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