My apologies,  I meant to say Daffeh. Wandifa, I apologize

On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Joe Joe <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  Opposition discussion is a none issue for Gambians at this time.  The
> discussion has long ceased to be opposition anything.  I wonder who the
> partisans are preaching to, except their choir.  Just go sweep the polls!
>
> Joe
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 09:36:32 -0400
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: STGDP’s Call for a Return to NADD is Disingenuous - WHAT A
> SURPRISE... BROKEN OPPOSITION...
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Wandifa,
> I bet all your colleagues from the other opposition parties disagree with
> you... they may not come directly here to confront you but they will soon.
> As for me, dont mind me... All I want you to record in your diary is that
> UDP by itself will not pull 10%.....
>
> Have a good day
>
> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:26 AM, UDP United Kingdom <[log in to unmask]
> > wrote:
>
> Fankung, almost all coalitions are premised on the recognition that no one
> party can do it alone. However, that has never precluded the legitimacy of
> the majority party to lead. That is why the Conservative Party of David
> Cameroon is leading a coalition government here in the U.K despite the fact
> that they could not have formed a government on their own without having to
> coalesce with another party, the Liberal Democrats. In a democracy,
> legitimacy is always derived from the majority, not the minority or your
> silly notion of equality.
>
> My rejoinder is only meant to clarify issues. I have no interest
> whatsoever, in fostering a ping pong game with people like you on this
> coalition issue.
>
> My advice to you is to consider inculcating some element of sincerity in
> yourself when debating national issues.
>
> Have a good day.
>
> Daffeh
>
> On 4 April 2011 13:28, Fankung Fankung Jammeh <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
> Here is another evidence that the Gambian opposition is full of power
> hungry leaders. It is clearly written in WALLS that NO OPPOSITION PARTY can
> defeat Jammeh on its own, or even make a dent in hi support. I know for sure
> that this SS Daffeh fellow knows that HELL WILL FREEZE OVER when we hear UDP
> defeats Jammeh on its own. And yet, all he sees is Darbo. If Darbo is not
> the leader no coalition. Oh well, get preapared for your 9% come
> November....  GOD BLESS APRC AND PROFESSOR JAMMEH.
>
>
> Gambia: STGDP’s Call for a Return to NADD is Disingenuous
> STGDP’s Call for a Return to NADD is Disingenuous
>
> By SS Daffeh, Secretary-General UDP UK
>
> BANJUL, THE GAMBIA—Sometime ago, in December 2010, Mr. Musa Jeng of the
> U.S-based Save The Gambia Democracy Project [STGDP] presented in the media a
> proposal he dubbed ‘‘The Compromise’’ in which he articulated how an
> agreement could be reached to break the stalemate that has taken grip of the
> coalition negotiations between the main opposition United Democratic Party
> [UDP] and a purported representative of PDOIS , with the former joining
> NADD, a political entity he described as belonging to all opposition
> parties, and assume leadership of it.
>
> He posited this as the only realistic option to break the stalemate and
> went on to justify his call on the basis that due to their experience in
> 2006 and the aftermath, PDOIS will never be willing to go along with what
> the conventional wisdom dictates and become part of a UDP led coalition. He,
> however, did not state what this experience was and why UDP should be held
> responsible for it.
>
> As a result of two recent online radio talk shows in which its chairman,
> Mr. Banka Manneh, participated, we now understand Mr. Jeng’s proposal to be
> in total convergence with the position of the Save The Gambia Democracy
> Project [STGDP].
>
> First of all, the STGDP should be reminded that this process like all
> coalition negotiations requires an honest approach that puts national
> interest above all others including ideologies, personal egos and
> differences. This can only be done if all stakeholders including PDOIS
> accept the universally practiced conventions and standards of coalition
> building to be the unfettered guiding principles of negotiations. This
> requires that the biggest party be adopted as a vanguard and for all other
> parties and political entities to throw their weight behind.
>
> In 2006, both NADD and UDP presented themselves before the Gambian
> electorates as independent sovereign political parties and tested their
> individual electoral strengths. The UDP had almost five times more votes
> than NADD and currently has more representation in parliament than any other
> opposition party in The Gambia. It also has a bigger and more robust grass
> root support base than any other opposition party. To put it in a nutshell;
> UDP is by far the biggest opposition party in The Gambia. This is
> irrefutable and beyond questioning. Therefore, I do not see any wisdom
> whatsoever, in STGDP’s call for the UDP to join a smaller party, NADD, in
> the guise of compromise. If abandoning one’s party for another is the only
> solution to this stalemate, then the common sense approach would be for the
> smaller parties including NADD, to join UDP since the latter is the biggest.
>
> As a matter of fact, what this process requires is not for parties to
> abandon their ship to join another but for the smaller parties to rally
> behind the biggest in line with internationally recognised and acceptable
> standards and norms of coalition building and as a matter of political
> legitimacy and necessity.
>
> Given the polarising and intractable nature of the NADD dispute of 2006, I
> find it utterly incomprehensible that the SGTDP would like to think that the
> resurrection of the same old squabble that causes serious damage to
> inter-opposition party relations can engender a realistic compromise
> solution to this impasse. If they had done a careful and balanced assessment
> of the situation and the facts on the ground, I have no doubt that the
> STGDP would have realised that this idea has no potential but for the
> opening of the Pandora’s Box once again. I envisaged no realistic compromise
> to be engendered let alone realised in that kind of environment.
>
> By virtue of their usage of an unexplained grievance that the PDOIS party
> apparently holds against the UDP as a sole rational behind their proposal,
> the STGDP has also failed to take into account the grievances of the UDP in
> the same respect particularly on the question of registration that altered
> NADD’s status from that of an alliance to a political party in contravention
> of the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding [MOU] that established it
> [NADD] and which cost the leader of the NRP, Mr. Hamat N.K Bah, his
> parliamentary seat. Therefore, both the UDP and the NRP can and quite
> legitimately, equally use their experience of 2006 and prior as a
> justification for their withdrawal and reason for refusing to return to
> NADD. The premise of STGDP’s compromise proposal is therefore fundamentally
> flawed in its lack objectivity and appreciation of the facts on the ground.
>
> Their claim that NADD belongs to all opposition parties is not borne by
> facts. Although the UDP participated in the creation of NADD the alliance,
> they did actually pull out from the organisation in 2006 after careful
> consideration. Therefore, if there was any UDP claim to NADD, that claim has
> been entirely relinquished in 2006 when the party pulled out.
>
> Suffice it to say; the NADD that the UDP participated in creating was
> intended to be an alliance, not a political party, and this is
> clearly stipulated in the Preamble and Article 1 of the Memorandum of
> Understanding [MOU] that established the alliance. However, that creation
> was completely and utterly obliterated when NADD was clandestinely
> registered with the Independent Electoral Commission, despite opposition
> from the UDP, as a political party and thereby changing its nature and
> status. Therefore, it is completely and utterly erroneous to state that NADD
> as it currently stands was created by all the opposition parties.
>
> A genuine pursuit of national interest and goals must always be guided by
> principles and values that are universally recognised and cherished.
> Otherwise it is bound to fail before it even starts. Thus, the idea that the
> universal principles and standards that underpin coalition building
> everywhere in this world should be forgone in our case for national interest
> is utterly simplistic at best; and disingenuous at worst.
>
> STGDP should also explain why it continues to be their position that it is
> the UDP that must do everything inconceivable and unheard of to break this
> coalition stalemate when the PDOIS/NADD party, on the other hand, is ever
> determined to remain firm in their trenches of unreasonableness and
> intransigence, not to mention their persistent refusal to reciprocate UDP’s
> overtures.
>
> If the STGDP wants UDP to return to NADD, then it would be advisable for
> them to consider actively lobbying for a complete de-registration of NADD so
> that it can re-claim its original and intended status, an alliance, with a
> flag bearer chosen from within the UDP and sponsored under a UDP ticket.
> This must be so as the UDP would still be the largest constituent party in
> the alliance anyway.
>
> Talking about compromise; the onus is obviously on the smaller parties
> including PDOIS and NADD to first recognise and accept the political
> legitimacy of a UDP led alliance, at least in principle, and then state
> whatever condition[s] they would like to see attached. That way, we can move
> this process one step forward; from the principal issue of formula to a more
> secondary issue of conditionality and thereby making compromise more
> realistic and feasible. This is how a compromise solution can be engendered.
> However, PDOIS and NADD mustn’t think they can have it both ways; they would
> have to either indicate their willingness to become part of the proposed UDP
> led alliance with conditions attached or accept that it isn’t for them to
> talk about conditionality in that respect.
>
> In my view, the NADD issue is an antiquated one that has not only been
> rendered obsolete but also lacking taste.
>
> *PDOIS’s Subterfuge*
>
> The pronouncement by PDOIS that a party led alliance is only prudent where
> there is a second round electoral system is the most ridiculous statement
> ever made in this coalition debate. As far as facts are concern, there is no
> second round voting system in South Africa and yet it was the ANC that led
> the coalition which brought President Jacob Zuma to power; there is no
> second round of voting in India and yet it was Sonia Ghandi’s Indian
> National Congress that led the coalition which returned Prime Minister
> Manmohan Singh to power; there is no second round voting system in Brazil
> and yet it is the biggest party that led the coalition which brought that
> country’s new president, Mrs. Dilma Rousseff, to power. - The list can go
> on- In all these cases, the idea of a primary to select a leader/candidate
> had been unthinkable and none-existent. PDOIS’s pronouncement is therefore
> not only baseless but also and very clearly, a preposterous subterfuge that
> they are now clinging on, regrettably, to hide their intransigence and
> refusal to heed to the popular call for the opposition to forge an all
> inclusive coalition to challenge the incumbent APRC in the forthcoming
> elections.
>
> SS Daffeh
>
> Secretary-General
>
> UDP UK
>
> www.udpgambia.com
>
> --
> *
>
> *****************************************************************************
> GOD BLESS THE GAMBIA.
> LET US JOIN HANDS AND SUPPORT SHEIKH PROFESSOR DR. ALH YAHYA JAMMEH (NASIRU
> DEEN) TO BUILD OUR COUNTRY. *
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
>
>
> --
> *
>
> *****************************************************************************
> GOD BLESS THE GAMBIA.
> LET US JOIN HANDS AND SUPPORT SHEIKH PROFESSOR DR. ALH YAHYA JAMMEH (NASIRU
> DEEN) TO BUILD OUR COUNTRY. *
>  ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>



-- 
*
*****************************************************************************
GOD BLESS THE GAMBIA.
LET US JOIN HANDS AND SUPPORT SHEIKH PROFESSOR DR. ALH YAHYA JAMMEH (NASIRU
DEEN) TO BUILD OUR COUNTRY. *


¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤