GAMBIA-L Archives

The Gambia and Related Issues Mailing List

GAMBIA-L@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
kalilu camara <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 24 Jun 2000 18:07:46 GMT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (129 lines)
My dear brother.
I cannot agree with you more on the question of noneviolence,
You are not alone in your pursuit.The key is how?; Not why?;
Who not what? Now not when!
Karl

>From: MOMODOU BUHARRY GASSAMA <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: A challenge to those advocating violent change in The Gambia
>Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 15:45:49 +0200
>
>Hi!
>     I have read a lot of messages propagating violence as the only
>available
>means of bringing about a change of government in The Gambia. I have also
>read how those who propagate other means especially peaceful ones are
>deemed
>to be living fantasies. I would like to suggest that those propagating
>violence from the comfort of homes in Europe and America are living a
>fantasy as much as those advocating peaceful means. One can be anyone one
>wants to be behind a computer keyboard. One can be Rambo, one can be
>Malcolm
>X, and one can be Bin Laden. One can even be Ghaddafi if one wishes. That
>is
>the beauty of the cyber identity. Then comes reality! The reality is that
>one may not be as tough as one portrays from a keyboard. One can be the
>greatest coward and the weakest "lefe lefe" there is yet the implications
>of
>their macho messages can be far-reaching and even devastating.
>
>  If the ones preaching violence as the only available means of bringing
>about change are comfortably sitting in Europe and America, who is going to
>bring about that violent change for them? I would be more convinced if
>those
>people were on the ground in The Gambia living what they are preaching. I
>would pay more attention to their message if it were Halifa Sallah, Lawyer
>Darboe, Shyngle Nyassi or any Samba or Demba living in The Gambia who was
>preaching what they are preaching. I would be more convinced, perhaps even
>converted if they truly believed in what they are preaching and pack up and
>go back home to be in the midst of the violence they are preaching. Apart
>from that I just say, "Practise what you preach".
>
>  The repercussions of the violent prescriptions these people are
>prescribing
>won't take place in a vacuum. The Gambia is not an empty space. Look at the
>results of violent confrontations in our sub-region. Look at Casamance,
>Liberia and Sierra Leone. It is very easy as stated earlier to sit
>thousands
>of miles away and prescribe violence knowing fully well that one is far
>removed from its effects. In other words, it is not their hands, feet or
>tongues that are going to be cut off. Yes, it might be their parents',
>children's etc. but it is still not the same. One can walk even if one's
>brother's legs are cut off. I would be more convinced if these people go
>back home and put their feet, tongues, hands etc. at the risk of being cut
>and still preach what they are preaching.
>  There have been many cases in the recent past that have outraged many of
>us
>not only in their brutality but also even in their deliberate assumption of
>Gambians' stupidity. The answer to those acts cannot only be violence.
>Measures have been taken that have yielded results. Why do you think Yaya
>didn't react in his normal way after the student massacres? Why do you
>think
>all the arrested students were released? Pressure, man, pressure! Pressure
>that has had some effect no matter how much one wishes to downplay those
>effects.
>
>  To those advocating violence I ask: do you have any organised means of
>bringing about a violent change? Do you have the finance to support a
>violent movement? Do you have a network somewhere to co-ordinate the
>activities of your movement? In short, what do you have in place apart from
>empty rhetoric? I say empty rhetoric because to propagate violence and
>dismiss the diplomatic approach as fantasy really smacks of a lack of
>understanding of how wars are fought. Ask the Arabs. When Israel was
>declared a state, the Arabs went bonkers and showed their absolute fury by
>attacking Israel. Yes, Israel had the military capability with the help of
>the West to defend itself. It however invested in a more important
>ingredient of war: propaganda and diplomacy. Because of the Jews' presence
>in broadcasting and publishing, they succeeded in transforming world
>opinion
>in their favour. That is why Israel gets away with basically anything today
>whilst the Iraqs, Yugoslavias etc. are bombed to smithereens for lesser
>sins. The importance of propaganda makes it imperative for guerrilla
>movements to have political organs that put a diplomatic face on the
>bombings and other atrocities perpetrated by their armed movements. To
>underestimate the importance of the non-violent aspect of the machinery of
>change displays a gross lack of understanding of the mechanisms of change.
>
>  To cut a long story short, those who are advocating a violent change in
>The
>Gambia need to come up with action plans. They need to show us how they are
>going to bring about that change and if possible with the least loss of
>life
>and suffering possible. To lack an action plan yet instigate unarmed people
>to have violent confrontations with armed-to-the-teeth security personnel
>is
>irresponsible to say the least especially when one is sheltered some
>thousands of miles away. Self-defence is a natural right but instigating
>the
>UDP to form vigilante groups knowing fully well that they would not be
>granted firearms licences when they would be pitched against armed police
>and soldiers seems like a recipe for disaster. Maybe those advocating a
>non-violent response to the activities of the government do not have a
>panacea to all Gambia's ill but neither do those advocating a violent
>response. The issue therefore should be meet at the crossroads and maybe
>work out something that would be in the interests of The Gambia for surely
>violent confrontation, war and civil strife are not in our country's
>interests. 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
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

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

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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2