 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Jun 2008 : 20:21:46
|
Ebouth, I will not elaborate much since I have stated earlier that I have rest my case but let me say this; I am not taking a step backwards. I am just being realistic. I Think the mistake you people are making here is propelling the notion that it is all about who will lead and that if NADD is reconstituted and leadership given to UDP the deal is done. This is a big fallacy. This issue is much about the formula for unity than anything else. The type that Sallah's desciples got their heads stucked in since 2006 and cannot see anything outside it has grave legal ramifications which I will not waste time talking about. They were not understood by many until when the Supreme Court ruled on the issue. However, the biggest problem is this; Both the UDP and NADD had tested their electoral strengths in the past elections since 2006, in all of which UDP greatly outscored NADD and reclaimed their universally recognized status as the biggest opposition party in the country. What these NADD advocates are now doing is literally asking the biggest opposition party [UDP] to join a smaller one [NADD] in the name of unity. That is unheard of. I don't know about planet Mars but certainly not on planet Earth.
I think you are little bit unfair to me when you implied that I do not provide solution because I did. The insulate desciples won't just have it. That's all. They spent two years saying all sort of nonesense about Lawyer Darboe here but when I started talking about their Ayatollah, Hell broke! Their recent name calling against me is just a ploy to deliberately deflect this discussion from the issues and also part of their bullying tactics to silence dissent. For that, I think they need to look for somebody else to prey on, not me for I can play that game better. The attack game they have accused me of playing is the game that they themselves started here. They just can't cope with me hence their desire to change the rules in the middle of the whole thing. Pathetic! My criticisms of Halifa Sallah are connected to the issues and therefore legitimate. As a citizen of our great nation, I will not resile from that duty, the duty to hold political figures to account in my small ways.
Anyway, as I have said before, I was just giving a sincere advice. People can either accept it or reject it. It doesn't make any difference to me. Given what I know, I am not interested in taking part in any discussion in which the idea of reconstituting NADD is even comtemplated. Any such thing will simply be a wholly unproductive exercise and therefore not worth my time and interllect.
Thanks |
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 03 Jun 2008 21:23:41 |
 |
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2008 : 01:52:12
|
"However, the biggest problem is this; Both the UDP and NADD had tested their electoral strengths in the past elections since 2006, in all of which UDP greatly outscored NADD and reclaimed their universally recognized status as the biggest opposition party in the country. What these NADD advocates are now doing is literally asking the biggest opposition party [UDP] to join a smaller one [NADD] in the name of unity. That is unheard of. I don't know about planet Mars but certainly not on planet Earth". Nyari...
In any democratic contest, there is bound to be a fight for the upper hand. Without contest there is no democracy and therefore one party rule will be the order of the day.
However, mature political minds always try to get over the divisions that took place during a contest and look forward for advancing the cause of a nation and its people.
Let me get this right, What is the difference between NADD joining UDP and UDP joining NADD? Is this not the same Juloo bulaa baala Arning Baabula juloola. (plain mandinka speaking may help here)
First it was the leadership issue and now it is legal issue? Really!! do we have any sense of what we are dealing with here? Is this just another blaa blaa blaa and no solution will satisfy ME??
Ebou4th and others, lets focus our energy on genuine UDP supporters who are willing to move forward for better Gambia? The likes of Karamba Touray, Pa Saikou Kujabi (whom I had a bitter disagreement last elections - Now good friends), Ebrima Dibba, Yahya Darboe, Ousman Manjang Atlanta, Manding Darboe New York and many others. These are people who are willing to put Gambia first before personal politics. These are some of the level headed UDP supporters that are in the party because they love the Party and Darboe.
Lets see how we can reach out to these folks and start the ball rolling. Honestly we will be wasting our time to be debating with a confused fellow.
Thanks for the optism...
|
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2008 : 21:32:40
|
'Let me get this right, What is the difference between NADD joining UDP and UDP joining NADD? Is this not the same Juloo bulaa baala Arning Baabula juloola. (plain mandinka speaking may help here' -DBaldeh
Right! here is the point then; if they are all the same, why would anyone bother reaching out to the quoted UDP affiliates when you can simply insert pressure on NADD's Ayatollah and get him to swallow his meaningless pride and join a UDP led coalition since according to the above author, nothing matters but unity and especially given that UDP led coalition is still open to all to join. This is a pre-requisite
It is unfortunate that this guy is so naive that he could believe that this kind of populist crude logics would pass the test of deligent scrutuny in this forum. This is a sign of hopelessness. He is such an erratic fanatic whose frustration is taking the best of him now and who says nothing sensible and coherent. The amount of disinguity he has exhibited here is extraordinary. He would say anything to appease people here when in fact the only thing he likes to see is a reconstituted NADD. Well, that would never happen. Anyone can take this to the bank.
I think it is better that he is advised to recognize that his arguments have now run out of every substance and that it is time that he succumb to the argue of commonsense.
Thanks
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 04 Jun 2008 21:47:20 |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jun 2008 : 08:52:32
|
Every genuine Gambian admitted here that the NADD formular of uniting all the opposition parties was and still remain the best idea that brought us this close to defeating the dictators.
Apparently you keep beating on this death horse of UDP led coalition which have no merits but simply signifying my way or the high way. Almost every reader here agreed that a unity formular is the best way to go.
You and only you will continue to dream of an unconditional UDP lead coalition which actually happened on two presidential elections without success. First it was the UDP/NCP which failed because of leadership issue. Second it was UDP/NRP/GPDP and it also failed.
The question to you sir, did we have a UDP lead coalition or not? Or did you mean it wasn't complete without the presense of NADD? The more this debate goes on the more your political brankruptcy and ego is exposed. Bring it more and more and by the time we are done, you will be having nothing more to argue. Cheem Lukut.... |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2008 : 21:02:00
|
Well, NADD too had being around and the truth is, they produced the worst results in the recent elections since 2006. That makes them the worst political option to rally around. It will therefore be a grave affront to commonsense for anyone to even contemplate the idea of rallying people around it. It won't happen, period.
The notion that because UDP could not defeat APRC in the previous election and hence no point joining them is palpably absurd. That notion would have hold water if there is a political alternative that has proven statistically stronger or equally strong as the UDP and/ or there is no such belief that APRC can be defeated in which case, we might as well stop contemplating the idea of opposition unity as it would be a pointless waste of time and energy. But because there is an apparent belief that APRC is defeatable and given that there is no equivalent or stronger alternative to UDP in the opposition circle, a UDP led alliance is the only tangible option, regardless of all its perceived flaws. This is where we need to start off. Any contrary view expressed here is a fairytale.
If there is a serious belief that APRC can be defeated by a united opposition, then we got to recognize that the best way to achieve unity is to adopt the best option at our disposal as established by empirical evidence [ a universally recognized litmus test] and work hard on it to make it better. That option is a UDP led coalition. This is what statistical evidence has indicated and that is what commonsense dictates.
Let’s take a look at what is happening in the US Democratic Party primary elections now. Sen. Clinton, even today, believes that she is the one who could be the stronger candidate against Sen. John McCain but Sen. Obama outscored her in terms of votes and delegate count. That is why she is conceding the nomination to him tomorrow, not the other way round. She is doing it not because she likes it but because that is what the rules of politics dictates. However, Sen. Obama’s statistical lead does not necessary mean that he will defeat McCain in November. He can still [God forbid] loose in November. But this does not give any legitimate leverage to Sen. Clinton to stand back and say I cannot support Obama because I believe I am the stronger candidate. Sen. Obama is now claiming entitlement to the nomination not because he is certained to defeat McCain in November but only because he has the numbers right behind him and this is regardless of the perceptions or belief about him in the Clinton camp. This is what the rules of politics dictates and that is why Mrs Clinton is joining Obama tomorrow, not him joining her. If only people can digest the logic here and make reasoning out of it, then everybody will undoubtedly agree with me that these NADD fanatics/advocates and their Ayatollah are being disingenuous in their call for unity.
It makes me wonder if it is the same person signing in with the name DBaldeh. Last time he wrote, he said UDP joining NADD or NADD joining UDP is the same thing. ‘Juludungbala Babulajulula’- his own words. Today, it is UDP- led coalition is a dead horse without merit. I wonder if he woke up with his trees this morning and God knows what he is going to say tomorrow. Another silly thing, I suppose. Well, make sure you don't declare Gambia as a colony of senegal, Ok.
Anyway, this topic is now exhausted. I would now like to give the decent readership a chance to reflect on all what is being said here and for those who are still cynical, to come to terms with the realities of our political predicament as expressed herein by my humble self.
Thank you all.
Cheem Lukut... -DBaldeh
Oh you got that wrong. I shall teach you mandinka today. I thought everybody from janjanburey speaks it well. Anyway, the phrase is;
Cheem lakat aalakatiteballah.
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 06 Jun 2008 22:04:58 |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2008 : 01:35:51
|
"It makes me wonder if it is the same person signing in with the name DBaldeh. Last time he wrote, he said UDP joining NADD or NADD joining UDP is the same thing. ‘Juludungbala Babulajulula’- his own words. Today, it is UDP- led coalition is a dead horse without merit. I wonder if he woke up with his trees this morning and God knows what he is going to say tomorrow. Another silly thing, I suppose. Well, make sure you don't declare Gambia as a colony of senegal", Ok. Nyari
You should be brave enough to call me by name and debate maturely. This quote above is exactly mine and there is no two names. The Dbaldeh is my signature only this time with a typo capital D.
Now let me put some sense in your brain again. Yes, Senator Obama claimed victory because that is what the rule of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY SAYS, who every wins marjority delegates wins the nomination. It is not a rule that apply to all political senarios.
Obama and Clinton both signed off to those rules and therefore have to live up to the rules. Now the question is why did UDP signed off to the rules of NADD (MOU) and backed down when it was convenient? This is what is call political opportunism. Clinton tried it but it did not work because mature political minds distinguish between playing by the rules and playing the rules as they favor you.
Another exposure of your political bankruptcy of how smart politicians win is how you describe Obama Vs Clinton. Obama, the apparent winner regardless of whether he is stronger or weaker, and who needs Clinton the most went and APPROACH Clinton at her home and seek her backing. Are you aware of that move by Obama? Probably not because you are busy defending one and only one way.
Do you really understand that for a politician to win you need the support of others regardless? Didn't you admit that Clinton is the Stronger - UDP stronger in this case but she is going to back Obama? So where does that put your argument that join me or am not joining you?
Didn't you see Obama is reaching out to the Clinton supporters, Edward's and others? Are you so blind to the realities that you advocate here every day?
On a final note, would you tell us how a UDP lead coalition will work and what opportunities would it accord the rest of the smaller parties? In the interest of national unity and a better and stronger government, how would a UDP lead coalition treat members of NADD and their political supporters? Ain't you advocating for UDP lead coalition without conditions validating our points that it is all about help me to get there and then we will see. This is a naive and immature political position.
This is the essense of debating the issues. You expose your weaknesses without knowing it. You have systematically walked us down the lane until you strip yourself nicked. Great job pretending to master a subject you have no clue about.
|
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Aku_pickin
Christmas Island
162 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2008 : 14:32:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by shaka
quote:
Originally posted by Aku_pickin
I'm in agreement here. Furthermore, the situation on the ground today, will never allow for an affective opposition that can unseat the regime. It's time other options/ideas are put forth. Thoughts...
We will be very glad if you can furnish us with another alternative that will allow for an effective opposition that can unseat the regime. Do not wait for others to do that for you, while that idea is rotting in your brain cells.
Shaka and Ebou4th. I have stated this before and I'll state it again. The only way to unseat this regime is to put pressure on the people (unfortunately) to help them see that they can have and deserve a better leader. We in the diaspora have the finances to effect change on the ground; to
Since we aren’t allow to vote, we can influence the way the populace votes. One way to do this is by withholding or limiting the remittances we send home.
We must put pressure on our relatives back home to vote for the party we feel has theirs and the nations as a whole at heart.
They need to vote for a leader who:
- Isn’t corrupt
- Respects the constitution, laws, civil and human rights.
- Recognizes that they are chosen by the people and willing to handover power peacefully when the people vote for change.
- Isn’t in power to steal and attain great wealth at the behest of the people.
- Supports presidential time limits
- Has the vision to solve our dependencies on food imports
- Has a clear strategy to reduce or limit our dependency on foreign oil by exploring renewable energy resources within the country.
- Sets the right policies and incentives in place to encourage and ignite the entrepreneurial spirit in Gambians and attract foreign investments.
- Recognizes that our strategic location gives us the ability to become the main port or hub for importing and exporting in West Africa.
- Will electrify the whole nation
- Recognizes that the role of the military is to protect the nation’s borders and not police duties.
- Respects an independent judiciary
- Will keep the military busy by creating an army corps of engineers who will aid in infrastructure construction and reconstruction.
- Will eliminate government corruption.
- Has the economical plan to reduce inflation
- Will create jobs, build hospitals, build road infrastructure, and build social services and programs for Gambians.
- Who will build a free and peaceful Gambia
- Will do all these things by putting together a solid team of Ministers who's only goals is to achieve the above in their respective areas.
Jammeh has continually brain washed the populace over the years, that they currently view him as the all and mighty. We need to undo this! Hold back or limit your remittances to make them want change and effect change by the ballot.
|
Justice must be served as impunity brings more repression and corruption! |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jun 2008 : 06:44:57
|
Aku_pickin, I cannot agree with you more. Putting economic pressure on our definitely a strategy that we can succeed in doing since we have control over what and how much we send over there.
I have similarly advocated such measures because I belief we have the human and financial resources to invest in areas where we can have definite impact on the Jammeh regime. Withholding remittance is one way we can be effective.
Another way off course is to mobilize ourselves in individual countries where we live and form strong political voting blocs. We can then turn around and put pressure on our elected officials here in the US or anywhere to address issues of human rights violations. This is a very effective method and it puts our nation on the world stage and give it the media coverage we need to put pressure on Jammeh.
Another area off course is to give the voters an alternative to what Jammeh represents. We can also do this by engaging in socio economic projects to show the locals that we mean more than just being opposition. We can equally come together and pressure the opposition as well to come up with winnable strategies.
We have the potentials to influence what happens on the ground in the Gambia. It is a matter of putting our heads together and taking actions.
Thanks
|
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jun 2008 : 19:05:36
|
Didn't you admit that Clinton is the Stronger - UDP stronger in this case but she is going to back Obama? So where does that put your argument that join me or am not joining you? - Dbaldeh
No, I didn't say or admit the above nor do I believe in it. I think it needs to be understood that the distortions, deceptions and gross misinformation have not done in the past and will not do today or indeed forever. This is what I said;
‘Sen. Clinton, even today, believes that she is the one who could be the stronger candidate against Sen. John McCain but Sen. Obama outscored her in terms of votes and delegate count. That is why she is conceding the nomination to him tomorrow, not the other way round.’
Obama and Clinton both signed off to those rules and therefore have to live up to the rules. Now the question is why did UDP signed off to the rules of NADD (MOU) and backed down when it was convenient? This is what is call political opportunism. Clinton tried it but it did not work because mature political minds distinguish between playing by the rules and playing the rules as they favor you.- Dbaldeh
UDP did not play the rules as it favored them. They quit the game all together [without regret] when it became clear that their adversaries were doing everything they can [the Kitchen and Shink strategy] to circumvent the rules in the middle of the game to achieve their desired goal as enshrined in their ABD Conspiracy project. This makes the rules of NADD no longer applicable to them since they are no longer members and/participants in the NADD game. You don’t expect the rules of football to be applicable to a former footballer who then went on to become a Rugby player, do you? Well, if you do it means you are silly in every respect of human imagination. The MOU is after all not a contract of sale. It was only applicable to UDP during their membership of NADD, not thereafter. This is no rocket science. I wonder why this guy can't get it. Is he thick?
What we are talking about here is the possibility of bringing two different political entities of equal legal standing and with their own separate internal rules [for NADD, it is the MOU and for the UDP, it is their party constitution] together in the form of an alliance/coalition. My argument is and has always been that if a fair, just and equitable remedy is to be realized, we got to allow the wider rules of conventional politics, not individual party rules, to take its cause and for all to accept whatever the outcome; whether desirable to one or not. This is what commonsense dictates. The notion that we can lay in motion a process that would be governed by the internal rules of a particular party, in this case NADD, and then somehow expect other parties to give-up their own internal rules in favor of the latter is a grave naivety that would never be allowed to fly across the face of commonsense. That is why it is imperative that we recognize and accept wholeheartedly, the reality that other parties will only be willing to give-up their internal rules if they are substituted by a universal set of rules or standards. This is why I keep emphasising the need to adopt the rules of conventional politics since they are universal standards cherished by all and observed in every democracy on planet Earth. This is what is equitable and it is what commonsense commands us to do. As far as I know, the NADD concept is an obsolete one and needs to be treated as such.
Contrary to what the author implied in his comments, Mrs. Clinton never tried to circumvent the rules of conventional politics. All that she tried to do and which she did not succeed in doing was to abrogate the Democratic Party’s penal rules as they applied to the Florida and Michigan votes. Notwithstanding this, she also recognized that in politics coalitions are always built around a person/party with the most votes. That is why she conceded the nomination to Sen. Obama yesterday. Everybody knows this is not something she was happy doing [her words were ‘I am suspending my campaign’, not 'I am ending my campaign'] but it was something she had to do because that is what the rules of conventional politics commands her to do.
On a final note, would you tell us how a UDP lead coalition will work and what opportunities would it accord the rest of the smaller parties? In the interest of national unity and a better and stronger government, how would a UDP lead coalition treat members of NADD and their political supporters? Ain't you advocating for UDP lead coalition without conditions validating our points that it is all about help me to get there and then we will see. This is a naive and immature political position.-Dbaldeh
Well, I am not a UDP official and have never hold out myself to be one. In that respect, this is not a matter for me but one thing I know, if NADD’s Ayatollah declares his willingness to join a UDP-led alliance in principle [ I repeat; in principle], the able and coherent leadership of the United Democratic Party would extend an olive branch to him and meaningful discussions would follow. Remember, they have done this before but were shunned by the arrogant, antagonistic and condescending Ayatollah Sallah. UDP leadership will never entertain any such behaviors from him as he is not considered a political opponent of any sort. He can only be a partner if he chooses to be so. Otherwise, he will always be left in his world of fanaticism and fairytale.
I am personally in favor of an all inclusive post APRC government and I have no reason to believe that the UDP leadership would have problem accommodating this idea. In fact they have embraced this before. In 2001, there was every indication that OJ was going to be the vice president if UDP had won that election. Having said this, the priority should not be about a cake that is not yet baked. It should be about programmes that would have a meaningful and positive effect on the lives of ordinary Gambians. This includes the need to revamp the consitution and the public sector institutions like the judiciary, the civil service and the national and homeland security insitutions.
There is every indication that this author is just looking for the last branch to save him from drawning hence, the hopeless and poorly executed fishing expedition as manisfested in his recent posting. He needs to be told that I have a Cruise Liner right beside him with too many towels and dry cloths to dry him up and keep him warm should he choose to come on board. I think it is better that he is advised to recognize that his arguments have now run out of every substance and that it is time for him to succumb to the argue of commonsense.
Thanks
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 08 Jun 2008 21:39:23 |
|
|
|
Moe
USA
2326 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2008 : 04:17:16
|
| Nyari, you really need to watch your mouth, you are begining to sound too convincing . I might become a UDP supporter if you continue like this bro.......................................Peace |
I am Jebel Musa better yet rock of Gibraltar,either or,still a stronghold and a Pillar commanding direction
The GPU wants Me Hunted Down for what I don't know ..... |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2008 : 09:18:37
|
Nyari, you are just an empty barrel that makes the most noise. You act as if NADD was in existence before all the opposition parties came together. Who constituted NADD? Was it not UDP, NRP, PDOIS, NDAM, and PPP that together constituted NADD? When was the MOU written? Was it not written and signed by representatives of all these parties and signed off by Darboe himself?
You keep separating UDP from being part of NADD when throughout the almost 16 months campaign UDP was part and parcel of NADD and they fully stood behind the principles of NADD. Didn't UDP only abandoned the NADD idea because they did not GET THE LEADERSHIP?
I think you have said it all when you said you have no say on what UDP decides. You are just making irresponsible comments in the name of UDP when you don't see eye to eye with their party militants.
I tell you what, I will not join a party without principles. I will not join a party that sees only one person as its possible leader with or without success. I will not join a party which does not speak with one voice. I will always call on weak leaders on their weaknesses regardless of what their entitles are.
So if you fantasize that I or anyone who believes in the NADD principles of equality and change will unconditionally rally behind a party whose leaders say is our way or the high way, you are dreaming. You are entitle to dream your dreams.
|
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
SOH
Gambia
46 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2008 : 11:45:13
|
The Gambian Opposition will always remain inherently weak because of some major factors.
First, several of its members do not adhere to the wisdom of shared roles thus responsibilities, everyone wants to be the boss, thus the saying, too many chiefs, no Indians.
Two, the disease of buying is all too common a factor in the opposition, combine that with weak bones, little desire to resist and money becomes worth selling one's dignity, so why not cross the carpet and jump on the bandwagon of easy life.
Third, the country is riddled with spies working for H.E, who knows, maybe your very own sibling is spying on you and on every member of your household, reporting your every move, or vice versa could be the truth.
As long as we remain in such a fixture, there will be no hope for change. No wonder now the country is being sold at an alarming rate to non-Gambians who are as dubious as the very system we have in place. No I am not against foreigners sharing in the national good, but I am against our security falling into the wrong hands.
Peace. |
|
|
|
Aku_pickin
Christmas Island
162 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2008 : 07:37:20
|
Point taken. However you must have hope that there are individuals out there who are capable and have morals and dignity to lead our great nation in the proper direction.
Don't be frustrated. With that attitude you are showing defeatism. Remember, God will never put you through something he did not feel you can't handle. There is always light at the end of the tunnel. We have some good members in our opposition. However they have to be willing to make some sacrifices for change. |
Justice must be served as impunity brings more repression and corruption! |
Edited by - Aku_pickin on 13 Jun 2008 07:41:57 |
|
|
|
SOH
Gambia
46 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2008 : 00:16:52
|
Greetings Aku Pickin,
And thank you fr the advice, but you see, I am no defeatist, I am just lethargic now having to see so many walls of morality crumble right under our eyes.
What about all those brave citizens who listened to leaders such as Juwara and therefore took real risks in their life to oppose oppression? Weren't they made to pay a high price for believing in resistance? Now what when the top sells off its very soul?
Yes, I agree with you, I firmly believe in that light at the end of the tunnel, and it will come, either by default or by hook or by crook, but it will come. My major concern however remains that when this light comes, that we Gambians will have enough light in our hearts and minds not to repeat the acts of the oppressor himself. Peace.
The Son of Haileh.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
