When we posted the complainant's letter to TI and invited the CGG to respond, we did not ask for a narrative. We did not ask for details. We were not interested to know Mrs Bangura's personal history, especially because she was selective in her narration of it. We did not ask for a defensive posturing. All that we asked for was for her to provide a basic rudimentary statement of what the CGG received, from whom, how it was spent, and on what – without the humbug of a litany of half truths.

Why did she wait until a query came from a member of the public before she offered what should be a routinely available piece of information? As for her claim to have given this rubbish information for the benefit of Transparency International, why, if she had regularly given them updates, would she now be writing to them a letter about the CGG's history, formation and existence, etc., etc., since 1996? Surely this was not new information for TI, because how else could they have given Zainab Bangura and the CGG (Sierra Leone) accreditation as national chapter if this information now being supplied for their sole "benefit" had not been given to them at the time? 

No! The unpalatable fact is that Zainab Bangura has been made to eat humble pie and she does not want to appear to have been made to conform. Her rather seemingly defiant overview is really meant, paradoxically, as an admission that this time she has effectively been made to climb down and give account to the people of Sierra Leone, through the agency of:
(1) the original complainant – an ordinary member of the Sierra Leone public; and
(2) Focus on Sierra Leone and this editor, who took up the issue as a matter of public interest and, through him, those who regularly visit this site or read this newsletter.

That I have personally committed so much time and effort on this singular issue is because I do not want a government within a government; just as with the RUF and AFRC, I do not want a State within a State. People like Zainab Bangura who try to act as another wing  of government – for that is truly what the CGG under her leadership has become - should be curbed and have their wings clipped, and be made to realise that they cannot replace democratic rule though the operations of their petty fiefdoms.

The issue here is not what account was given by her to her foreign resource providers. That is their own business, and between them and her. If they have unlimited resources to give away and do not care about the submission of proper accounts, it is their prerogative and far be it for me to interfere! 

What matters to me is this:

When money or materials are solicited and accepted for, and in the name of, Sierra Leoneans and for their own benefit, then at least the rules of transparency require that we should be told, even if informally but at least at the end of a year of operations:

(a) that requests for funds were made in our name;
(b) the purpose for which they were made;
(c) the results of those requests, including whether any monies and /or materials were donated; 
(d) how these amounts or materials have been, or will be used; and,
(e) how much remains of it.

My comments are in bold, or in blue if your are reading this on a colour monitor.

Mrs Bangura wrote:

Dear Gladwell

Thank you very much for bringing to our notice the above letter written to you regarding our organisation. I returned to Freetown on the 8th February, 2000 from a meeting from Paris - France.
(Your itinerary is of no consequence to us especially as you do not say whether it was on CCG's work, how much it and your other visits abroad cost, and whether it comes out of your personal purse, the CGG's accounts, or that they are freebies. You are a public body, Zainab!)

I do not recall any individual who came to the office to request financial statements as the anonymous writer claimed to have done. Therefore I will not react to the anonymous letter as well as the unfounded accusation made by the Editor because I feel it is politically motivated. 
(You last comment is contemptible. But I will not encourage you down this road as, luckily for you, I am not the point at issue.
But please note: The complainant did not say they met or spoke to you during their visit. But then you think you are the CGG. Anyway from what you say you were most probably away on one of your foreign junkets. Did you make any enquiries from your staff, after TI forwarded the complaint's letter to you, and only when we published it and raised the issue on this site?  What we would have expected in your narrative was something along the following lines:

"I do not recall any query of this kind having being brought to my attention. As soon as the letter of complaint was published on Focus I asked my staff about it but no one recalled anyone having visited this office to request such information. However, because the CGG is a public organisation that is accountable (to the citizens of this country), and in the public interest,  I will give a brief summary of the organisation's finances to the extent possible, taking into account (as Focus itself mentioned in its own commentary on 2 February) the disruption that was caused to our own activities by the rebel invasion last January.")

We are a non governmental organisation whose mission statement is, “To facilitate and encourage the full and genuine participation of all Sierra Leoneans in the Political, Social and Economic processes of Development in Sierra Leone”.
(Why do you bother to throw such mealy-mouthed words at us when you don't mean them? So you think you are encouraging genuine participation by referring to all legitimate questions about your stewardship as politically motivated? What do you think goes on, on this site and in its newsletter Focus on Sierra Leone? Your off-handish disposal of your responsibility to Sierra Leoneans when contrasted with the reverence that you show for TI and your donors, nails the lie on this. If you cannot answer a simple question from a Sierra Leonean about your operations without resorting to insults then whom do you think you represent?)

Campaign for Good Governance was established on the 1st July, 1996 with support from the International Crisis Group (ICG) with only myself and a Secretary. ICG only provided support for institutional support and a Technical Assistant to help us prepare proposals.
(Just a minor piece of information for your education. Alice Jay, one of your mentors formerly at the ICG contacted me desperately towards the end of 1995 (see here) when her organisation wanted a bit of the action in our crisis. I obliged …long before she even knew you existed. So enough of your posturing and self promotion.)

Our first proposal was to the British Government  for five workshops.
(The British Government is a big concern, Zainab. Which part did you make your proposal to? PC Peter Penfold? British Council? DFID? The FCO?) 

They provided us with the resources to organise the five workshops. Before the conclusion of these workshops the coup of May 25,1997 took place. 
(Tell us what these resources were. Since you will be saying, later, that you filed receipts and all with them, it should be very, very easy for you to say what these amounted to in money or materials. As the workshops had already started anyway, they must have cost something by the time of their abrupt termination. Was there a balance left that you did not use. Any offers? Any amount will do for now!)

Before the implementation of these workshops, the British Council in Sierra Leone was awarded the contract by the British Government to administer the grant.
(So what? Thanks for stating the obvious. I don't expect the British government to award the contract to some council from Tif-tif-land? What was the grant? Say it and save time and space! )

All original receipts were sent to British Council for all workshops before accessing resources for the next workshop. 
(So why didn't you ask the British Council (or the British Government?) for the receipts, or copies of them, before you wrote this disjointed rubbish?)

The coup of May 25, 1997 brought an abrupt end to our operation and we lost most of our documents etc.
(Poor Zainab! You know by now that I always try to be fair with my comments. I gave you a possible reason for your lapses, in advance (click here), but it was not meant to serve you as an escape clause for avoiding to give proper account. So don't abuse it! Go back to all the donors to whom you claim to have been sending these receipts and get them to give you copies to help you put together a credible statement of accounts!)

We finally succeeded in reopening the office in Conakry and operated for only three months.
(Who are "we"? Did you bring all your staff out into exile with you to Conakry? If so how many were they, and what did they survive on? With what did you open and operate the office? Certainly not with grains of sand!)

The United States Embassy in Sierra Leone and the British Government (Now you are talking big again, combining two of the biggest administrations in the world to impress us. Tell us which little fragments have been dealing with you, please!) provided resources for the organisation to be used as a focal point for civil society against the Junta.
(Alright, Mrs Bangura. But tell us what these resources amounted to. What were they, or was the arrangement between you and your benefactors a secret? Since you say you were "a focal point for civil society against the junta", has it crossed your mind that you may have gone outside the terms of reference of the CGG in assuming this role? In particular, were you mindful of your parent organisation (TI)'s express prohibition against financial and institutional dependence and its expectation that you observe their "guiding principles of non-investigative work and independence from government, commercial and partisan political interests"? You keep confusing CGG with Civil Society – they are different animals.)

All disbursement were done by the United States Embassy in Conakry - Guinea and the British High Commission in exile in Conakry - Guinea where all original receipts and statements of accounts were submitted.
(So therefore, let's see the copies of these receipts and statements of accounts that you submitted. Is that an impossible task, especially when you are dealing with reputably meticulous and accountable governments like the British and American? If the rebels took away or burnt down your own records, save your breath and our time and ask the British High Commission(er) and the US Embassy to make duplicate copies for you or put their own copies in the public domain …I mean the Sierra Leone public domain. Why do you keep on belittling our own national public interests, Zainab?)

The office was again relocated to Freetown  (Did this cost you or the CGG any money?) and started operating in June, 1998 after the British Department for International Development (Ha, so now we seem to be narrowing down our sphere of influence, are we?) wrote a letter dated 2nd June, 1998 authorising the British Council to start disbursement for the balance of £4,776 (What principal sum is this the balance of?) and agreed on the 2nd July, 1998 to provide additional of £60,000 (additional to which sum?) for an interim period of three months whilst we prepare a year’s project for consideration. We were not able to disburse the entire grant (Which one? £60,000 plus £4,776? We are assuming that you had already spent an undisclosed principal sum less £4,776 that you described earlier as  a balance!) because of the deteriorating security situation which led to the invasion of Freetown on the January, 1999. 
(Stick to your trend! Stop throwing in red herrings! So how much of the "entire" grant did you disburse then? You have a habit of hurry scurrying through the bits that have to do with money. Yet this was the information that our complainant went in search of and even now you seem unable to give straight answers.)

With the temporal closure of the British Council we were not able to access the grant until May, 1999 when DFID finally authorised the British High Commission to disburse the resources to us. (Which resources? The £60,000, the balance of £4,776? Or whatever?) This was done until August, 1999. 
(In other words you are saying you operated in this way from May, June, July and August? How much did you spend then, doing what?)

Meanwhile, CGG was able to develop a project for a one year effective 1st September, 1999. By then we still had £22,271 (Is this out of the £60,000 + £4,776?) undisbursed resources which we agreed with the DFID to add to our new grant 
(You are confusing issues here. Which new grant? How much was this one?) 

Within the period we were supervised by the British High Commission (So you had effectively become the creature of Paramount Chief Pa Komrabai Peter Penfold. You ceased to be a non-partisan and independent organisation. You became part and parcel of the establishment that you were supposed to monitor and reform. What other creature comforts did Penfold give to you and the CGG?) original receipts were submitted to them including monthly financial statements and account before new amounts were provided to us. 
(Okay, let's see them. Your friend Penfold should be able to do you this last small favour before he boards his plane back my way.)

In our project for 1999/2000 DFID approved approximately US $300,000. (That's a lot of money compared to the mere pittance other local NGOs get to do essential work in our communities, but then you know the big guys, and the others don't!) excluding a vehicle and a computer (Why? Who paid for these? You? Or someone else?) We also included an Accountant and an Accounting Assistance as well as costing for Auditing fees.
(How much did they cost you to employ? Surely these are easily quantifiable, even without records!) 

We have held discussion with KPMG - Peatmarwick who have agreed to act as our Auditors and will be providing us with an Accounting Software for which they have asked us to pay US$5,000 and to put together all our available documents together so that we could have a three years audited account. 
(Note, Zainab! This is the first and only occasion on which you have stated an amount that you actually propose to spend. 
But may I ask: Did you openly advertise, in accordance with principles of transparency, the Auditors' job? Did KPMG apply? You seem to suggest that it was simply handed to them - you say "they agreed to act". Did they approach you out of the blue? Who recommended them to you? Were there no local indigenous firms of accountants whom your organisation could employ? Or, was this a condition by the British Council that you had to employ their own people to do this work? It is of course possible that you employed a branch of KPMG based in Freetown and staffed by indigenous staff – in which case tell us. We will be content with the latter.)

Since then our two Accounting Staff have been working round the clock to put the pieces together. 
(Some pieces, indeed! I raise my hat to them. They must be highly proficient people. Their job descriptions must sound like a roll call in hell, in the midst of such confusion and (is it deliberate?) obfuscation!)

Following that meeting we wrote a letter to Standard Chartered Bank on the 20th January, 2000 to provide us with bank statements for 12th June, 1998 - July, 1998, 18th August 1998 11th September, 1998, 29th October, 1998 - 28th November, 1998 and for a second new account statements for 4th January, 1999 - 25th February, 1999, and 28th May, 1999 - 13th July, 1999. This was to help us in cases where we lost bank statements and used cheque books after the January 6th, 1999 invasion of Freetown. Standard Bank has asked that we pay for this request for we are ready to do. 
(How much is their asking price? Stop giving us duff information.) 

In addition to the British Government support (for which we, too, would be grateful, if only we knew what it amounts to) we were also funded by the National Endowment for Democracy in the United States. They approved a grant of US $21,750 in 1996. We never got to access the grant before the coup of May 25, 1997. We tried to access it in Conakry - Guinea, but failed.
(Why did you need to access this money? You said earlier that you "finally succeeded in reopening the office in Conakry and operated for only three months" and that "the United States Embassy in Sierra Leone and the British Government provided resources for the organisation to be used as a focal point for civil society against the Junta". Was their contribution not enough? What were you proposing to do with the extra cash?)

With the invasion of Freetown on the 6th January, 1999 the period was again extended to December, 1999. Unfortunately, due to our inability to access the rest of the country we asked for an extension to February, 2000, which we hope will be the last.
(So are you saying that since January 1999 until February 2000 you have had no access to the rest of the country? Let's hope that you do eventually get access for the sake of the poor forgotten country people. I very much wonder where all these thousands of pounds/dollars that you received have been going if, as you say, you have limited access to most of country. I suppose, like all things in Sierra Leone, your activities have more or less been a Freetown affair – Freetown being always equated to Sierra Leone by bogus leaders like you!)

Meanwhile during the course of this period we maintained a separate account for their funds, send financial reports as well as narrative reports.
(So you kept separate accounts? Did these too go missing when rebels stormed your office? If not, why is it problematic to present them without this rambling? From their name, I expect that the US Endowment for Democracy will not be averse to letting the Sierra Leone public have sight of your statements with them, would they? Remember we are pursuing you in the name of democratic accountability.)

Within these period small grants (How small, Zainab? Tell us, or are they too small to remember?) were provided to us by the United States Embassy, World Vision and Dutch Interchurch Aid. For the United States Embassy and the World Vision all original receipts are forwarded as well as financial statements.
(Ditto as before. Ask them for copies just in case rebels took yours away!)

For Dutch Interchurch Aid, the Programme Officer was sent from the Netherlands to do an assessment mission. They were so impressed (Wow!) with out financial statements and receipts compilation that they increased their grant by 100% to US $16,000 effective November, 1999.
(Bravo! Bravo, Zainab! He or she didn't need Dutch courage for that, did he?  The poor officer was probably mesmerised…or was he/she confused, I wonder! Still you don't tell us if you have spent the extra and on what, and if anything is left of it!)

Our organisation has never operated for a full year without one crisis or another.
(Zainab! Sierra Leone has not operated for one full day without one major crisis or another (including having to put up with people like yourself). Remember that you are not the government! Maybe your own crisis is contrived so that CGG can get a piece of the action. It keeps you in the limelight!)

Therefore we have never been able to utilise all resources allocated to us. (This means you have a quantifiable amount of unspent resources known to you. Tell us what it is, Zainab!) We had to be extending the grants period all the time, but always presenting financial statements and original receipts to donors for resources utilised. 
(These cannot take all of your time since you say you are not spending much at all. So what is all this talk about presenting statements and original receipts for not spending? Or are you still receiving over and above your requirements? If so, by how much?)

This has prevented us from producing a consolidated annual account report.
(Yes, it would. Your idea of accountability is that solely owed by you to your benefactors not to us the people you are meant to serve. Be that as it may, could you tells us why it is difficult for you to give a résumé to the public, when you do in fact say that you are "always presenting financial statements and original receipts to donors for resources utilised"?)

This year is the first time we have prepared a one year full programme with full staff (Do us a favour, how many staff do you have and what is your current salary cost? How much do you pay yourself? If you cannot say that, and since you say you have prepared a full programme for the year, from what baseline did you project the cost of next year's programme? Surely you must have built into it a staff component. What is the profiled amount? You tend to give us the rubbish things and leave out the important bits!) for which all our donors have committed to provide grants. 
(You obviously submitted a project plan that was costed by you, which your donors are happy to fund. How much in grants have they committed to provide. Put this information up front. Then we can start monitoring your activities for next year. We might even help supplement your memory lapses next time!)

We have worked for the past three years with the same donors and continue to work with the same grant given to us.  (What is the amount of this "same" grant? You are frustrating me!) In some cases we are trying to finish the allocated grant (How much is this one?) since 1996 like with National Endowment for Democracy (NED) (How much?) which expires on the 29 February, 2000 or close the grant and forward unutilised resources to a new set of activities like we did in the case of DFID’s grant (How much was this also?)
(Zainab spend, spend, and spend! It's solely your money after all. Try harder to finish it. Then more will come. One of these days I will pass word to the amputees and the destitute people at Kissy, Waterloo, Port Loko, Makeni, Kambia, Bo, Kenema, Kailahun, Pujehun, etc., that you are sitting on a gold mine which you are struggling to exhaust while they suffer abject misery and pain!)

For 1999/2000, we will be provided with nearly US$600,000 from donors, who have been funding us since 1996. This is an illustration of how satisfied they are with our work. (Wow!) We have moved from 2 employees to almost 30 (Ah, the magic figure at last!) countrywide. We are the first and only organisation that provide legal advice and representation, Human Rights Monitors nationwide effective 1st February, 2000, provide support to victims of domestic and sexual violence, micro credit to women across the country etc.
(Yes everyone else in the country is up to no good, except you. But for you and the CGG we would all be foaming at the mouth in ignorance and wallowing in destitution. God bless you, dear Zainab! 
With such amounts of resources, not to mention your pretensions to power, you should be able to do these wonderful things. Name any other local NGO in Sierra Leone, outside your Freetown enclave, that commands this amount of money. God Bless the USA! God bless Britain! God bless the very well endowed US Endowment for Democracy! God bless the International Crisis Group. May we have more crises for you to solve in future!
One of my correspondents who works within the NGO industry in Salone has told me that you control the most resources among the local NGOs. They have alleged to me that they do not get your co-operation to share your resources with them, including some of the very good personnel that you have, who could help them to do certain things that they are lacking in. I understand one reason for the all-local-NGO meeting that was held on Sunday, 20 February in Freetown, was to explore ways for NGOs to share resources and supplement the needs of each other in those areas where they lack the necessary expertise that their counterparts have. You in particular were singled out to this editor as being uncooperative and unwilling to share your human resources.  And here you are, bragging to us that you have so much money given to you that you are unable to spend all of it. You are a disgrace!
But do tell me something. Did your human rights monitors monitor your own activity late December 1998, when you allegedly led a mass demonstration of your civil society? …more about this later.)

Since we started the year’s programme, we have made sure we video and audio tape all our programmes, prepare reports for each activity and have snap shot which are kept in the office for everybody to access especially donors and interested parties. All these are to ensure 
sufficient evidence is kept of our activities on record for the future benefit of ourselves and our donors. 
(Yes Zainab – you are struggling to avoid saying 'the Sierra Leone public'. Your allegiance is to your donors; yourself; and did you say "interested parties"? I suppose I am an interested party. Maybe you can send me a video of your good self to keep for posterity. You are just too full of yourself.  I note that you have all these videos and snapshots to show us about your wonderful activities. It seems the rebels left them intact. All they took away were records of your accounts. Oh well, it seems we will not be having that kind of evidence!)

We will be organising 65 conferences and seminars all over the country (So now you have access to all parts of the country, do you?) for the year 2000, 13 of these seminars will be on corruption.
(Hurrah! I thought you would never say the word. Remember people who live in glass houses must not throw stones. Show us how scrupulous you have been with the CGG's finances before you start pontificating to the rest of us about corruption.)

We built the organisation from nothing (Not true!) to an institution which has become a household name in Sierra Leone. We had a dream which we have worked hard to make a reality.
(Dream on, Zainab! We will revive the Order of the Mosquito and we shall bedeck you with the highest accolade Sierra Leone can confer on its sons and daughters. We at Focus will send you a free etched badge of the CGG to be nailed on the front door of every household and mud hut in the country to proclaim your great achievements.)

We stood and fought for democracy in Sierra Leone because we believed in the ideals and principles of democracy, not because of our loyalty to the elected government. They were the embodiment of democracy and became the biggest beneficiary of our struggle. 
(This is just plain gratuitous rubbish, Zainab!  You do not begin to understand democracy as a concept and yet you claim to have fought for it. I can see that you mean it literally when you speak about fighting for democracy.
Just because you periodically bring out unsuspecting groups of demonstrators into the streets does not mean you are protecting democracy, does it? Does it matter to you that one such demonstration in late December 1998 got seriously out of hand and led to the deaths of two young, innocent schoolboy bystanders who were wrongly accused of being rebels/rebel collaborators? They were necklaced and set alight.
I also once heard that some bellicose women folk were going around asking that Kabbah should give them guns to go and fight the rebels. I wonder if you were one of those who made this demand, so I can be sure that you are not just an opportunistic rabble-rousing democrat.
Even when your own so-called democratically elected government finally changed its mind (wisely and correctly) to enter into dialogue with our rebel opponents and accepted the principle of limited power sharing, did you not defy its wishes by again bringing out your so-called civil society of vulnerable people into the streets to protest against this very sensible move? Then you have the supreme unadulterated nerve to claim that you stood for democracy?)

We were against the Lomé Agreement not because we did not want peace, but because we realised when we looked at the draft agreement, it was going to be an impossible agreement to implement. Something that everybody including the international community has come to realise. 
(Now comes your lack of candour. You do not like or agree with the Lomé agreement. You say it is impossible to implement. So why are you involved in it? You want the war to go on, yet you talk about peace.  It is only a spiritually dead country like Sierra Leone that puts such dead brains like you in front to lead them. What has the international community come to realise? What did you want them to do? Spell out your alternative for us to see. )

Despite our opposition to the peace agreement (Yeah, don't stop but go on and contradict yourself in the next bit), we have being doing everything we can to support it and make sure it works (You Jekyll and Hyde so and so!) including establishing dialogue and encouraging the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), Armed Forces Ruling Council (AFRC) and their leaders to disarm and demobilise and become part of the Sierra Leonean family.
(Wait a minute! I thought you just said (above) that the Lomé agreement is impossible to implement? How can you now "support it and make sure it works"? You are fooling yourself. Most people will see you truly for what you are. I suspect you are in this simply because of what you get out of it, i.e the attention and the control that you have over such tremendous resources. 
You talk about the Sierra Leone family? The only family you know is your foreign confraternities who dole the cash to you. A nice sounding phrase like "working towards establishing dialogue and encouraging the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), Armed Forces Ruling Council (AFRC) and their leaders to disarm and demobilise and become part of the Sierra Leonean family" (your own words) sounds great in the ears of donors and keeps the funds rolling in.)

I have being nominated by the civil society to represent them in the commission headed by RUF leader Foday Sankoh. An offer I have turned down because of my busy schedule. 
(Is this Civil Society the same as  the CGG? How did you engineer this one? Then you say that you are busy? Busy doing what, Zainab? Writing the sort of rubbish that unfolds us here? You are not telling us all the story.  You are running away from facing the RUF leader ... and you know why!
How can you be too busy as a civil society leader to serve on one of the country's most important commissions. Now I can see why Lomé has been slow getting off the mark. It is a disgraceful commentary on our nation that they found no one better  to serve on a key institutional framework for delivering Lomé?  How come they invited you, with your well known positions against everything - anti dialogue, anti Lomé, anti reconciliation with rebels, etc.? How could they involve you in something that you say you do not support? Someboy thinks you are indispensable. Unbelievable!)

At the same time, we have been able to develop a partnership with government on the issues which we work on i.e. military, police, corruption, local government and decentralisation and electoral system. 
(Now are showing your true colours when you talk about partnership with government, which is your euphemism for colluding with the present authorities. If you remember, this was the second accusation that our complainant levied at you and the CGG, namely that because of your contrived high political profile you are really in collusion with the government. I think you have become just another arm of the establishment. All that you have done is to create your own little niche to lord it over the rest of us. 
I begin to feel you are the government, or is it what your benefactors are financing you to attain by stealth? But no, Zainab, it won't work while people like me, who have a much longer history of dedication to the cause of our country, continue to draw precious living breath. The fooling of the masses of Sierra Leone has gone on for too long by opportunists like you and we are determined to put a permanent stop to it. We will watch you closely and scrutinise your every move from now onwards.
Your organisation cannot teach us anything about democracy, transparency or accountability. Not only have you failed hopelessly to practice it in your own organisation, as is more than evident in this sham of a narrative, you do not even appear to understand the import of the concepts that each connotes. So now you are going to tell us how to run the military, police, local government and decentralisation and electoral system and to root out corruption? Give me a break!
As I revealed before, you are someone who prefers to collude with the authorities but is unwilling to share with your sister NGOs that are struggling to make ends meet. But you have got so much money it comes out of your ear holes. Allegations have reached us since we published your letter, about the authoritarian way in which they say you run the CGG. Your staff are said to be petrified to challenge you over some of your allegedly silly decisions. I have been told that there are extremely capable people who work with you, who are probably better at running the CGG than yourself. But your alleged domineering attitude keeps their heads bowed all of the time.)

We hope that this information will be helpful and if we can be of further assistance, please contact us at your convenience.
(I also hope that TI has revisited you since. If they have not, and have accepted this trash as gospel truth to be filed as a statement of account from their Sierra Leone chapter, then they are the biggest jokers around.  I will not contact you again…until I am satisfied that you have reformed yourself and started acting in responsible fashion.
But you have a choice to move aside now and let the other people who you work with you take over and re-establish the CGG back on the rails to its original ideals.)

26/03/00