Many thanks Mr SG of SCARM, the watchdog movement. YES! We shall be free sooner than later with or without them. Amen.
Blaise Sevidzem Berinyuy Esq.
Fon-nteh (Shufai) Wo Baforchu, Tobin-Kumbo
Fon-nteh (Shufai) Wo Baforchu, Tobin-Kumbo
B.A, DIP, LLB Hons, PGD, C.A.P.A
(Human Rights Advocate, Solicitor and Notary Public)
(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 Monday, August 4, 2014 12:07 AM, 'Samuel Laikenjoh' via ambasbay <ambasbay@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Dr. Tumasang is right all the way. If Dr. Munzu wants to posit himself as the new leader of the Southern Cameroons struggle he should wait for another appointment by Biya of a so called tripartite talks where they were hand picked to represent the views of the peoples of the Southern Cameroons. This appointment managed to project them as leaders of the Southern Cameroons peoples struggle until they betrayed us one after the other starting with Barrister Elad. We allowed them to use the platform of SCARM to forment the AACs' which they carefully loaded with federalists. When their quest for a federation failed and SCARM declared what was termed then the Zero Option meaning separate Independence of the SOuthern Cameroons he Dr. Munzu clearly stated that the struggle had been taken over by extremists and quit. His sudden return caused a lot of consternation at home when he gave an interview purporting that unification was a given and that what we were
gunning for was a pipe dream. All at home vomitted him hence his sojourn abroad. It was rumoured here that he is doing this because Biya has promissed him the Prime ministerial position if he would bring the "secessionists" to the alter for slaughter and he thinks his past popularity with the masses is still the same. We have long gone past that veneration of greedy individualists and are looking forward to rescuing a people from bondage. He has lived in high society all through his life and cannot countenance coming down to join us in street fights. Let him stay where he is and leave us alone at our undistinguished levels. We shall overcome their treachery and be a free people someday.
Visha Fai
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 3/8/14, Martin Tumasang <tumasangm@hotmail.com> wrote:
Subject: RE:@Manu/Mishefon:Dr. Tums // Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something dear to die for!
To: "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>, "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>
Date: Sunday, 3 August, 2014, 17:19
Mishefon,you start by saying the
dialogue was instructed in Lagos or Abuja. No it was in the
African Commission for Human and Peoples' Rights in
Banjul. Nothing to do with Lagos or Abuja. Wrong premise
hence negative the whole opening paragraph.
I will look at the rest of what u are trying to
say later
Regards
Tumasang
To:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com;
cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com;
ambasbay@googlegroups.com
From: camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2014 09:10:05 -0700
Subject: Re: [camnetwork] @Manu/Mishefon:Dr. Tums // Re:
@ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something dear to die
for!
Ngia Maitre
Tumasang
Did you really re-read your
mail to realize how confused and illogical it sounds?
Normally, "Maitres" are supposed to be the
enlightened ones than shumbus and Air-Men like moi-meme. You
are not even ashamed to say that your stylized
circumlucutions related to the SC case was adjudicated in
Naija Court system...and you are
expecting the Cameroon President to implement what a small
District Court in Lagos (or was it Abuja) decides?
Vraiement, wuna go wait sotey biabia grow 4 wuna crobeau
head dem. In Francophone circles, it was classified as
Benign Negligence.
I have said this to anyone
who cares to listen. The only language that will cause
anyone to listen (UN, AU, Y'de, France, UK, US) to the
"plight of SC" is if there is "Drama" on
the ground and "Tchavoums" are flying left right
and center. Short of that is just a waste of time
and an avenue for a few to make monies through perpetual
Asylum racketeering of Cameroon "adventuriers" in
foreign capitals. Can you tell me how many
"Cameroonians" after gaining their
"Asylum" still attend a single meeting to discuss
the plight of those left behind? The nonsense they call
"The Force of Argument
and not the Argument of Force" is what has
damaged beyond repairs "The Anglophone Quagmire".
If you don't flex your muscle, who will respect you?
Empty sloganeering, Big Mop 4 Natty, Banjul Declarations,
UNPO Declarations, Naija Lower Court Judgements...all na
daso MVOUM. Some SCNC folks are still talking of how they
took over Radio Buea for 15 minutes thirty years ago. How
credible is that for a Liberation Movement? Yet you want to
compare with South Sudan, Eritrea, East Timor. Wuna don see
wetin?
Ngia Maitre, I am very
sorry to sound like I am against the SC Cause. I am Not. I am simply
surprised that we have "Intellectuals" of your
calibre reasoning with their "Hearts" instead of
the "Brains". People who have never participated
in anything SC but who now have access to WWW Internet are
free to say whatever they want since they are not the ones
doing the heavy lifting. Wuna all dey craze.
Ngia Maitre Tumasang,
remember how we all wrote here that Biya will not "put
foot 4 Buea during the decreed
"cinquantainaire"...Unfortunately for us, he came,
he saw and even stayed two days longer than anticipated.
Absolutely natty happened...except from noise makers like us
via the Internet. The SW Chiefs even made him a
"Sessekou". Same was said before his Bamendrous
trip. The guy not only went to Abakwa, but went to Ntarikon
"Palace to chop Achu and Ndza Nikki" and since
then the SDF Chairman (Biya's erstwile nemesis) has
become as irrelevant as a woman's dross after her
Period. Go Figure.Mishe
Fon
From:
"Martin Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com
[camnetwork]" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
To:
"camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>;
"cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
<cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday,
August 3, 2014 1:53 AM
Subject:
[camnetwork] @Manu/Mishefon:Dr.
Tums // Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something
dear to die for!
Hi guys,
greetings from
this end.
Brothers, we have been there
before where Oben, Tita and Leke arrived in Banjul in
the middle of a case and requesting in the name of
Southern Cameroons that the case be postponed or stopped for
they are in dialogue with La Republique du Cameroun on the
issues at bar already and a peaceful settlement should be
given a chance.
We
argued vigorously and told the court that we have no
problem with them joining the case on the side of La
Republique du Cameroun for these 3 do not represent Southern
Cameroons and no dialogue has taken place or is taking
place.
The
Court finally passed judgment instructing that La
Republique du Cameroun should enter into dialogue with
Southern Cameroons. La Republique du Cameroun has been
avoiding the dialogue because it knows the terms and
agenda for such a dialogue.
In the above toxic
mix, surfaces an ambivalent rogue character that no one
knows where he stands, who is everything to everyone,
working on behalf of himself or La Republique du
Cameroun, invites people for a dialogue which is being
claimed SCNC, Southern Cameroons and La Republique du
Cameroun as represented by its chosen
or ostensibly chosen representatives, participated in
the purported dialogue. Soon La Republique du Cameroun will
be brandishing this gift from Washington to the
international community that the court ordered dialogue is
taking place or has taken place. SCNC members might have
been ambushed into such a diabolic assembly without knowing
the intentions of the rogue organiser, who represents nobody
except himself or La Republique du Cameroun directly or by
proxy.
So what is the
modus operandi here. If we
have 5 million Southern Cameroonians, each can organise a
dialogue with la Republique du Cameroun citizens and come to
the public to publish the outcome?, or under what authority
was such a counterfeit purported dialogue organised?.
If Southern
Cameroonians want to talk amongst themselves on the way
forward, no problem. Let them talk. Munzu despite his
purported erudition failed politically to convince Southern
Cameroonians to follow his suggested approach in AAC1, AAC2,
or otherwise. He should accept the decision of the people to
seek their confiscated independence and not be mounting a
rear guard action by trying to convince some Southern
Cameroonians he might meet in an off licence or in an achu
eating conclave in the US. The decision on the way
forward had been taken years ago so Munzu should SHOUT UP
and accept the decision however wrong or right it might be.
The time to listen to Munzu's point of
view is long past. We listened to it in the past and
decided against it so he should shut up and let the people
who have decided the direction of their destiny carry on.
His failure to put is point across and get it accepted
resulted in his semi or total withdrawal from the struggle
so after his career abroad, he should not resurface or be
pulled out of liberation retirement to start causing
confusion. If he wants to say something, let him write his
autobiography and we will read it but he should not be
disturbing people with failed ideas that have all along been
rejected by Southern Camerooons who heard him and rejected
him.
On
discussion with francophones, the rogue organiser of the
meeting should not create a problem where non exist. For
example, Northwesterners do not have a problem with
their Bamilike cousins (across the Santa international
boundary) on a personal level so what can we discuss?,
to solve a problem that does not exist?. The problem is not
a personal one. It is about 2 nations i.e. La Republique du
Cameroun and Southern Cameroons and not personally between
Anglophones and Francophones.
Scotland is attempting to leave the UK. Do the
Scottish people have a problem with the English people?. Why
has a rogue character not called a dialogue between English
and Scottish people and even if such a meeting is called,
what will be the agenda?. That after 200 years the Scottish
people have lost their inalienable rights to self
determination?. These poor francophones that the rogue
character invited to the meeting, what do they know about
sovereignty (in operation or in abeyance), international
boundaries, inalienability of the rights of a people etc. To
them, they know they have done nothing personally against
anglophones but is that the issue?. The rogue character
should stop disturbing these poor
francophones and allow them continue with their daily
business whilst Southern Cameroons should also be allowed to
try and liberate themselves when and if they can.
Regards
Tumasang
To:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
From:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 2 Aug
2014 17:38:41 -0700
Subject: Re:
[camnetwork] Dr. Tums // Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We
have something dear to die for!
"Their
behavior not in shouting or in walking out BUT IN
ATTENDING SUCH A USELESS MEETING IN THE FIRST PLACE"
(Martin Tumasang)
Maitre:
A meeting that may have appeared to be
useless to you, from a distance, could actually be a useful
beginning to some. And like Gerald Seymour once
said; "One man's terrorist is another
man's freedom fighter"Have a great
week-endManu
___________
>
From: "ngunimicrowave@aol.com [camnetwork]"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>To:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
>Sent:
Saturday, August 2, 2014 1:15 PM
>Subject: [camnetwork] Dr. Tums //
Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh
Herbert) We have something dear to die for!
>Their behaviour not in
shouting or in walking out BUT IN ATTENDING SUCH A USELESS
MEETING IN THE FIRST PLACE. (Dr. Tums)
>
>Dr. Tums,
>I agree with you on the above
wholeheartedly.
They are lucky that they even had the chance to leave
without being "lynched" by the so-called
organizers.
>
>My father used to repeat a Catholic
doctrine prayer to me every time I made excuses of being in
a wrong company that had ended up in fracas. He would say -
"If you deny Satan, you deny with all ya
heart".
>
> Micro-Wave
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Martin Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com
[camnetwork] <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>To: camnetwork
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>; AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com
<afoakom@yahoogroups.com>
>Cc:
cameroon_politics <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
ambasbay <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>
>Sent: Sat, Aug 2, 2014 11:15 am
>Subject: [camnetwork] @ALL:
RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something
dear to die for!
>
>
>
>Dear ALL,
>I
fully support the lambasting of the two SCNC members who
walked out of the meeting after shouting at others hence
making the meeting to close.
>
>
>They must be
discredited and ridiculed for the behaviour. Their behaviour
not in shouting or in walking out BUT IN ATTENDING SUCH A
USELESS MEETING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
>
>Are they trying to
reinvent the wheel by attending such a useless conclave?.
What could be the possible outcome of such a diabolical
meeting except perhaps accidents on the way home by those
visiting from Cameroun if the meeting was not abruptly
terminated?.
>
>
>The time to dialogue with francophones on a
personal level is over. Whether personally a francophone has
done this wrong or not is not in question. The issue is that
of sovereignty of Southern Cameroons and not
about francophone/anglophone relationship.
>
>
>In International Law, international
boundaries are
not based on relationship between neighbours, being same
tribe, being same people etc. An international boundary that
is treaty based like that of Southern Cameroons can cut
through a tribe, through same people and even through a
house where the bedrooms can be in one country and the
sitting room in another country.
>
>
>A learned guy as Munzu
has two points driving his life.
>1)
Irrespective of the merits of the case of Southern
Cameroons, he does not want Cameroun to be separated. He
loves a big country.
>2) He believes
decolonization of Southern Cameroons is a difficult and
rather long process and we should be practical and take any
alternative which is immediate and easy to achieve i.e. to
remain colonized but with better conditions to better our
colonized lot.
>
>
>Those two SCNC guys, particularly
a respectable guy like Larry Eyong was accepting such a
useless invitation for what purpose?. To
convince Munzu to change his mind from a love of a big
country made of colonized people?, or to convince the
francophones to liberate Southern Cameroons and commit
economic suicide?.
>
>
>A meeting called
involving francophones can only have an agenda to discuss
how we can live in peace after separation of the diabolic
union that never was, and the equitable division of assets
so that peace can reign in the Gulf of Guinea. Munzu has
stated clearly in the past that he is not on the side of
Southern Cameroons so the stupid attempt to draw him out for
a debate or to try to force him to change sides is
"sans objet".
>
>
>AAC1, AAC2 etc.,
Southern Cameroonians have spoken amongst themselves and
have decided their future direction. Any further talks is
about how to implement the future direction. A legendary
confusionist/self seeker who invites
people to start re-inventing the wheel by starting again
from zero and start
talking with fran cophones on useless agenda does so at his
own risk. Larry Eyong and his co-voyager went to such a
diabolical conclave in their personal capacity and not as
SCNC or as Southern Cameroonian. Banjul said the government
should dialogue with Southern Cameroons/SCNC/SCAPO and not
for any rogue character to start organising personal
dialogues between Southern Cameroons, SCNC and francophones
or La Republique du Cameroon citizens.
>
>
>If anybody wants to talk, let him publish
the agenda and if division of assets and peaceful
co-existence post any separation is not on the agenda, then
we are not interested in such devilish talks. We cannot
"go for before, for back." for another
decades.
>
>
>Regards
>
>
>Tumasang
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>To: camnetwork@yahoogroups.com;
AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com
>CC:
cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com; ambasbay@googlegroup
s.com
>From:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Sat, 2
Aug 2014 07:36:37 -0700
>Subject:
[camnetwork] Re: (Boh Herbert) We have
something dear to die for!
>
>
>
>
>From a "zero
notes taken", I think your recollection of the
discussions are on point and captures the essentials of what
was debated upon. I would join you in thanking the hostess,
the always beautiful "Ms Patience, daughter of Pah
Lucas" for being so gracious and accommodating at such
such notice. Dr. Munzu, the guest speaker was equally very
tolerant and respectful of the myriad of conflicting points
of view that emerged. Many thanks to Mr. Ebini for this
effort. While this was not a "structured
conclave", I
think it was an important first step that may eventually
pave the way for further "structured debates".
Tolerance should
be the guiding principle. Shouting and Screaming at the top
of your voice has never won new advocates.I personally
believe, we Southern Cameroonians have a legitimate
Political problem with La Republique du Cameroun BUT if we
have to rely on individuals who cannot sit face to face with
their peers, LISTEN, DIALOGUE, DEBATE (responsibly),
LEARN...then we still have a very long way to go. What I
witnessed yesterday was pure madness from my two SCNC
brothers. YES, Mr. Larry Eyong Etchaw in my humble opinion
owes an apology not only to the guest speaker but to the
convener and to all other members who responded to the
invitation. To all the others who simply "vamoozed
because of Larry's outbursts", I say to them
"Man No Run. Wuna no fia. Na so we broda dey tok. Larry
na popoh don Repe. Na daso say dat ngopna njimtete old
peepoo 4 Yawinde don papley we 2much 4 feepty something
years. If wuna noba hia, make I tell wuna today: Larry yi
problem na over-sense
(the boboh has two hot PhDs) Qui dit mieux?".
>
>
>
>What I took home was
the indictment from Ms Patience on our Diaspora population
(Anglophones from NW and SW) intolerance level. She lamented
that we are quick to destroy each other and this was
manifested right infront of our eyes by the comportment of
the two SCNC "leaders" who unceremoniously shouted
their way out of the meeting causing many other participants
who were invited to equally walk away. She wanted such
meetings to involve more youths and women as they are the
wave of Cameroon's future. Our youths seem completely
disconnected from Cameroon's historical reality.
>
>
>A
rhetorical question from a participant caught my attention.
He asked Philip: "Moi je suis Francophone. Est ce que
je t'ai fait du mal personellement parceque tu es
Anglophone? Dites moi la
verite...Est ce que je suis ton ennemi parce que je suis
Francophone? And he concluded with:
"Les multiples problemes Camerounais c'est LA
FRANCE. Lutter meme contre le regime de Biya c,est un faux
debat. Biya est un pion de l,hegemonie Francaise. No more no
less.
>
>
>There were many more interesting exchanges.
For a start, I think it was a highly successful
gathering.
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: "Herbert Boh
herbertboh@yahoo.com [camnetwork]"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>To:
"AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com"
<AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com>
>Cc:
Cameroon Politics <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
"camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Saturday, August 2, 2014 4:34 AM
>Subject: [camnetwork] Re: [AFOaKOM] We have
something dear to die
for!
>
>
>
>
>FYI - At least three dozen members of the
Cameroonian Diaspora (Anglophones and Francophones alike),
some of them members
of the CPDM, SDF, and/or SCNC; and of more organizations
met earlier this evening for an "unstructured
discussion".
>
>
>At the initiative of
Christmas Ebini, who also hand picked those invited (mostly
resident in the Washington, DC Metro Area), Dr. Simon Munzu
(visiting from Cameroon), served as the main discussant in
what was generally a cool if often heated or even
bad-tempered dialogue.
>
>
>The topics discussed
touched, among other things, on:
>
>
>(i) the state of the colonial construct
called Cameroon; and,
>(ii) how to
deepen understanding of and win more support, notably from
our Francophone brethren, for the Anglophone Problem.
>
>
>Predictably, it turned to be one of those
sessions that
show just how unnecessarily divided we are at times on
issues that ought to unite us; how thin our patience is for
listening to political views that contradict our own
beliefs; but also how passionate and committed our people
(no matter their political cause) remain to the daunting
overall task of bringing real political change, liberty and
freedom to Kamerun; the Cameroons; Cameroon; Cameroun;
Southern Cameroons or La Republique du Cameroun.
>
>
>Perhaps on no single topic was disagreement
more vociferously expressed than on what participants each
understood to be the "end game". This was
understood by some to be a return to the two-state
federation; as action before the international community
(UNO, for example) to bring about recognition for the
sovereignty or in favor of the restoration of Southern
Cameroons; or joint action to ensure that the benefits of
liberty, freedom and autonomy flow to and benefit not only
Anglophones but the Francophone brethren as well.
>
>
>An argument to the effect that
another plebiscite or action before the United Nations to
cause independence to be
respected, first raised by Dr. Munzu in a newspaper article
published in Cameroon but due to be more holistically dealt
with in an upcoming paper (pledged by Dr. Munzu) fired up
SCNC representatives at the session. The latter countered by
recalling that over 40 countries have gained international
sovereignty since 1990 and what if they can, then so can
Southern Cameroons.
>
>
>A walk-out from the
discussions staged by the SCNC representatives triggered
several statements of condemnation from participants,
several of whom felt disrespected and some of whom described
the walk-out as revealing of intolerance to political
dissent on the part of the SCNC.
>
>
>The central argument
by Dr. Munzu was the need for a critical review of what
decades of action have achieved; the need to remain
practical; and the urgent need to ensure that support for
the cause is more widely shard by French-speaking
Cameroonians.
>
>
>Calls for meaningful action to ensure that
Cameroon obtains true independence from colonial France;
calls to integrate an approach that is more inclusive of the
younger generation of Cameroonians; calls for Anglophone
elite, especially those in the active service of the regime,
to quit denying the existence of the Anglophone Problem; and
calls to iron out differences between Francophones and
Anglophones; but also between North Westerners and South
Westerners to ensure more unity in the fight were issued,
among others.
>
>
>Boh Herbert
>PS: Summary
account written from memory and based on absolutely
"zero notes" taken during the session.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sent from my
iPhone
>
>On Aug 2,
2014, at 12:13 AM, "Wanaku Verdzekov
wanaku@kompeople.org [AFOaKOM]"
<AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Bobe
Njousi,
>>Thanks for rebooting the
classroom.
>>Wakik+ki
>>~wv
>>
>>On 8/1/2014 11:11 AM, Njousi Abang
njousid@gmail.com [AFOaKOM] wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dear all,
>>>A Komrade wrote this hotmail. It
remains alive even till
date.
Savour
>>>the contents once more.
Great pieces need revisiting from
time
to
>>>time. They prepare us for a
future with a difference. Read
on:
>>>
>>>On
3/1/2014 9:03 AM, Herbert Boh wrote:
>>>
>>>Dear
Bonav,
>>>
>>>Permit me to open by stressing anew
all the respect I
have
for
you and
>>>Dr. Yagnye.
"Chapeau!" not only for what you stand for and
profess
>>>publicly, but also for what I
consider to be a genuine
effort
on your
>>>part to understand the
Southern Cameroons Problem.
>>>
>>>It is my belief that we have
educated each other on this
and
Africa's
>>>struggles and that
we are right to seek leads from the
aborted
efforts
>>>of our forefathers in
Cameroon. In so doing, we
must
objectively
>>>consider why they failed.
>>>
>>>We
have often fallen short of understanding each other,
provoking
on
>>>occasion the kind of I would
dare say justified dismissive
one-liner
>>>from Professor Tatah Mentan, whose
views I rarely do not
share.
Here
>>>are a few historical facts
and guideposts that could help
our
>>>reflection:
>>>
>>>1. Our
peoples (be they the peoples of Cameroons or
the
peoples
of
>>>Africa) were not one before
colonialism. Let us cut the
revisionism.
>>>Our peoples were many fractious
factions, tribes, clans
and
>>>traditional kingdoms; often at each
other's throats;
drawing
any blood
>>>we could find to win
farmlands, conquer territory, expand
rule
and
>>>influence.
>>>
>>>2.
Colonialism destroyed that part of us. It destroyed
the
multitude
>>>of African kingdoms - too many to
enumerate in any book.
It
is
>>>colonialism that imposed
unity upon a conquered and
dominated
peoples.
>>>That does not mean that
there were no big African empires.
It
means
>>>that small empire survived
alongside micro states.
>>>
>>>3. German Kamerun - the grand
empire that extended into
parts
of
>>>present-day Nigeria,
Equatorial Guinea,
Gabon,
Congo-Brazzaville,
>>>Central African Republic, Chad and
Cameroon, of course -
was
the
>>>byproduct of that forced
unity, built at gunpoint, often
by
hanging
>>>the leaders of our
kingdoms and at the price of endless
bloodletting.
>>>
>>>4. I
am about to make a very big declaration. Here it is:
I
believe
>>>and I am sure Nuremberg
agrees that any nostalgia for
a
restoration
of
>>>German Kamerun is an apology
for Nazism and the kind of
fascist
>>>expansionism that led to the two
World Wars. May be some
hunger
for
>>>it. We are definitely
opposed to it and I believe you are
opposed
as
>>>well. If so, then we need to
cut the talk of reuniting the
peoples
of
>>>the Nazi invention named
Kamerun.
>>>
>>>5. It is that expansionism,
annexation and colonization
-
similar
to
>>>the policies of Nazi Germany
deciding against
international
law, to
>>>move into and occupy
Czechoslovakia - that we, Southern
Cameroonians
>>>accuse Yaounde of. Like Nazi
Germany, everything La
Republique
has
>>>done in Southern Cameroons
it has claimed to be legal, in
keeping
with
>>>international law and
consistent with
the will of the
people
obtained
>>>at gunpoint.
>>>
>>>6. If
you take away the years of the World War, the
peoples
of
>>>Southern Cameroons and the
peoples of La Republique du
Cameroun
were
>>>governed as one country for
less than 30 years.
>>>
>>>7. Now compare that short period of
common destiny to the
longer
>>>period - more than 40 years of
joint administration
alongside
Nigeria.
>>>Is one expected to be
more brothers with the friend of
40+
years
or
>>>with the friend of under-30
years? The dozen years of post
>>>independence were not years of
association given that La
Republique
>>>was steeped in the " Maquisard
War".
>>>
>>>8. As two different Trust
Territories, our destinies have
been
>>>separate for a very long time. The
international
boundaries
of our
>>>territories have been
known and enforced internationally
for
years.
>>>Our two brotherly peoples
- not any
more brotherly than us
with
>>>Nigeria or you with Gabonese -
were, each in their own
right,
put on
>>>the path to independence
as separate countries. As
different
peoples,
>>>we each earned the
right to self-determination.
>>>
>>>9. Without depending on the peoples
of La Republique,
Southern
>>>Cameroonians fought for and won
self-government at once
from
Britain
>>>and from Nigeria. We
made sure that independence
meant
that
the
>>>colonialists - both Nigeria
and Britain - left us to
handle
our
>>>self-government. Not so, La
Republique, where the French
left
so they
>>>could stay
permanently.
>>>
>>>10. Without waiting for the people
of Southern Cameroons
(still
caught
>>>in Trusteeship), the
people of La Republique du Cameroun
were
too
>>>impatient - they asked for
and were granted what
France
claimed
was
>>>independence. It was okay if
Southern Cameroonians - the
so-called
>>>brothers of the West of the River
Mungo - were held in
captivity.
>>>
>>>11.
While the sad experiences of Southern Cameroons in
Nigeria
>>>endeared La Republique to our
leaders in Buea, who wanted
genuine
>>>"union in
diversity", leaders in La Republique were
scheming
day
and
>>>night to colonize. Once
admitted into international
sovereignty,
La
>>>Republique du Cameroun set
its greedy eyes on colonizing
Southern
>>>Cameroons.
>>>
>>>12.
During the late 1950s but most especially in April
1961,
the
>>>annexationist country of La
Republique voted against
independence
for
>>>the brotherly peoples of
Southern Cameroons at the United
Nations.
>>>Ahidjo spoke English from the
rostrum to declare his
lack
of
interest
>>>in freeing the slaves
of Southern Cameroons from the
plantation
of
>>>colonialism.
>>>
>>>13.
The crime did not stop there. In August of the same
year,
the
>>>parliament (Assemblee
Nationale) of La Republique voted
into
law a
>>>Constitution that
consecrated the annexation of Southern
Cameroons
>>>even before the territory had
gained independence.
Every
time
Ahidjo
>>>thought he would be found
out, he made speeches in which
he
reaffirmed
>>>from his lips - his
heart elsewhere like a thief at night
-
that La
>>>Republique had no
intention or right to meddle in the
internal
affairs
>>>of Southern
Cameroons.
>>>
>>>14. While the charm of this
bite-and-blow "arrata die way
na
yi mop
>>>find'am"
approach was on display, the leaders of
Southern
Cameroons
of
>>>the time trusted those they
called their brothers from La
Republique.
>>>They pleaded with them then - as
they do with us now -
that
if they
>>>could only get rid of
the French and British colonialists,
they
could
>>>sought their unity and
mutual respect issues among
brothers
once the
>>>stranger is gone.
>>>
>>>15.
Southern Cameroonian leaders - the Fonchas,
Juas,
Endeleys,
>>>Mbiles, Nyentis, Dinkas, etc. -
were approached by and
they
chose to
>>>believe their brothers
from East of Mungo - the the Ums,
Ouandies,
>>>Ndogmos, etc. This is the same way
that our Francophonized
brothers
>>>today (Bonav, Yagnye) expect our
Anglophonized Southern
Cameroonians
>>>(Prof. Tatah Mentan, Chief Taku,
Njoh
Litumbe, etc.) to
trust
them.
>>>
>>>16. The trouble with that
"trust without verifying" or
"trust
because
>>>we are one" - the
trouble with that picture is simple:
Southern
>>>Cameroonian leaders have been down
that road before. They
were
not
>>>only lured into the Foumban
Tent and bitten by the
millipede;
now
>>>their successors are being
asked to trust that they will,
in
their
>>>turn, not be bitten by a
snake. Or, once bitten,
twice
shy.
>>>
>>>17. It
does not help the "just trust us approach"...
It
does
not help
>>>the "there is no
Southern Cameroons Problem" approach that
they
now
>>>use the same sing song.
Their call is for Southern
Cameroonians
to
>>>drop their fight for
self-government of their territory in
favor
of
>>>joining - did
I just use that word? - well, in favor of
YES
joining
>>>them to fight the
perceived common enemy (France-Yaounde)
who
happens
>>>to be the same now as
before, and true to script, is
embarked
today -
>>>as Biya said so clearly
in Buea last February 20 - on the
same
>>>annexationist tricks as before. The
hunter's bullet cannot
be
blamed
>>>if the inquisitive monkey
cannot read the bait.
>>>
>>>18. The invitation from our
Francophonized
brothers begs a
zillion
>>>questions. Where
did trust lead Foncha, Jua, Mbile? Where
did
giving
>>>up their people's
fight for self-rule for the bigger, mord
general
>>>fight against the common enemy get
them? Why should any
Southern
>>>Cameroonian do the same thing as
Foncha, Jua, Endeley,
Mbile,
Nyenti
>>>and Co. and expect a
different outcome?
>>>
>>>19. The truth on the other hand is
self-evident. Our
peoples
made
>>>progress together only when
Um Nyobe and Ouandie
fought
their
own
>>>battles against the
neocolonialists in La Republique while
counting
on
>>>what support they could get
from Southern Cameroonians
which
never
>>>gave up the fight for its
own self-government from Nigeria
and
>>>Britain. Different fronts weaken
even the most formidable
adversary,
>>>it is said.
>>>
>>>20.
The invitation to collapse all struggles into
one
united
front
>>>which has been made time
without number on this forum and
elsewhere
>>>repeats the tactical mistake of
taking splinters of weak
small
forces
>>>up against a crushingly
more powerful enemy and doing so
on
front. It
>>>is a strange doctrine
to invite all combatants to trust
all
battle
>>>victories into one
basket.
>>>
>>>21. Truth is that we are a more
united country
by
recognizing
our
>>>differences than by ignoring
them. Canada is. As a matter
of
fact,
>>>Canada and the USA are
more united despite being two
different
>>>countries. That's the Southern
Cameroons and the La
Republique
du
>>>Cameroun I think we can
achieve in trust and dignity for
all.
>>>
>>>22. It
is clear - it
has been clear in the past and will
be
for
the
>>>foreseeable future - the
army of liberation that is
divided
in
>>>objective and strategy cannot
fight in unison. That does
not
stop that
>>>liberation struggle
from winning battles in dispersed
ranks
and in
>>>adding up these many
small battle wins into the big final
victory
of
>>>the war.
>>>
>>>23.
Let me reiterate my belief in and support for what
Chief
Taku
>>>says: "The Southern
Cameroons Case is a case for
the
respect
of
>>>international legality, a
struggle against annexation and
colonial
>>>rule and, indeed, a fight for
justice against
international
>>>criminality".
>>>
>>>24. I
was delighted to read that Dr. Yagnye buys this
declaration
-
>>>hook, line and sinker. I was
disappointed by what he said
next
-
>>>consisting of watering down
someone's cause by saying
that
yours
is
>>>the same. Let me be clear,
though. Yes, indeed, La
Republique
has a
>>>case to make against
colonial France. The citizens of La
Republique
du
>>>Cameroun need to make that
case themselves. They may want
our
help and
>>>we would most likely
grant it, but it is their battle; not
ours
to
>>>lead.
>>>
>>>25.
The trouble, so far and no matter how deep we bury
our
heads
in
>>>the sand, is that the peoples
of La Republique behave like
they
do not
>>>have such a problem. They
are not as agitated about it as
the
people
>>>of La Republique. They
act like they did not have a
problem.
It would
>>>be okay if that was
all. What is hard to swallow is the
>>>feeling/impression they share so
generously that Southern
Cameroonians
>>>may be making a mountain out of an
anthill.
>>>
>>>Enough from me!
But, let me close by not comparing what is
clearly
>>>less evil with Ahidjo's
scheming. It worries me - I don't
know
for you
>>>- but it worries me that
this strategy by my
Francophonized
brothers
>>>is somewhat similar to
Ahidjo's one-party drive in 1966.
We
know the
>>>outcome. Failure is
guaranteed. The call for the
impossible
unity
>>>(given mere human nature),
has already been tried
without
success
by
>>>the opposition movements in
Cameroon, if we were looking
for
a recent
>>>precedent. It is my
view that embracing such a strategy is
the
best
>>>way of leading the hopes of
self-government for Southern
Cameroons
>>>straight into the Biya Crematorium
of so-called
Reunification.
>>>
>>>Boh
Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________
>>> Posted by: Njousi Abang
<njousid@gmail.com>
>>>________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__._,_.___
Posted by: Mishe Fon <mishefon@yahoo.com>
Reply
via web post
•
Reply to sender
•
Reply to group
•
Start a New
Topic
•
Messages in this
topic
(37)
Camnetwork is the premier Cameroon/Cameroun forum
since 1997.
Visit Your Group
New Members
1
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
gunning for was a pipe dream. All at home vomitted him hence his sojourn abroad. It was rumoured here that he is doing this because Biya has promissed him the Prime ministerial position if he would bring the "secessionists" to the alter for slaughter and he thinks his past popularity with the masses is still the same. We have long gone past that veneration of greedy individualists and are looking forward to rescuing a people from bondage. He has lived in high society all through his life and cannot countenance coming down to join us in street fights. Let him stay where he is and leave us alone at our undistinguished levels. We shall overcome their treachery and be a free people someday.
Visha Fai
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 3/8/14, Martin Tumasang <tumasangm@hotmail.com> wrote:
Subject: RE:@Manu/Mishefon:Dr. Tums // Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something dear to die for!
To: "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>, "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>
Date: Sunday, 3 August, 2014, 17:19
Mishefon,you start by saying the
dialogue was instructed in Lagos or Abuja. No it was in the
African Commission for Human and Peoples' Rights in
Banjul. Nothing to do with Lagos or Abuja. Wrong premise
hence negative the whole opening paragraph.
I will look at the rest of what u are trying to
say later
Regards
Tumasang
To:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com;
cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com;
ambasbay@googlegroups.com
From: camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2014 09:10:05 -0700
Subject: Re: [camnetwork] @Manu/Mishefon:Dr. Tums // Re:
@ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something dear to die
for!
Ngia Maitre
Tumasang
Did you really re-read your
mail to realize how confused and illogical it sounds?
Normally, "Maitres" are supposed to be the
enlightened ones than shumbus and Air-Men like moi-meme. You
are not even ashamed to say that your stylized
circumlucutions related to the SC case was adjudicated in
Naija Court system...and you are
expecting the Cameroon President to implement what a small
District Court in Lagos (or was it Abuja) decides?
Vraiement, wuna go wait sotey biabia grow 4 wuna crobeau
head dem. In Francophone circles, it was classified as
Benign Negligence.
I have said this to anyone
who cares to listen. The only language that will cause
anyone to listen (UN, AU, Y'de, France, UK, US) to the
"plight of SC" is if there is "Drama" on
the ground and "Tchavoums" are flying left right
and center. Short of that is just a waste of time
and an avenue for a few to make monies through perpetual
Asylum racketeering of Cameroon "adventuriers" in
foreign capitals. Can you tell me how many
"Cameroonians" after gaining their
"Asylum" still attend a single meeting to discuss
the plight of those left behind? The nonsense they call
"The Force of Argument
and not the Argument of Force" is what has
damaged beyond repairs "The Anglophone Quagmire".
If you don't flex your muscle, who will respect you?
Empty sloganeering, Big Mop 4 Natty, Banjul Declarations,
UNPO Declarations, Naija Lower Court Judgements...all na
daso MVOUM. Some SCNC folks are still talking of how they
took over Radio Buea for 15 minutes thirty years ago. How
credible is that for a Liberation Movement? Yet you want to
compare with South Sudan, Eritrea, East Timor. Wuna don see
wetin?
Ngia Maitre, I am very
sorry to sound like I am against the SC Cause. I am Not. I am simply
surprised that we have "Intellectuals" of your
calibre reasoning with their "Hearts" instead of
the "Brains". People who have never participated
in anything SC but who now have access to WWW Internet are
free to say whatever they want since they are not the ones
doing the heavy lifting. Wuna all dey craze.
Ngia Maitre Tumasang,
remember how we all wrote here that Biya will not "put
foot 4 Buea during the decreed
"cinquantainaire"...Unfortunately for us, he came,
he saw and even stayed two days longer than anticipated.
Absolutely natty happened...except from noise makers like us
via the Internet. The SW Chiefs even made him a
"Sessekou". Same was said before his Bamendrous
trip. The guy not only went to Abakwa, but went to Ntarikon
"Palace to chop Achu and Ndza Nikki" and since
then the SDF Chairman (Biya's erstwile nemesis) has
become as irrelevant as a woman's dross after her
Period. Go Figure.Mishe
Fon
From:
"Martin Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com
[camnetwork]" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
To:
"camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>;
"cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
<cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday,
August 3, 2014 1:53 AM
Subject:
[camnetwork] @Manu/Mishefon:Dr.
Tums // Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something
dear to die for!
Hi guys,
greetings from
this end.
Brothers, we have been there
before where Oben, Tita and Leke arrived in Banjul in
the middle of a case and requesting in the name of
Southern Cameroons that the case be postponed or stopped for
they are in dialogue with La Republique du Cameroun on the
issues at bar already and a peaceful settlement should be
given a chance.
We
argued vigorously and told the court that we have no
problem with them joining the case on the side of La
Republique du Cameroun for these 3 do not represent Southern
Cameroons and no dialogue has taken place or is taking
place.
The
Court finally passed judgment instructing that La
Republique du Cameroun should enter into dialogue with
Southern Cameroons. La Republique du Cameroun has been
avoiding the dialogue because it knows the terms and
agenda for such a dialogue.
In the above toxic
mix, surfaces an ambivalent rogue character that no one
knows where he stands, who is everything to everyone,
working on behalf of himself or La Republique du
Cameroun, invites people for a dialogue which is being
claimed SCNC, Southern Cameroons and La Republique du
Cameroun as represented by its chosen
or ostensibly chosen representatives, participated in
the purported dialogue. Soon La Republique du Cameroun will
be brandishing this gift from Washington to the
international community that the court ordered dialogue is
taking place or has taken place. SCNC members might have
been ambushed into such a diabolic assembly without knowing
the intentions of the rogue organiser, who represents nobody
except himself or La Republique du Cameroun directly or by
proxy.
So what is the
modus operandi here. If we
have 5 million Southern Cameroonians, each can organise a
dialogue with la Republique du Cameroun citizens and come to
the public to publish the outcome?, or under what authority
was such a counterfeit purported dialogue organised?.
If Southern
Cameroonians want to talk amongst themselves on the way
forward, no problem. Let them talk. Munzu despite his
purported erudition failed politically to convince Southern
Cameroonians to follow his suggested approach in AAC1, AAC2,
or otherwise. He should accept the decision of the people to
seek their confiscated independence and not be mounting a
rear guard action by trying to convince some Southern
Cameroonians he might meet in an off licence or in an achu
eating conclave in the US. The decision on the way
forward had been taken years ago so Munzu should SHOUT UP
and accept the decision however wrong or right it might be.
The time to listen to Munzu's point of
view is long past. We listened to it in the past and
decided against it so he should shut up and let the people
who have decided the direction of their destiny carry on.
His failure to put is point across and get it accepted
resulted in his semi or total withdrawal from the struggle
so after his career abroad, he should not resurface or be
pulled out of liberation retirement to start causing
confusion. If he wants to say something, let him write his
autobiography and we will read it but he should not be
disturbing people with failed ideas that have all along been
rejected by Southern Camerooons who heard him and rejected
him.
On
discussion with francophones, the rogue organiser of the
meeting should not create a problem where non exist. For
example, Northwesterners do not have a problem with
their Bamilike cousins (across the Santa international
boundary) on a personal level so what can we discuss?,
to solve a problem that does not exist?. The problem is not
a personal one. It is about 2 nations i.e. La Republique du
Cameroun and Southern Cameroons and not personally between
Anglophones and Francophones.
Scotland is attempting to leave the UK. Do the
Scottish people have a problem with the English people?. Why
has a rogue character not called a dialogue between English
and Scottish people and even if such a meeting is called,
what will be the agenda?. That after 200 years the Scottish
people have lost their inalienable rights to self
determination?. These poor francophones that the rogue
character invited to the meeting, what do they know about
sovereignty (in operation or in abeyance), international
boundaries, inalienability of the rights of a people etc. To
them, they know they have done nothing personally against
anglophones but is that the issue?. The rogue character
should stop disturbing these poor
francophones and allow them continue with their daily
business whilst Southern Cameroons should also be allowed to
try and liberate themselves when and if they can.
Regards
Tumasang
To:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
From:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 2 Aug
2014 17:38:41 -0700
Subject: Re:
[camnetwork] Dr. Tums // Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh Herbert) We
have something dear to die for!
"Their
behavior not in shouting or in walking out BUT IN
ATTENDING SUCH A USELESS MEETING IN THE FIRST PLACE"
(Martin Tumasang)
Maitre:
A meeting that may have appeared to be
useless to you, from a distance, could actually be a useful
beginning to some. And like Gerald Seymour once
said; "One man's terrorist is another
man's freedom fighter"Have a great
week-endManu
___________
>
From: "ngunimicrowave@aol.com [camnetwork]"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>To:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
>Sent:
Saturday, August 2, 2014 1:15 PM
>Subject: [camnetwork] Dr. Tums //
Re: @ALL: RE: (Boh
Herbert) We have something dear to die for!
>Their behaviour not in
shouting or in walking out BUT IN ATTENDING SUCH A USELESS
MEETING IN THE FIRST PLACE. (Dr. Tums)
>
>Dr. Tums,
>I agree with you on the above
wholeheartedly.
They are lucky that they even had the chance to leave
without being "lynched" by the so-called
organizers.
>
>My father used to repeat a Catholic
doctrine prayer to me every time I made excuses of being in
a wrong company that had ended up in fracas. He would say -
"If you deny Satan, you deny with all ya
heart".
>
> Micro-Wave
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Martin Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com
[camnetwork] <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>To: camnetwork
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>; AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com
<afoakom@yahoogroups.com>
>Cc:
cameroon_politics <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
ambasbay <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>
>Sent: Sat, Aug 2, 2014 11:15 am
>Subject: [camnetwork] @ALL:
RE: (Boh Herbert) We have something
dear to die for!
>
>
>
>Dear ALL,
>I
fully support the lambasting of the two SCNC members who
walked out of the meeting after shouting at others hence
making the meeting to close.
>
>
>They must be
discredited and ridiculed for the behaviour. Their behaviour
not in shouting or in walking out BUT IN ATTENDING SUCH A
USELESS MEETING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>
>
>Are they trying to
reinvent the wheel by attending such a useless conclave?.
What could be the possible outcome of such a diabolical
meeting except perhaps accidents on the way home by those
visiting from Cameroun if the meeting was not abruptly
terminated?.
>
>
>The time to dialogue with francophones on a
personal level is over. Whether personally a francophone has
done this wrong or not is not in question. The issue is that
of sovereignty of Southern Cameroons and not
about francophone/anglophone relationship.
>
>
>In International Law, international
boundaries are
not based on relationship between neighbours, being same
tribe, being same people etc. An international boundary that
is treaty based like that of Southern Cameroons can cut
through a tribe, through same people and even through a
house where the bedrooms can be in one country and the
sitting room in another country.
>
>
>A learned guy as Munzu
has two points driving his life.
>1)
Irrespective of the merits of the case of Southern
Cameroons, he does not want Cameroun to be separated. He
loves a big country.
>2) He believes
decolonization of Southern Cameroons is a difficult and
rather long process and we should be practical and take any
alternative which is immediate and easy to achieve i.e. to
remain colonized but with better conditions to better our
colonized lot.
>
>
>Those two SCNC guys, particularly
a respectable guy like Larry Eyong was accepting such a
useless invitation for what purpose?. To
convince Munzu to change his mind from a love of a big
country made of colonized people?, or to convince the
francophones to liberate Southern Cameroons and commit
economic suicide?.
>
>
>A meeting called
involving francophones can only have an agenda to discuss
how we can live in peace after separation of the diabolic
union that never was, and the equitable division of assets
so that peace can reign in the Gulf of Guinea. Munzu has
stated clearly in the past that he is not on the side of
Southern Cameroons so the stupid attempt to draw him out for
a debate or to try to force him to change sides is
"sans objet".
>
>
>AAC1, AAC2 etc.,
Southern Cameroonians have spoken amongst themselves and
have decided their future direction. Any further talks is
about how to implement the future direction. A legendary
confusionist/self seeker who invites
people to start re-inventing the wheel by starting again
from zero and start
talking with fran cophones on useless agenda does so at his
own risk. Larry Eyong and his co-voyager went to such a
diabolical conclave in their personal capacity and not as
SCNC or as Southern Cameroonian. Banjul said the government
should dialogue with Southern Cameroons/SCNC/SCAPO and not
for any rogue character to start organising personal
dialogues between Southern Cameroons, SCNC and francophones
or La Republique du Cameroon citizens.
>
>
>If anybody wants to talk, let him publish
the agenda and if division of assets and peaceful
co-existence post any separation is not on the agenda, then
we are not interested in such devilish talks. We cannot
"go for before, for back." for another
decades.
>
>
>Regards
>
>
>Tumasang
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>To: camnetwork@yahoogroups.com;
AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com
>CC:
cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com; ambasbay@googlegroup
s.com
>From:
camnetwork@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Sat, 2
Aug 2014 07:36:37 -0700
>Subject:
[camnetwork] Re: (Boh Herbert) We have
something dear to die for!
>
>
>
>
>From a "zero
notes taken", I think your recollection of the
discussions are on point and captures the essentials of what
was debated upon. I would join you in thanking the hostess,
the always beautiful "Ms Patience, daughter of Pah
Lucas" for being so gracious and accommodating at such
such notice. Dr. Munzu, the guest speaker was equally very
tolerant and respectful of the myriad of conflicting points
of view that emerged. Many thanks to Mr. Ebini for this
effort. While this was not a "structured
conclave", I
think it was an important first step that may eventually
pave the way for further "structured debates".
Tolerance should
be the guiding principle. Shouting and Screaming at the top
of your voice has never won new advocates.I personally
believe, we Southern Cameroonians have a legitimate
Political problem with La Republique du Cameroun BUT if we
have to rely on individuals who cannot sit face to face with
their peers, LISTEN, DIALOGUE, DEBATE (responsibly),
LEARN...then we still have a very long way to go. What I
witnessed yesterday was pure madness from my two SCNC
brothers. YES, Mr. Larry Eyong Etchaw in my humble opinion
owes an apology not only to the guest speaker but to the
convener and to all other members who responded to the
invitation. To all the others who simply "vamoozed
because of Larry's outbursts", I say to them
"Man No Run. Wuna no fia. Na so we broda dey tok. Larry
na popoh don Repe. Na daso say dat ngopna njimtete old
peepoo 4 Yawinde don papley we 2much 4 feepty something
years. If wuna noba hia, make I tell wuna today: Larry yi
problem na over-sense
(the boboh has two hot PhDs) Qui dit mieux?".
>
>
>
>What I took home was
the indictment from Ms Patience on our Diaspora population
(Anglophones from NW and SW) intolerance level. She lamented
that we are quick to destroy each other and this was
manifested right infront of our eyes by the comportment of
the two SCNC "leaders" who unceremoniously shouted
their way out of the meeting causing many other participants
who were invited to equally walk away. She wanted such
meetings to involve more youths and women as they are the
wave of Cameroon's future. Our youths seem completely
disconnected from Cameroon's historical reality.
>
>
>A
rhetorical question from a participant caught my attention.
He asked Philip: "Moi je suis Francophone. Est ce que
je t'ai fait du mal personellement parceque tu es
Anglophone? Dites moi la
verite...Est ce que je suis ton ennemi parce que je suis
Francophone? And he concluded with:
"Les multiples problemes Camerounais c'est LA
FRANCE. Lutter meme contre le regime de Biya c,est un faux
debat. Biya est un pion de l,hegemonie Francaise. No more no
less.
>
>
>There were many more interesting exchanges.
For a start, I think it was a highly successful
gathering.
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: "Herbert Boh
herbertboh@yahoo.com [camnetwork]"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>To:
"AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com"
<AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com>
>Cc:
Cameroon Politics <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
"camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
<camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Saturday, August 2, 2014 4:34 AM
>Subject: [camnetwork] Re: [AFOaKOM] We have
something dear to die
for!
>
>
>
>
>FYI - At least three dozen members of the
Cameroonian Diaspora (Anglophones and Francophones alike),
some of them members
of the CPDM, SDF, and/or SCNC; and of more organizations
met earlier this evening for an "unstructured
discussion".
>
>
>At the initiative of
Christmas Ebini, who also hand picked those invited (mostly
resident in the Washington, DC Metro Area), Dr. Simon Munzu
(visiting from Cameroon), served as the main discussant in
what was generally a cool if often heated or even
bad-tempered dialogue.
>
>
>The topics discussed
touched, among other things, on:
>
>
>(i) the state of the colonial construct
called Cameroon; and,
>(ii) how to
deepen understanding of and win more support, notably from
our Francophone brethren, for the Anglophone Problem.
>
>
>Predictably, it turned to be one of those
sessions that
show just how unnecessarily divided we are at times on
issues that ought to unite us; how thin our patience is for
listening to political views that contradict our own
beliefs; but also how passionate and committed our people
(no matter their political cause) remain to the daunting
overall task of bringing real political change, liberty and
freedom to Kamerun; the Cameroons; Cameroon; Cameroun;
Southern Cameroons or La Republique du Cameroun.
>
>
>Perhaps on no single topic was disagreement
more vociferously expressed than on what participants each
understood to be the "end game". This was
understood by some to be a return to the two-state
federation; as action before the international community
(UNO, for example) to bring about recognition for the
sovereignty or in favor of the restoration of Southern
Cameroons; or joint action to ensure that the benefits of
liberty, freedom and autonomy flow to and benefit not only
Anglophones but the Francophone brethren as well.
>
>
>An argument to the effect that
another plebiscite or action before the United Nations to
cause independence to be
respected, first raised by Dr. Munzu in a newspaper article
published in Cameroon but due to be more holistically dealt
with in an upcoming paper (pledged by Dr. Munzu) fired up
SCNC representatives at the session. The latter countered by
recalling that over 40 countries have gained international
sovereignty since 1990 and what if they can, then so can
Southern Cameroons.
>
>
>A walk-out from the
discussions staged by the SCNC representatives triggered
several statements of condemnation from participants,
several of whom felt disrespected and some of whom described
the walk-out as revealing of intolerance to political
dissent on the part of the SCNC.
>
>
>The central argument
by Dr. Munzu was the need for a critical review of what
decades of action have achieved; the need to remain
practical; and the urgent need to ensure that support for
the cause is more widely shard by French-speaking
Cameroonians.
>
>
>Calls for meaningful action to ensure that
Cameroon obtains true independence from colonial France;
calls to integrate an approach that is more inclusive of the
younger generation of Cameroonians; calls for Anglophone
elite, especially those in the active service of the regime,
to quit denying the existence of the Anglophone Problem; and
calls to iron out differences between Francophones and
Anglophones; but also between North Westerners and South
Westerners to ensure more unity in the fight were issued,
among others.
>
>
>Boh Herbert
>PS: Summary
account written from memory and based on absolutely
"zero notes" taken during the session.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sent from my
iPhone
>
>On Aug 2,
2014, at 12:13 AM, "Wanaku Verdzekov
wanaku@kompeople.org [AFOaKOM]"
<AFOaKOM@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Bobe
Njousi,
>>Thanks for rebooting the
classroom.
>>Wakik+ki
>>~wv
>>
>>On 8/1/2014 11:11 AM, Njousi Abang
njousid@gmail.com [AFOaKOM] wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dear all,
>>>A Komrade wrote this hotmail. It
remains alive even till
date.
Savour
>>>the contents once more.
Great pieces need revisiting from
time
to
>>>time. They prepare us for a
future with a difference. Read
on:
>>>
>>>On
3/1/2014 9:03 AM, Herbert Boh wrote:
>>>
>>>Dear
Bonav,
>>>
>>>Permit me to open by stressing anew
all the respect I
have
for
you and
>>>Dr. Yagnye.
"Chapeau!" not only for what you stand for and
profess
>>>publicly, but also for what I
consider to be a genuine
effort
on your
>>>part to understand the
Southern Cameroons Problem.
>>>
>>>It is my belief that we have
educated each other on this
and
Africa's
>>>struggles and that
we are right to seek leads from the
aborted
efforts
>>>of our forefathers in
Cameroon. In so doing, we
must
objectively
>>>consider why they failed.
>>>
>>>We
have often fallen short of understanding each other,
provoking
on
>>>occasion the kind of I would
dare say justified dismissive
one-liner
>>>from Professor Tatah Mentan, whose
views I rarely do not
share.
Here
>>>are a few historical facts
and guideposts that could help
our
>>>reflection:
>>>
>>>1. Our
peoples (be they the peoples of Cameroons or
the
peoples
of
>>>Africa) were not one before
colonialism. Let us cut the
revisionism.
>>>Our peoples were many fractious
factions, tribes, clans
and
>>>traditional kingdoms; often at each
other's throats;
drawing
any blood
>>>we could find to win
farmlands, conquer territory, expand
rule
and
>>>influence.
>>>
>>>2.
Colonialism destroyed that part of us. It destroyed
the
multitude
>>>of African kingdoms - too many to
enumerate in any book.
It
is
>>>colonialism that imposed
unity upon a conquered and
dominated
peoples.
>>>That does not mean that
there were no big African empires.
It
means
>>>that small empire survived
alongside micro states.
>>>
>>>3. German Kamerun - the grand
empire that extended into
parts
of
>>>present-day Nigeria,
Equatorial Guinea,
Gabon,
Congo-Brazzaville,
>>>Central African Republic, Chad and
Cameroon, of course -
was
the
>>>byproduct of that forced
unity, built at gunpoint, often
by
hanging
>>>the leaders of our
kingdoms and at the price of endless
bloodletting.
>>>
>>>4. I
am about to make a very big declaration. Here it is:
I
believe
>>>and I am sure Nuremberg
agrees that any nostalgia for
a
restoration
of
>>>German Kamerun is an apology
for Nazism and the kind of
fascist
>>>expansionism that led to the two
World Wars. May be some
hunger
for
>>>it. We are definitely
opposed to it and I believe you are
opposed
as
>>>well. If so, then we need to
cut the talk of reuniting the
peoples
of
>>>the Nazi invention named
Kamerun.
>>>
>>>5. It is that expansionism,
annexation and colonization
-
similar
to
>>>the policies of Nazi Germany
deciding against
international
law, to
>>>move into and occupy
Czechoslovakia - that we, Southern
Cameroonians
>>>accuse Yaounde of. Like Nazi
Germany, everything La
Republique
has
>>>done in Southern Cameroons
it has claimed to be legal, in
keeping
with
>>>international law and
consistent with
the will of the
people
obtained
>>>at gunpoint.
>>>
>>>6. If
you take away the years of the World War, the
peoples
of
>>>Southern Cameroons and the
peoples of La Republique du
Cameroun
were
>>>governed as one country for
less than 30 years.
>>>
>>>7. Now compare that short period of
common destiny to the
longer
>>>period - more than 40 years of
joint administration
alongside
Nigeria.
>>>Is one expected to be
more brothers with the friend of
40+
years
or
>>>with the friend of under-30
years? The dozen years of post
>>>independence were not years of
association given that La
Republique
>>>was steeped in the " Maquisard
War".
>>>
>>>8. As two different Trust
Territories, our destinies have
been
>>>separate for a very long time. The
international
boundaries
of our
>>>territories have been
known and enforced internationally
for
years.
>>>Our two brotherly peoples
- not any
more brotherly than us
with
>>>Nigeria or you with Gabonese -
were, each in their own
right,
put on
>>>the path to independence
as separate countries. As
different
peoples,
>>>we each earned the
right to self-determination.
>>>
>>>9. Without depending on the peoples
of La Republique,
Southern
>>>Cameroonians fought for and won
self-government at once
from
Britain
>>>and from Nigeria. We
made sure that independence
meant
that
the
>>>colonialists - both Nigeria
and Britain - left us to
handle
our
>>>self-government. Not so, La
Republique, where the French
left
so they
>>>could stay
permanently.
>>>
>>>10. Without waiting for the people
of Southern Cameroons
(still
caught
>>>in Trusteeship), the
people of La Republique du Cameroun
were
too
>>>impatient - they asked for
and were granted what
France
claimed
was
>>>independence. It was okay if
Southern Cameroonians - the
so-called
>>>brothers of the West of the River
Mungo - were held in
captivity.
>>>
>>>11.
While the sad experiences of Southern Cameroons in
Nigeria
>>>endeared La Republique to our
leaders in Buea, who wanted
genuine
>>>"union in
diversity", leaders in La Republique were
scheming
day
and
>>>night to colonize. Once
admitted into international
sovereignty,
La
>>>Republique du Cameroun set
its greedy eyes on colonizing
Southern
>>>Cameroons.
>>>
>>>12.
During the late 1950s but most especially in April
1961,
the
>>>annexationist country of La
Republique voted against
independence
for
>>>the brotherly peoples of
Southern Cameroons at the United
Nations.
>>>Ahidjo spoke English from the
rostrum to declare his
lack
of
interest
>>>in freeing the slaves
of Southern Cameroons from the
plantation
of
>>>colonialism.
>>>
>>>13.
The crime did not stop there. In August of the same
year,
the
>>>parliament (Assemblee
Nationale) of La Republique voted
into
law a
>>>Constitution that
consecrated the annexation of Southern
Cameroons
>>>even before the territory had
gained independence.
Every
time
Ahidjo
>>>thought he would be found
out, he made speeches in which
he
reaffirmed
>>>from his lips - his
heart elsewhere like a thief at night
-
that La
>>>Republique had no
intention or right to meddle in the
internal
affairs
>>>of Southern
Cameroons.
>>>
>>>14. While the charm of this
bite-and-blow "arrata die way
na
yi mop
>>>find'am"
approach was on display, the leaders of
Southern
Cameroons
of
>>>the time trusted those they
called their brothers from La
Republique.
>>>They pleaded with them then - as
they do with us now -
that
if they
>>>could only get rid of
the French and British colonialists,
they
could
>>>sought their unity and
mutual respect issues among
brothers
once the
>>>stranger is gone.
>>>
>>>15.
Southern Cameroonian leaders - the Fonchas,
Juas,
Endeleys,
>>>Mbiles, Nyentis, Dinkas, etc. -
were approached by and
they
chose to
>>>believe their brothers
from East of Mungo - the the Ums,
Ouandies,
>>>Ndogmos, etc. This is the same way
that our Francophonized
brothers
>>>today (Bonav, Yagnye) expect our
Anglophonized Southern
Cameroonians
>>>(Prof. Tatah Mentan, Chief Taku,
Njoh
Litumbe, etc.) to
trust
them.
>>>
>>>16. The trouble with that
"trust without verifying" or
"trust
because
>>>we are one" - the
trouble with that picture is simple:
Southern
>>>Cameroonian leaders have been down
that road before. They
were
not
>>>only lured into the Foumban
Tent and bitten by the
millipede;
now
>>>their successors are being
asked to trust that they will,
in
their
>>>turn, not be bitten by a
snake. Or, once bitten,
twice
shy.
>>>
>>>17. It
does not help the "just trust us approach"...
It
does
not help
>>>the "there is no
Southern Cameroons Problem" approach that
they
now
>>>use the same sing song.
Their call is for Southern
Cameroonians
to
>>>drop their fight for
self-government of their territory in
favor
of
>>>joining - did
I just use that word? - well, in favor of
YES
joining
>>>them to fight the
perceived common enemy (France-Yaounde)
who
happens
>>>to be the same now as
before, and true to script, is
embarked
today -
>>>as Biya said so clearly
in Buea last February 20 - on the
same
>>>annexationist tricks as before. The
hunter's bullet cannot
be
blamed
>>>if the inquisitive monkey
cannot read the bait.
>>>
>>>18. The invitation from our
Francophonized
brothers begs a
zillion
>>>questions. Where
did trust lead Foncha, Jua, Mbile? Where
did
giving
>>>up their people's
fight for self-rule for the bigger, mord
general
>>>fight against the common enemy get
them? Why should any
Southern
>>>Cameroonian do the same thing as
Foncha, Jua, Endeley,
Mbile,
Nyenti
>>>and Co. and expect a
different outcome?
>>>
>>>19. The truth on the other hand is
self-evident. Our
peoples
made
>>>progress together only when
Um Nyobe and Ouandie
fought
their
own
>>>battles against the
neocolonialists in La Republique while
counting
on
>>>what support they could get
from Southern Cameroonians
which
never
>>>gave up the fight for its
own self-government from Nigeria
and
>>>Britain. Different fronts weaken
even the most formidable
adversary,
>>>it is said.
>>>
>>>20.
The invitation to collapse all struggles into
one
united
front
>>>which has been made time
without number on this forum and
elsewhere
>>>repeats the tactical mistake of
taking splinters of weak
small
forces
>>>up against a crushingly
more powerful enemy and doing so
on
front. It
>>>is a strange doctrine
to invite all combatants to trust
all
battle
>>>victories into one
basket.
>>>
>>>21. Truth is that we are a more
united country
by
recognizing
our
>>>differences than by ignoring
them. Canada is. As a matter
of
fact,
>>>Canada and the USA are
more united despite being two
different
>>>countries. That's the Southern
Cameroons and the La
Republique
du
>>>Cameroun I think we can
achieve in trust and dignity for
all.
>>>
>>>22. It
is clear - it
has been clear in the past and will
be
for
the
>>>foreseeable future - the
army of liberation that is
divided
in
>>>objective and strategy cannot
fight in unison. That does
not
stop that
>>>liberation struggle
from winning battles in dispersed
ranks
and in
>>>adding up these many
small battle wins into the big final
victory
of
>>>the war.
>>>
>>>23.
Let me reiterate my belief in and support for what
Chief
Taku
>>>says: "The Southern
Cameroons Case is a case for
the
respect
of
>>>international legality, a
struggle against annexation and
colonial
>>>rule and, indeed, a fight for
justice against
international
>>>criminality".
>>>
>>>24. I
was delighted to read that Dr. Yagnye buys this
declaration
-
>>>hook, line and sinker. I was
disappointed by what he said
next
-
>>>consisting of watering down
someone's cause by saying
that
yours
is
>>>the same. Let me be clear,
though. Yes, indeed, La
Republique
has a
>>>case to make against
colonial France. The citizens of La
Republique
du
>>>Cameroun need to make that
case themselves. They may want
our
help and
>>>we would most likely
grant it, but it is their battle; not
ours
to
>>>lead.
>>>
>>>25.
The trouble, so far and no matter how deep we bury
our
heads
in
>>>the sand, is that the peoples
of La Republique behave like
they
do not
>>>have such a problem. They
are not as agitated about it as
the
people
>>>of La Republique. They
act like they did not have a
problem.
It would
>>>be okay if that was
all. What is hard to swallow is the
>>>feeling/impression they share so
generously that Southern
Cameroonians
>>>may be making a mountain out of an
anthill.
>>>
>>>Enough from me!
But, let me close by not comparing what is
clearly
>>>less evil with Ahidjo's
scheming. It worries me - I don't
know
for you
>>>- but it worries me that
this strategy by my
Francophonized
brothers
>>>is somewhat similar to
Ahidjo's one-party drive in 1966.
We
know the
>>>outcome. Failure is
guaranteed. The call for the
impossible
unity
>>>(given mere human nature),
has already been tried
without
success
by
>>>the opposition movements in
Cameroon, if we were looking
for
a recent
>>>precedent. It is my
view that embracing such a strategy is
the
best
>>>way of leading the hopes of
self-government for Southern
Cameroons
>>>straight into the Biya Crematorium
of so-called
Reunification.
>>>
>>>Boh
Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________
>>> Posted by: Njousi Abang
<njousid@gmail.com>
>>>________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
__._,_.___
Posted by: Mishe Fon <mishefon@yahoo.com>
Reply
via web post
•
Reply to sender
•
Reply to group
•
Start a New
Topic
•
Messages in this
topic
(37)
Camnetwork is the premier Cameroon/Cameroun forum
since 1997.
Visit Your Group
New Members
1
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
0 comments:
Post a Comment