Dad, I'd like relieve your anxieties in a couple of areas in your notes
below.
[But before that (before I come after Daffeh), 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.]
Nyang.
The extant conditions in Gambia are that there are two opposition alliances
and one opposition party;
UDP/NRP or ARC
NADD
GMC
If there is to be a unitary coalition of opposition parties, it will
therefore have to be ARC-led. ARC could, and I strongly encourage them to do
this, hold conversations with GMC to gain the support of GMC's leadership and
members. If successful, the alliance's name will remain to be ARC, an
amalgamation of UDP/NRP/GMC. The ARC is encouraged to continue her conversations
with NADD to gain the support of her leadership and members. If successful, the
grand coalition can remain ARC. Then ARC can begin the task of convincing APRC
members, supporters, and independent voters that their votes are best invested
with ARC.
So no one is currently talking about a party-led coalition. The gains of
earlier coalition-making have obviated that. And when an ARC-led coalition is
mentioned, it does not necessarily mean that Ousainou will be her presidential
candidate. The ARC's presidential candidate will be whoever the ARC wishes their
presidential candidate to be. I know there are an enormous number of Ousainou
haters in NADD but ARC may or may not choose Ousainou as her presidential
candidate. In fact, if I know Ousainou well, and if he is chosen as ARC's
presidential candidate, he may defer to another member of ARC to be the
presidential candidate. In either case, we are not concerned who an ARC
presidential candidate is as long as he/she is a member of ARC. Any of them is a
better alternative to Yahya the President.
[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.]
Nyang.
I encourage the UDP leadership, the NRP leadership, the NADD leadership,
the ppp leadership, the PDOIS leadership, and the GMC leadership to call on me,
my family, and friends, to contribute to their worthwhile efforts to defeat
Yahya at the polls in 2011 and I will gladly share what little I have even if I
shall deny myself a dinner or two. I share with them that they are not preparing
for failure. Preparing for absolute failure is NOT DOING ANYTHING or WHILING
PRECIOUS TIME AWAY IN LISTLESS CHATTER. The lives of the students, Deyda's life,
Koro's life, Chief Manneh's freedom, Kanyibaa's freedom, and the lives and
freedoms of multitude other fellow citizens is well worth it. I am driven
by nepotism, tribalism, opportunism, the agony of my fellow citizens, Gambia's
future, and the values I hold dear. Freedom of expression, association, and
industry. I am one diseased citizen. I'll bet there are other more diseased
fellow citizens as we speak. I am not a psycophant but this is how I want to
bring about change. Change Yahya from the presidency. Thank you sir. No more, no
less for now.
agenda what?????????
Haruna. I now have a year's supply of toilet paper.
In a message dated 2/17/2010 4:07:36 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"...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.
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, 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.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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.........................
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.
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!
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.
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!
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.
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.
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of
postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the
Gambia-L Web interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html