No Joe Sambou still? Maybe I have to wait a little bit longer.

Cheers
Daffeh

On 17 August 2010 04:30, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Comrade Yanks, no am not trying to prove any point. That is not my focus,
> it was merely a side issue aimed at helping you get over this issue of
> socialism. And i never do scavenge, the mere fact that i shared those links
> with you suggest that i know about them. What about your party leaders
> confirmation that your party is affiliated to the SI and do participate in
> their activities? This is my point as regards your this socialist crap and
> that is what you have to deal with. Am not going to accompany you on your
> other infantile and baseless arguements. You can continue confusing your
> self about democracy, socialism and communism. I will only get into academic
> discourse with serious people. So once again i call on you and your guys to
> rise up to the challenge or else save us with the never ending crap from you
> people. Wasalam, Nyang
>
> On Mon Aug 16th, 2010 8:41 PM EDT yanks dabo wrote:
>
> >
> >Comrade Nyang!
> >
> >You seem very desperate to prove a point that you had to scavenge
> >the world wide web, but only to come up with a foreign website that listed
> >the UDP on its website and you want to fool us that the UDP is a Socialist
> >party as well. You got to be kidding me!
> >
> >If only you had checked properly the Socialist International did not list
> the
> >UDP as a member, but that it is another Center Left party, which is
> different
> >from being a socialist party, as you wish to fool us.
> >
> >In fact how dumb can you be to reason that base on a foreign website
> listing of
> >the UDP on some website can be enough to prove that the UDP is a socialist
> >party when it is a common knowledge that the UDP is not a socialist party.
> >
> >The UDP is a Democratic party and i don't need a foreign website to prove
> that
> >fact to you. And i further do not need a foreign website to prove to you
> that the
> >PDOIS is still a Social party with Socialist values.
> >
> >It is true and I agree that we are in the 21st century, but what are you
> trying to say the
> >the PDOIS has realized that fact; you must be kidding me! The PDOIS has
> not
> >changed a bit, it's still a three men party led, that would not even offer
> their supporters
> >water to drink at their political rallies.
> >
> >So Nyang save us of the dilly dally that your party is somehow aware of
> the 21st century
> >politics.
> >
> >Furthermore, You must be without your head to reason that just because the
> communist
> >party of China is mentioned on the Democratic party of the United States'
> website meant
> >that the communist party has embraced Democratic values.
> >
> >I leave you to scavenge for more proves on the world wide web!
> >
> >
> >Nemesis Yanks
> >
> >
> >
> >Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 22:08:55 +0000
> >From: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: PUBLIC NOTICE BY ADMINITRATIIVE SECRETARY OF PDOIS
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> >Many here do talk of people having ego problems and label any that
> disagree with them as being of such category. But most of the time they miss
> the point. This Yanks dude is very honest. He has shared with any who cares
> the egoistic problem of his party. He wrote:
> >“…UDP had to walk out of NADD, when they are being insulted by little men
> PDOIS that they are
> >equals in the coalition!!! …Common sense dictates that an elderly finds it
> offensive to be told that he is of equal age to a newly born baby.”
> >True, Yanks UDP is such an elderly man that newly born PDOIS telling it
> that they are equal is utterly offensive thereby meriting elderly man UDP to
> walk out of NADD. But wait a minute!!! Elderly UDP could manage to endure
> the offensive nature of newly born PDOIS a little more if he would crown him
> his leader. Then and only then will the dandy UDP forego newly born PDOIS’
> offensive manners. Ma-baign-Ma-lanka. Nothing else!
> >Yanks, you so honest and I applaud you further for having informed us you
> always share your – UDP/UK fault finding innuendoes with your parent body
> before publication. I can see that is why in you people’s minds any other
> person who trashes infantile arguments that emanate from you is a Halifa
> Sallah in hiding. You people are very funny.
> >Modou Nyang and Suwaibou Touray will repeat the same thing almost in like
> fashion because it is the truth. Both men unlike you wannabe guys, worked it
> and lived it. They were there and participated in the process in different
> levels. Suwaibou has informed everyone that he was a member of the technical
> committee in which he sat with representatives of the other member parties.
> Cammon dude, do you wanna tell us your reps including those at the executive
> committees did not know what they were doing?
> >“NADD was a socialist's alliance which a Democratic party should not have
> anything to do with. “Nemesis Yanks.
> >Nemesis, did you ask Ousainou Darboe why your democratic party UDP is a
> member of the socialist International despite that he was even honest enough
> to tell you at an open congress that you are affiliated?
> >(references:
> http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticlePageID=1381 /
> http://www.broadleft.org/socdem.htm)
> >I am not aware of PDOIS affiliating with such.  You seem so deluded with
> the term socialism and I can tell you that you are almost alone in this.
> Sober people have gone over that long time ago just as they had dumped
> Jawara in the dustbin of history. So tell us something new and not bug us
> with this junk of Jawara. We were schooled and grew up in the twenty-first
> century and look at the world with an open mind.
> >So rise up to the challenge brother. You people are distracting us and I
> can assure you that you will not get it any further if you do not come up
> with tangible and concrete facts. You did not know what transpired and did
> not lay your eyes on the documents, just like you relied on erroneous
> elections results to launch attacks only to come up with another argument
> that it is not about results after you were exposed.
> >Again rise up to the challenge and stop the dilly dallying. We are moving
> forward and do not have time for your chit chat. Our message is mostly to
> those sensible people who are interested in solving our problems and not
> some amateurs wanting to make name on the fringes.
> >
> >Nyang
> >
> >
> >--- On Mon, 8/16/10, yanks dabo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >From: yanks dabo <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: Re: PUBLIC NOTICE BY ADMINITRATIIVE SECRETARY OF PDOIS
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Date: Monday, August 16, 2010, 12:07 PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >If there is a better way of explaining, why the UDP was justified for
> pulling out of NADD
> >coalition, i'm certain it could not have been better explained than this
> reaction of Mr
> >Suwaibou Touray on behalf of the Socialist party of PDOIS. That is if
> Suwaibou is not
> >another pseudoname of Halifa.
> >
> >To start with, Mr Touray must be commended for re-explaining the NADD set
> up and how
> >it was run to us again, after how many times we had been lectured about
> that by Modou Nyang
> >and the crew. However, it clearly demonstrated that NADD was built on the
> Socialits agenda.
> >The notion that all parties to the alliance are equal, even though in
> > reality they are not equal;
> >as the UDP was much more of a bigger party than PDOIS, which only
> comprises of few friends,
> >their secretaries, wives, relatives and friends of friends, etc.
> >
> >Mr Touray further confirmed that every decision made in NADD had to be
> equally made and agreed
> >before it can be implemented. I don't think even the communist party of
> China runs its affairs with
> >such consensus.
> >
> >In simple terms NADD had nothing to do with the notion that the majority
> view shall carry the weight.
> >
> >Sir Dawda once warned that voting for these people is tantamount to
> sharing one's wife
> >with them.
> >
> >No wonder the small party PDOIS thought it can actually lead a NADD
> coalition, comprising
> >of big parties. Simply because it was equal with them in NADD!
> >
> >Common sense dictates that an elderly finds it offensive to be told that
> he is of equal age to
> >a newly born baby.
> >
> >However, for some dumb reasoning PDOIS could not still get to grasp with
> the fact that the
> >UDP had to walk out of NADD, when they are being insulted by little men
> PDOIS that they are
> >equals in the
> > coalition!!!!
> >
> >A kid calling Daddy boy!!!!!!
> >
> >NADD was a socialist's alliance which a Democratic party should not have
> anything to do with.
> >In a democratic society the party with majority support leads and dictates
> such political coalition.
> >Even god wants us to have a leader, the imam in a prayer.
> >
> >What surprises me is that these folks still wonder who caused the mess of
> NADD that they are
> >using to sell their new agenda.
> >
> >These Socialists believed that they still have the solution to a
> democratic process. Less they are
> > not
> >getting the message clearly, the UDP is not and will not be part of such
> agenda.
> >
> >If they can't accept that in a democratic society the party with majority
> support ought to lead a
> >political coalition then they can form their alliance with the Alliance
> the Patriotic and Reconciliation
> >Party of Dr Jammeh.
> >
> >
> >Nemesis Yanks
> >
> >
> >
> >Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 04:50:38 +0000
> >From: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: PUBLIC NOTICE BY ADMINITRATIIVE SECRETARY OF PDOIS
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >PUBLIC NOTICE BY ADMINITRATIIVE SECRETARY OF PDOIS
> >
> >Let’s draw lessons from NADD and move on to address the current demands
> for democratic change
> >
> >The Central Committee of PDOIS has reviewed the content of the debate
> surrounding the Press Release No.3/ 2010 issued by PDOIS. It took note of
> the fact that no political party which was or is associated with NADD had
> issued a Press Release to rebut the position advanced in the Press Release.
> This is understandable since all those who served as Members of the
> Executive Committee or the Technical Committee of NADD knew the processes
> that were undertaken to establish NADD and why it was unanimously agreed to
> register it. Since no political party or leader has disputed that the
> registration of NADD was mandatory and was agreed unanimously there is no
> need to make the relevant documents public. However, since the supporters of
> one of the political parties hold a different view and have chosen to issue
> a statement as a reaction to our Press Release I am asked to issue a public
> notice to
> > request that they appoint an Independent legal practitioner to whom the
> >
> >relevant documents would be forwarded for review and pronouncement of an
> independent opinion whether the parties had agreed for candidates to contest
> under NADD or not and for NADD to be registered or not. PDOIS would want
> this opinion to be made public by the Independent legal practitioner and
> would concede for such opinion to be final on this matter. This will confirm
> whether some executive members were either ignorant of the content of the
> parent document they have signed as well as the supplementary processes they
> have endorsed, which are all sealed in black and white or are being
> deliberately misrepresented by a political constituency that  is ill
> informed of what transpired, while they the leaders turn their back.
> >
> >The Central Committee advises all those who want to undertake the venture
> of seeking an independent opinion to take permission from the executive
> Committee of the party they support before they select the Independent legal
> practitioner of their choice.
> >
> >The Central Committee of PDOIS holds the view that politics is about
> interest. It has never condemned and will never condemn a political party
> for leaving NADD. Parties have a right to ally with other parties or go on
> their own.   If there was second round of voting there would not have been
> any need to forge an alliance for the first round of voting. Each would have
> been able to test its strength, form an Alliance in the second round if they
> consider it tactically or strategically feasible.
> >
> >Without joining the debate, allow me to say that NADD was a highly
> structured Alliance with an executive committee comprising two members of
> each member party. Decision was based on the principle of Unanimity which
> means that each executive member had veto power. The relevant portion reads:
> >
> >‘‘Decision making at all levels of the committees of the alliance shall be
> based on the principle of unanimity provided that matters of procedure shall
> be determined on the basis of simple majority of the delegates present and
> voting. In the event of the need to break an impasse the delegates may agree
> unanimously to make a decision by consensus.’’
> >
> >The coordinator had no voting powers. He had neither an original nor a
> casting vote in case of an equality of votes. He could neither reject nor
> impose a decision on the executive. Quorum required the presence of the
> representative of each party. All NADD documents before and after its
> launching started with a concept paper which was drafted and submitted to a
> Technical Committee comprising two appointees of each party. I was
> personally involved in the work of the Technical Committee. I know some
> parties were represented by former Permanent Secretaries and people with
> doctorate degrees. After vetting by the Technical Committee, draft
> agreements were then given to the members of the Executive Committee to take
> to the Central or Executive Committees of their parties. Parties were
> required to get their own independent legal advisers to advise them whether
> to endorse the documents and
> > processes leading to the registration of NADD. No executive member of
> NADD
> >
> >will ever say that suggestions were made for documents to be given to
> independent legal advisers and were refused by Halifa the then NADD
> coordinator. Halifa did not have any veto power. NADD leaders would have
> been very naïve to allow one person to wield power that was not provided by
> any provision of the memorandum. The fact of the matter is that when the
> executive decided to submit the documents to register NADD, Halifa was in
> South Africa attending a meeting of the Pan African Parliament. If this is
> incorrect a member of the executive should have an interview with the media
> to prove us wrong.
> >
> >In fact, Halifa raised certain objections on the unfinished businesses
> prior to registration and told the Executive that such matters should have
> been considered before they submitted the documents for registration. He had
> to do a follow up with the IEC which gave rise to the formulation of draft
> rules on alliances which were forwarded to the members of the Executive
> Committee for the consideration of their parties. He has always told them to
> leave sleeping dogs lie since he does not want to undermine the integrity of
> people who had worked so hard to narrow differences just to create a viable
> alliance but would not hesitate to defend his integrity if the need arises.
> >
> >Those who understand the ABCs of the Elections laws would understand why
> an alliance would have a Name, Emblem, Motto, Colour and a Constitution.
> Those are all instruments for the registration of a political entity to
> contest elections. We hope the UDP leadership will step in to guide their
> membership in the Diaspora who are compelling us to divert attention from
> the APRC to focus on another opposition party. This is counter productive.
> PDOIS as a party has worked under the Jawara regime, is working under
> Jammeh’s regime and would work under the government of any elected president
> of the country. It is not our sovereign right to disqualify anybody from
> seeking the mandate of the people. Those who support the UDP and PDOIS
> should spend their precious time to suggest ideas, raise funds and promote
> the agendas of their parties in order to win the hearts and minds of the
> people. Politics is
> > not about exchanging angry invectives which make the voter become
> >
> >apathetic. It is sending positive messages to the voter to win their
> hearts and minds.
> >
> >To make matters short the some supporters of the UDP interpret the
> Memorandum of Understanding which established NADD their conclusions do not
> harm PDOIS’ political direction. Let us put it this way. According to the
> UDP supporters NADD was not supposed to be registered. However they
> acknowledged this portion of the memorandum
> >
> >‘‘The selection of the candidate of the alliance for the presidential,
> National Assembly and Council elections shall be done by consensus; provided
> that in the event of an impasse selection shall be done by holding a primary
> election restricted to party delegates on the basis of equal number of
> delegates, comprising the chairman, chairwoman and youth leader of each
> party from each village/ward in a constituency.”
> >
> >If we accept their premise that NADD was not supposed to put up candidates
> it would mean that the primary that would have been conducted would not be
> any different from what Agenda 2011 is calling for. We therefore hope that
> such people would encourage their party to endorse Agenda 2011 and move on
> with their campaign on their own platform to prepare the ground for a
> primary that would select one opposition candidate for the 2011 presidential
> elections.
> >
> >Furthermore as the desk officer responsible for monitoring day to day
> party matters I would like to convey to all PDOIS members, supporters,
> sympathisers and those who yearn to live in a democratic society that PDOIS
> has subscribed to the Memorandum of Understanding establishing the Inter
> Party Committee. The PDOIS has passed a resolution on Inter Party relations
> which should not collect dust and it reads:
> >
> >On the exercise of political rights
> >
> >The PDOIS Congress,
> >
> >Being cognisant of the fact that the Gambia is a sovereign Republic and
> that sovereignty resides in the people;
> >
> >Acknowledging that the authority to lead must be derived from the consent
> of the people;
> >
> >Taking note of the fact that it is the right of each sovereign Gambian to
> take part in the management of the affairs of the country either directly or
> through chosen representatives;
> >
> >Noting that representatives are chosen through a free and fair voting
> system;
> >
> >Bearing in mind that each Gambian has a right to form or belong to a
> political association;
> >
> >Taking note of the legal provision that political parties are mandated to
> shape the political will of the people by disseminating their political,
> economic and social programmes;
> >
> >Recalling the code of conduct adopted by all political parties in the
> Gambia on 6th February 2006 which calls for the respect of the rights of all
> other parties to campaign freely and to disseminate their political ideas
> and principles without fear;
> >
> >Therefore resolves,
> >
> >Ø  to educate all its members to understand their constitutional and legal
> rights and refrain from interfering with the rights of others;
> >
> >Ø  to cooperate with all political parties and civil society organisations
> to ensure that the constitutional and  legal provisions as well as the code
> of conduct governing the exercise of civil and political rights are
> respected and implemented by the state and  all citizens;
> >
> >Ø  to contribute to the realisation, consolidation, protection,
> preservation and expansion of the sovereignty of the people;
> >
> >Ø  to uphold and defend  freedom of association and freedom of expression
> and further contribute to ensuring  that the will of the people is not
> fettered in any way;
> >
> >Ø  Promote the establishment of a genuine multiparty system in the country
> to ensure that no restriction or hindrance is imposed on any party from
> exercising its political rights in the country.
> >
> >Secondly, PDOIS has a code of conduct which binds its members. The central
> committee calls on all members to abide by it in their political
> engagements.
> >
> >The code of conduct for PDOIS members is as follows:
> >
> >A PDOIS member is a community oriented person.
> >
> >He or she must take interest in every thing that takes place in his or her
> community;
> >
> >He or she shall attend all activities people conducted in his or her
> community, such as community meetings, burials, etc, as long as the
> competing responsibilities and priorities permit;
> >
> >A PDOIS member should clarify issues for people and should seek more ideas
> if he or she finds himself or herself ill prepared to make informed
> interventions;
> >
> >A PDOIS member should strive to persuade rather than impose his or her
> views on others;
> >
> >A PDOIS member shall not trade insults with insults or get angry at
> opponents who refuse to understand one’s position; on the contrary, one
> should display integrity and maturity in attitude at all times and give
> clear explanation in response to all hostile attacks on the integrity of the
> party so as to win over opponents or neutralise them;
> >
> >A PDOIS member should be convinced that public office is a position of
>  service and not a position of privilege; that election campaign is not a
> war between rivals for the golden fleece, but a time to enlighten the people
> so that they could be well equipped to choose competent public trustees;
> >
> >A PDOIS member shall always strive to gain clearer ideas so that one could
> have the confidence to clarify issues and thus earn the trust and confidence
> of the voter.
> >
> >A PDOIS member should strive to work to his or her optimum in the service
> of the party and country, irrespective of whether others are doing their
> share  or not.
> >
> >A PDOIS member should see himself or herself as equal to all other members
> and should not compromise with or ignore any practice that would harm the
> interest of the people.
> >
> >A PDOIS member of a branch must:
> >
> >Ø give personal attention to all volunteers;
> >
> >Ø show enthusiasm at all times;
> >
> >Ø  inspire people and try to make them active;
> >
> >Ø  develop a team spirit among volunteers; make them feel wanted,
> encourage a sense of belonging, maintain personal contact with voters,
> listen to their difficulties and keep them motivated;
> >
> >Ø  identify consistent volunteers who may prefer to be members.
> >
> >We hope all those who support PDOIS are aware of the task ahead of us and
> the sincerity, discipline and maturity it requires to win the trust of the
> people.
> >
> >To conclude PDOIS is to commence a cadre training programme on Monday,
> August 2010 for a period of 1 month. To enable our membership abroad to
> benefit in this fast track training initiative for membership, an on online
> training programme shall be conducted along side the home based training
> programme. All those who are members and supporters who have not sign up for
> the training programme could send their mails to me, Suwaibou Touray, at the
> address below before Monday,16 August 2010.
> >
> >Your Compatriot in the struggle
> >
> >For Liberty, dignity and prosperity,
> >
> >Suwaibou Touray
> >
> >Administrative Secretary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 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]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> >
> >
> >
> >¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
> >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]
> >¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>  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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤