Yus,
Brother, you are in a melee of your own making. When you re-surfaced on the
List after a brief hiatus, you postured yourself as a born-again contrarian
and critic of the Opposition. Nothing wrong with such posturing insofar as it
is not borne out of hostility and meant to guide us all towards something
more constructive. One of your criticisms of the Opposition - especially the
UDP - is your exasperation of their political delineation. When pressed by
Dampha on this, it turns out you were only feigning knowledge on something on
which you are largely ignorant of. It doesn't augur well for a healthy
discourse when one accuses people of something which - as it happened here -
is not their position and what you profess of them is based more on your
instinctual calculation than the facts. This how charlatans pose. Needless to
say, your posturing of late reeks of such charlatanry. If you want to be a
good critic of the UDP, Brother you will have to go out there and get as much
on them as you could and read them.
More to the point, your position on the vote-buying theory propounded by
Dampha et al, look so haggard and emaciated that i quite don't get it how a
remarkably brilliant fellow like you should pursue it to the boiling point of
ennui. This is not an ad hominem attack. Stuff is: you argue against evidence
that what plausibly explains away the 1000 missing votes is voter apathy. Why
would voter apathy explain away the 1000 votes you haven't forwarded a
convincing exposition. Logic and circumstantial evidence, however, defeats
the voter apathy theory. Stuff happens: Poor rural Kiang East ain't affluent
metropolitan Silicon Valley or Manhattan where contented voters can afford to
stay home at polls which provide opportunities for them to send messages to
their political leaders. Kiang East is perhaps one of the poorest Districts
in the Gambia and amongst the worst affected areas in the current farming
crisis, especially the fiasco of the current groundnut trade season. Added to
this is the fact that the despicable APRC record after seven years of
hardship on these rural communities where poverty, even pre- Jammeh, is
largely concentrated, makes it a matter of logical progression for Kiangkas
to have more reasons than anyone else to go out and vote rather stay at home.
This is an area that has very vocal farmers airing strident views of the APRC
gov't's despicable handling of the trade season which has left them worse
off. Tell me why such farmers would want to stay at home and not vote in
disgust against the same regime that has helped perpetrated and inflicted
these economic woes on them? Voter apathy is alluded to elections where
electorates are generally well contented with their status-quo and do not see
a need to upstage the apple cart positioned at an equilibrium. We don't need
to be psephologists to figure out this fundamental moral truth of
electioneering.
Whereas in the case of the vote-buying thesis, we have reports in Gambian
papers categorically stating that votes were being bought by the APRC. APRC
stalwarts like Baba Jobe and Kebba Joke have all unabashedly admitted that
votes were bought off voters. What Dampha has been pointing out to you is
that because we have evidence that votes were illegally bought, that by
itself, is capable of explaining away the mysterious 1000 votes not casted.
That is not to say that it only is responsible for the mysterious 1000 votes.
But that because the voter apathy theory was arrived at merely by speculating
and conjectures posited and not something to settle for when preponderance of
evidence exists that points to another direction i.e, vote-buying. That is
the crux of Dampha et al's argument.
You might want to foot-stamp and screech at this, but all you have raised
demurrers about, insofar as the by-elections are concerned, were all
positions staked out by none other than Kebba Joke. This is not some
guilt-by-association tirade; but a pointer towards how dissembling your
engagement is turning out to be. It is perfectly healthy to raise similar
demurrers that APRC supporters raise about the Opposition and remain on
healthy grounds. I have no problems with that at all; one can raise similar
objections as one's opponents/detractors have and remain sanguine to the
point where it turns out to add to our arsenal of defence in the struggle.
What concerns me, however, is how dissolving your objections are turning out
to be since it has, of yet, not demonstrably sketched a decent road map that
will lead the Opposition to victory come the elections. All you continue to
do is to lamentably and futilely harp on and or making attempts at debunking
a position most people in the Opposition now accept as what has chanced
during the by-elections. Needless to say, your demurrers continue to be on
shaky ground.
As i said from the very beginning, this pointy melee is of your own making.
You have been absent from the List when we dealt with virtually all aspects
of how the by-elections went the way they went. Now, if you are a
Johnny-Just-Come-Lately and wish to posture as a contrarian critic of the
Opposition, the most decent thing to do is to re-read all what people have
argued about on the case before launching in-your-face-bravados as a weapon
to dismantle something that has become a consensus on the List. And unlike
most JJCs, you want to feign knowledge on stuff you haven't read in totality
and in the event of realising your vulnerability, you seek enlightenment by
forcing people to go back discoursing stuff they have already discoursed to
exhaustion. Because of this defect on your part, i'm reposting what amounts
to my position on the by-elections and an analysis of the by-elections
figures. Most of what you have complained about are answered there. Now, to
rescue the debate from the rock pits of ennui it is inevitably inclined, read
this piece - pasted below - and we would all be in no doubts about the
vote-buying theorists position and this it should now be your task to debunk
- based on what is postulated and staked out.
All the best,
Hamjatta Kanteh
***************************************************************
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 04:33:20 EDTReply-To: The Gambia and
related-issues mailing list<[log in to unmask]>Sender: The
Gambia and related-issues mailing list<[log in to unmask]>From:
<A HREF="http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind0104&L=gambia-l&D=0&P=4406">Hamjatta Kanteh <[log in to unmask]></A>Subject: Vote-buying Du Jour!
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"In a message dated 01/04/2001
19:58:22 GMT Daylight Time,[log in to unmask] writes:
<< My initial reading of the> results in Kiang leaves no doubt in my mind
that this election was stolen. In that vein, Saul, I would not retract what I
said the other day if I were you. But for the rigging of the votes, APRC
would have been humiliated. My reason for saying this is very simple. If we
factor in the people that were registered but did not vote, the APRC majority
in Kiang will evaporate. We do not need an UDP official word to decipher what
went on here as far as vote-buying is concerned.> ,>
Brother KB,
Once again you've beaten me to it. The previous night, i subjected these
figures supplied by Mr. Ebrima Sillah, to a forensic scrutiny and my findings
were eerily reminiscent of the vote-buying spree of 1996/7 elections. If you
look closely at the different polling stations [see attached below this mail
a break down of the figures by Mr. Ebrima Sillah and courtsey of Mr. Sillah]
that the UDP lost to the APRC in the Kiang East by-election, you will observe
that in ALL cases, the percentage of the absentee vote is more than the
percentage the UDP polled in any of these given stations. See below how i
break them down to illustrate the point:
Masembeh Polling Station:
Percentage of Absentee Vote ------ 32%
Percentage of UDP Vote ------31%
Kaiaf A Polling Station:
Percentage of Absentee Vote ----- 24%
Percentage of UDP Vote ------ 20%
Kaiaf B Polling Station:
Percentage of Absenteee Vote ----- 30%
Percentage of UDP Vote ----- 16%
Njolfen Polling Station:
Percentage of Absentee Vote ----- 28%
Percentage of UDP Vote ----- 7%
It is remarkable in the case of the Njolfen Polling Station, that the
percentage of the absentee vote was FOUR TIMES more than what the UDP
actually polled. Now, this cannot simply be reducible to voter ignorance of
the issues involved, voter apathy and or the Urban migration effect [which i
just noticed Karamba had effectively debunked]. The vote-buying theory we
have propounded earlier, can only explain why in a place like Njolfen - where
i'm reliably informed the UDP has wider support than the APRC albeit
marginally - the APRC polled something like 90% of the votes casted whilst
the UDP only managed a measly 10% and some 28% of the registed voters stayed
away from the polls. Whichever way we look at these figures, the stench of
fraud and illegal influencing of the outcome of the by-elections, especially
in Kiang, is too strong to ignore. It cannot just be coincidence that in ALL
the polling stations that the UDP lost to the APRC in the Kiang East
constituency, the percentage of the absentee is actually more than what the
UDP polled. There is no doubt tthat this gut-wrenching stench that i keep
getting the whiff ofthe more i subject Mr. Sillah's figures to a further
forensic scrutiny, is nothing but a hotch-potch of vote-buying, voter
intimidation and other electoral shenanigans by Baba Jobe's terrorist thugs.
The question naturally arises why the vote-buying went ahead unstopped - save
being reported in the local media - and successful enough to determine the
outcome of the Kiang East by-election? As you alluded to, this
region/division i.e, [LRD] - according to figures i have managed to get from
Banjul last night - is the poorest in the country and where poverty is most
felt. Added to this drepressing vignette, is the fact that because of its
location, the poor farmers of LRD don't have the good fortune that their
colleagues in, say, the Baddibus [NBD] have of a close proximity with
neighbouring Senegal where there is a ready market for their yields. Hence
the latest farming crisis was felt by the farmers in LRD more than any other
division/region in the country. Perhaps another reason - and this is a
conjecture at this stage - might be that the farmers/folks in NBD
[Baddibu]have more relatives/sons/daughters in the Diaspora than, say, those
folks/farmers in the LRD. The moneys and or handouts that come from these
relatives/son/daughters in the Diaspora might act as a palliative to
theincredible hardship this year's season had unleashed and continues to
unleas hon these poor farmers. Gauging by the foregoing conjecture, it is
perfectlyunderstandable why the vote-buying spree that the APRC embarked upon
in these by-elections didn't dent the Opposition vote in Baddibu Central very
much but was successful enough in Kiang East to hand the seat to the APRC.
Now, it is very easy for those of us living abroad to scoff at the measly
D25.00 reportedly handed to the poor farmers in exchange for their voter's
cards. These people are going through hell right at this moment -
especiallythe folks/farmers in LRD. It is perfectly understandable how a
measly D25.00 and a little bit of behind the scenes arm twisting can leave
such a big dent on the Opposition vote. In my view, the Opposition leadership
bear a measure of responsibility for this quagmire. They should have thrown
in their towels soon as there was evidence that the APRC were buying votes
-as reported inthe local media. We must lightly chide them or even give them
a slap on the wrist for their negligence and incredulous naivety. This would
do at this stage whilst we constructively engage them in what has gone wrong
and the right remedies needed. I say this because this is the type of
scenario that cynics and closet Jammeh supporters need to clamber out of the
woodwork to engage in non-productive Opposition bashing. Non-productive
Opposition bashing is the wrong way to go about it: The Opposition is the
only moderate/peaceful means that we have as of now to deal with Jammeh and
thus we should not be too harsh on them or call them such scurrilous names
like"opportunists" - as some are alleging. We shouldn't expect of them to lie
tothe poor farmers or raise their expectations too high as Jammeh did when
hefirst took control and continues to do so. Promising or guaranteeing
everyfarmer three meals a day is too much to ask of the Opposition in the
interim especially in an economically bankrupt country like the Gambia. What
makes more sense and feasible is to promise to restore or introduce a free
marketfor the produce of the farmers and in the extreme guarantee the farmers
that their yields wouldn't be lying idly somewhere whilst they are in need.
Better still, given Jammeh and his Cartel's looting of our State coffers, the
Opposition can redress the farmers' plight by compensating their losses with
the moneys we confiscate from Jammeh and his hustling syndicate soon as we
are done with them. To those orphaned or even orphans pre Jammeh, the mansion
that he [Jammeh] has built at Kaninlai with tax-payer money, the mansion
would be ideal for an orphanage to care for the wretched and lonely who
haveno where to go. These are just my humble suggestions.
Whenever i take a hardnosed look at the events unfolding in the Gambia, i
can't help but despair that somehow elections just wouldn't do the trick in
eliminating Jammeh. One thing crystal clear to me is that if we do not get
our acts together NOW and let Jammeh steal the October presidential
elections, there would be be blood to pay for it. People are on their last
reserve of patience. Another five or seven years of Jammeh illegally at
thehelm of our nation doesn't augur well for peace in this once upon a time
relatively quiet and peaceful place. I hope i'm proven wrong. I fear for that
small country and those wonderful souls that inhabit it.
Hamjatta Kanteh
[log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]
URL: <A HREF="http://hometown.aol.co.uk/hamzakanteh/myhomepage/newsletter.html">http://hometown.aol.co.uk/hamzakanteh/myhomepage/newsletter.html</A>
**************************************Please note the following little errors
in the figuresfor Njolfen in Kiang East....the total number of votescast was
398 and not 390 while the total number ofvotes cast for Kolior also in Kiang
East was 646 andnot 648. I was doning the figures in a rush sorry
forthat.Thanks,E.--- Ebrima Sillah <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Hello
G-Lers,>> This was how things went in both Kiang East and> Central Baddibu:>>
Kiang East has a voter population of 3831.> The APRC polled 1784 votes while
the UDP got 991.> Now the breakdown the results make an interesting> reading
especially village by village.>> Kiang East:> Massembeh: Registered Voters
............884>> APRC Polled....................328>
UDP Polled....................277> Absentee
votes.................279> Difference bet UDP and APRC.... 51>
Total Number of votes cast.....605>> Kaiaf A Polling Station:>
Registered voters..............809> APRC
Polled....................454> UDp " " "....................159>
Absentee Votes.................196> Difference Bet
UDP and APRC....295> Total number of votes cast.....613>> Kaiaf B
Polling Station:> Registered Voters..............733>
APRC Polled....................399> UDP
Polled....................114> Absentee votes.................220>
Differennce bet UDP and APRC...295> Total number of
votes cast.....513>> Njolfen Polling Station:> Registered
Voters.............543> APRC Polled...................358>
UDP Polled................... 40> Absentee
votes................153> Difference bet UDP and APRC...318>
Total number of votes cast....390> Kolior Polling Station:>
Registered Voters.............862> APRC
Polled...................245> UDP Polled...................401>
Absentee votes................216> Difference bet UDP
and APRC...156> Total number of votes cast....648> TOTAL VOTES
PER CANDIDATE: UDP............991>
APRC..........1784> Difference bet APRC and UDP.. 793>> CENTRAL
BADDIBU CONSTITUNECY:>> Salikene Polling Station:>> Registered
voters..............2057> APRC Polled.....................356>
UDP Polled....................1273> Absentee
votees.................428> Difference bet UDP and APRC.....917>
Total number of votes cast.....1629>> Mandori Polling Station:>>
Registered voters...............443> APRC
Polled......................86> UDP Polled.....................225>
Absentee votes..................132> Difference bet UDP
and APRC.....139> Total number of votes cast......311>> Njabang
Kunda Polling Station:>> Registered voters..............1483>
APRC Polled.....................556>> UDP
Polled.....................472> Absentee votes..................455>
Difference bet UDP and APRC......84> Total number of
votes cast.....1028>> Daru Rilwan Polling Station:>> Registered
voters................644> APRC Polled.....................421>
UDP Polled......................56> Absentee
votes...................167> Difference bet APRC and UDP......365>
Total number of votes cast.......477>> Kerr Pateh Polling Station:>>
Registered voters................290> APRC
Polled.....................143> UDP Polled......................28>
Absentee votes...................119> Difference bet APRC
and UDP......115> Total number of votes cast.......171>> Minteh
Kunda Polling Station:>> Registered voters................829>
APRC Polled.....................417> UDP
Polled.....................164> Absentee votes...................248>
Difference bet APRC and UDP......253> Total number of
votes cast.......581>> Nawrelu Polling Station:>> Registered
voters.................509> APRC Polled......................310>
UDP Polled.......................26> Absentee
votes....................173> Difference bet APRC and UDP.......284>
Total number of votes cast........336>> Kintek Kunda Marong Kunda
Polling Station:>> Registered voters ................763> APRC
Polled.......................115> UDP
Polled.......................397> Absentee
votes.....................251> Differnece bet APRC and UDP........282>
Total number of votes cast.........512>> TOTAL NUMBER OF VOTES PER
CANDIDATE:> UDP................2534>
APRC...............2392> Difference..........142>> To
put things in proper perspective, in the last> National Assembly Elections,
UDP polled 1412 votes> in> Kiang East while the APRC got 1377 votes. The>
difference was only 35 votes.> In cental Baddibu the UDP got 3192 votes in
1997> while> APRC polled 2298 votes. The difference was 894 votes> in favour
of the UDP.>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
