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!
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!
Posted by: Mishe Fon <mishefon@yahoo.com>
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!
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"
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-end
Manu
___________
> 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>
>>>________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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.
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment