Being the perfect gentlemen/women that's expected of matured leaders
and adults, NADD's response to Jammeh's BULL CRAP, portrays the 7 Habits
of Highly Effective leadership [Steven Corvey] and none of the Paradigm
Shift Jammeh tries to hoodwink gullible Gambians with. Truly as it was
stated by Wollof Njie/Samba Laubeh: "Makk [Nyu Juup] baah Na Chi Dekah
- Hai Jaama -Teyh."
The gull that this despotic-desperado chap had, on such solemn and holy
day of forgiveness and repentance, to face multitudes of
Religious/Opportunistic/$$$ seeking elders/leaders, to become a Pat Robinson [YAHYA
KNOWS BEST] of Gambia, is mind buggling.
Dantes: The hottest place in hell are reserved for those who in times
of moral crisis, try to act or remain neutral [selfishness, job, fear,
Teranga, hypocrit, born-again muslim/christian/animist]?What?
Equally, NADD supporters and Jammeh bashers couldn't fathom why it took
NADD such a long time, to respond and why not forcefully? Respectfully
and rightfully, i will agree with Yahya Jammeh, this time only, when he
refered to the President Abdou Diouf of Senegal: "BU LAH MBAAM WEHHE,
NGA WEHHAKOH,YEN NYEP MBAAM NGEN" [when an ox/mule kicks you and you
respond by kicking the s... out of the beast, then both man and beast are
of the same burden].
To NADD, the days of ALTRUISMS are over and done with! No More Nice
Guys!  The game plan is for NADD to keep the momentum on track, as Yahya
Jammeh the individual, Security forces a confused/celebrated/feared lot
and A[F}PRC the collective, are self-destructing each other. Again,
NADD's planis to focus on molding/changing the minds of the Youths, Women
and foremost, The wise and disenchanted Security forces personell.The
later, being Yahya Jammeh's Last Card and ultimate destruction.
Out of a force of less than 2000, [+ -] the The Newly Imported
Republican Guards [Mercenaraies], NADD supporters and neighbors, landlords,
friends, families of these coniving/destructive Jammeh-minorities should
make it a patriotic duty at enlightening, striaghtening out, shaping up,
shipping out and warning these renegage/opportunistic few, especially
the NIA, that we as the restless many,  will hunt you down and prosecute
you, even if Jammeh dispatches you to the shores of Washington, DC, New
York, Taipei, or Paris,as Military/NIA Clown.Period!
AGITATE, EDUCATE AND ORGANIZE! FOR THE SAKE OFYOUR CHILDREN AND THOSE
UNBORN, SUPPORT NADD, JOIN A GROUP/MOVEMENT, OR START YOUR OWN SUPPORT
NETWORK.



Joe Sambou <[log in to unmask]> wrote:>From: "Amie Sillah"
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Foroyaa Burning Issue
>Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:13:54 +0000
>
>
>
>FOROYAA NEWSPAPER BURNING ISSUE
>Issue No. 86/2005, 10-13 November,2005
>
>Editorial
>
>JAMMEH'S SPEECH AND THE OBSERVER EDITORIAL
>"The Need For An Independent And Impartial Daily Paper"
>The journalistic fraternity and sorority need to meet and discuss the need
>for an independent and impartial daily paper. It is a shame on any country
>in the world to lack an independent and impartial daily paper. Of course
>papers can be found in every country which may favour one side of the
>political spectrum. However, there must also be those papers which are
>committed to the dissemination of information in good faith in the public
>interest.
>Even papers which favour certain political interest do so not by being
>spokes person of the interest but by giving interviews and other columns
>for the free expression of view. However, in the main they disseminate the
>truth in good faith in the public interest.
>In short, if one reads the observer
>editorial of Tuesday, November 8th, 2005, one must stop to wonder whether
>the observer editors are truly honest and sincere to their profession. In
>short, president Jammeh accused the opposition of treachery by claiming
>that they are supporting war between Senegal and the Gambia. The opposition
>have given a fitting response accusing him of fabrication and threatening
>to call for his resignation or impeachment if he fails to apologise.
>Instead of publishing facts to confirm the president's allegations, the
>observer editors have jumped into conclusions that the president is right.
>This is outright betrayal of ethical standards of journalism.
>We hope our colleagues in the observer will revise their position and
>publish the letter of the opposition in full to compensate them for their
>misinformation.
>
>NADD RESPONDS TO JAMMEH
>Below is a copy of NADD's response to President Jammeh's remarks on Koriteh
>day while he was receiving Muslim religious leaders. In their response
>which was in the form of a letter, the NADD leaders gave President Jammeh
>an ultimatum- to either provide evidence to substantiate his claims or
>apologize.
>Mr. President, four characteristics are indispensable if a person is to
>qualify to be classified among a world leadership that is fit to govern a
>Nation in the 21st century, that is, clarity, honesty, magnanimity and
>humility.
>Mr. President, when the mind is barren of knowledge, the heart devoid of
>mercy, the personality starved of humility and the attitude stripped of
>honesty, a person in position of public trust must become arrogant, greedy,
>power hungry, pompous and revengeful. Such a person will not hesitate to
>kill for
>power and die for power. Under such a leadership, might must become right,
>the rule of law must become subservient to the rule of might and a culture
>of impunity must reign supreme over the culture of rights and justice.
>
>This is why the wisdom of the ages deems it incontrovertible that hunger
>for power corrupts and obsession with power corrupts absolutely.
>The objective of addressing this letter to you is simple. The Members of
>the Executive Committee of NADD held an emergency meeting to discuss the
>content of the speech you delivered in your meeting with the Muslim Elders
>on 3rd November 2005 after the Eid prayers, commemorating the end of the
>month of Ramadan.
>
>At the opening of the meeting the Chairperson of the occasion conveyed that
>their visit was customary and symbolic; That such visits to leaders at the
>helm of state affairs started 95 years ago. In short, it provides an
>opportune moment for elders to state their concerns regarding the relation
>between Government and the Governed and further accords them the
>opportunity to offer words of advice to promote sensitivity and
>responsiveness to the vital concerns of the people.
>
>It is amazing to the NADD Leadership, as it must be to every decent human
>being in The Gambia who heard your message, that you would transform such a
>solemn occasion into a platform to try to threaten, denigrate, castigate
>and ridicule the Opposition despite the religious leaders' passionate
>appeal for sincere efforts by ruling party and opposition to deal with any
>matter of immense National concern in a concerted manner.
>Your disrespectful and revengeful posture constitutes a betrayal of the
>expectations of your peace loving visitors, a violation of your oath of
>office not to act with "ill-will" and an affront to any sense of political
>decency your comments had infact outraged all Gambians and non Gambians
>alike who expect a higher standard of practice in governance from a person
>occupying the highest office in the land.
>
>Mr. President, I am requested by the NADD Executive Committee to catalogue
>the relevant portions of your speech which are fallacious in content and
>further signify a total disregard for the letter and spirit of the
>Memorandum of Understanding prepared under the auspices of the
>Commonwealth, represented by General Abdousalam Abubakar, which the
>representatives of all parties including your ruling party, helped to draft
>but which your National Executive Committee have so far failed to sign.
>This is what is delaying its coming into effect.
>
>
>First and foremost you claimed that the Opposition met in New York and drew
>the conclusion that they can neither win an election in The Gambia or
>orchestrate a coup d'etat; That they resolved that the only way to depose
>you is to provoke a war situation between Gambia and Senegal in order to
>destabilize and uproot your government.
>
>
>You alleged that the Opposition sent E-mails, faxes, reports and copies of
>government documents to the Senegalese authorities in order to generate and
>fan hostility between the Senegalese government and your regime.
>That the Opposition fabricated stories that most of the forces sent by
>Gambia to Sudan are from the MFDC rebels; that such rebels serve as State
>Guards; that they even stated that Salif Sarjo, a leader of MFDC was
>poisoned by you and taken to a doctor to be killed in 2003; that their lies
>became evident when Salif Sarjo spoke on radio in 2005. You added that the
>Senegalese forces were deployed at Selety near the border with Gambia while
>Gambian soldiers were busy playing football; that the alleged lies of the
>opposition almost brought about a war which you averted only because you
>exercised restraint. You claimed that even after making peace recently the
>opposition
>met to conoclude that it will not last. All these statements were designed
>to give the impression that the Opposition harboured bad faith.
>
>
>You made it categorically clear that such Opposition members and their
>collaborators do not deserve to witness the 2006 elections. You threatened
>a reign of terror on the opposition and their alleged collaborators in
>government after the Ramadan.
>
>
>You also strayed into the differences between Muslim's regarding the date
>for holding Eid prayers. You stated categorically that those who hold their
>prayers after the date approved by the Supreme Islamic Council will not see
>the light of the day.
>
>
>Many threats, including death threats were issued during your speech that
>could give you the image of a brutal dictator who is ready to arrest,
>detain, maim and kill those who disagree with him.
>
>
>Mr. President, during this era of democratization in our subregion many
>would have thought that you will honour the goodwill mission of the
>Commonwealth and concentrate on making peace with the Opposition by signing
>the Memorandum of Understanding and thus prepare the ground for a peaceful,
>free and fair presidential election in 2006.
>
>
>It is hard for the Executive Committee of NADD to believe that after
>displaying maximum political decency during the by elections of 29th
>September 2005from which we emerged victorious you could state without any
>semblance of guilt or equivocation that the Opposition is promoting war
>between Senegal and Gambia because of its fear that it cannot win a free
>and fair presidential election in 2006.
>
>
>We wish to assert with all the emphasis we can muster that your allegation
>against the Opposition are fabrications. They are based on fiction and not
>facts. Consequently, they cannot stand the test of truth and commonsense.
>Mr. President, the commitment of the Opposition to free and fair election
>is corroborated by the following indisputable facts.
>
>
>First and foremost, we in the Opposition have agreed to sign the Memorandum
>of Understanding binding political parties in The Gambia to International
>Standards of best practice in democratic political conduct in a multiparty
>system which is characterized by adherence to truth, fair play, tolerance
>and submission to the popular will when expressed by the ballot.
>It is in fact your party which has shown little commitment to such
>practices by procrastinating or delaying its signing of the Memorandum of
>Understanding.
>
>
>In the same vein, just before the recent by elections, the Opposition
>parties went to court to ensure that there is strict adherence to the
>electoral laws so that only people whose names appear on the registers of
>voters would be allowed to vote. Your party advocated for those whose names
>are not found in the register of voters to be allowed to vote. Who then is
>actually afraid of free and fair elections, the Opposition or your?
>
>
>Furthermore, since the Opposition Alliance emerged we have participated in
>10 by elections. The facts reveal that we are also leading in popular
>votes.
>In the light of such development, which person with commonsense could be
>made to believe that the Opposition parties met in New York to draw the
>conclusion that we cannot win an election and that we can only take over
>the helm of state by promoting war between Gambia and Senegal. This is
>utter fabrication. No such meeting took place anywhere on the face of the
>globe.
>
>
>Mr. President, we must therefore state in no uncertain terms that in making
>such a statement you are putting the office of president in disrepute, thus
>justifying the grounds for impeachment, as is the norm in any civilized
>democratic state.
>
>
>In our view, the office of the president is too high to be a source of
>unintelligent fabrications.
>
>
>In this respect you owe the Gambian people concrete evidence to back your
>assertions or extend your apology to the NADD Executive.
>We give you five working days to provide the evidence regarding the alleged
>meeting or apologize, failing which we have no option but to hold a press
>conference to denounce you and call for your resignation or impeachment.
>Bear with us as we move to the second point.
>
>
>Mr. President, you also claim that the Opposition met recently to declare
>that your recent agreement with Senegal will not last. This is utter
>fabrication. In fact, every careful analyst will not fail to observe that
>no member of the NADD Executive has issued any comment on the issue in the
>press. This is due to an executive decision to promote alternative policies
>as befits an alternative government and not simply comment on your
>initiative.
>
>
>Hence, instead of being prophets of doom who spend our energies to denounce
>you for wasting the precious resources and time of the Gambian people and
>create immense hardship by being adamant in maintaining the increase in
>ferry tariffs in the name of defending National Sovereignty and territorial
>integrity only to acknowledge later that you have erred by violating
>Article 6 of the Agreement on Road Transport of October 2004, between
>Gambia and Senegal.
>
>
>However, instead of castigating you for your display of mediocrity and
>incompetence in matters of foreign policy we did a detailed analysis to
>find out the source of your shortcomings, with the view to find a way
>forward in promoting a privileged relation between Gambia and Senegal that
>would be informed by the doctrine of two states one people.
>
>
>In our discussion on the border issue the NADD executive recalled the words
>of your then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Musa Bala Gaye, in
>response to a question raised at the National Assembly on 5th October 2005
>and compared it with extracts from the Communiqué issued on 21st October
>2005, during your visit to Senegal.
>His very words read:
>
>
>"Mr. Speaker sir, as the Honourable member may know, the border was closed
>by the Senegalese authorities in protest to the increase in the ferry
>tariff at the Barra/Banjul and Bambatenda/Yellitenda crossings. The Gambia
>has not at anytime closed its side of the border and has not prevented
>vehicles, whatever the type, to enter or leave Gambian territory.
>Consultations have been going on since the beginning of the problem with
>the Department of State for Foreign Affairs playing a lead role. This
>process is on going with the hope that Senegal would reopen its borders and
>all related problems resolved."
>
>
>Here your Secretary of State is attributing the border closure to the rise
>in ferry tariffs. Your government officials have vehemently maintained that
>the rise in ferry tariffs was irreversible because it was an act of
>national sovereignty.
>However, in the Communiqué of 21st October, 2005 it is categorically stated
>that
>"The President of The Republic of The Gambia has decided to suspend
>immediately the new ferry tariffs and to revert to the tariffs effective
>before 15th August 2005. The Gambia government will notify the government
>of Senegal of its intention to increase the ferry tariffs in conformity
>with the provisions of the agreement on road transport of 5th October 2004
>between The Gambia and Senegal."
>
>
>Mr. President, the text of the Communiqué confirms that you have accepted
>that you violated the agreement on road transport of 5th October 2004. In
>your interview on the visit you also stated categorically that your
>government violated Article 6 of the agreement on road transport.
>The Executive Committee of NADD therefore concluded that the foreign policy
>failure of your government arises from naked incompetence or lack of a
>comprehensive foreign policy blue print to guide your relation with Senegal
>in particular and other states in the subregion like Guinea Bissau. This is
>what is responsible for your 180 degrees twist in foreign policy between
>5th October 2005 when the secretary of state answered the question at the
>National Assembly and 21st October 2005 when you visited Senegal.
>
>
>It goes without saying that the Executive Committee of NADD did not stop at
>identifying the shortcomings of your government we proceeded to examine the
>ingredients required to develop foreign policy options for a country.
>
>In our view, it is important to take note of the idiosyncrasies of the
>leadership in each country in our subregion to determine whether they are
>prone to domination or cooperation.
>
>
>Secondly, it is necessary to look at the interest of each country in our
>sub-region as regards The Gambia, to determine whether such interests are
>based on the collective interest of the two peoples or the interest of few
>groups in any given country.
>Thirdly, it is necessary to determine the principles of the ruling parties
>in each country to determine whether a given party is committed to the
>principles of the African Union in general and democratic principles at
>home. Such analysis would have enabled a genuinely democratic government in
>The Gambia to determine the foreign policy options of your government
>towards Senegal in particular and other countries in our sub-region in
>general.
>
>
>The lack of coherence in your foreign policy with Senegal is attributable
>mainly to your claim that you have no advisers. This claim implies that you
>have no policy think tank. Hence your officials are likely to recommend
>what pleases you. Hence instead of controlling circumstances you are
>controlled by them. This is the dilemma of your government.
>Mr. President, compared to the myopic attitude you attribute to the
>Opposition as being mere prophets of doom, the NADD leadership had gone as
>far as to assert that in our relation with Senegal we must be guided by the
>principles of African Unity and the goals and Programmes of African
>Integration. This vision goes beyond the concept of relying on sovereign
>national interest as the determinant of external relation to advocate for
>the principle of collective sovereignty.
>
>
>This vision will help us to map out all the sovereign interest of the two
>countries and then determined how they could be assimilated into the
>collective interests of the two peoples. This is the way to make the
>doctrine of two states one people a reality. In order to forge ahead the
>NADD Executive sees the need to build the people to people ties of the two
>countries. This envisages the establishment of relation between the
>National Assembles, media, trade unions, women federations, youth
>federations, farmers\ groups, professional associations, sport federations,
>chambers of commerce, and the intellectual community. It does call for the
>negation of policies like aliean identity cards for the Senegalese. It is
>therefore abundantly clear that you have no evidence to prove that we met
>just to express our hope for renewed conflict between the two countries. We
>therefore demand for
>evidence to refute our assertion or an expression of apology for misleading
>the nation. Let us now move to the third point.
>Mr. President, the most outrageous allegation you made against the
>Opposition is your claim that it is an informer of the government of
>Senegal. No single letter, e-mail or fax had ever been issued by any
>Executive Member of NADD to promote hostility between the two governments
>as alleged.
>
>In fact, if you give a second thought to your allegation, you will deduce
>that it tantamount to an assassination of the integrity of the Gambian
>Nation. Just imagine the scenario Mr. President. The Opposition's striving
>to be an alternative government is reduced to an informer, the government
>is transformed into an accused person while a foreign power serves as a law
>enforcer who subjects Opposition and government to interrogation and
>confrontation to know who is right or wrong. How can such a scene promote
>National self respect?
>
>Mr. President, there is no iota of truth in your allegation that the
>Opposition is an informer of the Senegalese government. You can provide no
>e-mail, fax, report or vconfidential document made by any member of the
>NADD executive to Senegal. We therefore demand evidence to refute our
>claims or an apology for misleading the nation.
>
>Furthermore, you accused the Opposition of trying to come to power by any
>means and having the intention to stay in power by all means. In this
>regard, you claim that they do not deserve to witness the 2006 elections.
>
>Mr. President, you are the one who came to power by any means and you are
>the one trying to retain power by all means. This is why you have been
>amending the constitution to perpetuate yourself in office. You have
>accepted no term limit to your presidency and you have negated the second
>round of voting.
>
>Apart from these points let us state in no uncertain terms that contrary to
>your assertion that the Opposition is out to get power by any means, there
>is abundant evidence to show that NADD as an Opposition Alliance is more
>committed to democratic principles.
>
>
>In fact Article 9 of the Memorandum of Understanding limits the term of the
>First President under a NADD ticket to a one five year term. The person
>will not seek a second term or support any candidate in the next following
>election to create a level field for political contest.
>
>Subsequently, a term limit of two five year terms shall be inserted in the
>constitution. This confirms that there is no iota of truth to your
>allegations. We therefore demand evidence within five working days or an
>apology for misleading the nation.

=== message truncated ===


---------------------------------
 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤