Sunday, 28 February 2010

A False Myraid: Continuation: Politicians are lairs, evil, etc says Yahya Jammeh

The self-interest pursuant of human beings sometimes goes against conventional wisdom. People engage themselves in serious criminal activities just to satisfy personal goal fulfilments.
Why should men transport contra-ban substances such as drugs through international borders knowing full well the repercussions lying ahead?
People join the military, with full knowledge that they might be killed in war situations. The balancing act of men across time reveals that, we innately do things with our self-interest in mind at all times. Sometimes personal sacrifices get the wider exposure. (Some Gambians join foreign armies for resident papers and the pay not for freedom or democracy, gambling on serving unharmed until the end of service contract)

Why do people vote for political party A as against B?
Why do politicians go on campaign trails, disseminating the party’s messages?
Why do political parties make promises to electorates and claim that, they will do more for the people than rivals?
The answers aren’t that complex to underpin, however elements of partisan prejudice will continue playing a part in complex political narratives.
Politicians aren’t saints, they hope and wish, just like we all do. The promises that all politicians advance is a way to capture the individualistic/collective self-interest of voters.

In short appealing to our expectations (good roads, health care, schools, jobs etc). Obama’s one word slogans bear testimony to this fact: Hope! Change! Hope for what? And Change for who?

The careers of scores of British politicians went in smoke due to claiming expenses more than legally allowed. This are MP’s who work hard for their electorates, yet the self-interest aspect overpowered them.
Both former Prime Minister Blair and President Bush are enjoying lucrative lecture and private invitation due to the name they attain as politicians.
Why should men be willing to die for others? Is your live less valuable than others? Soldiers are told to obey orders even if it meant shooting a human being. Why should people leave their faith in the hand of another?
For those of us who believe in God and a day of reckoning, killing a person unjustly is a sin which cannot be forgiven.
Dictators don’t go out and about killing people. They recruit ordinary men and women to do the evil act for them. They employ killers; these killers are protected by a sophisticated machinery of civil servants. Sometimes people help dictators without realising it. Many good men/women are helping Yahya Jammeh for instance by covering up for him, brushing up his image, diplomatically working hard to make him look good. Why? Self-interest.

However, the Islamic standpoint is that, not everyone who dies in the cause of good is a martyr. People can die for far complex reason other than for God. Hence we cannot just ordinarily know the real reason people do the things they do. Some of our predicaments are by accidents, unexpected.
The politician in question should be patient and avoid trying mind control Gambians. Some may have allowed themselves to be captivated, giving up their minds unquestionably, that is not the norm, it is a misnorma.
Therefore, let him put to rest the talk of sacrificing for the people. The people should be the judge of that. Self-serving politics is unattractive and self-defeating. Condecending at best!!!!
“Hide your good deeds like you hide your bad deeds” (Abu Uwais) then only God will reward you. However politics is a profession were such is not the case. Everything must be put under the media glares.
Yahya Jammeh came upon us with the claims that politicians are lairs, dogs, evil etc. Yet he is the biggest of them today. His self-interest pursuing has resulted in him curtailing the rights and freedom of Gambians. He has created a nasty entity of the NIA, Green boys and made the civil service his personal slave enterprise.
Gambians are willing to kill for him, torture for him, fabricate evidence for him, harass for him, spy for him, lie, blindly follow him and many other filthy human characteristic are done for Yahya Jammeh, why? Some now even looks at him like a God. People wish to enhance their self-interest through Yahya’s favours.
Gambians who decline to get involve in attacking and exposing Yahya in the open are equally guarding their self-interest. Think about strolling round Bakau beach, taking pictures of Westfield, Kairaba Avenue. Visiting the hot spots and enjoying the delicious local foods. Why should you spoil that for anyone?
Yahya has destroyed his legacy and sadly maybe his relationship with his maker. No amount of charity absolves a tyrant. It is because of the quest to see freedom and prosperity in our country people risk their privileges in exposing Yahya. However, at the bottom it all, it is our self-interest to see a free and better Gambia for all. And for that we are willing to die, a noble cause by all standards.


Don’t tell us about the beast
His abomination and vanity
Polluting sacrileges
Undeniable absorption capacity
Mafioso espionage
Latitudinal practises
Murder instinct and greed immeasurable

The simpletons aren’t stupid
Selfishness and lack of hope
Allow men to be infected with
Foul incense
Don’t you under estimate the simpletons
It is no rocket science
Establishing who is destroying the little
Who’s the chief architect in the dog e dog
Watch me and i watch you fall

The Contenders
All you are saying
Or will be saying
Have all been said before
The search for real people
With D-plan
A master plan worth our attention
Call it a plot
Ridding the landscape of thorns
Habitual for all
Making hope lives

Monday, 22 February 2010

A concern Christain reacts to my article: Ultimate Sacrifice

The writer is calling him/herself as Gambiano--- A real name would have been better.
This is the query:

Below is my comment to you peice. Let's practice tolerance.

A quick comment on Suntou Bolonba Touray's column December 2009 in The Gambia Journal:- The Ultimate Sacrifice: Eidul Adha: Man or Animal.
Touray wrote "Also we as Muslims don’t believe that, God sacrifice his own Son for the sin of others to come. Sin even lay people like myself can tell is ever increasing, therefore God sacrificing his only Son for us make little sense".
Bolonba look up the word FAITH. Profess what you believe and NOT what you don't believe when it comes to religion. Because the same way you said it makes little sense to Muslims that God sacrifices his only Son is the same way it makes less sense to Non-Muslims that Mohammed is a prophet and the Quran is the word of God.
If you live in a glasshouse don't throw stones.
Policing Intolerance.
Prisoner of Tolerance.
A. Gambiano

Here is my first response to him/her:

Thanks for your observation Gambiano. Unfortunately you are rather late in the day in terms of religious discourse. Every religion has things which cannot be reconcile with others, thus the difference in belief systems. And to make intellectual comparisons is the bedrock of comparative religion.
I understand from your mail that you are a Christian, if so, I have been exposed to the faith from early childhood in Sierra Leon a country i was born in. I have a lot of respect for the faith and its followers, however, I felt that the difference we have should be shared if the need arises.
I have listened to many Christian talk shows on radio making emphasis on why Christians don't sacrifice animals and Muslims do, it is from such exposure that i did the article explaining the Islamic point of view.
If you see that as an attack on Christianity, then you need to read my piece again and see the deeper conversation i put across. It is a known fact that, Muslims love Jesus (Isa) the Son of Mary and the Qur'an devoted a whole Chapter to the birth and live of Jesus and his Mother plus the disciples. Hence we as Muslims don't disrespect Jesus as some Christians on their part do to Muhammad. Faith is about mutual tolerance and respect, I am very tolerant to different faith groups, I even have books on religion such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judaism, many books on Christianity and the new secular dogmatic believes.
However, I remain a Muslim and once in a while, I do comparative writings on religious subjects. If you follow religious literature's actively, Gambiano you will notice that every day there are countless materials written by Christians against Islam. In fact, the majority of websites attacking Islam are mostly run by Christians. As a Muslim, my central believe is that, there is no need for negative religious propagation, whoever is guided will receive the correct understanding of Islam and may by God's grace embrace the faith, this is why Muslims hardly depict Christianity with negative propaganda materials like Christians do to Islam.
I hope you understand the brief response here, we cannot all be the same in the ways we think and believe.
Suntou Bolonba Touray

The writer reacts again with the following remarks: The writer call him/herself as 'the prisoner of tolerance':

I am solely an agent of tolerance and I rather be late in this discourse than never.
I have many Christian friends that respect Islam, and sadly in some cases more so than the so called Muslims. As you mentioned there are countless materials written by Christians against Muslims or the negative depiction of Muslims by Christians. Equally, I can refer you to many sites on the internet , books and materials that will be quite the contrary. More telling, I sit in the circles of Muslims and their portrait of Christians is not good either. So if you are tolerant, negative propaganda should not be the measure stick for your discourse. Remember we all live in glasshouses.
I do not mean to go back and forth on this topic. My point is we need to be mindful of what we pen. Thanks for being tolerant and I hope you we can be crusaders of tolerance.
Prisoner of Tolerance,

My final response to his reactions:

Gambiano, many take the tolerance moral high ground but actual don't have a shred of it. If you value your opinion and wish to practice tolerance, then you should be comfortable with the views of others. By attempting to play smart and silence me is a Cristal clear demonstration of intolerance. Be comfortable of who you are and then allow others to express their opinions. Counter them if need be, but you cannot hoodwink me in anyway or form.
By the way, use your real name so that i can respect your opinion. Thanks anyway, and good bye.
I don't live in a glass house, and by the way, throw as much stone as possible. Islam is not my property, it is a religion i believed in, hence i don't get offended because somebody write or say things i don't like against the religion. I counter other people's views when i see fit to further intellectual and open discussions.

Saturday, 20 February 2010

A discussion with Kankaba Sahko, griout super star

I am runing an interview with Kankaba Sahko at her residence in Paris. Our dialogue will be featuring the classic Mandingo song known in Badibu, Kiang, Jarra, Kombo, Janjabureh, URR and many parts of Cassamance.
The song is Domori woo mman naa domorila, tenkulu wayan.

Here is a link to Kankaba singing the song: The material is nearly ready, but the interview will come later. Enjoy culture.

Another Kankaba Song is feature below:

Alhamdulilah ( I thank Allah for everything)

Our creator the Almighty is worth all our thanks and remembrance. I thanks Allah for making many things easy for me. I pray that Allah keep us steadfast and sincere in our actions and deeds.
"patient is at the first instance" (Prophet Muhammad) This statements means that, when we get into difficulty or disappointment at a loss of things we love or hold dear, we should be patient from get go not after saying all sorts and then claim that we are patient.


By Suntou Touray
A Gambian politician claims that he entered politics some twenty years ago seeking only to sacrifice for the country’s poor masses.
By all conventional standards, the obvious conclusion one is oblige to make is that, politicians wish to represent a chosen constituency and to advocate for the enhancement of the electorates. However, in the case of this politician, this known fact doesn’t apply. He portrays himself as the gentle warrior of self-sacrificing Gambians who abandon personal fulfilment at the expense of educating and enlightening the illiterate masses.
The self-sacrificing went as far as holding back personal pleasure and the natural order of fulfilling a matrimonial relationship. Hence he created a mystical legacy that none is able to match so far as demonstrating his willingness to break grounds for the Gambia is concern. A man who is in his early fifty’s, living at times of modernity and all it goes with is seen by his fans as a politician without an equal in many dimension.
His fan base although very narrow, borders on committed indoctrinated elements who after time find it impossible to disassociate themselves from his political errors and short comings. To them, his life alone is enough testimony of a genuine politician who should not be subjected to our scrutiny let alone criticism. An undemocratic notion by all measure, but a necessary evil they would argue.
The facts of life which if apply to him or each and anyone of us, the simple logic of conventional wisdom will break the facade modelled. A master propagandist per excellence, a man who shines light on his every political action, never missed exposing a single significant pre-plan advantageous manoeuvre. In essence all that he has been doing is playing with the emotion and conscience of a young democratic nation.
Self-interest application: (self-interest is the strongest motive of all. A gesture of self-sacrifice: A show that you suffer as those around you do, will make people identify with you, even if your suffering is symbolic or minor and theirs is real. R-Green)
Starting from Priest, Imams, Parents, teachers, lecturers, Journalist, PhD holders, Master degree holders, etc. All categories of us do things because of our self-interest. This could in short be in two fold. For a person who believes in religion and a day of reckoning, the reward expected is either of his life or the hereafter.
Young Gambians today travel thousands of miles to get good education, work and so on because they wish to have a happy and good live. People work hard to get a doctorate degree, masters etc in order to be competitively advantageous over peers, why?
Religious men/women also don’t escape this dogma. Whatever sacrifices they do, either for charity, out of goodness etc is based on the hope of rewarded- by God or fellow men.
What about when a politician who spends half his live soliciting for votes through conventional methods regularly takes the moral high ground of anchoring on self-sacrifice?
Whether one is a socialist, Capitalist, communist, right/left wing, centre right/left etc, the aim is one-- to lead or be in-charge of a powerful political position. Can a politician be wholly altruistic? Not taking credit for anything, you don’t wallow in your reputation and name and so on. Is that possible?
Well, for the politician in question, he never missed taking credit for his actions, neither does he missed inventing politicised slogans for the media or public. This person also operates on the public front than any politician we know. His actions are always out in the open, yet the claims of self-sacrificing dominate his every conversations.
Barack Obama for instance, started his career as a charity social worker. He then went on to his law profession, becoming a senator and finally a president. Did he do the social work purely for the poor or to later in life fulfil an ambition of career in politics? Only he can tell, but if he tries to bombard readers with his altruistic sacrificial social work, many will be wary of him.
This politician on the contrary has a stable income from media business, appearing in conferences, a stint in parliament and the reward of travelling abroad to get paid.
Is he right in reminding us that we should be grateful to him for his sacrifices and support his political doctrines rather than snub him?
Personally I don’t think any politician acts totally for the public good alone. It is a career path; they get advantages associated with the job. Hence they shouldn’t remind us about the sacrifices they engaged in. Doing that only expose the fact that, the deed is not genuinely done for the public good, but rather for recognition, name, respect, power and being in the public eye regularly. That is a satisfaction for some, and may be the politician in question. He needs to remain in the realms of what is humanly possible, enough of outlandish claims.

Wednesday, 17 February 2010


Shall push through the
Reform agendas
They shall motivate you
They shall persuade your frustration
They shall try to include you
In the conversation and lonely
We the people’
‘For our country’
‘In our poverty’
‘The living cost is dire’
I wish to be one of the people’

The songs will pound on and on
With ingenious sound bites
Looping and sneering
Creating value by monking!!!
False celibacy with real people
Yet ‘i will be one with you’
And now you are away from them
Watch the Gambia watch
Read the Gambia read

A case of tongue in cheek
Latched against the unsuspecting minds
Praise me, damned if not
Haven’t you read about the dragon spitfires?
You evil, hypocrite, vain, vicious, dumb,
tribalist, sad, ignorant, buffoonery, you, you ...

The contenders or their advocates
Twist the finger inward
There lies all the grand deceptions

Wednesday, 10 February 2010


Rejoinder: Gambia: Agenda 2011: leaders of opposition parties must do the right thing.

Mr Jeggan Grey-Johnson’s write up on the freedomnews paper at first glance could deceive even the most critical reader. But on close scrutiny, his attempt of lecturing the UDP/NRP and the wider Gambian voters who don’t subscribe to PDOIS politics could not be missed. He like the few usual PDOIS followers of mainly Halifa Sallah, found it hard to resist the temptation of talking at Gambians. They tend to find us as very ignorant and people who don’t know their good.
Unlike the stance of PDOIS and Halifa, the UDP/NRP camp sees Gambians as people with intellect and the free will to do as they reasonably see fit. The pontificating of Halifa to Gambians is the biggest mistake this few harden followers of Halifa continue to repeat.
The leader of the biggest opposition party in the Gambia in an interview on the online Radio run by the www.thegambiajournal, concedes that, he has made some mistakes and he is willing to listen and change the political direction of Gambia. That is what we expect from our leaders, Obama’s short stint in white house demonstrate this practical example.

The UDP leader unlike the political saint don’t bonk about blaming others for the failure to unseat our country’s dictator. Oh no he accept that the task to change our condition is a job for every single Gambian. There is no time to blame others, and the sooner Halifa and his followers get to grips with that the better.
The United Democratic Party just like PDOIS, PPP, NRP, GMC etc are all registered political parties. These entities are under no constraint to join with others in unseating the APRC dictator and acclaim human rights abuser but for the sake of synergy and complimenting one another in various avenues can join forces through the proven method across the world to end Yahya Jammeh’s tyranny.
Mr Grey-Johnson on the other hand lectured us on why he think Halifa and O.J are the selfless politicians, well meaning, no over ambition for power etc whilst the UDP and NRP leaders are power hungry and unwilling to do unity. The puzzling thing which every sincere observer of Gambian political landscape will opine is that, Halifa is the leader who is the most difficult of all Gambian politicians one can deal with. Even lifelong PDOIS members concede to that fact off the record.
Without further ado, let me point out one statement from Mr Grey-Johnson’s complete partisan piece.

“The fact that UDP and NRP are paying lip service to unity, and doing the complete opposite, signals the power lust for leadership even before they’ve reached State House.” Mr Grey-Johnson

How so, whoever has been feeding you these words apparently is lying. If you look deeper, use less emotion, you will notice who is unwilling to open up to unity talks. We are supposed to put the fire out at this juncture, but since you started the exchanges, I will assist you along the way.

It is for the NADD/PDOIS leader to deal with the antipathy existing between him and Darboe. Gambians know Ousainou is more influential than Halifa, 5 to 1 may be but still Gambians wish that, the differences between the two men be resolve and harmony prevail.
All sober Gambians should see Halifa’s latest attempt as a belligerent defiance in the face of a slow walk toward serious unity. Halifa’s entire Agenda 2011 is allegorical, pointing to something all together different than what it’s portrays. Gambians should be careful of his new trick.

Halifa has masterminded PDOIS affairs for over two decades, proofing unsuccessful yet, what can work are ignored because of pride and other ulterior motives. Halifa’s new plot is more farfetched than the decoding of the Davinci code. We at the UDP are aware of the forces at work prompting Halifa stubbornness masking it with rousing flowery words.
The quest to be remembered or even name alongside the messianic legacy of Africa’s anti-colonialist heroes will continue to deprive Halifa of the ability to understand issues now. He should stop living in the past!

The drummers of Agenda 2011 are seriously sleeping politically. How can different political parties hold primaries to select a leader? In which country have we ever seen such a system?
Mr Grey Johnson, don't fall for a trick bigger than Denton Bridge. All successful temporal marriages of convenience came about as a result of lesser parties rallying behind bigger ones. But for some spectacular reasons Mr Sallah thought by avoiding the opposition political parties and going direct to the voters, he can get his wish of fulfilling a compelling dream.
Readers should understand that, Mr Johnson’s misinterpretation of Gambian opposition’s true state is meant only to give Halifa more credibility against the other opposition leaders Gambians prefer over him In short his analysis can be simplify as follows:

Read the skill in super manipulation
1. Halifa is not power hungry but others are (Ousainou)
2. Sedia handed the baton to Halifa and Ousainou didn't. (What that expose his that, Mr Grey-Johnson's dislike of UDP selecting Ousainou at their party congresses doesn't matter, what matters is that Ousainou should be deselected because one Mr Grey-Johnson said so. I wonder where his democratic credentials went to, if he has any?)
Opposition leaders who ended up becoming Presidents, Prime Ministers stick with their people. They don’t all practice the American system of letting a fail opposition presidential candidate be banished to their congressional seat.
Obvious examples one can point out are: Former Prime Minister Tony Blair of United Kingdom. He was an opposition leader until John Major was unseated. He then went on to lead labour for over ten years.
Abdoulie Wadda of Senegal, he too was an opposition leader for close to two decade, yet he ended becoming the Senegalese president using the formula that sane minded political tacticians and strategist would only contemplate... the rallying of smaller parties behind the larger one.
In Kenya, the current Prime Minister was an opposition figure until he became the prime Minister after so many years, and the current president himself was a product of smaller parties backing the larger one. In Zimbabwe, the current prime Minister was an opposition leader for a long time. I can go on and on.
Mr Grey-Johnson it seems wish to bypass all proven methods of coalitions for a system that only Halifa Sallah can think of out a box. Even in America were electing a party leader takes the form of a primary, the contending candidates all belongs to one party, not different parties. The mere flaunting of such absurd idea is not just counterproductive but seriously lacking scholarly thought.
The UDP select their party leader at their annual congress, it is the executive and the members who regularly stick with Ousainou, who is Mr Grey-Johnson to suggest that, Ousainou should leave thus lazily thinking that, his man will get advantage due to that.
I wonder why the PDOIS guys are actually throwing such outlandish argument.

3. Agenda 2011 which propound some of the most of undemocratic calls is embraced by some confused and misinform followers who refuse to look deeper than what is apparent. That is, Halifa said in the material, only those who buy into the agenda 2011 will be allowed to vote in any primary. Now, is that democratic Mr Grey-Johnson? No wonder only lifelong Halifa guys are even contemplating reading the material.
4. Mr Grey-Johnson fail to point out that Halifa is actually a failed parliamentarian who couldn’t withhold his seat in Serrekunda. If Halifa’s 25 years plus political wisdom is such that, he can give us readymade solution out our current debacle, he will never speak to anyone about coalition let alone speaking with the UDP. If it is Halifa who is in Ousainou’s position with a majority stake in the opposition camp, the last person he will consider speaking to will be Ousainou. Yet Mr Grey-Johnson felt, Ousainou is the problem and Halifa the political dynamo and master tactician should be given a crocked badge to lead the opposition into a 6% vote share.
5. NADD according to Mr Grey-Johnson got a 100% improve result, in actual terms if you add 3%+3%=6%. In politics there is no insignificant figure when it is vote share, half a percent is a serious figure. Thus, NADD did not score 6% but a lesser amount. And even for argument sake if we take the 6% as an improvement, which right thinking person will exchange 6% for over 25% plus?
Only our somersaulting PDOIS poll analyst will ever take us in that direction. NADD couldn’t even capture a mere double figure in the range of 10% or even 12% but a meagre 6% yet Mr Johnson is shouting his top off with such figures, imagine if NADD has score 15%, who will dare approach Halifa for him uniting with other opposition parties? But as usual, Mr Grey-Johnson like many of Halifa’s followers only understand his outward big ideological propaganda, his stubbornness and lack of tolerance to alternative views never down on his harden followers. Their years of residing in the west have little or no effect on their understanding of give and take in politics.
Ousianou Darboe is not power hungry neither unwilling to speak with members of other opposition camp. In fact that is what he has been doing for long time now. But if you are trying to convince someone who looks at you like an illiterate, what chance do you have to put your message across to him?
Mr Grey-Johnson should tell us why he thinks Halifa will win a primary to become the leader of the opposition. If he can just manage to do that in just one paragraph, many will appreciate his efforts.
But to finally state why Mr Grey-Johnson and other misinform writers feel the Agenda 2011 will favour Halifa or their chosen candidate before any voting, their premise is the simple fact that, it is Halifa who wrote the idea.
Since Halifa wrote the undemocratic idea which among other thing state that:
“one person can sell the idea to 50 people, this 50 people will come back to the initiator of the Agenda (Halifa)...” so that he can tell them what to do, and those 50 people will also go on passing the good news to hundreds more. This simple logic place Halifa at an advantageous position against the rest of the opposition candidates.
Now let Mr Grey-Johnson tell us less intelligent Gambians, is that a good way to attain leadership? Deceiving your colleagues with a grand idea which is nothing but communistic at best. However, all that Mr Halifa Sallah has unconvincing put together calling it Agenda 2011 is just a dream lacking direction.
PDOIS even in Banjul could not over two decades of taking part in party politics produce a winning candidate, Halifa became a parliamentarian due to UDP boycotting the 2001 elections, leading to him wining the Serrekunda seat. Wouldn’t it be much easier for Halifa to device a winning formula for his own battleground first and then he can think of countrywide?
The Agenda 2011 is:
An idea propounded by one man, cannot be the property of a nation. When people were involve from the onset to the completion of the agenda, then it become a representative material, but by virtue of it being a singular idea of Halifa, Gambians are at liberty to say no to dictatorial tendencies at its infancy. We are no more a state where one man can hoist his thoughts on the rest, with the pretext of sweet talks and hiding behind sovereign dogma. Halifa is equal to one Gambian; therefore, let him tell us, who he consulted in arriving at the modalities of what he is calling the ‘Agenda 2011’. What substantive researches did he carry out and what methodologies if any did he utilize to know that, the agenda 2011 will make any difference? Did Halifa carried out any preliminary test among Gambians, preferably none PDOIS sympathizers in ascertaining the viability of the Agenda?

Monday, 8 February 2010


The numerous figures
Picking from the lot
Amidst the pros and well laid Arguments
Hitherto king makers
Changing lane in the tick of battle
The faults attributed to the old guards

The contenders
What do we know about them?
It is all happening too quickly
Whilst our nation grips in fear
Uncertainty and nightmares
Yet they emerge from the woodwork
Bold and loud
Squeezing the agendas
Manifested in the bracket of
Self indulgence
The parable clearer on each scribble
The fewer watching populace
Appreciating the messy encounters
Is it all part of the game?
All are talking about the
Good of the disgrace paradise
Determining the real contenders
The last of the work in progress

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Welcoming Jollof news

I visited the new online paper It is also an interesting platform for news and commentaries. God bless the guys out there.