 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
 Posted - 26 Aug 2009 : 05:19:29
|
Survival and poverty alleviation concerns These extracted quotes from statement by Halifa Sallh are simply facts and realities of economy that concerns us more than anything else?
According to official statistics 59 percent of the population is living in abject poverty. I have just looked at the electricity bill of a middle income family and accessed what it needs to survive on a monthly basis. The bill to be paid amounts to 1200 dalasis The bag of rice bought is 900 dalasis.The gas bought for cooking is 700 dalasis. The telephone bill ismore than 400 dalasis. If one combines the expenditures mentioned so far it would amount to 3200 dalasis. It goes without saying that a breakfast of tea and butter without milk for a family of 8 amounts to 50 dalasis per day. This would amount to 1500 dalasis a month. If this is added to the sum of 3200 one would have an expenditure amounting to 4700 dalasis.This excludes expenditure on daily meals which cannot be less than 100 dalasis a day and 3000 a month, for a middle income family. This means that a middle income family would have to spend 7700 dalasis per month to live the life of a low income family. Rent and other expenditures are not mentioned. The sum mentioned is far beyond the monthly income of Directors occupying grade 12 positions in the public service. These are among the highest offices in the country. This is why top civil servants are constantly hoping to travel abroad, attend a workshop or be attached to a project to augment their income." |
 |
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2009 : 10:04:46
|
Guys... I am late to jump in here but your debate is fascinating for real.
Your different analysis of Halifa's statement clearly underscores your individual mindsets and pre conceived notions of the person of Halifa... From Turk, to my sworn enemy and learned friend Nyarikang... to Kobo and uncle Kon one can tell clearly who was reading the statement with an open mind and who was scanning through the statements with an intend to find faults.
Turk is too busy to concentrate when reading from Halifa because he is probably not used to reading long statements.. He is used to listening to TV clips. Therefore, he misses the fundamentals of the statement.. Halifa often offers alternatives but you have to read to see them.
For Nyari.. am really sorry am laughing my head off... it shows how badly this guy want to catch Halifa saying the wrong thing. After reading the entire statement even PRIMARY SCHOOL kids could tell that 30 years was a typo or human error as the error was corrected several times in the statement.
It also shows his lack of understanding of how international lending institutions work organizations work when dealing with finances. This is probably not his area of expertise so that is understandable. It is neither statistics nor legal. So you are excused sir...
Brother Shaka, Kobo, and Uncle Kon, one can call you any names they want, but one thing is absolutely clear.. you use your brains and your understanding of subject matters on this forum are second to none...
I know am starting a new war but it is worth the sacrifice.... |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Janko
Gambia
1267 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2009 : 13:50:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by kobo
For the benefit of general public, "30 years of AFPRC/APRC leadership?" appear to be typographical/human error?
"...The culture of the coup does not promote such political rights. Such rights are only embodied in the culture of the Republic. Are you in support of the political system of the coup period or the one demanded by the Reoublic?..."
The above is a typo. err.
|
Clean your house before pointing a finger ... Never be moved by delirious Well-wishers in their ecstasy |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 28 Aug 2009 : 20:06:59
|
'What an imbecile!!! You made accusations for all to see then expect the burden of the proof to be on the accused. Present your facts for us see.' -Shaka
I did not make any accusation. I just stated the facts which unfortunately went on to expose your Ayatollah's [Halifa Sallah] utter deceit. It is you who presented a purported IMF report here and adduced, based on it, that $5 million of the money owed to Almenta was paid by the Gambian tax payer. This is how you put it.
'US$5 million of the final instalment is Gambian tax payers’ money guaranteed by STANDARD CHARTERED.'
I now challenge you to revisit your report and produce that part of it which stated that this money was paid by the Gambian tax payer. That is all I asked for.
As far as I know, the document you are relying on, which is not only largely irrelevant to this subject as the Almenta saga is only mentioned within a context, does not have anything in it that supports your claim above.
'Why the need for a guarantee if money is already paid by the EU.' -Shaka
This is why I said you are a complete nuts, an absolute numb. Do you expect the Arbitration Court to award compensation against a party before it, in this case the Gambia governemt, without putting any enforcement mechanism in place to ensure compliance? The moment judgement was delivered, that money became a debt and the court will always have to ensure that an enforcement mechanism is in place to recovery it in the event of default in payment. This may be done by requiring a provision of a collateral security [ e.g Asset declaration and surendering of title deeds], Insurance cover or some form of third party guarantee. These measures become operative only as a matter of last resort, and where the debtor adheres to his/her terms of payment, their operations becomes no longer necessary.
'Th fact is that EU was only involved in the initial instalment payment of US$6.7 million in Feb. 2001.'- Shaka
What are you implying here? Halifa Sallah said it was paid by the APRC government [the Gambian tax payer], and now you are saying the EU paid the first instalment which going by your account, amounts to $6.7 Million. Who is lying here? I accept this as a clear admission of your clear lack of knowledge of the things you talked about, and an acknowledgement of Halifa Sallah's deceitful tendencies.
'This was money donated to the Gambian people by the EU for structural adjustment programmes therefore, it is the Gambian peoples' money and accountable to the Gambian people'-Shaka
Again, you are uneducated on the facts here. After the disputed 1996 presidential election, all the western donors including the EU Suspended direct financial assistance to the Gambia on the basis that that election was neither free nor fair [ This is public knowledge]. These assistance were to resume only after a free and fair election in 2001, and this includes the EU's annual structural adjustment aid programme.
Although this money was earmarked for the Gambia as part of the EU annual structural adjustment aid programme, it was in fact frozen since 1996. But when the Almenta saga broke out, the EU decided to partly release it on the basis of the considerations I highlighted in one of my postings above to help resolve this problem and to encourage democratization in the Gambia. It was not a blanket grant or a mere benevolent gift that the Gambia government could use in a spending spree. It was release for a purpose, and that is to resolve the Almenta crisis and to encourage the APRC to allow a free, fair and transparent election to take place in 2001.
'The final instalment was paid in August 2001 by the Gambian tax payers guarnteed by the Standard Chartered Bank as per the agreement. If the EU had paid the whole sum there is absolutely no need for the bank to take the pledge to pay this money in the case of default of payment by government.'-Shaka
Like I said above, the EU had its own agenda and objectives to achieve here. They had to be sure that those objectives are achievable before they spend their money as they too are accountable to a constituency [the well educated European citizens]. The culture of advancing financial assistance by instalments by some Western donors is just a way of keeping one's eye on the ball and ensuring that where things are going wrong, you can chip in and influence the course of things towards your desired goal. This easily ensures compliance as the donor can always withhold the rest of the money if things are not going as they desired.
In the light of the clarifications above, I hope you will now cite a sentence in your largely unconnected and irrelevant IMF Report that actually stated that the so-called remaining $5million came from the Gambian tax payer.
You've stated that $6.7million was paid by the EU, and $5Million by the Gambian tax payer but this is in sharp contrast to Halifa Sallah's statement that the whole $11.4 million was paid by the Gambia government [Gambian tax Payer]. Can you now tell the readership which of the two conflicting statements is absolute bonkers, yours or Ayatollah Sallah's? You don't want to accuse your Ayatollah of lying, Do you?
The chickens will soon come home to roast as the expose' continues.
Thanks
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 28 Aug 2009 21:31:02 |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2009 : 15:24:38
|
| I will get back to your lies and conspiracies pretty soon. |
|
|
|
Janko
Gambia
1267 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2009 : 22:27:51
|
Statement by Halifa Sallah on July 22nd Anniversary
... The insincere and the ignorant will always pay a price for their folly?...
… The coup period certainly abolished the independence of the judiciary and created a system where absolute power was in the hands of a council which could not be removed by democratic means and where anyone could be arrested and detained at will. ...
… The state resources and institutions are managed as the property of all irrespective of party affiliation. All parties would have access to the public media to put across their divergent policies and dissenting opinions. The culture of the coup does not promote such political rights. Such rights are only embodied in the culture of the Republic. …
… What Gambia becomes after 2011 is entirely in each of our sovereign hands…
Culture is the way of life of a people….???
Halifa Sallah’s statement pertaining to “July 22nd Anniversary” paints a complex political structure. On the one hand he laments the state of the Republic and on the other the difficulties faced with the democratic process, such as “dispensation of justice”, “transparency and accountability”, “fundamental rights”, “press freedom” and other freedoms amongst other discrepancies. I admire his courage and optimism.
Mr. Sallah´s clarity regarding the electorate understanding their position; what they stand for and vote for and the difficulties faced with the electoral process is undeniable. I find his optimism limitless faced with the structural discrepancies.
The question is how we deal with the current situation to enhance the ability of the electorate to evaluate and reinforce their positions and their passion to get out of the settees to the polling station. What plans do we have to enhance the empowerment of the electorate? How do we intend to mobilize the “sovereign hands” of the electorate to have a say in what becomes of Gambia after 2011?
|
Edited by - Janko on 29 Aug 2009 23:15:07 |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 29 Aug 2009 : 23:43:27
|
Uncle Janko, it all comes down to leadership and how much the people can be inspired to let go of the status quo and look to a new future.
It is an undeniable reality that Majority of Gambians have suffered tremendously in the hands of the Jammeh regime. Either directly or indirectly their individual lives have been impacted negatively by Jammeh and his regime.
However, it is difficult to deal with an oppressive regime and the Gambian voters are aware that a birth in the hand is worth two in the Bush. It is a matter of life and death for them...
The choices are difficult for them and so far they are making them purely base on individual conditions.
Do they choose to oppose the status quo and be left at the mercy of tyranny and nothing else to hang on to OR
Do they stay home, protect themselves and keep their families safe.
I think the voter apathy is purely based on calculation of the circumstance and the hope presented to these voters.
When there is reason to believe again that things can change the way they are, then you will see people standing up. Until the opposing parties seriously consider joining hands and seek support of the people, there is little reason to believe and reasonably so that Gambian electorates will be willing to vote against the status quo. |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Janko
Gambia
1267 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2009 : 11:37:59
|
Kottoo dBaldeh
… it all comes down to leadership and how much the people can be inspired to let go of the status quo and look to a new future...
Yes, and to inspire the people requires giving them the chance of assessment, something they can compare and contrast with what they have.(status quo) A leader that presents a solution, a plan, a convincing alternative to the ”bird in hand”. Hence the worth of the bird in hand comes into consideration only if there are two in the bush, but if there are no birds in sight there is no need for speculation.
In fact historically, the trend is; the longer a leader stays in power the more Gambians seem comfortable with him/her. Is that because the leaders get better with time or is it the inability to present a concrete alternative to leadership? What makes the task even harder is that Gambia has no experience of political change through the electoral process.
|
Clean your house before pointing a finger ... Never be moved by delirious Well-wishers in their ecstasy |
Edited by - Janko on 30 Aug 2009 19:46:21 |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2009 : 22:18:41
|
quote:
..In fact historically, the trend is; the longer a leader stays in power the more Gambians seem comfortable with him/her. Is that because the leaders get better with time or is it the inability to present a concrete alternative to leadership? What makes the task even harder is that Gambia has no experience of political change through the electoral process.
Absolutely.... and I must add these are the kind of problems the Gambian opposition must understand in order to successfully challenge the status quo. The politics of the 80s and 90s style of approach must be changed to realize any form of milestone.
These are some of the trends Jammeh is counting on that Gambian electorates believes in government (mansakunda/Laamu/Ngurr)and that is Allah who puts him there and no one can remove him. While some of it is mystically true, effort is what is needed to bring in the needed change.
In fact, the goal of the opposition should not only necessarily be regime change in itself through the ballot box, but challenging the regime to make concerted efforts to allow the creation of independent democratic institutions and a partial level playing field.
As is there is no evidence that the Jammeh regime would even be willing to give up power even if they are defeated at elections. So to engage the government in making gradual changes to the system and political norms in the Gambia are the first steps I believe.
"Rome wasn't built in a day" and I believe it is going to take time to mold the Gambian electorates and electoral system to allow a somewhat level playing field.
The work to bring change in Gambia becomes more challenging by the day to your point. We got some work to do Uncle Janko...
Ramadan Mubarak... |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Moe
USA
2326 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2009 : 23:07:40
|
| Dbaldeh i really don't like you but you are absolutely right except for the fact that even when defeated they might not leave . They don't have a choice ,Jammeh is not that foolish. Now we are talking politics bro ,keep it that way....................................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 ..... |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2009 : 18:40:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by shaka
I will get back to your lies and conspiracies pretty soon.
What! This inept disciple has just done a runner. Has he?
Oh dear!
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 31 Aug 2009 18:46:44 |
|
|
|
shaka
996 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2009 : 22:00:24
|
In January 1999, the government seized the property of The Gambian Groundnut Corporation
(GGC)—a private company that had a monopoly on the processing and exporting of
groundnuts—without compensation. Alimenta, GGC’s parent company, submitted the case for
arbitration in July 1999. The dispute was settled out-of-court after the government paid
compensation of US$11.4 million to the company. The EU provided grant aid of about
US$7 million to help settle the case.
Source: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2006/cr0611.pdf
I hope this will help restore your sanity. Hater!! Foolish dog barka flying bird!! |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2009 : 06:02:12
|
Shaka congrats for a job well done! Please rest your case here and re-direct your energy to deal with other important topics
|
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2009 : 06:35:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Janko
Statement by Halifa Sallah on July 22nd Anniversary
... The insincere and the ignorant will always pay a price for their folly?...
… The coup period certainly abolished the independence of the judiciary and created a system where absolute power was in the hands of a council which could not be removed by democratic means and where anyone could be arrested and detained at will. ...
… The state resources and institutions are managed as the property of all irrespective of party affiliation. All parties would have access to the public media to put across their divergent policies and dissenting opinions. The culture of the coup does not promote such political rights. Such rights are only embodied in the culture of the Republic. …
… What Gambia becomes after 2011 is entirely in each of our sovereign hands…
Culture is the way of life of a people….???
Halifa Sallah’s statement pertaining to “July 22nd Anniversary” paints a complex political structure. On the one hand he laments the state of the Republic and on the other the difficulties faced with the democratic process, such as “dispensation of justice”, “transparency and accountability”, “fundamental rights”, “press freedom” and other freedoms amongst other discrepancies. I admire his courage and optimism.
Mr. Sallah´s clarity regarding the electorate understanding their position; what they stand for and vote for and the difficulties faced with the electoral process is undeniable. I find his optimism limitless faced with the structural discrepancies.
The question is how we deal with the current situation to enhance the ability of the electorate to evaluate and reinforce their positions and their passion to get out of the settees to the polling station. What plans do we have to enhance the empowerment of the electorate? How do we intend to mobilize the “sovereign hands” of the electorate to have a say in what becomes of Gambia after 2011?
To address some of your concerns; civic education and information like these foroyaa editorials below are very important to orient the mass on good leadership, the need to sacrifice, fight their political rights and what is at stake for them
1. Foroyaa on-line newspaper Editorial : Are the Gambian People Concious of Their Sovereignty? under http://www.foroyaa.gm/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3215
2. Foroyaa Editorial : Do Gambians know what a State is? under http://www.foroyaa.gm/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3281
If you consider other effective alternatives you may recommend them?
|
Edited by - kobo on 03 Sep 2009 06:41:28 |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2009 : 20:14:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by shaka
In January 1999, the government seized the property of The Gambian Groundnut Corporation
(GGC)—a private company that had a monopoly on the processing and exporting of
groundnuts—without compensation. Alimenta, GGC’s parent company, submitted the case for
arbitration in July 1999. The dispute was settled out-of-court after the government paid
compensation of US$11.4 million to the company. The EU provided grant aid of about
US$7 million to help settle the case.
Source: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2006/cr0611.pdf
I hope this will help restore your sanity. Hater!! Foolish dog barka flying bird!!
I didn’t know this nonsense is sitting here as I have not logged on for a while. Now that I know it I shall tackle it head on.
Before I begin, I must admit that the inconsistency on your part in this debate has been incredible, and it’s certainly doing my heading as I do not know which one represent your position. At First and like Halifa, you refused to acknowledge the EU’s role in the resolution of this dispute in terms of advancing money to liquidate the debt. After a bit of explanation on my part, you then said, in sharp contrast to Halifa’s statement, that the EU actually paid $6.7million and $5Million by the Gambian tax payer. [See your posting of 22nd August 2009] However, your $5Million claim was not supported by your own source of evidence. And when I took you to task on this by simplifying issues for you while at the same time exposing your lack of understanding of the issues involved in this matter, you change your story. As it stands now, your line of story is that the EU provided $7Million as oppose to your original claim of $6.7Million.[See your posting of 1st September 2009] I suppose by the logic of this, that also means the tax payer provided only $4.4 as oppose to your original claim of $5milion. What a grand inconsistency! In respect of the remainder [$4.4] you disassociated the EU from, again there is no suggestion in your so-called evidence to the effect that this was paid by the tax payer.
Your inconsistency here is not itself a surprise to me as I do know that you don’t know what you are talking about. You are just doing a fanatical mombo jumbo to appease your fellow disciples. But the fact that you based all these different and contradicting claims on a purported IMF report is chillingly troubling. What this tells me and indeed any reasonable observer is either that your story lacked credibility [I have no doubt this is the case] or you are so dummy that you are incapable of interpreting simple documents and connect them to fact based scenarios, thereby rendering you inept and lame to put forward any robust and coherent argument in support of your deceitful Ayatollah in this matter. The IMF is notorious for some other things but certainly not blatant inconsistency of records and poor arithmetic.
Moreover, even if I go by your claim that the EU only paid $7million of the $11.4 debt, that still vindicates my point that Halifa Sallah had been deceitful in his July 22 statement because it stills contradict his claim that the whole $11.4 was paid by the APRC government. He has failed to acknowledge EU’s role in the liquidation of this debt and deliberately chose to leave his readership with the impression that the whole $11.4million was paid by the Gambian tax payer, something he very well knows is untrue.
Given that you have stated that $7million of the $11.4 was paid by the EU, something that clearly contradicts Halifa Sallah's statement to the effect that the whole $11.4 million was paid by the Gambia government [Gambian tax Payer]. Can you now tell the readership which of the two contradictory statements is a palpable lie, yours or he’s?
Thanks
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 15 Sep 2009 20:46:57 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
