
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]
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
Do you want a Hotmail account? Sign-up now -
Free¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤To
unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interfaceat: 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-lTo 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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
|
