Hi Ebou!
                Thanks for taking the time to respond to some of the issues
raised by those who read your prior postings and for trying to offer
clarifications. You wrote:

"I will continue to narrate my experience the way I perceived it as a live
witness. It has nothing to do with tribalism or so."

You are definitely within your rights to narrate your experiences. That is
the beauty of democracy and free speech. However, claiming your rights
within such a framework means accepting others' rights to scrutinise and
question what you present. It is academic and nothing personal because most
of us who debate and communicate on the L do not know each other. I, for
one, am glad that what you presented has nothing to do with tribalism.
However, even though what you presented might not have been deliberately
tribalistic, the latter part of  its construction and presentation can raise
tribal sentiments with dangerous repercussions.

You also wrote:

"I can tell you that if left ignored as some critics may wish, it could
eventually be a major source of explosion there..."

What you have written about tribalism in relation to the GNA is frightening.
I don't think anyone on this forum said anything about ignoring the issue of
tribalism. The issue is there for all to see. What we have been saying is
the danger of people with interests antithetical to that of the government
using the issue of tribalism to incite people to violence as has been seen
in other countries. The issue has to be tackled in a sober and constructive
manner to avoid violence and division. If the concern is as widespread as
you indicate, the GNA should at once take steps to remedy the situation. It
should forthwith institute a study to determine why the soldiers feel the
way they do, whether there are any grounds for such feelings and what steps
should be taken to remedy the situation if it turns out that the soldiers
are right and what should be done if the feelings are baseless. This would
be a better means of dealing with the tribal issue in the GNA than letting
it simmer underneath only to explode with devastating consequences or
inciting people to violence.

No one is "academically" toying "around with the subject for its so called
tribal undertone..." either. What was raised was the tribal undertones of
the latter part of your posting and its potential implications for the
country. The figures you presented and the way you presented them can in the
wrong hands have consequences beyond the academic realm.

You wrote:

"in sharing his experience with the world, should Shyngle Nyassi be
considered a potential threat to the coexisting tribes in the Gambia?"

No. Shyngle Nyassi should be an example for all to emulate. By resisting
affiliation based on simplistic tribal lines and sharing it with us without
listing the number of Wollofs, Mandinkas etc. with ulterior motives, he has
demonstrated his gallantry with regard to the tribal issue.

You wrote:

"They have long since learnt that the public doesn't give a heck to them
when maimed or destroyed as soldiers " and "how many of you have ever come
across GNA soldiers talking in the way I do?  We should not be blamed for
our silence."

What exactly do you want or expect the Gambian civilians to do? If the
soldiers are afraid to talk, can you blame the civilians? If the civilians
were to demonstrate on behalf of the Gambian soldiers, who would be the
people to shoot at them, arrest and torture them? Would it not be the
Gambian soldiers themselves? I believe that putting the responsibility of
dislodging the government other than by democratic means on the shoulders of
the Gambian civilians is giving them an unproportionate responsibility given
that they possess neither guns nor bullets.

The alleged atrocities committed if true are serious criminal acts which
should shock and disgust all Gambians. The reaction on the L has
demonstrated that. The alleged atrocities are even more shocking to people
who know the names you listed. Lt. Basirou Barrow was my classmate at St.
Augustine's and you can never imagine how I felt when I visualised him being
killed and buried behind a toilet. However, what you have presented are
allegations until proven. You have done your duty as a Gambian. The next
step should be for the elected representatives of the Gambian people, some
of whom have access to what you have presented, to take the matter further.
They should put in motion steps to institute a commission of enquiry to look
into your allegations. Another alternative would be for the families of the
deceased soldiers to form an action group and institute criminal proceedings
against the alleged perpetrators of the alleged crimes. Maybe people like
you who were "live witnesses" would for the sake of justice present what you
know. Some of what you described took place after the AFPRC and thus not
covered under the Indemnity Clause. Thanks.

Buharry.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------