 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BambaLaye
USA
100 Posts |
 Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 19:29:30
|
Halifa Sallah is not a saint, not infallible, is not prone to errors in judgement and has the right to be arrogant sometimes (it works sometimes)but he sure does make lots of sense when it comes to moving the country in the right direction for the long-run.
I respect his judgment and will follow and listen to him more than any other "gelegele" out there. For he will not abandon his principles and is ready to make the sacrifice (he has for many, many years)for a better Gambia. You can give that one to grandma!
Who told you there is no common sense in politics?
|
|
Edited by - BambaLaye on 07 Aug 2006 19:31:37 |
 |
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 19:36:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by BambaLaye
Halifa Sallah is not a saint, not infallible, is not prone to errors in judgement and has the right to be arrogant sometimes (it works sometimes)but he sure does make lots of sense when it comes to moving the country in the right direction for the long-run.
I respect his judgment and will follow and listen to him more than any other "gelegele" out there. For he will not abandon his principles and is ready to make the sacrifice (he has for many, many years)for a better Gambia. You can give that one to grandma!
Who told you there is no common sense in politics?
I did not know we had gelegeles in politics. PUSH MU TAKA |
|
|
|
BambaLaye
USA
100 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 21:50:57
|
Oh Yeah! Halifa has to be arrogant and steadfast to get some of those "gelegeles" to go the right direction and pull some of the cockraoches out of their hiding spots. You see them potting in and out when the lights are beemed they get stuck.
PUSH MU TAKA ...you can't say it better! |
|
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 23:09:18
|
I can rememebr the old landrovers that only started when the crank shaft ii turned with something that looks like a wheel puller.. The apprentice used to do that while the drivere is busy shifting between the clutch and accelerator perspiring in the hot truck
The late Mr Deen of Banjul who was involved in the groundnut trade used to have the famous green trucks called KOURI YEH; slow but strong and ugly trucks and always green in color. That was the trademark of his company. PUSH MU TAKA. That was something.
By the way who were the cockroaches. Cockroaches are nocturnal and therefore hate light. GO HALIFA GO. DI NA LERR NI DIGI BECHECK NDARR KAMA |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 23:46:18
|
"I THINK HALIFA SALLAH HAS ENJOYED A LOT OF POLITICAL IMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME. PUTTING HIM ON THE SPOT ALLOWED ALL OF US TO SEE WHAT HE WAS MADE OF"(Kondorong).....I did not remember anywhere Halifa Sallah was put on the spotlight that "allowed all of us to see what he was made of". Is there an autobiography or any biography(authorised or not) of Halifa Sallah that i am yet to be aware of? Can you help me out brother Kons? Since you actually know what Mr Sallah is really made of can you please share it with us. I would be very worried about this allegation if i was Halifa's wife(you know, jealousy wise)
My brother, your idea of democracy is very flawed indeed. If critising Ousainou Darboe and Hamat Bah while sparing Mr Sallah made us undemocratic, then i better buy a new dictionary. We are not judging Ousainou, Halifa, Hamat or any other politician personally. Most of us have not even met or spoken to then for God's sake. Instead we can only judge them on their public utterance since none of them have been proven to hold the power of the executive. It is the very ideas that they try to sell to us(as politicians) in exchange for our votes that are under scruntiny not the politician per se. Does it ever occur to you that the NADD supporters you are villifying for not critising Sallah might have been satisfied with what he has to sell as opposed to the delusion that he is omnipotent. If you come here trying to sell us the idea that hoes and cutlasses are more efficient tools of agriculture than mechanised tools and on top of that want to lead our nation at all cost, then we'd ram your butt with a heavy duty tractor because we ain't that stupid.
If you see the flaws in Sallah's idea please do not hesitate to share it with us for we are only human and not worthy of omnipotence. You do not have to wait until Sallah or anybody is elected and happen to betray our expectations of him before you start shouting "i told you so, he is not what he claimed to represent". Is is that the hypocrite in you saw all the flaws in Sallah's ideas but chose to keep it to yourself for fear of upsetting his supporters? Otherwise i see no reason for you to attack those who believe he present better ideas to sell than say Darboe or Bah. To end it for now, can you please share with us "what he(Halifa Sallah) is made of" |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 00:15:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by shaka
"I THINK HALIFA SALLAH HAS ENJOYED A LOT OF POLITICAL IMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME. PUTTING HIM ON THE SPOT ALLOWED ALL OF US TO SEE WHAT HE WAS MADE OF"(Kondorong).....I did not remember anywhere Halifa Sallah was put on the spotlight that "allowed all of us to see what he was made of". Is there an autobiography or any biography(authorised or not) of Halifa Sallah that i am yet to be aware of? Can you help me out brother Kons? Since you actually know what Mr Sallah is really made of can you please share it with us. I would be very worried about this allegation if i was Halifa's wife(you know, jealousy wise)
My brother, your idea of democracy is very flawed indeed. If critising Ousainou Darboe and Hamat Bah while sparing Mr Sallah made us undemocratic, then i better buy a new dictionary. We are not judging Ousainou, Halifa, Hamat or any other politician personally. Most of us have not even met or spoken to then for God's sake. Instead we can only judge them on their public utterance since none of them have been proven to hold the power of the executive. It is the very ideas that they try to sell to us(as politicians) in exchange for our votes that are under scruntiny not the politician per se. Does it ever occur to you that the NADD supporters you are villifying for not critising Sallah might have been satisfied with what he has to sell as opposed to the delusion that he is omnipotent. If you come here trying to sell us the idea that hoes and cutlasses are more efficient tools of agriculture than mechanised tools and on top of that want to lead our nation at all cost, then we'd ram your butt with a heavy duty tractor because we ain't that stupid.
If you see the flaws in Sallah's idea please do not hesitate to share it with us for we are only human and not worthy of omnipotence. You do not have to wait until Sallah or anybody is elected and happen to betray our expectations of him before you start shouting "i told you so, he is not what he claimed to represent". Is is that the hypocrite in you saw all the flaws in Sallah's ideas but chose to keep it to yourself for fear of upsetting his supporters? Otherwise i see no reason for you to attack those who believe he present better ideas to sell than say Darboe or Bah. To end it for now, can you please share with us "what he(Halifa Sallah) is made of"
May be i need to be a bit more explicit. I think you are also picking on a few lines and read the whole posting.
I have not said or talked about anything bad that is being swept under the carpet regarding Hailfa. What i have tried to say is, for the forum to discuss Halifa will enable us know what he is mad e of. What i mean is that it will enable memebers to come to know him better, his waekneses, streghhts thoufgts etc. You might want to read the posting again.
I also talked of the problem within our supporters of not having a tolerance and creating room for self critique within memebers. Our strategy has always been poiting fingers at others which i think is wrong.
You see your response is so full of anger very characteristic of NADD supporters. We seem to accuse the July 22nd supportes of being extreme, but i see the same extreme in our party supporters. Certainly you do not seem to follow the level of maturity Halifa would have responded to my posting.
Your choice of words is an indication of intolerance to criticism that is not expected of a people who seek the highest office of the land. You are only confirming what i have always said that for us, criticism is a one way traffic that only leads to other political camps. certainly with tens of thousand of words in the English dictionary, there are nmore appropiate words to chose from. Perhaps it might be a limitaion of your vocabulary. |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 00:58:16
|
| Hey Brother Koms calm down, that phrase way never meant for you but i was rather echoing what Hamat Bah told his audience i the US. That instead of Jammeh buying tractors for gambian farmers he should have bought hoes, cutlasses and other prehistoric tools as a means of uplifting their plight. If you want to own it then that is fine by me, no calms. You can snake your way all you want but you are a long way from aswering my questions. By the way Halifa's strength and weaknesses are better known by those who are close to him personally so may be you could help us out if you do. I never meant to disrespect you in any way. May be you are taking me too seriously, hence your anger as oppose to me being angry. Thanks |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 01:07:25
|
You see you need to come clear. Communiction is an important process in arriving at an agreement. My apologies if the response was out of place.
You see during the second world war, Bitish troops entrenched in Normandy, were ordered to advance forward. Word went around the trenches but by the time it reached the front lines, it changed from GET READY WE ARE GOING TO ADVANCE to GET READY WE ARE GOING FOR A DANCE. Being battle fatigued they jumped out of their trenches and suffered serious casualties from the Germans.
Who knows if the break down of NADD is due to comunication problem.
Shaka, my apologies again but you Kondorongs are short tempered and i drank a lot of magic water from Kanilai lately. I would suggest you dont write in parables because the quotation from your posting actually made no mention of Hamat bah. |
|
|
|
OB1
84 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 17:49:37
|
After seeing the much needed debate on the issue of NADD versus UDP/NRP fallibility, it strikes me as bizarre that many, on this forum, have decided to apply ‘selective memory syndrome’ when it comes to being FACTUAL and OBJECTIVE in their views on the ongoing impasse. I have stated many times before that the facts are very clear:
1. In 2003, (or there abouts) Darboe came to the US and promised to heed the call that many made in Atlanta, and DC, and numerous other cities, as well as the UK and even Gambia that only a united opposition can salvage the nation. He agreed with OJ, Halifa Sallah, and the others to put together a framework to bring about that demand.
2. Darboe and Bah agreed to the MOU and JOINED NADD out of their own free will on Feb 17th 2005, almost 18 months ago!
3. They made a PROMISE that together with the other leaders they will join forces and WE pro missed to support them whole heartedly to ensure that power is returned to the people, and democracy and rule of law will be entrenched in our nation, through a NADD government, (that is what their aims are), that is what they singed, and led us all to believe.
4. NADD (including UDP/NRP under their leaders) put up single candidates for the bye-elections, and won. Not a bad result. Hamat lost.
5. Then for some STRANGE reason, just as the political score card was heavily favouring NADD, Darboe FIRST pulled out of the Alliance/Party, but ONLY after he DID not get the nomination for leadership.
6. Shortly after that Bah pulled out also.
7. From the above, Darboe and Bah on the face of it LOST out: one lost the nomination for leadership the other lost the NA seat. That is what both have in common, nothing else. So they left in a huff, to spoil it for everyone else, themselves included. The mentality seems to be: “If we can’t have it, no one else will!” Is this what we want to encourage in a new Gambia? I think not!
Now, the question we must all ask ourselves, for God and Heaven’s sake, is WAS Darboe honourable in doing what he did? There are occasions when Darboe has erratically acted on his own (like BOYCOTTING the National Assembly elections (2002) just weeks before, after all deposits where in). Is this a leader that we should trust? Is Darboe a consistent person in his political persuasions, does he believe in what he says? Does he know what he gets into, or does he do what pleases him and him alone, and if it is not in his favour backs out, under the pretext that he is representing other people (i.e. the rest of UDP). The very same questions would be asked of Hamat Bah.
Then on a final and perhaps more important issue: The issue of a NADD/UDP NRP coalition (or re-coalition) is NOT down to the leaders. I refuse to accept this notion. The parties they lead are made up of people. It is the people who desire the real change that will help make the real change, not any one person. If that is the case then let’s forget plurality and public participation. The point being made is we should look at what best serves our interest. We asked for NADD, or a united coalition. We got one that we ALL agreed with. Then two broke off. Leave them alone to break! Darboe and Bah have an option, they can always come back, nothing is stopping them, aside from their egos, and outright selfishness. And if these are characteristics that they are so arrogantly brandishing BEFORE they are even close to being in power….God help us when they get into State house. Let us stick with our promise to support the ORIGINAL NADD. Anything less, will put us in grave danger of encouraging deceit and ultimately disaster. Let's stick to what we said we'd do and do it well. Let’s not be subjected to manipulation of (cakes, numbers, and silly notions used to justify the unjustifiable). Bah and Darboe messed up. Let them admit it, and come back to the fold, or go their own way. Whoever follows them, does a great disservice to the original cause, that we all cried for three years ago, and got a year and a half later, only to be broken some months back by TWO people! Only TWO, out of hundreds of thousands Gambians the world over.
Peace.
BN |
BN |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 18:56:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by OB1
After seeing the much needed debate on the issue of NADD versus UDP/NRP fallibility, it strikes me as bizarre that many, on this forum, have decided to apply ‘selective memory syndrome’ when it comes to being FACTUAL and OBJECTIVE in their views on the ongoing impasse. I have stated many times before that the facts are very clear:
1. In 2003, (or there abouts) Darboe came to the US and promised to heed the call that many made in Atlanta, and DC, and numerous other cities, as well as the UK and even Gambia that only a united opposition can salvage the nation. He agreed with OJ, Halifa Sallah, and the others to put together a framework to bring about that demand.
2. Darboe and Bah agreed to the MOU and JOINED NADD out of their own free will on Feb 17th 2005, almost 18 months ago!
3. They made a PROMISE that together with the other leaders they will join forces and WE pro missed to support them whole heartedly to ensure that power is returned to the people, and democracy and rule of law will be entrenched in our nation, through a NADD government, (that is what their aims are), that is what they singed, and led us all to believe.
4. NADD (including UDP/NRP under their leaders) put up single candidates for the bye-elections, and won. Not a bad result. Hamat lost.
5. Then for some STRANGE reason, just as the political score card was heavily favouring NADD, Darboe FIRST pulled out of the Alliance/Party, but ONLY after he DID not get the nomination for leadership.
6. Shortly after that Bah pulled out also.
7. From the above, Darboe and Bah on the face of it LOST out: one lost the nomination for leadership the other lost the NA seat. That is what both have in common, nothing else. So they left in a huff, to spoil it for everyone else, themselves included. The mentality seems to be: “If we can’t have it, no one else will!” Is this what we want to encourage in a new Gambia? I think not!
Now, the question we must all ask ourselves, for God and Heaven’s sake, is WAS Darboe honourable in doing what he did? There are occasions when Darboe has erratically acted on his own (like BOYCOTTING the National Assembly elections (2002) just weeks before, after all deposits where in). Is this a leader that we should trust? Is Darboe a consistent person in his political persuasions, does he believe in what he says? Does he know what he gets into, or does he do what pleases him and him alone, and if it is not in his favour backs out, under the pretext that he is representing other people (i.e. the rest of UDP). The very same questions would be asked of Hamat Bah.
Then on a final and perhaps more important issue: The issue of a NADD/UDP NRP coalition (or re-coalition) is NOT down to the leaders. I refuse to accept this notion. The parties they lead are made up of people. It is the people who desire the real change that will help make the real change, not any one person. If that is the case then let’s forget plurality and public participation. The point being made is we should look at what best serves our interest. We asked for NADD, or a united coalition. We got one that we ALL agreed with. Then two broke off. Leave them alone to break! Darboe and Bah have an option, they can always come back, nothing is stopping them, aside from their egos, and outright selfishness. And if these are characteristics that they are so arrogantly brandishing BEFORE they are even close to being in power….God help us when they get into State house. Let us stick with our promise to support the ORIGINAL NADD. Anything less, will put us in grave danger of encouraging deceit and ultimately disaster. Let's stick to what we said we'd do and do it well. Let’s not be subjected to manipulation of (cakes, numbers, and silly notions used to justify the unjustifiable). Bah and Darboe messed up. Let them admit it, and come back to the fold, or go their own way. Whoever follows them, does a great disservice to the original cause, that we all cried for three years ago, and got a year and a half later, only to be broken some months back by TWO people! Only TWO, out of hundreds of thousands Gambians the world over. Peace.
BN
If only two people withdrawing from NADD has led to an impasse, then would it not confirm that the two peopele have a large following behind them.
If i get your posting right, you intimimated that"..The issue of a NADD/UDP NRP coalition (or re-coalition) is NOT down to the leaders. I refuse to accept this notion. The parties they lead are made up of people. It is the people who desire the real change that will help make the real change, not any one person. If that is the case then let’s forget plurality and public participation."
I beg to differ from your last point. It is of course down to the leaders. In a democracy, citizens choose a leader to represent them since not all of us can attend parliament and make legislation. Hence without leadership there is no democracy. There is a difference between a LEADER WHO FOLLOWS HIS PARTY AND A LEADER WHO LEADS HIS PARTY. Leaders have to lead and not follow.
Don’t get me wrong here, but there is a great difference between supervising, managing and leading. At the top of each party, they are not supposed to manage but lead.
Popularity and public participation in a democracy as i said in many posting does not exist at all levels. The majority selects a leader who makes decision on their behalf. That is why it is important to select a leader who is credible because by voting for him, you have surrendered your rights to make decisions and entrust that right including the majority of citizens to this individual. However that decision must not BE IMPOSED.
Citizen’s desires are manifested through the leadership they select. There are thousands who still support UDP and NRP and so are similar numbers in APRC, PDOIS, and NDAM etc.
In fact APRC has the majority seat in parliament thanks to the boycott but also because Gambians voted for the party. Whether Gambians were right to vote in APRC is not an issue. There is no RIGHT OR WRONG IN A DEMOCRACY IN TERMS OF WHAT PARTY THEY VOTE FOR. HAVING THE LIBERTY TO CHOOSE A PARTY OF YOUR CHOICE IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS THE CONERSTONE OF TRUE DEMOCRACY. In other words, restricting CHOICE runs against the grains of genuine democracy and this is where it has some problems. Again, democracy seems to be option these days. Whether there can be another way, remains a mystery and an untried adventure.
In fact, democratic regimes have created more trouble to humanity than dictatorships. Democracy gave us the Second World War and also slavery.
Therefore, once a leader is sworn in- he makes decisions on our behalf whether we like it or not. That is why there is performance review period of every five years in which we assess their performance and either give them a new mandate or choose another person to lead us. However in between the performance review period, society also mandated parliament to impeach the president if he is found to abuse his office, incompetent or some other laid down guidelines. I must admit the constitutional requirements are so cumbersome, that even in the United States, impeachment is very rare since Watergate scandal. In Africa, only the country of Liberia impeached a sitting president.
It is on the basis of the citizens’ surrendering their rights that give legitimacy to the leader to make decision and for society to abide by them. That is why we set up the three branches of government, Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary. Its as a result of society foreseeing leaders abusing the entrusted power that checks and balances are put in to ensure public interest is served.
This is why, even if a corrupt government is toppled, the incoming government is bound by agreements they made. You cannot say that because that loan was not properly utilized therefore you would refuse to honor their contracts. This is at the heart of sovereignty. So therefore, Hamat and Ousainou, were both selected by a majority in their parties to speak on their behalf just the same way Halifa was selected by PDOIS for example.
Consequently each comes to the negotiation table with FULL SUPPORT OF ITS POLITICAL CONSTTUENCY. That is why it is called a negotiation.
It should be noted that the MAJORITY IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT and history has proven that many times.
I am a NADD supporter, also a supporter of PDOIS since inception. But I am also aware of the fact that there are Gambians who do not share my party’s policies and programs, but also conscious of the fact they should have right to express their feelings and vote for any one they so wish for without having to judge them.
This is why PDOIS never tells people to vote for them. They lay down their programs and policies and ask Gambians to judge for themselves. The party was known to tell Gambians “… to be MASTERS OF THEIR DESTINIES..” It is that principle of PDOIS that I still stand by. If we loose as a party is because we have NOT CONVINCED THE ELECTORATE ENOUGH TO VOTE FOR US. As to whether our programs were better than others is irrelevant here. The judge in a democracy is the electorate who decide by casting their vote. Remember leaders are servants of the people and must SERVE that political constituency that voted them into power.
|
|
|
|
OB1
84 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 20:03:26
|
| Kons, I agree with where you are coming from. But the notions and concepts you highlight, (quite rightly too), is based on the assumption that it only applies to a party that is not as fluid as the ones we see prevailing in The Gambia. NADD, UDP, NRP are all extremely fluid, in the sense that the rigidities of a thorough establishment has eluded most membership, and the leaders especially. That is why cross carpeting is rampant, that is the leadership is more about the individual than a structure. And this being the case, it is much easier to get PEOPLE to shift allegiances with where the BLOCK goes (a village in URD, or a community in LRD), than getting them to go with one party because of ITS Leader. It has only worked for the incumbency, that Leaders (president) alone has the sole appeal to attract voters. But for the opposition it has always been other influences that make the party (chiefs, etc...at the INFORMAL level). My case is proven by the fact that IF it was only about Leadership and name recognition, then why has Darboe Never stood for NA elections? And why did Hamat lose his seat? |
BN |
|
|
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
Posted - 08 Aug 2006 : 20:36:15
|
| You have some valid points i must say. |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2006 : 02:01:34
|
Demba Baldehbanna, Sorry that I couldn’t respond fast owing to some other commitments. Anyway thank you for you posting.
Let me begin by saying that the idea of opposition unity was not precipitated by a belief that none of the opposition party programmes are good enough to win support from Gambians. Otherwise they would not have secured 48% in the last election. So, you are wrong to insinuate that UDP have no programme. Party programmes are normally embodied in a Manifesto.It is a legal requirement that such a manifesto should be presented to the IEC before a party is allow to operate. Therefore, if your assertion is correct, then UDP would have been non-existent. If you said you have not heard of them, then their might be a reasonable explanation for that. My suspicion is it is because everyone is occupied with the task of getting the opposition camp together and perhaps lack of adequate media coverage.
With regards to your statement about replacing a dictator with a dictator, I see this as an attempt to consolidate Halifa’s response to UDP/NRP proposal that the election be governed by the present constitution. I can tell you this; No matter what we do we must have to inherit the present constitution that gives what Halifa calls Monarchical powers to the president, in the event of victory. It would be practically impossible for the present constitution to be abrogated the next day after victory. In fact, that would be a treasonable offence punishable by death. If that is what Halifa is advocating then he should be arrested and charged for incitement to commit the offence of treason against the Republic of the Gambia. We will have to wait for a National Assembly to be constituted three months after victory before any reform can be put through. In that interim, we will have no choice but to live under the dictates of the present constitution. That doesn’t mean Alhagi Ousainu will be going around imposing alkalolu and Seyfolu on us. In fact he fought vigorously against such practices in the past. We all witnessed it. So clearly Halifa’s rambling on this issue is absolutely ludicrous and very well misplaced.
Am sure Gambians don't want a monarchy. If we are to do away with that, we have to start from somewhere, and that is by way of asking the people what they want. That is certainly not a bad idea. Is it? The political bickering and wrangling must now stop so that we can move on. Otherwise, it will be HE. President Yaya A.J.J Jammeh for another five years.
Those of you thinking of a NADD plan 'B' are dreaming. Regardless of who wins the presidency, Come another five years, you will have the same UDP, the same NRP and with the same leaderships intact. The only difference would be heightened hostilities between UDP/NRP and NADD and that is what Yaya Jammeh [should there be APRC victory-God Forbid] would exploit to realise his thirty year rule dream. Are we going to allow that?
I know you people are using rhetoric’s to obscure this debate but there is no point doing that because it will not help the struggle. All what it does is further polarisation of opinions and fuelling hostilities among opposition supporters. Don’t follow Dalton. He is a very skilful but sensational journalist, and he is using this debate to rehearse his skills at the detriment of this very noble project. He should wait until the Independent NewsPaper is back on the streets of Banjul. Then he can direct his skills towards APRC even when they are in opposition or nowhere.
Please, let's end the hostilities now. aprc is exploiting our predicament to gather votes. We must not allow them. Let’s remember one thing; so long as the APRC continued to be given a mandate in a free and fair election, they have a right to govern regardless of how that would impact on our lives.
‘Never underestimate the determination of a quite man’ -per Ian Duncan Smith MP [Former leader of her majesty's opposition-UK]
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2006 : 03:30:20
|
Brother Nyarikangbanna, welcome to the club of political frustration. I agree with some of your analysis of starting somewhere. Let me ask you a question, where were you people when UPD/NRP first pull out of NADD? I remember very well and correct me if am wrong, you had several postings at the begining of the leadership crises steering everything towards UPD. There were hardly any mention of a compromise between the parties in your postings. I will go back and quote what you wrote but I will wait to see your response.
In one of your postings on allgambian.net you indicated that if they choose anybody other than Darboe, then Jammeh will be the president again. Your tone was very bias and uncompromising. Those of us who sat on the fench fighting for unity in whatever way say perform were so frustrated until we stop contributing our dollars to the coalition.
That was several months before we got to where we are now. I mentioned in one of my postings that if Darboe stayed at the table, he is eventually likely to get the nomination. Up until the break up, honestly I was rooting for him to be the flagbearer. I had no doubt in my mind that if he was not selected, there will be chaos because of UPD's expectation. Many Gambians also appealed to Darboe to witdraw his resignation and go back to the table for negotiation and they never did. Now four weeks before the elections, you people are fighting tool and nail to get to the table. What does that say about your strategy and recognition of what is at stake? Certainly you did not see the need to negotiate 9 months ago.
I wanted to clearly give you my position and how I have handle myself throughout this debate. It is my humble believe that if UPD had taken the bold move, use its majority arguement and professionally ask all other political parties to join them in a party alliance with conditions, they would have got what they wanted. Had they gone to the first series of meetings with a clear agenda and call for a government of NATIONAL UNITY BEHIND UPD it would have eventually happened. UPD should have conceeded and accept to treat all other parties with respect and equality in return for their backing. This would have eventually happened. Had UPD recognized the role of any of these parties regardless of their size, they would have been successful in convincing these people that it was best to join the UPD.
The fact of the matter is that UDP took everything for granted and openly expect to be selected authormatically. The formula that Halifa and others put in place from the onset was clear and straight forward. There could have been strong negotiation skills employed by the UDP, but they either did not have the skills, or did not know what they ultimately want.
Brother Nyarikangbanna, there is still hope, but UDP must be willing to represent the interest of the Gambian people and the parties involved in other for them to win their conscience. One cannot dismissed an opponent, label them as untrust worthy, and greedy only to come back and ask them to back you without any conditions. So the call is for UDP to say, lets formulate a plan for a government of NATIONAL UNITY. They should clearly take the lead and spell these steps out for everyone to see. UPON victory, they should honor their promises and call on other opposition leaders to join them in fulfilling the dreams of the Gambian people. Until UDP is willing to respect the role of each and everyone of those parties, they cannot win with all their muscles. At the end of the day your muscles will give up on you. What say you Nyarikanbanna?
Peace |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
OB1
84 Posts |
Posted - 09 Aug 2006 : 13:56:37
|
Well said Baldeh! May I say, at this juncture, that the issue is NOT UDP as a party but Darboe as its leader. The most in the UDP party (made up of supporters like you and me and others), are NOT happy with what Darboe has done. He never consulted anyone on his decision to back out of NADD. This is habitual of him to act in a dictatorial and unilateral manner. Let's look at the facts:
1. In 1996, he ran away after polling day to the Senegalese embassy for ‘fear of his life’. Leaving his staunchest supporters behind to wait for any fate that befell them, the APRC made a ‘monkey’ of him later that day during the ceremonies at the J22 square, everyone knows this, and regardless, the top brass of the PPP, NDAM (now) still rallied behind him to lead in 2001: Fast forward to 2002.
2. In 2002 he backed out of the NA elections, claiming that they were unfairly organized. Despite that was only months earlier he had said that the Presidential elections were free and fair. This went against all the opinions of the rest of the UDP top brass that is why Waa Juwara pulled out and formed NDAM. Now let’s look at the 2001 Presidential elections: Rewind to 2001.
3. In 2001 after the presidential election results were announced by GJ Roberts, Darboe decided (on his own, without having the courtesy or foresight as a leader to consult with the leadership of UDP), to call Jammeh and concede. Remember the dialogue? Well let me transcribe the telephone conversation:
Darboe: This is Lawyer Darboe here. Sir, I am calling to concede, and to congratulate you for a well deserved victory……
Jammeh: Thank you.
Darboe: It was a well contested election……
Jammeh: Tell your people to back down, I do not want any trouble from them, understand?
Darboe: Yes, Yes, I do......congratulations, the results were free and fair, and you deserved to win.
Jammeh: I am you daddy!
Darboe: What?
Jammeh: I said, I am your daddy....say it.....
Darboe: Errr, yes, yes, if you say so....
Jammeh: Say it!
Darboe: Yes, you are my daddy.
The above is on record, I heard it so did the whole Gambia. Now tell me, does this man Darboe have the moral and even legitimate authority to hold the whole process of a united opposition to ransom? I think NOT! Let us call a spade a spade and be done with it, and let's move on. Darboe and Hamat can either join, or carry on wasting everyone’s time. If they want to hand the victory over to Jammeh that is their choice, because that seems to be their posturing anyway. But history will not judge them too kindly. They are losing support from within; they are losing credibility from the Diaspora, which is a major source of funding. And they have little backing from the business community in Gambia. Jammeh is trouncing them silly. Let them come back to the fold (NADD), before it is too late. Time is seriously against all of us.
Peace.
BN
|
BN |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
