It is commendable that Gambians in the Diaspora engage with the political and social issues of major concern to fellow citizens at home. One would be justified in hoping that collective involvement must at worst, highlight those concerns that engage a significant number of people in Gambia in their day to day running of the country on the bases of official policy. There should therefore be more organisations like UGOA. It is in that spirit that I would like to comment on a handful of issues raised by the APRC Atlanta organisation in its press release. Dr. Abdoulie Saine's observation that a disproportionate number of young men of the Jola ethnic group populate senior positions in the military is of major significance. If it can be statistically established that Saine's observation is factual, then any policy responsible for that circumstance is what has raised ethnic consciousness. Not the resultant observation of the fact. There must be a quest to deal with our past and to historically excavate potentially contentious questions such as may relate to ethnic discrimination of various groups like the Jola, Manjago, Balanta, Aku, and Papel. Discrimination based on gender and religious affiliation need as well to be openly discussed, their social and economic roots exposed and explained in order that they may never recur. Filling in military positions by loyal ethnic brethren is an old post independence security strategy used by most African leaders. And the consequences of this myopic stratregy has been invariably devastating. It is thanks to the intelligent observations of folk like Saine that we may intervene politically to defer the negative consequences of appointments and promotions based on factors other than professional merit. A second issue of significance raised in the press release is the April 2000 massacre of school children. Every effort to explain away this terrible nightmare must simply fall on its own callous irrationality. In the press release, guilt of the demonstrators is callously equated with guilt of their murderers. We are told that ."...the authorities on the ground made a serious error of judgement"....and the students "made a serious error of judgement when they defied the constituted authority and took the law into their own hands.....". Indeed the students threw stones and destroyed public property. The "authorities on the ground" murdered them in cold blood. Thirteen of them! Unless we are lobotomized zombies, there should be no comparison whatsoever in degrees of lawlessness inherent here. The tragic events of April 2000 is not something that can be occassionally retrieved for political convenience and purile academic debates. Not even in Apartheid South Africa was the cold blooded murder of school children acceptable. Ours were legitimately angry school children venting their anger the best way they felt they could (like students do all over the world!) and they got killed for it! Worse is that no one has taken responsibility for the heinous crime and so no one has paid any price for the blood of the children. The APRC can only be free of moral opprobrium when it dispenses justice on this and other cases of wanton extra-judicial killings in our land. And if we do not apportion the APRC leadership blame, where esle should we place it? Only when African leaders protect the sanctity of African lives shall we see a human rights revolution throughout the contitnent. The political establishment has every right to spew rhetoric at so-called intellectuals and their role in national development. But it seems to me quite foolish to hold that criticism is warranted only when it provides alternative ways of thinking or presents alternative policy formulations. Far from it. All of us are capable of judging whether or not a particular policy negatively impacts our lives without for that matter, being able to offer suggestions as to what should consist of improvement. In other words, Gambians have every right to say what they think is wrong, even if they cannot suggest how to better the situation. Criticism is constructive as long as it prompts us to think of the probability of alternative ways of doing things. Certainly, if Gambian intellectuals provide ideas on matters of policy or policy implementation, that is well and good. On the other hand the government has a host of employees whose job is to do precisely that, people whose job it is to think of alternatives. Or does it not? As they say here, No Hard Feelings! Momodou S Sidibeh ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to: [log in to unmask] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~