Mr. Sallah,
I'm at work right now, but I cannot help but acknowledge your challenge.
However, just for the record, I want to take this opportunity to caution you
about getting unduly angry. Why? Because there is a tendency for one to
loose one's head when you become upset. Here you are challenging me to a
no-holds barred debate, and you're getting really worked up even though the
debate hasn't resumed yet. Due to your anger, you're misstating basic facts
about what has happened previously. I couldn't contain myself with laughter
when I read your labeling of me as Hamjatta's sycophant and cheerleader.
This was simply not the case. You and anybody else who cares, can go back to
the G-L archives, and download the postings in chronological order from the
beginning of these exchanges. If you do that, you'd see that your charge is
totally baseless. My interpretation of the Korro Ceesay case, and the
Constitution, both exposed angles that were untouched by Hamjatta. So,
before embarrassing yourself any further, refer to the archives in
chronological order, and see who first pointed out what, and when. In fact,
at one point, Hamjatta was really exasperated that you were ignoring him,
and totally concentrating on me. Those comments are part of the public
record for all to see. You then came back, and said, you'll now adopt a
multi-prong approach, and address us both simultaneously. So, if I were just
a mere cheerleader, why would you ignore the big Kahuna, and concentrate on
me?
I did abstain from the debate for sometime (mainly December,) because of the
intervention from some of your blind supporters, who chose to throw
baseless, and false labels at us. Why? Because some people have clearly
demonstrated their inability to tell the truth. So, why engage them? I've
stated this fact before. During that time, I've made comments on some of
Hamjatta's postings encouraging him. If that is sycophancy, I'll take it.
Also, I'll take my crude logic over your refined logic any day. Why? Let's
look at this cheer leader/sycophant label you're throwing at me. Anybody
with sense knows that, one can only be a sycophant of someone you look up
to. Do I think Hamjatta has the potential to become an explosive
intellectual in the Gambia? You bet. Do I admire his sometimes truly matured
insight on events, even as young as he his? Yep. But, his sycophant? That's
a big stretch, Mr. Sallah. Not, to brag, but I have two professional degrees
under my belt. And I make a decent living working as a professional. Now,
if people are to believe your refined logic, you're saying that I'm looking
up to a student - which status has attendant constraints that we all know
about. As it is, I can do things that Hamjatta could only dream of. Basic
fact. But, I'm his sycophant/cheer leader? If your logic is what refined
logic looks like, please keep it. I don't want any of it.
The simple truth about this debate is that, though I've never seen/met
Hamjatta, we concur totally on all the salient points at issue here. And
between the two of us, we've exposed you for what you truly are. Now, I can
understand your frustration. When this debate started, you launched into
your usual boasts about forcing us to put our "foot in our mouth." Anyone
who red your response to Joe Sambou's appeal could see your desperation to
move on, and give the one-sided views about your role in the country since
1994 to your blind followers. One has to wonder whose foot is in his mouth
now. My "final thoughts" must really be grinding you inside. Now, you can
understand how people like OJ must have felt when you were rightly pointing
out their flaws. Truth could be painful, Mr. Sallah. Sorry, I have to tell
you.
Regarding this brag about coming after me with all you have, you better
watch yourself. Your writings, speeches, and gestures are all a matter of
public record. According to your own testimony, you don't even recall
meeting me ever. Now, who knows more about the other between the two of us?
Is this your refined logic at work again? You have a knack for dismissing
my warnings, but just lop stuff at me, and see what you get.
For your information, I've since acquired a copy of the '97 Constitution.
I'm almost through it, the first time. You can test my knowledge of it
anytime. But, just for the record, what I said previously was that I'd only
seen excerpts of the Const, and didn't like what I saw. Again, don't take my
word for it, refer to the archives. Thanks to this electronic age, all our
comments are on public record.
On my summer 1996 letter, please dissect my crude logic for me. I really
can't wait. Not publishing that letter only betrayed your true sentiments.
I'll take you on this "principle" business regarding telling Gambians
there's nothing wrong with Yaya Jammeh running for president. Player and
referee simultaneously. Nothing wrong with that?
Finally, Mr. Sallah, I'll be waiting for you to address the points I've
raised in my "final thoughts" piece. That should be a good starting point,
don't you think? I'll then raise some new issues. And we can get this debate
going. Needless to say, I'm far from being intimidated. But, I guess you
know that by now. If anything, I'm worried about you playing the victim,
like you did previously. Poor, honorable Halifa Sallah being hounded by a
few unruly characters. Evokes sympathy. Since you're calling for this
debate, I repeat again that, if your people jump in and start calling us
false labels, it would get ugly. If you want to help, set the record
straight. No hard feelings here, but you've misled people for too long. It's
time we take a close look at our most vocal politician. So, throw out the
gloves. To this young man, your challenge is most welcome!
Hamjatta: I intended to fax you a copy of the entire '97 Const, but due to
some problems with our International line, it had to wait. I didn't want to
raise your expectations too high by giving you a time line. But, hopefully,
that logistic bit should be cleared soon. It's got more to do with office
politics/power play than anything else, if you're curious. Let's hope for
the best.
Saul.
>From: foroyaa <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Halifa: Re: To Hamjatta
>Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 13:07:31 -0000
>
>Saul,
>
>Your crude logic is becoming more evident. You supported the coup because
>you trusted Jammeh. I refused to accept a ministerial post offered by the
>coup makers on the grounds of principle. I have made it abundantly clear
>at
>the time that they could not build the type of society my colleagues and I
>have devoted all our lives towards building. You abandoned the ship when
>you
>realised that your trust was misconceived. I supported a party which
>opposed
>President Jammeh's presidential aspirations by putting up its own
>presidential candidate. I stood against the APRC in the National Assembly
>elections.
>
>Yet, your crude logic still gives you the impression that I saw nothing
>wrong with President Jammeh becoming the President of the country. On what
>grounds then did I reject the ministerial post he offered or PDOIS putting
>up candidates against the APRC? You refused to acknowledge the democratic
>principle my colleagues and I have always advocated - that it is not the
>right of any Gambian in a sovereign republic to determine who is to
>exercise
>his or her rights to be the representative of the people. This is why we
>have never advocated for any party to be banned even the PPP, or that any
>Gambian should be excluded from appearing before the people to seek a
>mandate.
>
>It is amazing that you are still finding it difficult to understand this
>simple fact. This is what has compelled me to open up the debate. It is
>wide
>open. This time I will not give you the latitude I have given before. I
>hope
>you are fully prepared.
>
>On the question of sycophants, I hope you will realise that the term fits
>you more than anybody else. All you have been doing is simply serving as
>Hamjatta's cheer leader. This became so disgusting that I concentrated on
>communicating with Hamjatta rather than referring to your amplification of
>his views.
>
>When the debate started, you stated clearly that you have never read the
>Constitution. However, at the end you claimed that I have sullied my image
>by supporting a flawed constitution. I have to go back to your level so
>that
>all those who are at your level will understand the message I have been
>trying to communicate. I am quite sure that when I analyse the letter you
>claim we have refused to publish, you will certainly regret that you have
>ever written such a letter.
>
>I am simply waiting for Hamjatta's answer to my questions. Since somebody
>has sent Hamjatta the Indemnity Clause, I hope he is doing a thorough
>analysis of the status of the Coroner's Act.
>
>The debate is wide open, young man. It is wide open. This time I will not
>be
>as generous as I was.
>
>Greetings.
>
>Halifa Sallah.
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: saul khan <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Saturday, February 05, 2000 07:55
>Subject: Halifa: Re: To Hamjatta
>
>
> >Mr. Sallah,
> >
> >It's good to hear from you. I hope you've had a good tour of the country.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
