| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 02:36:44
|
Ok. I respect your right to freedom of expression. All am asking you to do is stop distorting facts. I have been on the phone to Gambia and i know happened there.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
 |
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 02:41:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nyarikangbanna
Ok. I respect your right to freedom of expression. All am asking you to do is stop distorting facts. I have been on the phone to Gambia and i know happened there.
Thanks
Its not about distorting facts. What a vague expression ...("facts!..")? You are not the best judge. Its an open forum and if you don't appreciate other views. You are in trouble. I can tell you since UDP has been in existence I voted them in all general elections but felt totally dissappointed now. If others are leaving others are joining. Good luck! |
Edited by - kobo on 29 Aug 2006 02:50:28 |
|
|
|
Biraago
Gambia
173 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 03:07:31
|
Kobo,
I am very curious to know from you, what lead you to be a UDP supporter and now NADD.
What were thepolicy differences between the UDP and the other political parties that attracted you then and what was the reason for jumping ship now.
You are very good at analysis.
Can you please give us an insight of your personal expirience in a new topic? It would be very educative. |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 08:19:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Biraago
Kobo,
I am very curious to know from you, what lead you to be a UDP supporter and now NADD.
What were thepolicy differences between the UDP and the other political parties that attracted you then and what was the reason for jumping ship now.
You are very good at analysis.
Can you please give us an insight of your personal expirience in a new topic? It would be very educative.
Thas was my choice, a personal matter and at those times and circumstances, the UDP was the leading
major opposition party in terms of numbers and popularity but not on politics, ideology or the party's manefesto.I had no choice but to rally behind a massive opposition party and gave them full support against the APRC and Jammeh.
I decided to disclose it to show the certain so-called 'die hards' demonstrating extremism and very inflexible; that I look for the best political strategy to challenge APRC's authority to rule the Gambia. Now I do consider that a national alliance has more broader based objectives and more effective to deal with the current political crises and downfall of APRC; if all opposition parties united together under one banner and ticket for the elections.
Also compelled to exposed myself as the way and how the debates are going, Bronx and Nyarinkanbana thought they own UDP/NRP. |
Edited by - kobo on 29 Aug 2006 08:59:41 |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 10:47:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nyarikangbanna
Kobo, what do you mean when you say NADD is more credible under the law? All the parties in the Gambia are constitutionally constituted by virtue of their registration with the IEC. So how can one party be more credible under the law than others? Again, this only goes on to further expose your naivety.
Look, I have just return from the Nothing Hill Carnival and I am dead. Please wake me up with something sensible not this scrap ok.
Thanks
Yes I clearly declare that NADD is more credible not only under the laws of the Gambia but politically more viable, dynamic and ultimately the best alliance with proper national colours to unite the opposition under one umbrella. The testimony is seen in the Presedential nominations. NADD solidifies PDOIS, NDAM and PPP but UDP and NRP backed out. If they were committed it would have shown great impact in the Presedential nominations because instead of five it would have been three (APRC, NADD and GDPD). Please rule out GDPD as the leader does not reside in the Gambia in the last five years and may not qualify. Therefore eventually it would have been between APRC and NADD (as UDP and NRP also would solidify) for political and strategic reasons. Thas legitimate, valid and legal in the interest of the nation. You are the crabs crawling and the nuts to crack your strong shell as hard as stupidity.
You can't deny the facts above? |
Edited by - kobo on 29 Aug 2006 10:49:42 |
|
|
|
Biraago
Gambia
173 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 14:50:05
|
Kobo,
I respect and admire your sincerity.
Your answer is satisfactory to me.
I must testify that you have been very consistent in your endeavour to see the opposition paties united against dictatorship and for justice and emancipation. History would judge your contributions on this forum as being fruitful, democratic and pariotic in the general sense.
I did'nt ignor your appeal regarding these two elements. It's just that the week-end was too engaging. And when I sat by the keyboard yesterday, I found out that you had replced me in being irritated withem and used the same method that you were advicing me against.
I do understand your frustration. We wish all Gambians to evolve, thus the consistency in our engagement.
I wish you the best. |
|
|
|
Bronx
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 15:03:11
|
The pomposity that comes out of you two is beyond me. These two elements huh.This is the problem with you halifarites. You have been shouting for too long, You like to bully people with fictitious and incoherent arguments. Failing that you tried to diminish their humanity. I got news for you missy...this two elements will never bow to your ploys again. We will challenge you all the way. So be silent all you want but peddling crap on this forum will always be challenged.
|
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 17:41:26
|
BRONX:
I strongly respect your political views , though I don 't agree with them. I think you are a courageous fellow for standing up to your views about the future of our country.
However , I do think that you can still be a little bit more open-minded , considering that there is no single solution to our political problems but a series of possible solutions. Maybe that is why the "game" of politics is "invented".
You seem to be very dogmatic about your dislike of Halifa ( remember you called him a deceit , arrogant , self- claimed lawyer ...etc..etc)which is none of my business , but you seem to forget that NADD is a work product of Darboe (just as it is of Halifa , O .J, Waa Hamat , and others).So you need to be able to understand that the legal contradictions in the creation of NADD should not exempt Lawyer Darboe. You seem to heap all your blame on Halia as if he is the only one who created NADD and registered it. Maybe you know something I don' t know .Is that not right ? |
|
|
|
Bronx
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 21:35:14
|
Kayjatta,
I never claimed Halifa is solely responsible for the setup or break up of NADD. Au contraire. I have all along made it clear that the blame can go all around. If you peruse my first comments on this issue, you will find that I was a lot reconcialliatory when I first start posting on this forum.
When I realise that this is not reciprocated from the other side, I decided to stick to my guns and face the bullies. I don't dislike Halifa. I disagree with certain stances he took during the transition to civilian rule. I am not the only Gambian that hold that view. He was challenged on that numerous times on the Gambia_L and his explanation is nothing but flimsy.
So to make a story short, so to speak, NADD was a marriage of convinience that ended in divorce. All parties are responsible for this. What I object to is this notion in some quarters that Darbo was solely responsible for what happened. That is not true and I will be damned if I should be made to agree to that demagoguery. |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2006 : 01:33:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bronx
Kayjatta,
I never claimed Halifa is solely responsible for the setup or break up of NADD. Au contraire. I have all along made it clear that the blame can go all around. If you peruse my first comments on this issue, you will find that I was a lot reconcialliatory when I first start posting on this forum.
When I realise that this is not reciprocated from the other side, I decided to stick to my guns and face the bullies. I don't dislike Halifa. I disagree with certain stances he took during the transition to civilian rule. I am not the only Gambian that hold that view. He was challenged on that numerous times on the Gambia_L and his explanation is nothing but flimsy.
So to make a story short, so to speak, NADD was a marriage of convinience that ended in divorce. All parties are responsible for this. What I object to is this notion in some quarters that Darbo was solely responsible for what happened. That is not true and I will be damned if I should be made to agree to that demagoguery.
There are two important acknowledgements of "truths and facts" you have made which looks very interesting to me as follows:
"I never claimed Halifa is solely responsible for the setup or break up of NADD. Au contraire. I have all along made it clear that the blame can go all around. If you peruse my first comments on this issue, you will find that I was a lot reconcialliatory when I first start posting on this forum."
"NADD was a marriage of convenience that ended in divorce. All parties are responsible for this."
These statements are indifferences to your approach of the debates all along but however you have substantiated why you took that approach and now do understand your different standpoints. However we came at a point when you and Nyarinkanbana were objecting as detractors that NADD is not credible and has no legal and political basis for its existence. How many times do you challenge the integrity of the spirit of formation and registration of NADD and various attempts to sell superiority and credibility of your political ideology underlying formation of UDP/NRP alliance (for example party led strategy) over NADDs (National character or broad based strategy).
Initially as you stated "I was a lot reconcialliatory when I first start posting on this forum."; what rationale have made you considered that it was the best approach on the issues we were confronted with?
Secondly you also stated "NADD was a marriage of convenience.." ; what conveniences were your objectives envisaged or how could have NADD offer or assure you (or both UDP/NRP) those conveniences?
Finally do you disagree to the fact that formation of NADD was a credible political strategy for all the opposition parties?
Please ignore personalities and deal with rationale, ideals and ideologies as decisive as possible and in simple terms.
|
Edited by - kobo on 30 Aug 2006 01:44:43 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2006 : 17:36:45
|
BRONX:
Please , let 's talk a little bit more about this situation. Look there are two points I want you to agree with me on , and if you don't please tell me why you don't.
One , the present predicament in the opposition is caused by Darboe's unacceptance of any body other than himself as the flagbearer and his subsequent resignation.
Two,Darboe need not resign at all for the purpose of national interest. The simple reason is that whoever become the flagbearer is only in power for five years (one term) and will retire from politics totally after that.NADD government is only transitional , to set up a level playing field for future elections where Darboe and UDP will still have a chance to win considering thier majority status in the opposition. Or yet still if he knew he wanted a party -led coalition with him the leader he could have made that clear from the beginning . Is that not right ? |
|
|
|
Bronx
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2006 : 18:11:22
|
Kayjatta,
I don't accept your premise and thus didn't agree with you on both. Unless you are privy to the discussions that took place, how or who told you that Darbo didn't or will not accept anyone as flagbearer. This is the sort of distortion that broke the negotiations down. You are claiming authority on an issue or discussion that you were not privy to. You form a biased opinion that the reason the talks breakdown is due to Darbo's intransigence. Unless you are there, I will suggest you are just spouting the NADD talking points and I will not agree with you on that point.
On the second point, I am still flabbergasted at the anger directed at the man (Darbo) for exercising his right to association. National interest huh... Don't you think the tens of thousands of APRC supporters have the national interest at heart too. We may disagree with them but it is their country too. You guys are confusing NADD's interest with national interest. If we are to build a democratic society, the inalienable rights of people to speech, religion, association and pursuit of happiness should always be protected. Communist have national interest too. They rule by committees and no dissent is allowed. Darbo decided that NADD is not what he envisaged, He left with his supporters. Hamat Bah came to the same conclusion and so do his supporters. They are Gambians with the national interest at heart. They disagree with NADD or now PDOIS/NDAM on the way forward. That is democratic to me. You may not agree with it, but that is politics. |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2006 : 18:17:33
|
| Thanks Bronx , good luck! |
|
|
|
Bronx
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2006 : 18:26:55
|
Kb,
Best of luck to you too. Nuff respect. |
|
|
|
Jangjang
Austria
62 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2006 : 19:56:16
|
Bronx and Daffeh.
Did lawyer Darboe knew before signing the NADD MOU that the Gambian constitution do not support an alliance ? If so why did he sign it ? Is it to deceive the Gambian people? Make Be Darboe and UDP made a mistake to sign the agreement. What was his solution then to the problem of registering NADD as an Alliance or Party? Why did he not spelt it out then that we want a Party-Led alliance and I must be the Flagbearer? Instead of wasting peoples' time and energy just to cry "MISTRUST" afterwards. This is the problem with Darboe he has no solution to our problems that is why UDP has no program of action. You interlectual oppotunists keep on talking about Halifa's role in convincing Gambians to Vote for the 97 constitution. But again he and PDOIS cannot convince the voters to vote for them at a natioanl election. What an irony! He can convince Gambians in such a short durartion of time to vote for the constitution but cannot convince Gambians to vote for their policies in 20 yrs.Why is this so? Halifa has put across solutions to our problems but it is the Gambian people who decide. The Gambian people voted for the contitution, Halifa did not force them. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
