Ebou,
           I did not miss anything.  Your objective was very clear.  It was
to show that PDOIS is a stumbling block to a coalition, pure and simple.
Your second objective was to manipulate your readers to write off PDOIS for
being an obstacle, full stop.  It is a programmed apologists like Hamjatta
who could misread your motives.  It was simply an unintelligent way of
trying to be intelligent, full stop.

You assume that I am angry.  The number of symposia I attend put me on a hot
seat on a daily basis.  I wished you stayed to challenge me in New York.  I
would have shown you how much respect we have for those who disagree with
us.  No! No! my brother, there is no need to engage in a punching march.
What is important is to call a spade a spade.  There is absolutely no basis
for us to engage in a prolonged debate.  Where all is plain there is not
much to debate about.

The fundamental point is that my party was invited to the United States to
explain what is happening in the Gambia and its policies.  You came after I
had delivered my speech and left when discussion about coalition did not go
your way.  You have shown clearly where your interest lay.  You were not
interested in knowing our views regarding the situation in The Gambia or the
policies of our party. You had your own agenda

It is of course your prerogative to choose what to listen and what not to
listen to.  Where you went wrong is to give the impression that PDOIS was
opposed to a coalition.  In fact you displayed your outrageous notion in the
most arrogant of manner for the second time after clarification had already
been made.  You wrote: "Roughly twenty minutes later I was on my way home
especially after realising to my great disappointment that the prospect of
opposition -party coalition for the Gambia's presidential election,
something I strongly desired, had little chance of materialising, thanks to
PDOIS' intransigence."

I am sure Hamjatta can now see that you have betrayed your "cloven hoof".
It is clear that you were not simply expressing ideological differences as
an obstacle to a coalition.  You were apportioning blame.  Your sinister
plan went beyond apportioning blame.  You went further to create a comical
situation by indicating how your two friends appreciated what I said.  This
is the point that Hamjatta missed.  What is tragic about this is that you
did this simply as a disinformation ploy to isolate PDOIS. Why are you
hiding your sinister intentions?  You even called on fund raisers to begin
to take a stand.  I do not need to quote the appropriate sentence.  In fact,
your last piece shows how much you hold PDOIS in contempt.  When I mentioned
the money we spent to attend the conference and the response you appear to
take a comical posture again.  It is as if we were disappointed that funds
were not raised.  It is as if I came to the US in anticipation of filling
our money bags with green notes. Every body heard what I said in New York
when people started to raise funds.  Some of our sisters who presented
solidarity messages at the symposium in NewYork invited me to go to Chicago
and so on with them.  I did not have time.  Lat Jor will tell you that I
hardly slept as I was preparing for our congress right there in the US.  If
money is what brought us I would have stayed to raise funds.

Just to show you how busy I was let me just narrate what happened between
Sunday and Tuesday when I left for the airport to come home.  After Joe
Sambou saw Darboe he came to me and we spoke up to about 2 a.m. on Monday
morning.  I was to leave for New York by 7 a.m.  I had one and a half hours
sleep.  I left for New York in the morning.  We arrived around 2 p.m. By 3
p.m. I was in the hall.  The programme started after 5 p.m.  We were there
up till midnight.  I slept around 2 a.m. and woke up at 5.30 a.m.  I took my
bus to go back to Washington.  I arrived there by 2.30 p.m. and was supposed
to report at the airport by 4 p.m.

Any sane person can see that we were not on a fund raising venture.  We were
in the US to share views and we had hoped that even those who disagree with
us would appreciate our initiative.  Let me also take the opportunity to
inform you that since you made your comments Gambians in the US have been
making contacts to make financial contributions to PDOIS.  If your objective
was to sound comical I must say that you have pricked a lot of conscience
and the more you seek to undermine PDOIS the more you put your own integrity
into question.

Let me deal with the main point at issue in a simple manner.

On the issue of coalition, it is elementary truth that a coalition is a
tactical instrument.  No party exists which would raise objections if its
presidential candidate is supported by other opposition parties.

In the same vein each party can give a thousand and one reasons why its
presidential candidate would be the most ideal candidate.  Hence when a
coalition is suggested, discussion is necessary to come up with a formula
that will suit the concerns of each.

As far as PDOIS is concerned it has worked out its views on coalition and
merger from a scientific basis.  This will be published after our congress
is held.  The aim of PDOIS is to eradicate the subjugation, ignorance and
poverty of our people.  We will merge with any party with convincing
policies and programmes on how to end such subjugation, ignorance and
poverty.  If the existing regime creates a governance environment which is
inimical to the liberty of the people it becomes our historical imperative
to develop a minimum coalition with any force which has clear policies,
programmes and practices on how to enhance the governance environment,
enlarge the democratic space and the liberty of the people.

Where there is second round of voting the best way to select the candidate
of an opposition coalition is to leave the masses to select their choice for
a second round.  This is rooted in the premise that where a president can
win an election during the first round of voting freely and fairly the
opposition can be deemed not to worth the salt.

However, where special circumstances exist requiring opposition parties to
form a coalition in the first round a formula must be developed for
selecting a presidential candidate and restricting the mandate of the
elected person so that the masses will be given the opportunity to make an
undiluted choice of president after the exceptional circumstances are
addressed.

We hope we have rectified all your misconceptions and that we will now put
the issue of PDOIS not being in support of a coalition to rest.

An issue which becomes incidental to the subject of coalition is socialism.

Ebou, the frontiers of human knowledge, is expanding whilst the horizon of
your own mind seems to be stagnant.  The era of nationalism with charismatic
leaders irrespective of ideologies is already behind us.  Today countries
are competing as to which one will have a higher rating in human development
according to universally acknowledged indices.  Governance and the degree of
empowerment of the people is one criterion Ideology has already been put in
its proper perspective not as a dogma but as a thinking tool that should
enable one to draw policies and programmes for human development. What
people gauge are the viability of policies and programmes of parties and not
the appellation they ascribe to themselves

I wrote about the Gambian economy and how we intend to address the poverty
of our people and you are talking about Kim Il Sung, dictatorship of the
proletariat and all those jargons which arose from your indoctrination in
military school under cold war circumstance; ideas you least understand and
are incapable of interpreting correctly.  Our polemics with Saja Taal will
help you to have a better understanding of what you were exposed to even
though we consider our debate with him as a mere academic exercise.  What is
relevant now is the analysis we gave in my last piece.  I have shown you how
debt service charges consume 417 million dalasis from a national budget of
1.3 billion dalasis.  This is more than the budget for education, health,
works and communication and agriculture combined.  How are we to expand
services by relying entirely on taxes to pay debts and maintain services?
When the private sector is calling for tax relief to be competitive. This is
why we say the public sector must become productive.

I have shown you the fact that the private sector is very small; that 11% of
the labour force is employed by the government, the parastatals and the
private sector.  This sector guarantees very little corporate and income tax
to maintain services.  Gambia has an informal sector economy.  The farmers
cannot be replaced by large scale capitalist farmers without being sent to
their graves since there are no industries to absorb them.  They now earn
less than 2000 dalasis a year.  We say that they should be encouraged to
have their co-operative gardens and bore holes should be provided for them
to farm and share their incomes. Read my reply to Hamjatta for more details.

We are telling you Gambian realities, you are telling us about Kim Il Sung
and so on. Your friend, Hamjatta says that I am engaged in rhetoric.  I
wonder what you are engaged in!  What has Kim Il Sung got to do with The
Gambia where there is a constitution, independent electoral commission, a
multiparty system which is constitutionally guaranteed and so on.  What
democratic minded Gambian are calling for is a government, which can respect
and develop the instruments of government in place. I guess no party can
come in The Gambia through the ballot box, overthrow such a system and still
survive.

Clearly what is on the historical agenda is how to further empower the
people and not how to centralise power in the hands of a charismatic
leaders. In fact, we are of the opinion that PDOIS' programme of empowering
the people will be the most far, reaching programme in the history of the
world.  The topic is beyond the scope of these exchanges.  Look forward to
our Website where we will elaborate on how we will dismantle the monarchical
features of the executive presidency and ensure that the people control
power at all levels.

Be prepared to take us to task on our claims instead of judging us by your
prejudices, which are by-products of your indoctrination during your
training under cold war propaganda.

We hope you will set aside those prejudices and read anew to catch up with
history's expanding frontiers of knowledge.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------