After some thought and after listening to advice from people that I deem wiser and older than myself, I have decided to return to this Bantaba. As Hamjatta said, a return was necessary in the spirit of togetherness and the unity of purpose. But, also, my return is mandated for two reasons. First, it is my moral obligation as an objective Gambian to challenge the flawed theories of certain members of this list whose flawed thinking and demagogic thoughts are akin to bigotry. Second, after seeing the way in which Mr. Saidy Khan has addressed certain members of this forum, I think my return is necessary. I am sure some of you are asking yourselves what gives me the right to make all this noise about the issue at hand? My answer to this is the fact that after having lived in this country for several years and having received a good traditional education as well as a street education that is invaluable, I speak from a unique perspective on the theories and assumptions that Saul has made. To actually challenge the validity and logic of his article, it is necessary to view the article in the context in which it was written. His response was prompted by a very interesting article that Madiba posted to all of us. It concerned Mr. Henry Louis Gates' documentary on Africa and how it portrayed Africans as also having been an integral part of the trade itself. This is a disputable fact and has been the subject of many a debate over the past 400 years. In response to this, Mr. SaidyKhan took it upon himself to stereotype African Americans negatively to make his point that Africans did not participate in the slave trade. He proceeded to naively categorize them into three segments: Blacks, Negroes and Niggers. Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam typified the way he expected a black man to be and he subsequently called him a black. His next categorization was what he called the Negro. According to him, Henry Louis Gates fit this category and this could explain his the postulation that Africans sold one another during the slave trade. This was a rather naive categorization of Mr. Gates to make a point. This man is one of the foremost scholars of African studies and has done his research over a period of many years. Therefore, Mr. SaidyKhan's pathetic attempt to explain Mr. Gates' postulation was laughable at best. All this being said, my biggest objection to his futile attempt at stereotyping was to his use of the word Nigger. The word Nigger is defined in any dictionary as a black person, a member of a dark skinned race or a socially disadvantaged class. However, the dictionary stresses that it is the most offensive word in the English language. The truth is that this word did not exist until Europeans coined the term to describe our ancestors. The word was used to describe our ancestors at their lowest state. Brothers and sisters from The Gambia and other places from the continent who, after being subjected to a process where even to uphold one's pride and self esteem was a burden, were called this word. And as time went by, every negative unfounded stereotype about black people was associated this word. Stereotypes such as big lips, big noses, savagery, laziness and unintelligence were one of the few unsavory stereotypes that were associated with the word . Those of us that have seen glimpses of old racist cartoons, like Sambo, can understand my abhorrence to the negative use of this word. In certain instances, the use of word is acceptable when it is used by black people as a term of endearment. But when someone uses a broad brush to paint a whole section of a population with the most offensive word in the English language, it's use becomes offensive and derogatory. Mr. SaidyKhan tried to justify his use of the word by saying that it's use indicated the mindset of those he was trying to describe. But his interpretation of the word was twisted and completely wrong. Neither Mr. Saidykhan or his supporters can come up with any evidence of an alternate definition of the word. I openly challenge those of you who proclaimed that Niggers existed with an exclamation point to come up with evidence for a justification of your statements. Yes, it is true that unsavory characters do exist everywhere. But to label them as Niggers without any justification for the use of the word is akin to bigotry. The fact that Mr. SaidyKhan is guilty of stereotyping is quite funny. Given that in response to one of Alpha Robinson's pieces he talks about stereotyping. It is as follows: "I have vowed not to let anyone get away with perpetuating such stereotypes -- however subtly they put it" Mr. SaidyKhan openly vowed that he would not let anyone get away with stereotyping, yet he perpetuates the same type of behavior. Is a man like this to be taken seriously? You be the judges to that. His use of the word in a very negative way, explains a whole lot to me. Because, as I explained earlier, this word was used to humiliate our ancestors at their lowest state, his use of the word can be described as a manifestation of self hate. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that he aptly described himself when he coined his definition of the Nigger. He is the educated type, mind you, ALA Armstrong Williams . To conclude, I would like to address a phrase by Hamjata Kanteh. In response to my piece about my PROTEST, Hamjatta said that this is a democratic forum and all views should be entertained that we should agree to disagree respectfully. To that I say that we can never agree to disagree with bigoted views. Before we start looking at bigger issues, let us start with the bigots on the Gambia-L. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------------