The 'Susungi Research' episode reminds me of the fable about 6 Blind Men of Hindustan (India), who approached an Elephant with the intention of defining/explaining it to others. The first blind man approached the elephant from its body and declared that "an elephant is a wall." The next fell on the trunk of the Elephant and concluded that "an elephant is a big snake." The third blind man stumbled on the tusk of the elephant and concluded that "an elephant is a spear." The fourth blind man held the elephant's leg and concluded that "an elephant is a tree." The fifth blind person touched the ear of the elephant and declared that "an elephant is a large fan," and finally, the sixth blind man held the tail of the elephant and declared that "an elephant is a rope."
Which of these Blind Men accurately definied an Elephant? Who was wrong/right? Why? Any lesson to learn from this?
Food for Thought:
Dr. Susungi stumbled across pieces and bits of information depicting an insignificant aspect of the historical evolution of the former British UN Trust Territory of the Southern Cameroons versus La Republic du Cameroun, with special reference to the unification Agreement, meant to legalize the unholy marriage between two equal states, that has failed woefully. It failed because "the marriage" resulted in neocolonialism, victimization, marginalization, and illtreatment of the English speaking people of the Southern Cameroons. These ills and other Human Rights Abuses have been well documented elsewhere.
For further Research:
Has Dr. Susungi discovered any legal research finding forbiding divorce (after a legitimate marriage)?
Christopher Atang, Ph.D.,
Professor
5507 Pipingwood Drive
Houston, Texas 77084
It's not the load that breaks you down, it's the way you carry it.
- Lena Horne
From: Nfor N Susungi <nsusungi@yahoo.com>
To: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com
Cc: "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>; "cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com" <cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com>; "cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com" <cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com>; "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>; standardtribune <standardtribune@ymail.com>; thepostnp <thepostnp@yahoo.com>; thestarheadlines <thestarheadlines@yahoo.com>; eugenendindi <eugenendindi@yahoo.com>; eugene.nforngwa <eugene.nforngwa@standardtribune.com>; "epiendengu@yahoo.com" <epiendengu@yahoo.com>; edenmedia <edenmedia@yahoo.co.uk>; "recorderspecial@gmail.com" <recorderspecial@gmail.com>; "wimbum@yahoogroups.com" <wimbum@yahoogroups.com>; "sdf-forum@yahoogroupes.fr" <sdf-forum@yahoogroupes.fr>; "thinkexchange@yahoogroups.com" <thinkexchange@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] Motion to Adopt the Draft Federal Consitution by the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly
Ntemfac,The simple answer to your question is that the tern "reunification" was first used in the document entitled: "Pre-plebiscite Resolution on Reunification of Southern Cameroons and Cameroun Repbublic". This is the resolution which Ahidjo and Foncha signed in Yaounde on 14/10.1961. If you are angry because I am revealing the truth which is painful to you, please know that, as a researcher, I also feel the pain of this knowledge. Sometimes, I feel like a child who is learning for the first time that he was adopted.Dr. Susungi
--- On Thu, 7/5/12, Pa Fru Ndeh <PaFruNdeh@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
From: Pa Fru Ndeh <PaFruNdeh@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] Motion to Adopt the Draft Federal Consitution by the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly
To: "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>, "Nfor N Susungi" <nsusungi@yahoo.com>
Cc: "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, "cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com" <cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com>, "cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com" <cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com>, "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>, "standardtribune" <standardtribune@ymail.com>, "thepostnp" <thepostnp@yahoo.com>, "thestarheadlines" <thestarheadlines@yahoo.com>, "eugenendindi" <eugenendindi@yahoo.com>, "eugene.nforngwa" <eugene.nforngwa@standardtribune.com>, "epiendengu@yahoo.com" <epiendengu@yahoo.com>, "edenmedia" <edenmedia@yahoo.co.uk>, "recorderspecial@gmail.com" <recorderspecial@gmail.com>, "wimbum@yahoogroups.com" <wimbum@yahoogroups.com>, "sdf-forum@yahoogroupes.fr" <sdf-forum@yahoogroupes.fr>, "thinkexchange@yahoogroups.com" <thinkexchange@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, July 5, 2012, 7:33 AM
We need to have a PATRIOTIC ABORIGINAL ANGLOPHONE of WEST CAMEROON EXTRACTION WORLDWIDE CONFERENCE - > PAAWCE Worldwide Conference.The Restorationists had already had theirs AAC1 and AAC2.What we need is a PAAWCE Worldwide Conference void of casuist reasoning.Blessed Be CameroonPa Fru Ndeh From: Ofege Ntemfac <ntemfacnchwete@gmail.com>
To: Nfor N Susungi <nsusungi@yahoo.com>
Cc: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com; "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>; "cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com" <cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com>; "cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com" <cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com>; "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>; standardtribune <standardtribune@ymail.com>; thepostnp <thepostnp@yahoo.com>; thestarheadlines <thestarheadlines@yahoo.com>; eugenendindi <eugenendindi@yahoo.com>; eugene.nforngwa <eugene.nforngwa@standardtribune.com>; "epiendengu@yahoo.com" <epiendengu@yahoo.com>; edenmedia <edenmedia@yahoo.co.uk>; "recorderspecial@gmail.com" <recorderspecial@gmail.com>; wimbum@yahoogroups.com; sdf-forum@yahoogroupes.fr; thinkexchange@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:04 AM
Subject: [cameroon_politics] Re: [wimbum] Motion to Adopt the Draft Federal Consitution by the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly1. Motomby-Zoleta herein speaks of UNIFICATION. So Dr Susungi where did you get the Re-unification that you have been carrying on about? Motomby-Woleta (Opposition Spokesman): Mr. Speaker sir, I rise to second the motion. And in doing so, sir, I wish to say that this side of the House, in our determination to help along unification..... 2. What does paragraph 47 of this Annexation Law say? Dr Susungi...I just made this point blank to you...on your Facebook page. Southern Cameroons does not have a problem of unification or re-unification; We have a COLONIZATION problem. Full stop. 3. Has the spirit of Solomon Tandeng Muna arisen in you? How sad. On 7/5/12, Nfor N Susungi <nsusungi@yahoo.com> wrote: > Tande, > > The only importance that I give to the Pre-plebiscite Resolution on > Reunification is that it served as the basis for drafting the constitution > of the Federal Republic of Cameroon which was discussed in Foumban and > subsequently adopted by the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly on > 18.9.1961. Consequently whether there was a union treaty that was ratifed > and sent to the UN Secretariat under Article 101 or the UN Charter becomes a > mote point. > > I have not read J.C. Ngoh's book and I dont know his sources; but I have > the a copy of the proceedings of the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly of > 18.9.1961 and let me reproduce for all of you the motion regarding the draft > constitution. > > Motion to adopt the Draft Constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon > on 18.9.1961 > Minister of Finance (Honorable Solomon Tandeng Muna): Nearly all of us in > this House, although we need not take part in discussing the constitution or > have not taken part in directing the action taken, in one way or another, we > have stood among people criticizing the constitution, propounding another > one and all the pros and cons of this Federal Constitution are quite fair to > most of us. > Sir, I think it is quite proper that this action taken by ourselves for our > country goes into record in our hands, because in the heart of our country, > certainly, people will say "when our leaders at one time faced the storm and > wanted the people of the territory to voice all their difficulties, they all > came together and approved a constitution for our united country" > Mr. Speaker Sir, I am quite optimistic that we the leaders have promulgated > a useful, a good constitution, which under a stable government, which if > handled by a people who are God-fearing, we shall lead this nation to a very > successful end. > Mr. Speaker sir, I don't want to belabor the motion. It is explicit and I > hope honorable members will give it the blessing it deserves. Sir, I beg to > move. > Motomby-Woleta (Opposition Spokesman): Mr. Speaker sir, I rise to second > the motion. And in doing so, sir, I wish to say that this side of the House, > in our determination to help along unification, we shall not abdicate our > right to criticize, urgently if need by, whatever measures are to be taken > in this territory, which we feel would not be to the best interest of the > people. I was saying last time sir that we cannot give tacit approval to > the way the proceedings, or the bringing about, or the formulation of this > constitution was handled by our colleagues of the KNDP. > ……. > …….. > …… > After the lengthy speech of Motomby Woleta, the Draft Federal Constitution > was unanimously adopted on 18.9.1961, paving the way for its promulgation on > 1st October 1961. > Tande, there is absolutely no question about the fact that the draft > constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon was tabled as a motion on > 18.9.1961 or that it was unanimously adopted by our democratically elected > leaders. > Dr. Susungi > > > > > > > > > --- On Wed, 7/4/12, Dibussi Tande <dibussitande@gmail.com> wrote: > > > From: Dibussi Tande <dibussitande@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] Why it is misleading to say that there was > no Legal Reunification > To: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com > Cc: "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, > "cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com" <cameroons_sdf_party@yahoogroups.com>, > "cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com" <cameroonfinland@yahoogroups.com>, > "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>, "standardtribune" > <standardtribune@ymail.com>, "thepostnp" <thepostnp@yahoo.com>, > "thestarheadlines" <thestarheadlines@yahoo.com>, "eugenendindi" > <eugenendindi@yahoo.com>, "eugene.nforngwa" > <eugene.nforngwa@standardtribune.com>, "epiendengu@yahoo.com" > <epiendengu@yahoo.com>, "edenmedia" <edenmedia@yahoo.co.uk>, > "recorderspecial@gmail.com" <recorderspecial@gmail.com>, > wimbum@yahoogroups.com, sdf-forum@yahoogroupes.fr, > thinkexchange@yahoogroups.com > Date: Wednesday, July 4, 2012, 4:04 PM > > > > > > > > > Hi Nfor Susungi, > > > > I think, you're giving this particular document much more importance than it > deserves. This was never a binding agreement much less an international > treaty. It was a working document, and at best, a road map. In fact, this is > just one of the many resolutions and communiques signed by Southern > Cameroons leaders and Ahidjo during the period in question. Contrary to what > you claim, the British were very well aware of the October 1960 conference > which was convened at their behest. As Julius Ngoh points out clearly in his > book, The Untold Story of the Cameroon Reunification: "In the opinion of the > British government, a clear statement had to be made on the form of > reunification, and when and how it would be implemented. In this connection, > Ahidjo and Foncha held a series of meetings in Yaounde on 10, 11 and 13 > October 1960..." Ngoh goes on to explain why the document signed after the > conference "was a mere piece of paper," and why "Ahidjo had taken them > [i.e., the KNDP delegation comprising Foncha, Muna Jua and Effiom] for a > ride." > > > It is worth pointing out that the resolution in questions was just one of > three documents that came out of the meeting. To demonstrate how little > value these documents had in the grander scheme of things, one of these > documents clearly stated that "the implementation of reunification cannot be > automatic but gradual," with Jua talking of a separate existence of "at > least five years." (see Malcolm Milne's No Telephone to Heaven for details). > Well, we all know how well this resolution was implemented. > > > So my advice is that we should read and interpret this and other pre-1961 > documents with a certain amount of circumspection or else we will > inadvertently or deliberately engage in revisionism. > > > > You also state that the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly adopted the > draft Federal Constitution on 18.9.1961. A reading of the motion that was > submitted to the house tells a different story. Let's read some more from > Julius Ngoh: > > > ".. what the SCHC and SCHA adopted on 5th and 18th September 1961 > respectively was the motion to the "brotherly" atmosphere in what finally > became the Federal constitution. It was not the adoption and/or ratification > of the Federal Constitution per se. The motion which was tabled by S.T. Muna > did not request for the adoption and/or ratification of the constitution but > rather for the approval of the "action of the leaders" of both Southern > Cameroons and the Republic of Cameroon and the "brotherly manner in which > they... conducted the negotiations." > > > > In short, what the Southern Cameroons House of Assembly adopted in September > 1961 was a mere "motion of support", to use today's political lingo... > > > The reason for this "omission" is a very simple one; as the Southern > Cameroons Attorney General explained to Jua during the Yaounde Tripartite > Talks, "by virtue of the terms put at the plebiscite, whatever Constitution > is accepted by East Cameroon, West Cameroon is bound to accept it..." - the > price that Southern Cameroons paid for not negotiating and finalizing the > federal constitution BEFORE the plebiscite. > > > > Dibussi > > > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Nfor N Susungi <nsusungi@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Why it is misleading to say that there was no legal Reunification. > By Dr. Nfor N Susungi > > 1. My attention was drawn to a recent interview by Hon. Ayah Paul Abine > in which he stated that "there was no legal document on reunification". > This was further stated on his Facebook page. I am prompted to react > because Hon Ayah Paul lends to this statement his status of a man of law. > Any kind of clarification on reunification must be based on a dispassionate > review of the facts (in the legal sense of the word). What are the facts as > we know them? > 2. The starting point for discovering what really happened on October > 1, 1961 is to look at a document which was signed in Yaoundé by President > Ahidjo and Prime Minister John Ngu Foncha on 14.10.60 innocuously entitled: > Joint Communique. In this document, the Cameroun Republic, represented by > President Ahmadou Ahidjo and Prime Minister Charles Assale and the British > Southern Cameroons represented by John Ngu Foncha agreed on the terms and > conditions for merging the two territories to form a federal union, in the > event that the people of the British Southern Cameroons vote in favor of > joining the Cameroun Republic in the UN plebiscite that was scheduled for > February 11, 1961. > 3. The term Joint Communique was a misnomer because, in reality, it was > an agreement between two sovereign states as attested by signatories to the > document.