Mr. Alieu Badara Sowe,
I honestly believe that you are now adding insult to injury. I was of the conviction that your article was taken out of context, but you are now proving me wrong. As a journalist you should not involve in character assassinations and conspiracies to discredit peoples name. You said in your piece that the criminal conviction of Ebou Taal is "public knowledge". My question to you is: If it is "public knowledge", what is the ... point of publishing it, in the first place? Where is that "Sutura" we used to have for each other? Is a "scoop" more valuable that that? You are a journalist of high esteem, please keep it so, and remember, personal attacks can devalue your integrity.
One more thing. If you want to attack Fatou Taal, do it in another way and not through the Gambia-L. She did not send anything regarding this issue to the List. May I inform you that we have settled all differences regarding this subject and we want to address some residents of Kaninlai.
Prince Coker
----- Original Message -----
From: Alieu Badara Sowe
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 3:28 PM
Subject: Response to Fatou Taal
Fatou Taal
I read with interest your correspondence with Ebrima Ceesay, on Gambia-L,
and I am compelled to put the records straight for the sake of my integrity,
which I jealously guard from the date I became a journalist. I worked very
hard, suffered all kinds of treatment in the defence of press freedom at the
time Gambians needed their journalists most (1994 to date). So I will not
idly sit down and watch a worthless girl like you to tamper with that
integrity.
Let me start by making it categorically clear to you that I wrote your dad's
story in the public interest and without malice. Like Ebrima Cessay rightly
put it to you, let me also say it that I last spoke to Ceesay in 1996 and he
has nothing whatsoever to do with your dad's story. Ebrima has not
telephoned or written a single letter to me since he left The Gambia.
However, what I cannot even understand is, why do you have to embark on a
fruitless venture of trying to establish who my source is, when as you
intimate, the story was untrue!
After I published your dad's story, the Daily Observer took it upon itself
to come up with a reaction that tends to imply that my story was totally
fake. Your dad, and of course some APRC big wigs capitalised on a simple
factual error to publish what the Observer printed as a correction. Note
that I am not a party to the Observer's so called apology to your father. I
would have gone for a clarification.
Yes, it maybe correct that your dad had not even travelled to the U.K. I did
make several efforts to talk to your dad prior to publication but to no
avail. Nonetheless, what is very clear is that the substance of the story
was true. If your dad is arguing that his appointment was not rejected by
the British authorities on the grounds that he (your dad) is an ex-convict,
can he then tell us why he didn't leave for the U.K. since his appointment
early this year (it is almost six months since his appointment)!
The bottom line is, whether for corruption, embezzlement or stealing, your
dad has a record of criminal conviction and this is public knowledge.
Peace.
Alieu Badara Sowe
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
