Modou Nyang, you stated;* *

* *

*‘‘Halifa made it clear in his Agenda 2011 that UDP had 149448 votes in 2001
while NRP had 35,671 votes. Please read the Agenda again. You will get the
real figures rather than approximations. If you want a copy of the Agenda i
will mail it to you electronically.’’ *

* *

I don’t think you have read Halifa’s Agenda 2011 carefully or you must be
playing the sycophancy card once again. Halifa did not state any of the
figures you mentioned above. This is what Halifa have stated;



*The split confirmed that a party led alliance or a divided alliance is not
the way to bring about change in the Gambia.  A divided NADD became
extremely weak. The UDP party led alliance also showed its weakness. Instead
of adding votes from the NRP and GDP, the UDP led alliance lost
approximately 80,000 votes. In short, while UDP had approximately 145,000
votes in 2001presidential elections, in 2006 it ended up with approximately
104,000 votes. NRP had approximately 35, 000 votes in 2001. This did not
feature in the votes of the UDP led alliance in 2006. Hence putting the
three parties together did not lead to more votes; on the contrary it led to
a lower number of votes. There is no empirical evidence to indicate that the
same tactic will yield a different outcome.’- *Foroyaa newspaper,
25thSeptember 2009 edition.
**

* *

Going by the above, it appears that you don’t know what you are talking
about as your figures did not even matched with Halifa’s. Halifa’s figures
too did not match with both the official figures which are now published in
IEC’s official website, and UDP’s own kept records. In either way, there is
no doubt that Halifa have exaggerated his figures. If we go by the official
figures, which does not represent your figures above, and Halifa’s logic as
entailed in agenda 2011, UDP/NRP’s lost would account for 60,980 votes, not
80,000 as claimed by Halifa. If we go by Halifa’s own figures the lost would
amount to 76,000 votes. Again, this is less than his approximately [his own
words] 80,000 claim. An approximately 80,000 figure should be something more
than 79,000 but less than 80,000. Neither of the above figures represents
this qualification. It is therefore fair and perfectly legitimate to say
that Halifa have embellished his figures.



The issue is in fact not so much about the figures but the ludicrous claim
that they somehow indicates a manifestation of electoral shun on the nature
of alliances adopted by both NADD and UDP led alliance prior to the 2006
presidential election i.e. party led alliance and the so-called umbrella
party. That is absolute nonsense. Although there may have been a degree of
voter discontent over opposition disunity or the incumbent’s employed
harassment and intimidation tactics,-depending on which side of the story
you want to believe- there is absolutely no evidence that the low
voter-turnout seen in 2006 was as a result of the types of alliance adopted
by either NADD or the UDP. This defeats the whole essence of Halifa’s agenda
2011 and that is exactly what UDP-UK rejoinder was all about. There is no
denial about UDP’s drop in votes but this was due to some other factors
namely; the voter turn-out which has dropped by 31.1% from 2001 despite a
219,630 increase in the electoral population, and also the lack of
preparation on the part of both UDP and the NRP thanks to their prior
membership of NADD.



I know you would like to connect me to the UDP-UK rejoinder but I can assure
you that I was not involved in this - not the planning or indeed the
drafting as I was tied up at work. My only connection here therefore, is
being an interim co-ordinator of the group. I only got to read the final
draft as everyone else.



Thanks



Suntou

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

>   Suntu,
>
>  How Many times am I to prove that you do not do your homework well? I can
> see that you are trying to get allies from all those People with hate
> messages. This is weakening your course. Such hate messages cannot isolate
> any one.. We have seen those types of people here in the US during Obama’s
> campaign. They cannot explain why they hate him.
>
> Consequently their hate messages worked out very well for Obama. Here too
> you are giving Halifa more publicity than he has asked for. The worse thing
> that you did to your self is to raise issues which led to the challenge for
> Halifa to explain the role he played in NADD. I am still waiting to read
> part 3 so that things will be clearer since your camp is still trying to
> distort the truth even though no NADD leader had come out in public to do
> so.
>
> Your last hope to discredit Halifa is your claim that he distorted the
> result of the 2001 Presidential elections just to prove that the UDP lost
> more votes than it really did, when compared to 2006 so that its leadership
> would be discredited. In my reaction to your rejoinder I decided to skip the
> issue of the exact number of votes your party the UDP had in the 2001
> election in order to do a proper research on it. I have now scanned the
> results of the 2001 Presidential elections with the signature of the then
> Chairman of the Independent Electoral Commission Gabriel Roberts.
>
> However, before going into your distortion of the results I would want to
> help one of your friends to understand what I meant when I said Darboe was
> not brave enough to tell his colleagues what he wanted and stuck by it
> before they ventured to form NADD. He misunderstood me completely and
> strayed into accusing Halifa of promoting that a brave person should be
> selected to lead an opposition alliance. My position is that if Darboe is
> strongly convinced that he should lead and others should follow. He should
> simply declare that for all to understand and then proceed to sell his
> agenda to the people. Whoever wants to join him would do so and those who
> would not want to join him would go on with their own programmes. Since UDP
> is not ready to compromise on leadership it should make that clear and stand
> by that decision and should not join any arrangement where leadership would
> have to be negotiated with other stakeholders.
>
> let me now deal with the results of the 2001 Presidential elections. Halifa
> made it clear in his Agenda 2011 that UDP had 149448 votes in 2001 while NRP
> had 35,671 votes. Please read the Agenda again. You will get the real
> figures rather than approximations. If you want a copy of the Agenda i will
> mail it to you electronically.
>
> Halifa indicated that the two parties formed an alliance in 2006 along with
> GPDP and had votes numbering 104,808 votes..Halifa concluded that compared
> to the 2001 figures the two parties lost 80,301 votes. Where then has Halifa
> gone wrong?
>
> Could you not do simple addition and subtraction? Add 149,448 votes to
> 35,67. You should get 185,119 votes. Subtract 104,808 from 185,119. What is
> your answer? Is it not 80,301 votes. Halifa is dead correct and you the
> members of the UDP camp in the UK are dead wrong.
>
> I have investigated and got the results a long time ago. I wanted to check
> whether you have leaders who would guide you to know the truth. The fact
> that you are still persisting in claiming that Halifa’s figures are wrong
> has forced me to request for a scanned declaration of results signed by The
> Chairman of the IEC and I hope you will now apologise to Halifa for your
> misleading statements. I am surprised by the fact that you are still
> clinging to the view that Halifa quoted wrong figures even though your
> leaders in Banjul should be able to tell you the truth instead of leaving
> you to humiliate yourselves before world public opinion. I have decided to
> share the copy of the declarations of the 2001 election results with the
> online media for all to see for them selves since I cannot directly place it
> here unless as an attachment.
>
> Furthermore Suntou, you claim that it is the UDP who enabled Halifa to win
> his Serrekunda Central Seat. Let us look at the results of the elections in
> Serrekunda since the UDP was put up by the three major parties of the first
> Republic, that is, the PPP, the NCP and the GPP.
>
> In 1997, the UDP campaigned against Halifa Sallah in Serrekunda East and
> put up a major PPP supporter, Bakary Manneh, as their candidate in order to
> exploit OJ’s popularity as the MP at the time of the coup. The results were
> as follows Halifa had 8, 529 votes, The UDP had 8, 067votes and the APRC had
> 9, 575votes. Contrary to your position that the UDP put up a candidate
> against Halifa in the 2007 National Assembly elections to humble him while
> it left Sidia Jatta’s seat uncontested since he was a humble PDOIS leader,
> Halifa did not stand as a Presidential Candidate in 1996. It is Sidia Jatta
> who stood as a candidate against the UDP. And in the 1997 National Assembly
> elections, the UDP also put up a prominent NCP supporter in Wuli against
> Sidia Jatta. Alhamdu Conteh who stood as The UDP candidate had 1,098, Mamadi
> Karlo Jabai of the APRC had 4, 641 and Sidia Jatta of PDOIS had 5, 499.
> Sidia won despite UDP"s attempt to contest the seat.
>
> In the 2002 National Assembly elections, the UDP boycotted the elections
> and called on all its members to stay away from the polls. In Serre Kunda
> Central, Halifa had 5, 563 votes as a PDOIS Candidate while the APRC
> candidate had 5, 143 votes. Halifa won.
>
> In the 2005 by election in Serre Kunda Central, Halifa had 5, 911 votes as
> a candidate of the alliance while the APRC had 3, 984 votes. Ther alliance
> added only 348 votes to the 2002 votes Halifa had as a PDOIS candidate. As a
> NADD candidate Halifa had 4, 302 in the 2007 National Assembly elections,
> UDP had 1, 548. and the APRC had 6, 386.
>
> It should be clear that Sidia and Halifa both won their seats as PDOIS
> candidates irrespective of the UDP. UDP made a big mistake in contesting the
> Serrekunda central seat. It did not spoil anything for Halifa. It spoilt its
> own name. Many young people started to describe it as a party that pours the
> sand in the porridge if it is not invited to share in the eating. UDP UK is
> also doing more harm to the UDP. I will take up this issue later.
>
> Suntu you concluded that: "The UDP U.K knows very well, Halifa's students
> will come trying to defend the indefensible. They will again continue to
> twist the facts and try to blame others for Halifa's inability to convince
> Gambian voters. What the UDP propose which is respectfully talked by sincere
> Gambians, Halifa don't want to pay attention to that. What he want is to
> talk directly to Gambians, the civil society, the NGO's etc and then create
> a cadre of people who will later chose him as their saviour."
>
> This is your allegation. This is your fear. You do fear that Halifa could
> convince the Gambian voters. Your objective therefore is to prevent this
> through premeditated character assassination. You claim that I am trying to
> distort facts. What facts are we trying to distort? If Halifa cannot
> convince the Gambian people then why is he your headache. Halifa is not
> Darboes problem and Darboe is not Halifa’s problem. The problem of the
> Gambian people should be our problem .Allow me to quote what Halifa said
> recently.
>
> "Interestingly enough, in 2001 the APRC candidate had 242, 302 votes when
> it forged no alliance with the NCP. At that time there were 501, 304
> registered voters. Suffice it to say, even though the number of voters
> increased by 169, 032, by 2006 the votes of the APRC could only increase by
> 22,102 votes. The UDP candidate had 149,448 votes in 2001. Even though it
> developed alliance with NRP, which had 35,671 votes in 2001, its votes went
> down 104,808 votes in the 2006 elections, despite the increase in the number
> of registered voters by 169, 032 voters."
>
> "Foroyaa: What is your advise?"
> "It is therefore necessary for political leaders to go back to the drawing
> board and map out a new way forward. How is the opposition to attract the
> 542,055 voters who did not vote for them is the subject at hand. This is
> what Agenda 2011 is all about. Even though I am not excluding acceptance of
> candidature, I have already declared that the best option is to select a
> neutral candidate who will be able to run a non partisan transitional
> cabinet for a period of 2 to 5 years and then step aside after a genuine
> multi party contest. It is left to Gambians to decide whether they have a
> better way forward."
>
> Please ask Darboe to state his proposal for a way forward so that we know
> what the UDP want for the Nation. That is better than endless bickering by
> the spokesperson of the party in the UK .
>
>
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 2/10/10, suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>* wrote:
>
>
> From: suntou touray <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 4:12 PM
>
>
>  Bailo, good to know your ears are wide open. I thought you understood the
> famous English saying "one man's meat is another man's poison". What you
> believe to be crap from Suntou is a gem to some and vice verse.
> I have always been a fan of politics Bailo, however it doesn't dominate my
> life. I reveal here last year that, i was reading and consulting with some
> Gambian opposition parties. trying to know certain aspects of their politics
> and also to maintain how i can relate to them.
> It was after this period, i decided the best option out there is the United
> Democratic Party. Hence my joining their ranks.
> I appreciate your boldness in stating on several occasion that a party led
> coalition is the solution. Not every PDOIS member wish to accept this fact,
> but in life we have to accept and politely disagree.
> The situation for us all are very similar. Our central concern is to see
> that a government comes to power that will respect the rule of law and
> adheres to good governance. And also a government that will abide by term
> limits and allow for diaspora Gambians to come home anytime and stand for
> election without any restriction like it it is now.
> UDP/NRP all agrees with this principles and also PDOIS. Therefore the
> deliberate error some people are throwing about saying that, Ousainou will
> not abide by term limits is the biggest nonsense.
> Ousainou is selected by the UDP at there annual party congress to lead the
> party, yet Jeggan is complaining that Ousainou didn't hand over to someone.
> Who is the new expert to lecture the UDP on how to select a party leader?
> Let Halifa hand over the leadership of PDOIS to Sam Sarr before he too
> passes the required age. After all, the American system seems to be if you
> cannot get the presidency, you pass it on. Let Sam step up. Jeggan can
> lecture his PDOIS members but not us.
> The annoying thing in all this exchanges is that, those who cry baby when
> we reacted are all in hibernation, this world.
> No wonder truth is relative. Bee kaa foo ila bori leya, tiw tiw ( each
> person shout for your runner). Things are moving, albeit slowly. But
> progress is been made. Ajarama, and Ibalen jam. Ya Allah dandu meen foof
> kata e katato. Ameen.
> Suntou
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:56 PM, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
>
>>   Suntou,
>>
>> I heard you loud and clear. But we gotta move on and not get stuck to the
>> past.
>>
>> As for the NIA, they are everywhere in the Gambia. Recently a young man
>> was pulled out of a public bus at Denton bridge and merciless beaten to a
>> vegetative state by our so-called security forces. His crime? The bus in
>> which he was travelling was like all vehicles on the road at the time
>> ordered off the road because the Presidential motorcade was expected along
>> it. The wait was apparently long and this young man made the mistake of
>> telling someone he was was speaking with on his mobile that they were
>> waiting for the for the convoy of our stupid president to pass. An NIA
>> informant overheard his indiscretion and decided to teach him a lesson. When
>> the bus reached Denton Bridge; the informant ordered the driver of the bus
>> to halt the bus, the young chap was pulled out and his alleged crimereported to the security forces. Their immediate reaction was to beat him to
>> a vegetative state for his indiscretionary words against the President.
>>
>> It is therefore ordinary private citizens who are paying a higher price
>> under the status quo than public personalities like Ousainou, Halifa, OJ,
>> Seedia and the rest, the immense sacrifice of the latter category
>> nothwithstanding.
>>
>> Honestly, I am not a strong moslem as you. Evidence suggests that are not
>> a taleban otherwise the only technology you would approved of is the killing
>> machines. I guess you own a tv and even a computer. As such If you were a
>> taleban, your fellow talebans would have been seeking to publicly flog for
>> your deviation. So you cannot be a taleban! Though I must confess that
>> sometimes I tend to mis-consider you as one very angry ayatollah who
>> considers so-called PDOIS fanatics like myself as supporters of the great
>> Satan. I sincerely hope that is not so. Remember, you cautioned us sometimes
>> ago that politicians are not to be trusted. Your transformation into one
>> within this short space of time is amazing. Who and what is primary
>> motivation? I suppose Halifa is not the one.
>>
>> Anyway, keep up the good work for your party and the Gambia in general and
>> please leave the crap out. I concur that you reserve the right
>> to.........................
>>
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Bailo
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On *Sun, 7/2/10, suntou touray <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>> >* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: suntou touray <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>> >
>> Subject: Re: Let us turn a new page
>>
>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Sunday, 7 February, 2010, 12:10
>>
>>
>>  Bailo, your spin was well intention albeit your inability to accept the
>> facts of your Messiah's calamity. He cannot hide neither run  away from his
>> mistakes. We are all willing to move on and try to talk as brothers. But
>> what we cannot leave alone the continuous blame game Halifa attributed to
>> others leaving his own saintly person out.
>> Politics is not a career for saints Bailo, the sooner Halifa recognises
>> that the better. And the gang mentality his supporters manifest is a turn of
>> for even his supporters, ganging up against those who speak about his
>> politics will only cause Halifa less cloud.
>> I also notice that, some of his guys start calling me Taliban, extremist
>> and what have you. If they are willing to stoop so low in their
>> misunderstanding of politics, my body feel for them.
>> Bailo, you are strong a muslims brother who actively partake in islamic
>> actvist, those that make you a Taliban? I know some of your Islamic
>> commitments, but I also accept that, as Muslims, we should be interested in
>> politics, science, literature, acceptable art, philosophy, just anything we
>> can enhance our minds with.
>> But alas, the gossip that Suntou is intolerant pumped up by the PDOIS boys
>> has reached me a long time. Some of this liers are even in cahoot with the
>> Foroyaa establishment providing them with equipment and the like.
>> My Islam allows me the privilege to be an enterprising citizen wherever I
>> live. I am a Muslim by choice and will practise Islam to the best of my
>> ability and will put across the little I know God-Willing. I respect the
>> laws of the land i reside in. But If my comments on Halifa incense some to
>> the extent that, they are willing to vilify and attribute nonsensical tags
>> to me, then I am vindicated.
>>
>> Let us see how things pan out, we standby our findings and whenever it
>> becomes necessary, we shall respond to all false analogies on UDP. For those
>> who wish to be taken seriously including you Bailo, distant yourself from
>> errors, no matter who commits them, only then people will accept your
>> subsequent cries.
>>  Modou's abysmal response require no countering from us. he place Halifa
>> in even more serious doubts hence putting across Halifa's line. He is the
>> brave soldier and others not. The facts speaks different. Ousainou's office
>> is man regularly by NIA agents, doing all they can to deter him from
>> actively politics. His clients harassed, his associated harassed, yet the
>> foroyaa guys go about their business selling papers and earning yet claiming
>> to be sacrificing more than others. It make me laugh mate.
>> Suntou
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 2:01 PM, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>   Comrade Modou,
>>>
>>> Your clarification efforts are highly appreciated. Let us now move on and
>>> chart a new course towards helping bring about unity within the opposition
>>> movement. In our unity is our strength. However, I strongly believe that the
>>> general opposition movement would again fail to realise our common goal of
>>> achieving a new Gambia for all if we continue to rely on already tried and
>>> tested counterproductive strategies of destructive criticism aimed at
>>> promoting one's candidate while vigorously attempting to tarnish that of
>>> another's. Some may argue that come on, this is merely politics at play. I
>>> personally consider such tactics as a smear campaign. Anyone on the
>>> frontline of our national politics conscientiously opposing the retrogessive
>>> policies and actions of the unjust APRC regime deserve nothing but support
>>> and encouragement from everyone craving and campaigning for positive changes
>>> in the Gambia. Ousainou Darboe, Halifa Sallah, Femi Peters, Seedia Jatta,
>>> Mai Fatty and many others like them therefore only deserve our genuine
>>> respect and good advice. I had concluded long time ago that under the
>>> current poliitcal dispensation in in our beloved country the easiest and
>>> most convenient resort for any person seeking only their own personal
>>> interest would be to join the APRC Party.
>>>
>>> Our primary objective should be towards ensuring that the leaderships of
>>> the UDP-led Alliance and the remnants of NADD coalition would both sooner
>>> rather later pursue a strategy of meaningful co-operation with one another
>>> towards achieving an over-due united front against the incompetent and
>>> callous APRC regime. That way, the doubters would have been confounded and
>>> hope lost by the silent majority of Gambians would be restored.
>>>
>>> Let confidence building measures between all sides of the opposition be
>>> pursued in earnest from now on as time is precious sliding away.
>>>
>>> Please try to help get your dear uncle bailed out after being found
>>> guilty and sentenced yesterday for making a wrongful attribution to our dear
>>> colleague, Halifa. Coincidentally, the amount payable which is any, should
>>> be envoyed to him in jail for the benefit of good Gambian causes he has been
>>> diligently campaigning for.
>>>
>>> Finally I wish to commend organisations such as the STGDP and GDP who
>>> have been focussing on just that. Let us not be daunted nor depair; ultimate
>>> victory is assured for the cause of any struggle for justice, freedom and
>>> respect for human dignity.
>>>
>>> Let us turn a new constructive page. Let all good works go on. Amen!
>>>
>>> Bailo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On *Sat, 6/2/10, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >
>>> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Date: Saturday, 6 February, 2010, 3:50
>>>
>>>    Bailo,
>>>
>>> Uncle Haruna understands Halifa very well. This is why he prefers to rely
>>> on the issue of credibility and not the election statistics which Halifa
>>> relied on to draw his conclusion. My uncle is among those who say that
>>> politics is about numbers. In fact the other camp rely on this so much that
>>> they refer to some parties as fringe parties. They know what Halifa is
>>> talking about but like the proverbial ostrich they prefer to bury their head
>>> in the sand.
>>>
>>> You see, some of these people do not care whether there is change or not.
>>> What they are interested in is the change they want. If they cannot get it
>>> they prefer to join Jammeh. They should not fool the rest of us. Where is
>>> Waa who used to criticize Halifa. He accepted the post of a governor while
>>> Halifa rejected the post of a Minister. This is the difference between him
>>> and his critics. He wants genuine change for the long suffering Gambian
>>> people.
>>>
>>> Halifa has made it quite clear that the lowest common multiple in
>>> politics is numbers and concluded that the numbers which rejected both
>>> opposition and ruling party are so overwhelming that none could be
>>> considered credible if that is the yardstick of measuring credibility. He
>>> therefore concluded that those who want change should go back to the drawing
>>> board. He offered a proposal and called on others with better proposals to
>>> offer their own. Where is the bickering? All honest Gambians have seen the
>>> light and cannot be deceived any more. They know who is power hungry and
>>> those who want to empower the people.
>>>
>>> Nyang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On *Fri, 2/5/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >
>>> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Date: Friday, February 5, 2010, 6:41 AM
>>>
>>>   Please note that perspective does not always represent reality is what
>>> I intended to express in  my previous contribution.
>>>
>>> Bailo
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On *Fri, 5/2/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >
>>> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Date: Friday, 5 February, 2010, 11:22
>>>
>>>   Please note that perspective does not always represent reality is I
>>> intended to express in  my previous contribution.
>>>
>>> Bailo
>>>
>>> --- On *Fri, 5/2/10, bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: bailo jallow <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >
>>> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Date: Friday, 5 February, 2010, 11:12
>>>
>>>    Haruna tendered "So here Evian you will notice that my notes were in
>>> response to your notes and I encourage you to read your notes where you
>>> re-presented what Halifa said."
>>>
>>> This is how I represented Halifa's statement: "You seem to be in denial
>>> but that is sadly the truth. The APRC is far from credible and from the
>>> perspective of the potential electorate, neither exists a more credible
>>> alternative. Otherwise, the opposition would have won last time."
>>>
>>> Please note that perspective does always represent reality.
>>>
>>> The truth isI did not  misrepresent Halifa; you did. Instead of
>>> acknowledging your error, you are trying to shift it elsewhere. That's
>>> absolute dishonesty!
>>>
>>> Bailo
>>>
>>> --- On *Fri, 5/2/10, Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Haruna Darbo <[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> >
>>> Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Date: Friday, 5 February, 2010, 0:55
>>>
>>> What i will do Evian is to leave my comments close to yours and Halifa's
>>> in order that the proximity may yield further comprehension where cacophany
>>> meddles.
>>>
>>> [-----Original Message-----  From: bailo jallow [log in to unmask]
>>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Thu, Feb 4, 2010 12:20 pm Subject: Re: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH
>>> COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>>     Sheikh Haruna, The following is exactly what Comrade Halifa was
>>> reported to have stated (emphasis mine):
>>>
>>> “Some supporters of the APRC said that the opposition parties in the
>>> Gambia are not credible. They should also add that the ruling party is not
>>> credible. Their assessment of Gambian politics as it stands would then be
>>> correct and balanced."
>>>
>>> And this is how you interpreted it:
>>>
>>> *"As to which party official speaks for the other parties, Halifa shared
>>> with us that there is no credible opposition or ruling party. What he should
>>> have said was that his party PDOIS was not credible. Then he would have been
>>> speaking for himself because he is more intimately aware of PDOIS'
>>> credibility. i think he was echoing Waa's assertions that there is no
>>> credible opposition. The problem is instead of focusing on his party's
>>> credibility, he attempted to match Waa's cluelessness. In so doing he
>>> admitted Waa may be right."*
>>> **
>>>
>>> So here Evian you will notice that my notes were in response to your
>>> notes and I encourage you to read your notes where you re-presented what
>>> Halifa said. Then come back here and read the entire quote as it appeared in
>>> the Foroyaa note, undoctored by you. What you will conclude is that even
>>> given your sophomoric representation, my comment (Not interpretation) here
>>> does capture the cluelessness of PDOISards fantastically. You see the APRC
>>> supporters are smart people compared to Halifa. They are not interested in
>>> selling the demerits of the ruling party because that is who they support.
>>> Now Halifa advising them to ALSO say that there is no CREDIBLE RULING PARTY,
>>> in addition to There is no CREDIBLE OPPOSITION PARTY, and that they will
>>> have been both CORRECT and BALANCED is where he put his foot in his mouth.
>>> Implicitly, Halifa agrees with their supposition that there is no CREDIBLE
>>> opposition party as CORRECT. Because there is more than PDOIS in the
>>> opposition parties, Halifa is thereby speaking for other parties. That is
>>> the reason I shared the advice about when in court and accused of theft,
>>> your defense ought not be that not only are you a thief in agreement with
>>> your accuser, your accuser is also a thief. The grander picture Bailo is
>>> when you consider you are an independent voter. And you hear Halifa utter
>>> such. How does it make you feel about him and his incredulous party PDOIS.
>>> Forget NADD at this time for there is really nothing in NADD besides PDOIS.
>>> Please let me know if this is still not clear to you.
>>>
>>> [So now let us focus on separating the chaff from the grain: Halifa
>>> reported that "some supporters of the APRC said that the opposition
>>> parties in the Gambia are not credible." This is factual. It is APRC
>>> supporters like Waa Juwara as you conceded who are claiming the above; it is
>>> not Halifa as you wrongly asserted. Halifa is merely a messenger who
>>> conveyed the message. What Halifa opined in response is "They should
>>> also add that the ruling party is not credible. Their assessment of Gambian
>>> politics as it stands would then be correct and balanced."] Evian.
>>>
>>> Inutile.
>>>
>>> [I hope you would therefore accordingly revise your interpretation of
>>> Halifa's statement to reflect the reality of what he expressed.] Evian.
>>>
>>> I was not interpreting anything. I was translating. And there is no
>>> further revision necessary.
>>>
>>> [You aso wrote:
>>> "I would encourage you to read Halifa's quotation again because I think
>>> you misunderstood it. Not that it makes any significant difference whether
>>> you understood it or not. It just throws your analysis of that part off
>>> quilter a bit. That is the bit about "Not excluding acceptance of
>>> candidature". There Halifa is speaking of himself and not the candidature of
>>> other. Share with us your renewed understanding."] Evian regurgitating what
>>> Haruna shared.
>>>
>>> [As you encouraged, I referred again to the relevant statement of Halifa
>>> as follows (emphasis mine):
>>> "Even though I am not excluding acceptance of candidature, I have
>>> already declared that the best option is to select a neutral candidate who
>>> will be able to run a non partisan transitional cabinet for a period of 2 to
>>> 5 years and then step aside after a genuine multiparty contest. It is left
>>> to Gambians to decide whether they have a better way forward."] Evian
>>> repeating.
>>>
>>> [My understanding of the statement remains the same even though I admit
>>> that Halifa did not qualify whose candidature he meant.] Evian.
>>>
>>> Halifa did not need to qualify whose candidature he spoke of. The English
>>> is sound and very good. If it were you or Mams I would have asked for
>>> further clarification.
>>>
>>> [He did not indicated either "my" or "any" to give us precision of
>>> reference to candidature.] Evian.
>>>
>>> Bailo, the MY is implicit. That happens all the time in conversations in
>>> English. Just for fun, let us replace MY with ANY just before candidature.
>>> That would not have been the best sentence structure but it still tells you
>>> Halifa is speaking of himself. This is because MY is the ownership litmus
>>> but ANY goes to the quality of the candidature and not domain. Hey Allah, I
>>> hope you understand me. So let's extend the semantic game further; Let us
>>> say Halifa meant Ousainou, OJ, Hamat, or Waa's candidature, and insert any
>>> of these names just before candidature. Now you will agree with me that
>>> Halifa does not have the purview of accepting other's candidature. Do you
>>> agree? If you don't just ask yourself where is the authority for Halifa to
>>> ACCEPT a dog-catcher's candidature????? He can ascend to their candidatures
>>> when they accept accept it themselves and the way he does that is by voting
>>> his desire or ascension. These are some of the games Shaky Shaky plays with
>>> English in order to improve himself. Please let me know if you need further
>>> ideas on these and others.
>>>
>>> [In essence, he might have been referring to his own candidature or
>>> someone else's.] Evian.
>>>
>>> Unless he is retarded, he could not have been referring to any other's
>>> candidature.
>>>
>>> [It is for him to help clarify.] Evian.
>>>
>>> I don't need Halifa to clarify and I am certain most of our coleagues
>>> don't need any further clarification of the statement. Let us save Halifa
>>> the mental gymnastics where he could try to manufacture extraneous meaning.
>>> That will be a bigger problem for the man.
>>>
>>> [Whatever he meant, I know that either interpretations are possible.]
>>> Evian.
>>>
>>> You do the tests and convince yourself either way. It is easy. You can do
>>> it Bailo.
>>> [In conclusion, I think you have mistakenly fallen for that proverbial
>>> saying of comparing apples and oranges in the following statement of yours:
>>> "Halifa endorsing Ousainou's candidature will be equal to you or me
>>> endorsing Ousainou's candidature or Halifa's candidature at this point in
>>> time. There is not much basis for that."] Evian repeating what Haruna
>>> shared.
>>>
>>> [In order words, you have over-rated yourself and me at to be at par with
>>> Halifa;] Evian.
>>>
>>> No. I am not at par with Halifa. Just ask him. We are of different mettle
>>> and polarly opposite ambition.
>>>
>>> [the latter is a political known and both you and me are virtual
>>> political unknowns.] Evian.
>>>
>>> Well. Do you want to be a political known Bailo????? I can make your arse
>>> famous in a jiffy. You might not like what you become famous for though.
>>> Political known. I have not heard such cacamayme since Moussa Camara shared
>>> Mbaranbirinbiring with me in 1982 in Kuntaur.
>>>
>>> [Therein lies the difference between us Halifa's endorsement of any
>>> candidature.] Evian.
>>>
>>> I see.
>>>
>>> [Cheers] Evian.
>>>
>>> Cheers to you too. And don't try to be cute with your Grand Pa again. If
>>> you know what is good for you, you'll turn in your PDOIS armband.
>>>
>>> I still love you though.
>>> Haruna.
>>>
>>> --- On *Thu, 4/2/10, Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Modou Nyang <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Subject: Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Date: Thursday, 4 February, 2010, 0:41
>>>
>>>   Foroyaa News : HALIFA SALLAH COMMENTS AFTER THE APRC TOUR, NO CREDIBLE
>>> RULING PARTY NO CREDIBLE OPPOSITION A NEW WAY FORWARD NEEDED
>>>
>>> After the completion of the APRC tour, Foroyaa approached Halifa Sallah
>>> for comments.
>>> This is what he said:
>>>
>>> “Political leaders should tell their supporters the truth. A political
>>> vacuum exists in the Gambia. Some supporters of the APRC said that the
>>> opposition parties in the Gambia are not credible. They should also add that
>>> the ruling party is not credible. Their assessment of Gambian politics as it
>>> stands would then be correct and balanced. Some leaders who do not want to
>>> be honest to their supporters are trying to give the impression that the
>>> statistics I have been putting out are over statements. They are not telling
>>> their supporters the truth. Political leaders should tell the truth. For
>>> only the truth shall set us free. I have relied on empirical evidence to
>>> conclude that at this very moment we do not have a credible ruling party or
>>> opposition party. We have a duty to create both. Those who are offended by
>>> this statement are not prepared to do what is necessary to save Gambian
>>> politics from being an exercise in mediocrity.
>>>
>>> After the presidential elections in 2006, I wrote a pamphlet in which I
>>> quoted the statistics to confirm my assertion. Gambians have to be reminded
>>> these statistics to awaken each from our political apathy.
>>>
>>> According to the IEC, 670, 336 voters were registered prior to the 2006
>>> presidential elections. When the results were delivered the IEC indicated
>>> that the APRC candidate who was also supported by the NCP had 264,404 votes.
>>> If this is subtracted from the total number of registered voters it would
>>> mean that 405,932 voters did not vote for the APRC candidate. The UDP
>>> candidate who was also supported by NRP and GPDP had 104,808 votes, while
>>> the NADD candidate had 23,473 votes. The total votes of the opposition
>>> amounted to 128,281 votes. If this is subtracted from the total number of
>>> registered voters it would be apparent that 542,055 voters did not vote for
>>> the opposition. Wherein lies the credibility of the ruling party and the
>>> opposition party if politics is reduced to its lowest common denominator as
>>> contest based on the number of votes.
>>>
>>> Interestingly enough, in 2001 the APRC candidate had 242,302 votes when
>>> it forged no alliance with the NCP. At that time there were 501,304
>>> registered voters. Suffice it to say, even though the number of voters
>>> increased by 169032, by 2006 the votes of the APRC could only increase by
>>> 22,102 votes. The UDP candidate had 149,448 votes in 2001. Even though it
>>> developed alliance with NRP, which had 35,671 votes in 2001, its votes went
>>> down 104,808 votes in the 2006 elections, despite the increase in the number
>>> of registered voters by 169032 voters.
>>>
>>> Foroyaa: What is your advise?
>>>
>>> It is therefore necessary for political leaders to go back to the drawing
>>> board and map out a new way forward. How is the opposition to attract the
>>> 542,055 voters who did not vote for them is the subject at hand. This is
>>> what Agenda 2011 is all about. Even though I am not excluding acceptance of
>>> candidature, I have already declared that the best option is to select a
>>> neutral candidate who will be able to run a non partisan transitional
>>> cabinet for a period of 2 to 5 years and then step aside after a genuine
>>> multiparty contest. It is left to Gambians to decide whether they have a
>>> better way forward.
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>>
>>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact
>>> the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>>> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>>
>>
>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact the
>> List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>
>>
>> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
>> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
>> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
>> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact the
>> List Management, please send an e-mail to:
>> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact the
> List Management, please send an e-mail to:
> [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]>¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>
>
> ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ To
> unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web
> interface at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
>
> To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to:
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l To contact the
> List Management, please send an e-mail to:
> [log in to unmask]¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
>


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

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤