Re: Hi

Alex..why is ya phone not working?

On 7/29/12, Muchuo Alexander <muchuoalex1999@yahoo.com> wrote:
> HI
>  Try to buy some news papers and /or magazines for us to read here and know
> how things are going on there-just some recent papers and or magazines.That
> is if you can afford.Fare well.Alex
>
> --- On Thu, 8/19/10, Blaise S. Berinyuy(Esq) <blaiseberi@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> From: Blaise S. Berinyuy(Esq) <blaiseberi@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Why I Accept the Reunification of 1st Oct. 1961
> To: ambasbay@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, August 19, 2010, 3:33 AM
>
> Just to thank my Chairman of the Constitutional Drafting Committee, A.F
> NDANGAM for his beautiful analysis.
>
>
> Blaise Sevidzem Berinyuy Esq.
> Fon-nteh (Shufai) Wo Baforchu, Tobin-Kumbo
> B.A, DIP, LLB Hons, PGD, C.A.P.A
> (Human Rights Advocate, Solicitor and Notary Public)
> Taku Chambers
> P.O. Box 144 Buea,SWP - Cameroon
> Phone: 237 77680743 (Cell)
> Tel/Fax: 237 33323500 (H)
>
> --- On Wed, 8/18/10, Augustine Ndangam <ndangamsenior@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> From: Augustine Ndangam <ndangamsenior@yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: Why I Accept the Reunification of 1st Oct. 1961
> To: ambasbay@googlegroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2010, 4:42 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I sincerely plead with Dr Susungi to kindly post a scanned version of this
> secret document on the net. I make another request in paragraph 5 of this
> posting. Oliver Twistism perhaps? What's wrong with a hearty appetite?
>
> 1.      That Document which Dr Susungi found does not Commit
>           The People of Southern Cameroons
>           When Dr. Nfor Susangi says that he found a document  that now
> makes him believe that Reunification took place, we take it that he is
> entitled to his opinion and believe. When, however, he goes further to
> assert that what he found "refutes the theory that there was no legal Union
> "  there is need to flash the red light and ask him to halt where he is.
>           Even if Foncha signed such a document, it does not commit the
> people of Southern Cameroons whatsoever.:No one should be allowed to
> promulgate a law before it is passed.  Foncha  had no business  signing
> anything  binding on the people of SC back  in October 1960. before the
> people had voted and without the Administering Authority.Paragraph five of
> UN Resolution 1608 XV is crystal clear on the fact that the tripartite
> meeting  set up by the UN GA was to use the agreed and declared policies of
> the parties
> concerned.  If Foncha and Ahidjo had signed a document  earlier and (as Dr.
> Susungi suggests) Foncha  kept it secret it loses the binding validity by
> this UN (GA) directives to the three governments invited for the tripartite.
>           Finally it should be noted that Foncha and Ahidjo Agreed,
> declared  and signed the statement at paragraph 2(b) of their Joint
> Communique that the transfer of Southern Cameroons Sovereignty would be to
> "an organization representing the future Fedreation".  Yet in the morning of
> September 27th 1961 Britain ignored this bilateral agreement  and
> transferred Southern Cameroons to LRC without even
> informing Foncha or his government.  If Britain could ignore whatever
> arrangement  Foncha and Ahidjo had signed and do what they did, the people
> of Southern Cameroons have stronger reasons to reject any commitment by
> Foncha that hinders progress towards their right to self determination.
>
> 2)      Grave Misquote
>           Paragraph five of UN GA Resolution 1608 XV reads:  "Invites the
> Administering Authority, the government of the Southern Cameroons and the
> Republic of Cameroun to initiate urgent discussions with a view to
> finalizing, before 1 October 1961, the arrangements by which the agreed and
> declared policies of the parties concerned will be implemented."
> Here (in blue) is how Dr Susungi quotes the above paragraph
>  "Invites the Administering Authority, the government of the Southern
> Cameroons and the Republic of Cameroun to initiate urgent discussions with a
> view to finalizing before 1 October 1961, the arrangements by which the
> agreed policies of the parties will be implemented      The phrase "agreed
> and declared" is not only important but crucial in understanding what Dr.
> Susungi is asking us to
> swallow.  If Foncha and Ahidjo" reached agreement on whatever, but failed
> to declare it publicly then that document is on the strength of this UN
> directive in Resolution 1608 XV Para. 5 rendered  completely null and void.
> However, Foncha and Ahidjo did , infact, declare what they had agreed upon
> and these were made public in THE TWO ALTERNATIVES. The one which Dr Susungi
> alleges that he found is not there in THE TWO ALTERNATIVES
>
>
>
> 3)      The Focus of our struggle
>           When Dr. Nfor Susungi keeps harping on this silly idea that the
> passage of time has given reunification legitimacy, there is urgent need to
> bring our brother to a proper focus before he misleads other Southern
> Cameroonians .  The central issue in this our struggle our main focus is
> Self-determination.   Our right to self-determination was recognized in the
> Charter of the UN and a Trusteeship Agreement signed to ensure that it would
> be accomplished. Our right to
> self-determination is inalienable which means it cannot be rightfully taken
> away from us by any body – not even the passage of any duration of time can
> take  or give  away our right to self-determination. Let Dr Susungi join us
> in speaking the same language.
>
> 4)      Buea House of Assembly Debate of 18th September 1961
>           Over and over we have said that the one document that should have
> legally bound the people and Territory of SC to LRC is a Treaty of Union
> signed by Foncha and Ahidjo , ratified by their respective Legislatures and
> registered at the UN Secretariat. There is no such document in existence.
> The one thing that we know happened after Fumban is S.T. Muna's motion in
> the House of Assembly debate of Monday 18th September 1961 thanking the
> President and Government of LRC for their co-operative and brotherly manner
> in which they conducted business in Fumban and approving the action of the
> SC leaders in the negotiation.  What we fail to see on the business of the
> House
> for that day or any other day is a Bill of Ratification of a Treaty of
> Union between the State of Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun
> and if there is any such document anywhere we want to also know if it was
> registered at the UN Secretariat in accordance with Article 102  of the
> Charter.  On Monday 18th September 1961 when Hon St. Muna moved his motion
> to approve the action of SC leaders, not even the amended Constitution from
> Fumban was there before the House and no one should jar on our nerves about
> a fictitious document which  Foncha himself could not place before the House
> of Assembly for ratification and we should now be stupid enough to tie our
> fate to it.
>
> 5)      "Reunification" Had its Waterloo after Plebiscite.
>           The francophone choose to characterize  the event of 1st October
> 1961 as "Reunification" and  we are surprise that Dr Susungi consistently
> speaks from this francophone standpoint. Because they see the event as
> Reunification they  came up with the "mighty"/erroneous and misinformed
> theory of the mother-nation by which  they regarded their country as the
> successor of German Kamerun and the event of 1st October 1961 as the return
> of part of their country (SC) having linguistic and other cultural
> differences
> from the mother- nation.
>           Southern Cameroons on the other hand call the event of 1st October
> 1961 "unification" and the nuance is important. Over and over againSouthern
> Cameroonians have told the people  east of the Mungo this simple but
> irrefutable fact that at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 Germany was forced
> to renounce all its overseas colonies, including Kamerun. These territories
> became extinct and the purpose of the UN in 1961 was not to recreate German
> Kamerun which cannot be done without destabilizing the entire sub-region.
>           In any case, LRC's claim to be "mother-nation" met its waterloo
> with the ruling of the ICJ when after the plebiscite LRC went to the World
> Court to Challenge the result of the plebiscite in Northern Cameroons .
> Even if today francophone continue to talk of "Reunification" Southern
> Cameroonians should use words that harmonize with history.
>
> 6)      Distinguishing the Two  Susungis
>           In  1955 a 9-man delegation from Southern Cameroons filed a
> PETITION AGAINST THE ANNEXATION OF THE SOUTHERN CAMEROONS at the UN
> Secretariatin New York .  The petition was signed on behalf of the SC ( take
> note) by three people: Sam Ekontang Elad, J.N Foncha and S.T.  Muna.  On
> their way back from London JN Foncha and the other members of the delegation
> signed THE LONDON COMMUNIQUE drafted by someone whom we have good reasons (
> in the national interest) to withhold his name.
>           Is Dr. Nfor Susungi telling us now that JN Foncha signed a binding
> instrument on unificationin 1960 then turned around in 1995 and signed a
> petition Against the Annexation of the SC?  If he is, let me refer him to a
> praise worthy article on how FONCHA AND MUNA DID NOT SIGN ANY DOCUMENT…
>  that binds  Southern Cameroons to Republique du Cameroun.  The author of
> this Article  states in his clear and lucid style that it was important to
> place on Record the fact that Foncha and Muna  did not sign any document
> that binds us to LRC and (so the author of
> that article argues) no one in future should produce any fictitious
> document to assert the contrary.  The author of this praiseworthy article is
> non-other than Dr. Nfor Susungi.
>
> My second plea to him is to again post that article of his on the internet
> to refresh our minds.        So it turns out that with his present posting
> we seem to be standing  as it were face to face with identical twins both
> called Dr. Nfor Susungi.  Our problem is what scar on their exposed limbs
> will help us distinguish the two?  I propose that we call one Nfor Susungi
> (LRC) and the other  Nfor Susungi. (Action Group)
>
> A.F. Ndangam
>
>
>
>
> From: Angwi Fon <anye@shaw.ca>
> To: ambasbay@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Tue, 17 August, 2010 21:43:24
> Subject: Re: Why I Accept the Reunification of 1st Oct. 1961
>
> Dr Susungi you write;
>
> "But because I don't feel good about what has happened to us in 50 years, I
> now have to figure out another way to extricate myself from the pit into
> which we now find ourselves.  That is the essence of my position."
>
> We are anxiously waiting for you to find this way out of the pit and share
> with us, why didn't you just find this way first, it would have restored
> tremendous respect
> to you instead of going about it the way you did, causing us to take our
> eyes off our immediate projects. In future, I suggest you look at a problem,
> solve it or
> make
> it a project for other brilliant minds to solve. I don't know if you
> consulted with other members who believed that reunification never took
> place before provoking such anger and waste of time.
>
>
>
>
>


--



The thing always happens that you really believe in; and the belief in
a thing makes it happen.