 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 07:57:24
|
I think UDP/UK is ignoring the facts and the essence of this discussion or argument. I sense that emotions, sentiments, and mudslinging is the only tactic left for the UDP/UK. The real UDP (Gambia) will not respond to Halifa's challenge because their fiction cannot match the facts. So it is understandable that their responsibility is outsourced to the firebrand but clueless UDP/UK.
Can we just confine ourselves to the issues once again? We have asked the UDP/UK a bunch of questions, none of which are still answered. That is the issue. It is time to answer please!!!!! |
Edited by - kayjatta on 18 Aug 2010 07:59:01 |
 |
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 08:39:32
|
THANKS KAYJATTA! YOU GET IT! THE PERSONAL ATTACKS, NAME CALLING & WOEFUL PROPAGANDA ATTEMPTS TO MIS-LEAD GAMBIANS IS THEIR TACTICS
FOR EXAMPLE HOW CAN SUNTU DEVIATE FROM THE ISSUES TO CONDEMN P.D.O.I.S/HALIFA AS "COMMUNIST" WE ARE NOT CONVINCE WITH THAT FOR P.D.O.I.S/HALIFA ARE DEMOCRATS & GAMBIAN POLITICIANS! THESE TYPE OF REMARKS ARE CHEAP AND UN-CALLED FOR LIKE IF I SARCASTICALLY CONDEMN SUNTU/DAFFEH/U.D.P AS "TRIBALIST"
PLEASE FOCUS ON OUR NATIONAL ISSUES AND WAY FORWARD FOR THE GAMBIA OUR HOMELAND
|
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 17:08:53
|
ON THE CASTIGATION OF EACH OTHER AS GAMBIANS I HEREBY DECLARE THAT I AM NOT ACCUSING SUNTU/DAFFEH/U.D.P AS TRIBALIST BUT JUST SHOWING THEM AN EXAMPLE OF MAKING FRIVOLOUS STATEMENTS AND PROVOCATIONS! I JUST FED SOME U.D.P-UK MILITANTS THEIR OWN POISON AND ACTED ACCORDING TO THEIR MENTALITY
AM IMPRESSED THAT I GOT THE BASIS FOR N.A.D.D WITH THESE WORDS OF WISDOM FROM A U.D.P MILITANT QUOTED; " I belief what we as Gambians in the Diaspora should do is try find a solution to bring all the political parties together to challenge Jammeh on a sing unified ticket without any ado and based on mutual respect and understanding rather than character assassinations which I belief would help only Jammeh and his group." By Mr. Bamba Mass (A UDP MILITANT IN THE UK)
More on the way forward; courtesy of Gainako Why doubt Lawyer Ousainou Darboe, UDP Leader’s bravery against The Jammeh regime? By Mr. Bamba Mass (A UDP MILITANT IN THE UK) under http://www.gainako.com/news/news/2010/08/18/why-doubt-lawyer-ousainou-darboe-udp-leader%E2%80%99s-bravery-against-the-jammeh-regime.html
|
Edited by - kobo on 19 Aug 2010 02:48:23 |
|
|
|
Janyanfara
Tanzania
1350 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 19:44:40
|
Hey Guys,
I have listened and digested all the points raised. I am UDP dead and core to the bone. But I do respect Halifa and PDOIS and all other oppositions for we are all in this firefight together.
Now Lets forget about what happened and when. Lets think of what to do better as election is just around the corner.
NADD was formed on so many pillars called the Memorandum Of Understanding and if there happen to be a breakdown of one or two of those understandings, it has to be because it was not built on a strong foundation to the acceptance of all party leaders and their followers.Because leaders come and go but the people remain.Therefore the followers are the most important and for political parties to come together under a common unbrella to unseat a dictator and restore democracy,Choosing a leader has to be done through the peoples Power and not just a few gardering of party representatives with each a single vote. That was why some members of the other party cried faul and forced their leader to upt out and We all knew if the PDOIS or ppp or NDAM happens to be the majority opposition at such and a thing like that happened, its members would go for Halifa's, OJ's, Waa's head.Ousainou too is no difference and he too had no choice but to bow to pressures from his followers otherwise how can he lead if he became at odds with his followers?.This was what happened with NADD AND IT COLLAPSED with the major party breaking out.
I was there when NADD was formed but then everyone was busy trying to unseat Jammeh as he has put fire to every house.So if Nadd could not function due to unforeseeable circumstances, why not do everything right this time so as not to allow what went wrong to repeat it self this time?
We all know for a fact that there is no where in world history of a coalition where a majority party allows the junior partners to lead them unless if leadership has to be rotational. But even so it would first start with the majority within the coalition.So lets forget firing amongst ourselves.It only serves our common opponent as it was manifested in the last election every party AFRC or otherwise all campaiging against UDP and Ousainou as if Ousainou was the president.
Now I put a proposal to Halifa and all other political opposition.
Let the people choose who to lead futute new coalition through nationwide election and if anyone comes victorious,UDP would follow that leader to lead that coalition.
If anyone has a better solution than the one I propose then come forward and state it. |
|
|
|
Janyanfara
Tanzania
1350 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 20:07:43
|
Brother kobo and brother kayjata, can any one of you be so truthful to your selves and answer these questions for me?
What would you do if PDOIS was the majority party within NADD and Ousainou is chosen as a coalition flag bearer?
Has it ever happened anywhere where a party leader from the majority opposition joining forces with a junior partner and the flag bearer is from that junior partner?
What is wrong with the UDP crying foul for their Leader not able to lead the coalition when their party forms the majority within the opposition and that coalition?
With these questions answered, then we can talk common sence because I belief Bamba Mass UDP UK was expressing his own opinion as a person and this is the powers of democracy as Mr. Bamba Mass does need Suntu, Daffeh or any member of the UDP UK's permission in expressing his personal views.UDP UK if democratic would not hold any member at ramson for making a view shared.Mr. Mass I belief was calling on other oppositions to shake UDP's hand to unseat Jammeh as we all know UDP IS THE ONLY PARTY PRESENT TODAY THAT POSSES A REAL THREAT TO JAMMEH'S REGIME. Am I wrong?
So if we want to be different from Yaya Jammeh and if we sincerely do want change, then we must return power back to the people.
I have so much respect for Halifa so I would not want to openly speal the beans. But his attacks on the UDP and its leader for the breaking of NADD is I belief the direct result for the UDP UK's response.Just like you guys his generals siding with him.Now is not the time to dig deep back old wounds. A solution has to be reached and belief Mr. Sallah if he truely loves the people of the Gambia would not object to the people choosing a leader for him.Except if he thinks he is better educated,qualified and tallented to listen to the voice of the electorates.
I know if I should ask only opposition supporters to elect a new leader to lead the comming coalition, many of you would not oppose the idea as you know who that leader is going to be. But I belief we all would agree Gambian are capable of choosing who they think is best qualifies unseating Jammeh. So let us all give them that voice to choose our leader.
Thank you
Janyanfara |
Edited by - Janyanfara on 18 Aug 2010 20:28:56 |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11634 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2010 : 20:54:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Janyanfara
Now I put a proposal to Halifa and all other political opposition.
Let the people choose who to lead futute new coalition through nationwide election and if anyone comes victorious,UDP would follow that leader to lead that coalition.
If anyone has a better solution than the one I propose then come forward and state it.
Janyanfara,
Good to see you back here. I belive with people like you, we still have hope for a new possibility of opposition alliance.
Your proposal above is not that very different from Agenda 2011 (Agenda 2011 calls for opposition party leaders and even neutral individuals to go for primaries).
This should be a good starting point for serious discusion/negotiations for a way forward.
Keep up the good work!
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
sankalanka
270 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 02:26:36
|
This is an article I wrote in the Gambiapost in January of 2009. I strongly believe that a proposal to solve the opposition political impasse to form a coaltion or unite around a single presidential candidate, is to make the effort a national referundum on the present political dispensation in the country. As such opposition party politics should be completely out of the picture.
Attached Message
From: REBADJAN@aol.com
To: dialog@thegambiapostforum.com
Subject: Re: [>-<] Who is the Best Oppositition Candidate for 2011
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:27:48 EST
This is the right time to debate and talk about a concerted opposition effort for the 2011 presidential elections. The two year window, can help those who want to take up the responsibility, develop a structure that will bring about a coordinated attempt by Gambians, both at home and in the Diaspora, to facilitate a rigorous participation in the political process, culminating in the support and sponsor of a presidential candidate.
It might appear inconsequential, but the participation and involvement of Gambians in the Diaspora, to any meaningful and successful political change, should not be underestimated. In fact, a serious and coordinated effort by Gambians in the Diaspora, can act as an impetus that will galvanize a grassroots awakening to the possibilities of a peaceful transfer of power by the ballot box.
Once people have faith in the power that is inherent in them; and once they have faith in the forces that have been mobilized to garner their support and participation, their level of fear will begin to dissipate and they will be willing to take more risks. Therefore, any effort to build a political machinery for the 2011 presidential elections, should be very thorough; the level of commitment and seriousness of the mobilization process should be acutely adequate, and the responsibility of the Gambian polity to take ownership and become active stakeholders in the process, abundantly necessary.
Once people have a stake in the process; and once they realized the power that is inherent in their collective endeavors, there is nothing that will keep them back short of victory. This is the transformative power in a people for change. This is the desire that should be elicited from the people. It is the only assured way in which the revolutionary tendencies of the people are uninhibited, guided and shaped to bring about change; to bring about a peaceful transfer of power.
At this juncture, the Gambian people have two fundamental choices for change: they either coalesce around a peaceful transfer of power, and if that fails, the tendency for some to change power violently may become inevitable, even if in the long run.
The dynamics of power in the current political dispensation, and the consolidation of the power bases of the ruling party both in the government and outside of it, makes any attempt at political change that is not people-oriented and inspired, less formidable and consequently doom to fail.
The building of any political structure for change, therefore, should enlist the support and sought the participation of the Gambian people, both in the Diaspora and at home. To this end, any meaningful effort should obviate the political biases that people do have; this is part of the normal political process, but these are not normal or ordinary times.
To bring about a peaceful transfer of power, therefore, must transcend all barriers, both parochial and ethnic.
The opposition political parties are weak, due not only to an endemic political culture that breeds patronage, and other tendencies that militates against a conscious and informed citizenry; but also in their inability to reinvent themselves and make themselves more relevant and accommodative, bringing in new insights and new ways of doing things.
Their structures have not been too optimistic, characteristically confined within the broader limits of their power and authority, and concentrated in their central or executive committees. They centralized all power and authority to themselves, and do not create any mechanism in which the active participation of others is encouraged, sought or utilized; and thus the transformative quest for political change, become reduced to the mere rudiments of managing a political party. The creation of new political parties, under the present political climate, will not augur well either.
Any effort at this juncture, to bring about a peaceful transfer of power, must be made beyond political party politics. It is only after a peaceful transfer of power has been effected, and with a structural and institutional mechanism of governance rooted in the rule of law, can a viable and effective political activity become possible.
Hence any desire for change, and a peaceful transfer of power, should be built around a movement that encompasses all opposition political parties; all Gambian political organizations, both at home and abroad. The strategic objective would be to bring all, and develop a mechanism in which a presidential candidate can be identified, sponsored and supported by all the people. The primary objective: to elect any other Gambian as president.
Since the Gambian constitution dictates that any presidential candidate must be resident in the Gambia within a stipulated time frame, any Gambian who meets this requirement and qualification, can be eligible to put his or her name for consideration to be nominated as the presidential candidate for the opposition. Political parties, civic organizations, indeed all Gambian organizations both at home and abroad, can sponsor any candidate they deem fit to represent the interest of all Gambians.
Once all these candidates have been identified, they would then be subjected to a primary election to determine who amongst them will emerge as an opposition presidential candidate. The whole Gambian opposition should therefore embrace and support this person once his or her nomination has been secured.
The successful implementation of this strategy to nominate an individual as an opposition presidential candidate, would largely depend on a good organization; a robust mobilization structure, and a discipline campaign by all involved.
Once a candidate has been nominated through the primary process, and before such a candidate is duly accepted to represent the interest of all Gambians, there will be a memorandum of understanding between this candidate and all the stakeholders, concerning the modalities of governance once the candidate assumes office. A document similar to the M.O.U of NADD can be crafted, and the modalities of a transition government formulated.
Two consultative committees at both the Diaspora level and the home level, would be necessary to develop this approach. The Diaspora committee will help register the support and participation of Diaspora groups and organizations; sensitize the aims and objective, and solicit the help and ideas from everyone. The committee can include, but not limited to Diaspora groups, contributors of Gambian online papers, prominent Diaspora academicians and intellectuals and other individuals.
The home committee will also solicit the support and participation of all opposition political parties; civic groups and prominent individuals. They will work in tandem with the Diaspora committee, and develop the mechanisms for accepting and preparing candidates for the primary elections. They can solicit the assistance of the independent electoral commission, if need be.
The idea of a primary, although an American political institution, can be new in our part of the world. However, if the possibility of selecting an opposition presidential candidate can always be too cumbersome, why not open the process to all Gambians and make the selection through a primary election.
Rene
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rebadjan@aol.com |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 08:18:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Janyanfara
Brother kobo and brother kayjata, can any one of you be so truthful to your selves and answer these questions for me?
What would you do if PDOIS was the majority party within NADD and Ousainou is chosen as a coalition flag bearer?
Has it ever happened anywhere where a party leader from the majority opposition joining forces with a junior partner and the flag bearer is from that junior partner?
What is wrong with the UDP crying foul for their Leader not able to lead the coalition when their party forms the majority within the opposition and that coalition?
With these questions answered, then we can talk common sence because I belief Bamba Mass UDP UK was expressing his own opinion as a person and this is the powers of democracy as Mr. Bamba Mass does need Suntu, Daffeh or any member of the UDP UK's permission in expressing his personal views.UDP UK if democratic would not hold any member at ramson for making a view shared.Mr. Mass I belief was calling on other oppositions to shake UDP's hand to unseat Jammeh as we all know UDP IS THE ONLY PARTY PRESENT TODAY THAT POSSES A REAL THREAT TO JAMMEH'S REGIME. Am I wrong?
So if we want to be different from Yaya Jammeh and if we sincerely do want change, then we must return power back to the people.
I have so much respect for Halifa so I would not want to openly speal the beans. But his attacks on the UDP and its leader for the breaking of NADD is I belief the direct result for the UDP UK's response.Just like you guys his generals siding with him.Now is not the time to dig deep back old wounds. A solution has to be reached and belief Mr. Sallah if he truely loves the people of the Gambia would not object to the people choosing a leader for him.Except if he thinks he is better educated,qualified and tallented to listen to the voice of the electorates.
I know if I should ask only opposition supporters to elect a new leader to lead the comming coalition, many of you would not oppose the idea as you know who that leader is going to be. ButI belief we all would agree Gambian are capable of choosing who they think is best qualifies unseating Jammeh. So let us all give them that voice to choose our leader.
Thank you
Janyanfara
Janyafara, good to see you again; and thanks for your post. I would start by first reassuring you that I, Kayjatta has always been truthful to myself and to others. Jokes asides (and I like teasing people), my arguements and positions may be controversial but they are always backed by solid evidence. You can ask Turk and Moe  .
I will respond to your questions one at a time:
Question 1. "What would you do if PDOIS was the majority party within NADD and Ousainou is chosen as a coalition flag bearer?"
My answer: I would respect and support whoever was selected. This is what you guys do not either understand or deliberately ignore. NADD was not formed by a verbal agreement. It was formed as a contract between different parties backed by documents. All the different parties in NADD signed those documents. Those documents established how the NADD leader will be selected. Those documents at no time and place indicated that the leader of the majority party shall be the leader of NADD. In contract law, there is what they call "contract terms rule". This simply means that written terms of an agreement cannot later be changed by verbal or other statements. So UDP's argument that Darboe should be the leader of NADD because of its majority status is frivolous and not supported by any documentation. I challenge you guys to tell us which of NADD's documents says that the leader of UDP should be the leader of NADD!!! One of NADD's provisions indicates that "all the parties in NADD will be treated equally...", and Darboe signed it.
Question 2: "Has it ever happened anywhere where a party leader from the majority opposition joining forces with a junior partner and the flag bearer is from that junior partner?"
My answer: Not that I know of, but that is not the point. The point is that there was an agreement made by a group of opposition parties, and they all signed on paper that they will respect the terms of the agreement. Then at the last minute UDP reneged on their pledge in a flagrant violation of the terms of the agreement simply because Darboe has a personal expectation which he did not voice out at the beginning. It would have been more honorable if Darboe had indicated from the beginning that "he would only partcipate in a UDP-led coalition". Then everyone would know what they were up against; and if they agree to rally behind UDP, fine!
Question 3: "What is wrong with the UDP crying foul for their Leader not able to lead the coalition when their party forms the majority within the opposition and that coalition?"
My answer: There is so much wrong with that, because it is a violation and a betrayal of the terms of the agreement in the sense that all the documents Darboe and the UDP signed to form and register NADD as a political party, none said that the majority party must be the flagbearer. So to have the expectation that Darboe must be the falgbearer is a myth and it is dishonorable.
Now after answering your questions, let me add this. There is no illusion that the parties that came together to form NADD are not all of the equal strength. We all know that some have more followers than others.
It is the recognition of these that certains checks and balances were created in NADD.
1. the option of a "primary election" (if a leader could not be selected unanimously) intends to enable the majority party (UDP) claim its clout because chances are they will be the winner. But UDP feels too big, they don't even want to contest in a primary with those they consider "political lightweights". They want leadership handed to Darboe on a silver platter. Sorry, we in PDOIS do not believe in monarchs!
2. the flagbearer of NADD, if elected to become president, would serve only one term and step down and totally retire from politics. he would not also back any party in subsequent elections. This protects minority parties from a potential UDP majority tyranny and hegemony.In short, NADD is a coalition of compromise among different interests. The common interest of unseating a dictatorship and establishing a true democracy was the goal...
Attention: I am not speaking on behalf of PDOIS, NADD, or any other political party or group. Furthermore, Kayjatta is not an attorney.
Anything said and written here is nothing but personal opinion and representation. |
|
|
|
Nyarikangbanna
United Kingdom
1382 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 12:52:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Momodou
quote:
Originally posted by Janyanfara
Now I put a proposal to Halifa and all other political opposition.
Let the people choose who to lead futute new coalition through nationwide election and if anyone comes victorious,UDP would follow that leader to lead that coalition.
If anyone has a better solution than the one I propose then come forward and state it.
Janyanfara,
Good to see back here. I belive with people like you, we still have hope for a new possibility of opposition alliance.
Your proposal above is not that very different from Agenda 2011 (Agenda 2011 calls for opposition party leaders and even neutral individuals to go for primaries).
This should be a good starting point for serious discusion/negotiations for a way forward.
Keep up the good work!
Momodou, the people have already chosen in 2006 and the result is a ratio of 5:1 in favour of UDP. Therefore this is a settled matter. If UDP has an impasse in our own selection process, we will conduct a primary to choose a candidate. However, given that a primary is an internal contest, it is inconcievable to even think that UDP will contest a primary with other independent soveriegn parties. Where on this planet has anyone heard a coalition of indepedent soveriegn parties contesting a primary to choose a leader? Any opposition party or leader who wants to challenge the UDP would have to meet us in a general election and demonstrate his/her electoral worth.
Janyanfara is quite right; UDP/UK is a democratic organisation with diverse membership. We have no desire whatsoever to curtail anybody's right to express his or her opinion. Our position on issues is normally presented in a more official format.
Given that UDP/UK haven't yet meet to consider a response to PDOIS, I think it would not be appropiate for me to comment on other issues raised here.But can I make one thing clear, and let no one make any mistake about it; the United Democratic party will not contest a primary with any opposition party as a pre-requisite for forming a coalition with them. Like I said above, any opposition leader who wishes to contest against the UDP and its leader would have to meet us in a general election. Our big clunging fist will undoubtedly teach them yet another bitter lesson.
Regards
|
I do not oppose unity but I oppose dumb union. |
Edited by - Nyarikangbanna on 19 Aug 2010 13:22:05 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 13:29:39
|
 "big clunging fist"? Is that how you refer to 25% votes? Democracy requires that you respect minority parties. Even Jammeh understands that. Otherwise, with his 60% over UDP's 25%; we could easily declare the Gambia a one-party state and with only 25% votes you cannot do anything about it... |
|
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11634 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 14:00:36
|
| Kay, you are on spot! I always wonder how Nyari and Suntu will treat minorities if they were in a position of power. |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 14:13:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by kayjatta
"big clunging fist"? Is that how you refer to 25% votes? Democracy requires that you respect minority parties. Even Jammeh understands that. Otherwise, with his 60% over UDP's 25%; we could easily declare the Gambia a one-party state and with only 25% votes you cannot do anything about it...
The joke is that, intelligent guys wish to close their eyes and try to hookwink decent folks. Why should UDP go to a primary with PDOIS? I know the american system of doing things affect us all, but can you sight one such example where a thing like that happen?
Hence, if PDOIS are dragging their feet over unity, does that mean we have to go along with such nonsence?
And it doesn't actually matter how you or Momodou try to spin this subject, PDOIS have never intend to change their position, therefore, they cannot hide and try to blame others.
However, the dymanics theyr created is such that, they know, even if GMC came on the floor, PDOIS will be second to it, hence there craft to say that, let a neutral person lead the coalition.
We don't care how much they dislike Ousainou, politics is about the willingness to stake it all, and Ousainou has done that. He is the leader of the UDP and will lead the party with or without a coalition. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 14:30:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Momodou
Kay, you are on spot! I always wonder how Nyari and Suntu will treat minorities if they were in a position of power.
Momodou, it is sad that, a fifty something year old like you can blatantly misrepresent facts.
It depends what you term as minority. This shows that, you still haven't a glue who the leaders of PDOIS are.
Get real for once and find out whether, Sedia, Halifa and Sam see themselves as minority.
After that, then you can repeate your deliberate demeaning.
Coming to the real issues. If a minority party understands its place, it open doors for larger parties to invite them. But the condesending leaders in PDOIS will actually twist the approaches of UDP and proclaim that, God himself has bestowed destiny on them to take the Gambia out its mess. They will use such open invitation to endlessly try to fabricate plots against UDP supporters with endless editorials and what have you.
This is why, PDOIS is not an entity, that one can go and say welcome in a coalition, they will actually not even respond to you.
You guys have misunderstood the party, hence your continous errors in arriving at wrong conclusions.
Halifa will actually have a field day should Darboe and his team personally visit them and welcome them to a coalition. He will arrogantly belittle them and try to sabotage such moves. This is why, all the efforts have to be done in such way, the leadership of the UDP will never be misrepresented or lied upon.
PDOIS is not party that seeks politics as usual. They wish to brainwash and change the minds of Gambians. This underlying dogma makes them difficult to deal with. Whilst gullible onlookers keep criticising Darboe for not reaching out to them, which is a lie, PDOIS goes on the attack trying to analyse one figure after another, with their bais Foroyaa, thus making coming together impossible.
NRP is larger than PDOIS, however, they realise the normal and usual rout of coalition is a smooth and easy process, not arrogant posturing.
Momodou, to answer your ill-faited concern, we will deal with minority parties, with dignity and deligently. however, should a minority party wish to held us with unnecessary conditions, we will not buy into such double standards. You can interpret that any how you fancy, it is cool. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 14:43:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by kayjatta
Janyafara, good to see you again; and thanks for your post. I would start by first reassuring you that I, Kayjatta has always been truthful to myself and to others. Jokes asides (and I like teasing people), my arguements and positions may be controversial but they are always backed by solid evidence. You can ask Turk and Moe .
I will respond to your questions one at a time:
Question 1. "What would you do if PDOIS was the majority party within NADD and Ousainou is chosen as a coalition flag bearer?"
My answer: I would respect and support whoever was selected. This is what you guys do not either understand or deliberately ignore. NADD was not formed by a verbal agreement. It was formed as a contract between different parties backed by documents. All the different parties in NADD signed those documents. Those documents established how the NADD leader will be selected. Those documents at no time and place indicated that the leader of the majority party shall be the leader of NADD. In contract law, there is what they call "contract terms rule". This simply means that written terms of an agreement cannot later be changed by verbal or other statements. So UDP's argument that Darboe should be the leader of NADD because of its majority status is frivolous and not supported by any documentation. I challenge you guys to tell us which of NADD's documents says that the leader of UDP should be the leader of NADD!!! One of NADD's provisions indicates that "all the parties in NADD will be treated equally...", and Darboe signed it.
Question 2: "Has it ever happened anywhere where a party leader from the majority opposition joining forces with a junior partner and the flag bearer is from that junior partner?"
My answer: Not that I know of, but that is not the point. The point is that there was an agreement made by a group of opposition parties, and they all signed on paper that they will respect the terms of the agreement. Then at the last minute UDP reneged on their pledge in a flagrant violation of the terms of the agreement simply because Darboe has a personal expectation which he did not voice out at the beginning. It would have been more honorable if Darboe had indicated from the beginning that "he would only partcipate in a UDP-led coalition". Then everyone would know what they were up against; and if they agree to rally behind UDP, fine!
Question 3: "What is wrong with the UDP crying foul for their Leader not able to lead the coalition when their party forms the majority within the opposition and that coalition?"
My answer: There is so much wrong with that, because it is a violation and a betrayal of the terms of the agreement in the sense that all the documents Darboe and the UDP signed to form and register NADD as a political party, none said that the majority party must be the flagbearer. So to have the expectation that Darboe must be the falgbearer is a myth and it is dishonorable.
Now after answering your questions, let me add this. There is no illusion that the parties that came together to form NADD are not all of the equal strength. We all know that some have more followers than others.
It is the recognition of these that certains checks and balances were created in NADD.
1. the option of a "primary election" (if a leader could not be selected unanimously) intends to enable the majority party (UDP) claim its clout because chances are they will be the winner. But UDP feels too big, they don't even want to contest in a primary with those they consider "political lightweights". They want leadership handed to Darboe on a silver platter. Sorry, we in PDOIS do not believe in monarchs!
2. the flagbearer of NADD, if elected to become president, would serve only one term and step down and totally retire from politics. he would not also back any party in subsequent elections. This protects minority parties from a potential UDP majority tyranny and hegemony.In short, NADD is a coalition of compromise among different interests. The common interest of unseating a dictatorship and establishing a true democracy was the goal...
Attention: I am not speaking on behalf of PDOIS, NADD, or any other political party or group. Furthermore, Kayjatta is not an attorney.
Anything said and written here is nothing but personal opinion and representation.
Kay, blatant lies again. Nothing surprising.
No one is saying the UDP leaders are unable to bring parties together. What decent Gambians are saying is that, NADD was doomed project from the start. Since a condesending personality was given a bone to chew inorder to massage his ego, things fell apart from that day. That is why, he scheme and plot for the end to be the way it did. He always wanted to some how bypass the usual coalition rout, hence the damned Agenda 2011.
Why should Halifa be the thorn in the talks, using Sam SARR his LARKE at will whislt he is in South Africa?
The UDP utilses all cautions, even allowing for wise old gurads like Hassan Musa to prevail and make the UDP ignore the sad and betrayals of the Halifa the doomed Coordinator who was at the time in bed with Lamin Waa Juwara to mess up everything to achieve this end.
Waa who may have been eyeing up joining APRC plotted in open against Darboe, whilst Halifa enjoyed that, knowing he will end up heading an organisation called NADD without the right mandates.
Hence, you cannot lie here against the UDP and your frivolous questions and fat lie analysis are just predictable.
IF a smaller party wish to behave like a party with dominant stake, what do you want them to do? bend down for Halifa. To hell with that.
Again, the examples of coalitions just like it is happening in Guinea, is smaller parties coming to larger ones. If our gods in PDOIDS see every single Gambian as *****s and incapable, sitting down for UDP, NRP to bow down to them, that will never happen.
Politics is about give and take, but hey not in ways that can translate into sarcasm and lies. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2010 : 14:52:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Santanfara
...
Halifa will actually have a field day should Darboe and his team personally visit them and welcome them to a coalition. He will arrogantly belittle them and try to sabotage such moves. This is why, all the efforts have to be done in such way, the leadership of the UDP will never be misrepresented or lied upon....
THATS AN ASSUMPTION! "....should Darboe and his team personally visit them and welcome them to a coalition."
THE REST IS MAILNLY BLANTANT LIES, DISTORTIONS AND MISREPRESENTATION OF FACTS PLEASE REVISIT GENUINE EFFORTS & PUBLIC NOTICE; "PDOIS wrote to UDP before its Congress to indicate to them that the party was waiting for the resolution of the UDP Congress on inter party unity in order to know what form of Alliance could be forged for 2011. " FROM RELATED Bantaba Gambian politics topic PDOIS Press Release after the UDP congress under http://www.gambia.dk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9341
|
Edited by - kobo on 19 Aug 2010 15:46:52 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
