Blogger Template by Blogcrowds.

I have seen the light and I am born again. Instead of a pampered and pompous frat-boy; instead of an arrogant prick; instead of an Emperor with no clothes, I now see President George W. Bush for what he is: the military genius of our times. It's time to repeal the 22nd Amendment and make George W. Bush our President for Life.

The final epiphany came last night during Bush's historical speech about our victory strategy in Iraq. The realization had been dawning for a few weeks while listening to the White House spin; but last night during his brilliant, concise and courageous lesson to us all I had the A-HA! Moment; cementing my faith in Bush's unparalleled genius.

It's the Terrorism, stupid!

Enquiring minds will like to know why we invaded Iraq? It wasn't about WMDs. We know that. The whole WMD thing was a big, fat lie, er, uh a little fib to get us where He (bush) wanted us to go. I used to be mad about the deception that got us into war. But now I see the grand strategy. George Bush is a geo-strategic, chess playing genius that makes Zbigniew Brzezinski, Samuel Huntington and Henry Kissinger look like the Three Stooges

Ok, let's be honest, lies are sometimes necessary; especially in a democracy. After all it was Plato who said,

The rulers of the state are the only persons who ought to have the privilege of
lying, either at home or abroad; they may be allowed to lie for the good of the

And certainly we didn't go to war in Iraq just to get rid of that old evil dictator, Saddam Hussein. Hell, we put him there in the first place. Plus we armed him to the teeth for his war with Iran..
And it certainly wasn't about liberating the Iraqi people and spreading Democracy. We only do that in fairy tales and storybooks, not in real life. In real life we go, we take, we use and then we leave. Usually leaving the place we've been in ruins.

And the war can't be about Oil. We don't need no stinking oil. We've got plenty. Otherwise, why doesn't the new energy bill emerging from a Republican Congress demand we drill in the ANWR? Why isn't the administration making a stink, like Lou Dobbs on CNN about China taking over Unocal? Why don't we ban gas-guzzling SUVs? No, don't let those pesky energy worrywarts fool you. We've got plenty of oil in the pipeline for years to come.
So if the War in Iraq wasn't about WMDs or Saddam or oil or liberty, then what is the war in Iraq about? The terrorists, stupid! How many times do I have to pinch myself when I come to that realization?

That was what Bush is saying right out. In his Speech at Ft. Bragg, Bush used the word(s) terror/terrorists/insurgents or `they' to refer directly to terrorists more than 50 times in 30 minutes. He only used 9/11 about five times, but we know with a wink and a nod what he means. 911 equals terrorism.

And now, in a place where there was no terrorism before the war in Iraq, we've got suicide jihadists streaming into Iraq from all over the world. We've got them all in one place. We've got them right where we want them. And when we get them all in Iraq as part of our master plan, the annihilation of terrorist will begin.

We've got the Kurdish army in the north, we've got the Shia army in the South and we've got the Israelis ready to rout Hezbollah out of Southern Lebanon, back through the Bekka Valley all the way to Damascus. Finally, we've got ourselves, the most awesome fighting machine in the history of the world right in the middle with our precision guided weaponry, smart bombs, napalm, depleted uranium and bunker busters. It's genius I tell you. The terrorists don't have a chance.

When Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Bush and the orchestrated choir of believers all shout that it's better to fight the terrorists in Iraq than in our homeland - this is what they're talking about. The master plan; the grand scheme, the genius of George Bush. That’s why they lied about WMDs and all of the reasons for war. Don't you see? It's all about herding the terrorists into Iraq and then wiping them off the face of the planet.

This is the reason why we’ve got to put aside our partisan politics, our satirical chimp licks and our well honed cynicism. It's time to admit that he's not an idiot, but an idiot savant. George Bush, through his 20 moves ahead geo-strategic chess game has out maneuvered, out thought and out played every last one of us.

And maybe it has cost tens of thousands of lives, hundreds of billions of dollars and all of our credibility and respect in the world, but in the end, if it rids the world of the international terrorist network of evil, we'll have to say, like the President, that it was worth it.
It's time to admit that George Bush is a genius. He may be a mad genius. But, he's our mad genius.


If you haven't had a chance to read this chick's blog ( you really should head on over there NOW. She's always so on point and hilarious about all this crap (and more). (I love how she calls him "Scooter" - fits perfectly)

I was waiting on her take of last night's "come to Jesus" chat Georgie had with the nation and she didn't let me down. Herewith I present AngryBlackBitch.


There is only one thing American's care about, and that’s winning. They don't really care about being lied too, just as long as you pull it off. That's why the lies about the Iraq invasion never caught traction before now. As long as we could win, no one cared that much. The reason things have dramatically tanked recently for Bush, is that Americans have seen this movie before, and they know we are not winning. Elections took place in Iraq and all hell broke loose.

Americans cannot tolerate losing because success is a central American myth. Americans define themselves as successful, and all powerful. Loss is not part of the American dream. That is what made Vietnam such a festering sore, we lost! Messed with our heads and ego big time. And the American people will punish anyone severely who messes with their myths. Witness Johnson and Carter.

That's why Democrats should be happy that Kerry lost. If he had won a squeaker, he would have tried to make some changes, but Iraq would have gone downhill anyway. It has been too late in Iraq for awhile. Thus, the American people would come to think we were losing with Kerry in office. And he would preside over a disaster. No, Bush launched this unwinnable war, let him and the Repugs reap the benefits of it. The sad irony is that so many innocent men and women are losing their lives and livelihoods because these clowns (bush &Co) have to get Saddam.


The single largest challenge that we face in Africa is tribalism. As a rural born, urban-schooled African, I regarded tribalism as an evil that we have to overcome if any meaningful development is to take place. However, lately I have come to regard tribalism both as a cancer and also a tool that can be used to propel Africa to a new dimension of development.

The majority of Africans are not able or willing to forsake their tribal allegiances so what do we do with this mindset. How can we channel this tribal energy into a national mainstream? We need to understand the tribes before we impose nationalism on them. Tribes are a contradiction in today’s Africa they are an evil if your tribe is not in power and a benefit if your tribe is in power. This is due to the nature of our political and government systems whereby there are no checks and balances; fostering a climate of absolute power resting on the Executive and by extension to the Executive's tribe. So what should be done?

The first step to getting rid of an ailment is an accurate diagnosis and an admission by the patient that he has something that ails him. Once the diagnosis and admission have been made then a course of treatment is initiated that allows healing to begin. We need to admit that Africans are by nature tribalistic and this in itself is not inherently evil. Fact: tribes had institutions and systems that catered for the welfare of all the tribal members. Could it be that African States by totally disregarding tribal institutions and systems have weakened themselves? Africans traditionally belonged to extended families, which in turn belonged to a clan, and which in turn belonged to a tribe. In our haste to make the absurd partitioned Africa (Berlin Conference and the partition of Africa) into nations we chose to totally disregard this established socio-political order to our own peril. So we have tried and failed at making the great leap from individual tribal members to national citizens. For one to have allegiance to a nation the benefits must outweigh those of belonging to a tribe. In most African nations you are defined as a citizen only on paper. Your primary designation is that of an ethnic group. For example on paper you might be Gambian but your benefits or ill fate is determined by whether you are Mandinka, wollof, Fula, Jola etc. This schizophrenic national mindset permeates Africa and its denial only compounds the problem.

African States need to form governments and institutions that have their power base in the tribal institutions because this is where the real power emanates from. i.e. Most Africans respect and have primary allegiance to the tribal structure. The central government is viewed as an outside force that is often hostile and not relevant. I submit that the national government would have more legitimacy if all tribes were represented. All issues in government would be examined using dual standards; a tribal and a national standard. Balance both interests. In most parliaments an upper house should be formed consisting of statesmen who command the most respect and support from each tribe. All tribes would be designated two members very much like the US Senate. This group will balance the State interests versus the tribal interests. An equal representation will ensure that the rights and interests of minority tribes are not trampled upon by majority tribes.

Africa has tribes for better or for worse. If given lemons make lemon juice. It is the hand we have been dealt let us play it to our advantage; turn our cancer into HEALTH.


Letting your self get bullied is just the best way to look weak and pathetic. I am glad Halifa and the other opposition members of National Assembly are taking the clerk of that body (national assembly), the attorney general and my erstwhile employer (the independent electoral commission) to court.

The dispute is over the penchant letter that the clerk sent to the opposition members of the assembly urging them to vacate their seats because of a constitutional provision that even a layman like yours truly can discern. The provision he made reference to state thus:

Section (91) (1) (d) of the Constitution, which states that;
“A Member of the National Assembly shall vacate his or her Seat in the National Assembly, if he or she ceases to be a Member of the political party of which he or she was a Member at the time of his or her election”.

Bear with me here. I am kinda slow. But has any one of these opposition figures left their respective parties? Isn’t NADD a coalition of those parties? Which by the way remain separate legal entities with valid registrations. Where is the freaking vacancy?

Who is behind this shenanigan? The clerk’s role in situations of vacancies is to inform the electoral commission as such and not to take it upon himself to declare seats vacant. This is a test of character for NADD. If they let Yaya and his cronies dictate the rules of the game, they can’t cry foul at the results. Sue their ass and if the mercenary judges thwart your efforts, call your supporters to take to the streets.

As a rule, I'm not a fan of Hallmark Days - those occasions when we're obligated to celebrate and tithe to the tinsel titans who compel us to compassion or guilt.

But Father's Day has always had a special spot on my calendar - not only because I like fathers who stood up to responsibility, but it serves as day for me to reflect on the sacrifices of a man who once called the Village of Saba home. The man with the loud voice, but a gentle heart. The joke on our side of the village is that my old man will scare the living hell out of a lion with his voice but the soul behind the man we called Dad is as gentle as they come.

Father’s day is a day of remembrance for me. I remember the phone call that broke the terrible news… the demise of my father. It is still vivid in my memory as the morning dew. But I will not dwell on that sad news, because his is a life worth celebrating.

Frankly, I don't know why Dad doesn't slam the door on his way out. Considering the abject poverty that bedevils the life of an illiterate African villager; who live literally from hand to mouth.

The reason he doesn't is because fathers, when they are true fathers, don't do that sort of thing. They don't act childishly, throw tantrums, pout and demand attention. They take the guff and keep on trucking or in the case of my old man keep on farming and doing any odd job to feed his family. It's a very grown-up thing.

Before everyone who had a bad father or a lousy husband starts typing my name, allow me to disclaim: The world is full of good and bad men, some of whom have managed to procreate, as well as good and bad women. Ditto. But this is not about them. This is an ode to a man I grow up to respect and even more after he gasp for his last breath.

This is my appreciation for my father’s patience and understanding. His strength and reliability in spite of the forces arrayed against. This is the reason I celebrate father’s day. If only I can give ol' dad a call.

Let me get this straight. A member of CONGRESS delivering petitions signed by millions of Americans and 105 other members of congress is not allowed past the White House gates?

A petition signed by almost 1 in every 500 Americans and the President doesn't even have the decency to let the Congressman delivering it past the front gates?

Common decency. In typical Bush Co fashion, this administration thinks that if they ignore him, he will go away. Ignore it is their mantra. If we ignore the insurgency, it'll die down. If we ignore the reports of Gitmo abuse, people won't think there's a problem. If we ignore the fact that the poll numbers are sinking, no one will notice. So they won't answer to 105 Representatives of the people, who, by the way, represent MILLIONS of Americans.

This is what it's come to. This is yet another lowlight in Bush's presidency. Like a spoiled five-year old, he's giving Congress (and by extension, millions of Americans), the silent treatment.
So remember this picture. Remember the day the President of the United States refused to let members of Congress pass those gates. Not because they pose a "security threat"; not because they were violent, but because our President is a big, spoiled, whining baby who thinks if he doesn't look under the bed, the big bad monster will go away.

Well, we're not going away. Conyers would have stood there all night, if not for his age. The truth is ugly. And scary. And it's there, whether Georgie wants to see it or not.

Binneh Minteh Posted the following comment to the posting I made on may 30th.
He wrote:

Ousman, am not making up any stories here. I was at the Denton Bridge when all
these things happened. May be I should have clarified better. Yes Suwareh was in
charge of the TSG personnel on the ground. I was deployed there with a
contingent of the commando unit and some recruits that just completed training
at the time to join him. Suwareh was in fact taken captive after he went to talk
to the insurgents."

Can a lieutenant over rule a major as Binneh espouses

Chongan then was an assistant inspector General of Police whose office was
at the Police Headquarters in Banjul. So it was true that he was at the Banjul
side of the bridge. Well under normal circumstances a lieutenant cannot over
rule a major. When chongan gave orders for us to fire, he left the bridge. That
is why I wrote as follows"

Upon getting back to my men on the ground, I found
MAJOR CHONGAN givingorders that we should fire at them when they try crossing and then he left the bridge. One thing I learnt as an officer is to deploy and use my men in accordance with the means available. I concluded that resisting
and fighting back at that juncture was poor leadership and just sacrificing our
men."I did not over rule his orders, but as the most senior after suwareh was
taken captive on the other side and after chongan left the bridge, I used my
initiative to pull the men from the bridge and headed to talk to the Inspector
General of Police.

I am still flabbergasted as to how many mediators were at the Denton Bridge on July 22nd 1994. Ebou Colly aka Sam Sarr told us in captivating details on the Gambia-L that he was playing that role. Now by my count, the number is three… Ebou colly, Binneh Minteh and Captain Amadou Suwareh. The later two came from Binneh’s account.

I am not calling Binneh or any one a liar. I wasn’t there. I have an inquisitive mind like everyone else and a conflict in the narratives ignites my Cerebral cortex into action. Haloscan (the comments software) might not be doing Binneh justice. But if you are reading this Mr Minteh and wanted to post a detail response just let me know and I will make sure you are accorded that privilege.

Move on

The Washington Post reports that Bill Frist agrees with the autopsy of Terri Schiavo, that she was without brain function, and that the diagnosis made by her ACTUAL doctors was more accurate than his video-diagnosis in a field outside his medical specialty.

"The diagnosis they made is exactly right. It's the pathology, I'll respect
that. I think it's time to move on."

Isn't that special? Now that he has wasted uncountable legislative hours and money, created controversy and hatred where there should have been none, invaded the privacy of a family and in general abused his office, he gets to say, "My bad," and forget that this entire incident actually happened.

He repeated the same “let’s move on crap” on Good morning America. I felt like grabbing him through the TV and B**** slapping him.

Why would Matt Drudge run this banner? Silly me. To help Edward Klein sell more books off course. Matt Drudge is smart enough to know that another "Hillary-sucks" book would only increase her constituency. But, what's so insane about this particular book is that -- assuming the idea is to hit Hillary politically – it will fail utterly. If the charge is true, how on earth could one read the passage he quoted and not feel sorry for the woman?

Hillary cannily turned her biggest liability -- that she was overly ambitious and wanted to create her own political career separate from Bill -- into strength. The underlying subtext of her 2000 New York Senate run was that of a woman's redemptive odyssey after having endured the humiliation of the Monica mess across the cable stations and in the front pages of every newspaper. She was the wronged wife who refused to just be a victim. Instead, she launched out on her own. This wasn't said explicitly, but the impression was made.

Now, Drudge wants to spread the Klein story that Hillary isn't just a victim of a philandering husband -- but that she endured a rape, stayed with the husband and raised her daughter. And this is supposed to be a political hack job against her?

In any sense, the story is repugnant -- particularly its complete lack of thought for the feelings of Chelsea Clinton. Yes, she's an adult now, but she's still a human being.

But, as a "political" attack, Drudge's giving this banner status is beyond stupid. Which brings me to my original gut feeling… it is all about making a buck.

This is what operation no compromise means for you bone heads that think Yaya Jammeh is serious about fighting corruption. Yankuba was ordered to return 2.4 million dalasis of taxpayer’s loot that he stole a few months ago and this is the reward he gets for thievery in Yaya Jammeh’s Gambia…

Should I be surprise at this development? Operation no compromise is nothing but a joke. Yaya … the most brazen thief hasn’t declare how he got so rich so soon. The charade, which happens to be the Paul commission, was nothing but a calculated maneuver by Yaya to strengthen his grip on power.

Is it that black, Hispanic and Asian women never go missing! Do they just have a greater sense of direction? Eugene Robinson examines the odd media phenomenon of wayward white chicks.

See ya

DNC Chairman Howard Dean's comments, as reported in this San Francisco Chronicle story, that Republicans are:

"A pretty monolithic party. They all behave the same. They all look the
same. It's pretty much a white Christian party.”
Have generated tons of interests. While the comments of longtime Democrat and Def Jam founder Russell Simmons, as reported in this New York Daily News story, that:

"When it comes to reaching out to poor people and minorities, I think there's no
enthusiasm on Howard [Dean]'s part, while [RNC Chairman] Ken [Mehlman] shows a real willingness to listen."
Have been largely ignored.

The fact that African Americans are finally getting the Democrats and the Republicans to pay attention to us, and finally move from giving our issues lip service to taking action, is a great development.

What Blacks are doing is no different than what the "religious right" has done for years. We are tired of the rhetoric and the clitonian masquerades (that is acting like you care) when you don’t give a heck that the Democratic Party has been doing on black folk for years.

Dean's comment that:
"We're more welcoming to different folks, because that's the type of people we
are. But that's not enough. We do have to deliver on things: jobs and housing
and business opportunities."
Shows he is listening. But that has to translate into action. Why hasn't Dean (and to larger extent the democratic party leadership) moved to support well-qualified African American candidates running for office who find themselves challenged by lesser-qualified white candidates? Kweisi Mfume shouldn't have a primary challenger in his Maryland Senate campaign; Michael Coleman shouldn't have a primary challenger in his Ohio Gubernatorial campaign and Charles Sanders shouldn't have a primary challenger in his Ohio 2nd Congressional District campaign. But these highly qualified African American candidates all find themselves challenged in primary battles by white Democrats. Why? And they (Democratic Party leaders) wonder why we(African Americans) are leaving the Democratic Party in droves.

In a follow up to my previous post…benign neglect, with the G8 (group of 8 industrialized nations) summit coming up and Britain’s Tony Blair pushing for debt write-off and a doubling in aid to African countries, I feel the urge to caution these leaders about the way they go about this venture… not that they will ever hear what I got to say.

Writing off debt to free resources for human development in Africa is a humane gesture. However the act most be followed by stringent rules to see to it that these funds are in fact use to uplift the living standards of the people. The mindset in most European capitals that the bad old days in Africa, when leaders in military fatigues sent their wives to buy real estate, jewelry and give birth to make their offspring westerners are over, that the Mois, Mobutus and Bokassas are either dead or in retirement and that the present crop of African leaders are upright, forward-thinking leaders with the continent's welfare at heart must be eradicated.

The notion that with the present generation of leaders in Africa, canceling odious debts made to the old, discredited African leaders of yore will be put into health, education and building roads without any mechanism for verification is just fantasy. The fantasy is based on the European thinking that things are changing on the continent of Africa with the new generation of leaders at the helm. To which I say bull. I have to suppress a laugh each time I hear this talk of a new generation of leaders from western talking heads. That’s not the Africa I lived in and sees on my visit, and if plans for an African recovery are built on such naiveté and wishful thinking, they are destined for failure.

How…one might venture to ask, did the elites in these western countries come to term turn leaves in Africa as born again, civic minded leaders with their citizens interest at heart? The answer is simple… elections or semblance of it. The fact that more African countries are run by nominally elected governments instead of military dictatorships is what the whole concept of “new leadership” is based on. This obscures the fact that the new administrations are structurally clones of those that went before them. The elites that have sabotaged development since independence have adapted to the times, learning to play the democracy game with panache. Africa's kleptocracies have reinvented themselves.

Case in point the Gambia. When Doctor Jawara, 30 years in the saddle, was run out of the country in a military coup, western countries with their Bretton woods institutions voiced their dissent, called and paid for elections. Elections were held and guess what? The military dictator turn civilian was 'democratically' elected.

Like most people who love and care for Africa, I pin my hopes on the emergence of a breed of young, educated, technologically aware Africans who, less burdened by the rigid demands of tribal loyalty and free of the inferiority complexes of the colonial era, will stride confidently towards the future. But we are not there yet.

However, this doesn't mean the west should give up on aid, abandon the campaign to write off debt, or stop trying to level the playing field when it comes to trade. The gist of my post is that the same old tedious rules shouldn’t apply this time around. Conditions on aid will have to be set and strictly policed. Donors will have to keep a sharp eye out for the more sophisticated scams that kleptocrats will come up with. In essence carry a big stick while offering the carrot.

“Africa’s time has come.” Those are the words of the world’s most famous political prisoner, Nelson Mandela on a recent visit to Washington. As millions of American movie goers invade theaters to visit galaxies far, far away in the final chapter of Star Wars, Madiba [as Mandela is fondly called] tried to awaken the conscience of America’s leaders to the plight of a continent right here on earth, just on the other side of the Atlantic.

Africa, often neglected and marginalized is the only region on planet earth no better off than it was 25 years ago. Millions of Africans live in countries burdened by war, millions of African children do not go to school, and millions of Africans die as a result of disease, hunger or conflict. Africa risks being left even further behind as economic stagnation spreads. Though tragic these statistics are nothing new. The rest of the world [especially the rich western countries] that exploit the continent hasn’t flinched at the consequences of their benign neglect attitude towards bilad_as_sudan.

Mandela, with all the glory that he earned the hard way is telling us that it is Africa’s time without calling for an end to the system of global apartheid separating haves and have-nots, with many of those have-nots discriminated by race and geography, living in the African world.

If Africa is to progress in any meaningful way, a few things has to happen. The unbearable debt burden that these nations owed to the west has to be cancelled. Debt has become the burning tire neck lacing the African continent. There is a reverse transfer of resources from the world’s poorest to wealthy bankers and their surrogates in the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The biggest burden of this debt is borne by women and children, as cash-strapped African governments close schools and health centers in service of the ever-spiraling obligations. Imagine the long-term effect of bartering the cancellation of these debts with the institution of verifiable and sustainable democratic institutions. The cost to the west will be minuscule compared to the militaristic adventures they undertaken.

Fair trade is another thing that has to happen. African farmers can’t compete against the heavily subsidized U.S. agro-business industries. If farmers in Europe are complaining about it, how can back breaking, labor intensive farming communities in Africa compete in this environment?

The military industrial complex’s role in the numerous festering conflicts on the continent of Africa cannot be ignored any more. All western military aid and sales programs to Africa need to stop. Making military force a higher priority than development and diplomacy creates an imbalance that encourages irresponsible regimes to use western military hardware to oppress their own people. It doesn’t foster democracy and Africa doesn’t need that kind of assistance.

The exploitation of Africa’s natural resources by western companies for the growth in the portfolio of their shareholders has to be remedied. Ninety percent of all western engagement with Africa is in the extractive industries—oil, mining, timber, and minerals. Countries like Nigeria are perhaps the most egregious. In spite of the rich oil flowing onshore and off, the average Nigerian has the same standard of living as his or her grandparents did in 1960, before any oil was drilled. This rape of Africa is unconscionable. Africa’s resources must benefit its own people. Demands of accountability, transparency, and ethics must be made not only on African governments but also on western companies. Until then, sorry Madiba…it is not going to be Africa’s time.

In another scathing attack on his political opponents, President Yahya Jammeh has described the country’s opposition as a group of power hungry people and hate mongers.
Speaking in an interview with the local press in Kanilai, President Jammeh illustrated his assertions by saying that the absence of the entire top brass of the opposition at the recent U-17 victory celebrations at the July 22nd Square was a case in point.

Should the opposition join in celebrating this farce? Ghanaians were robbed fair and square. Watch the video of a fan intruding and confusing the Ghanaian goalkeeper culminating in the Gambia’s victory.

Everyone agrees that the events that took place in Tallinding [Gambia] on Sunday may 29th 2005… the official launch of an opposition coalition to uproot Yaya Jammeh’s entrenched dictatorship was a big event. But how big, for what reason, and whither it points the Gambia, remains enclouded by a storm of ideological hopes and projections. After every major election, its results are immediately subject to mixed explanations. After our 2001 presidential elections, Yaya Jammeh's victory was attributed to electoral fraud, intimidation and Ousainou's ineffective campaign, culminating in his throwing in the towel… even though the majority of his supporters are gearing up for a challenge to the fraudulent election result.

Not only is objective truth probably not discernable in these circumstances, but most of us (the commentators and players) had vested interests in pushing one explanation or another. Note to self don’t dwell on the past elections…be optimistic.

Which brings me to the question how big or important was this event? Aside from the size of the crowd, bringing together Gambian politicians of the ego that assembled at that Tallinding event for a common cause is no easy feat. That in of itself goes to show the urgency of their mission…getting rid of Tony Daba (Yaya Jammeh) before he runs the country into the ground. How many more reasons do any opposition figure in that nation need to see the good in this coalition? Rescuing and restoring the vibrancy of a nation trumps petty politics and individual ambitions. Any time you can bring the likes of Omar Jallow and Halifa Sallah to share the same platform, you know there is something special going on.

So whither it points the Gambia? The coalition theoretically is a sound idea. Building civil institutions under a quasi-interim government that can’t participate in a subsequent election five years later will go a long way in fostering the entrenchment of democratic values and all that comes with it. Let’s hope NADD’s eventual leader will put these theories to practice and will not succumb to sycophancy and the aroma of power.

Newer Posts Older Posts Home