>Dear Netters,
>Are there any FUNDAMENTAL differences between what our abled theoretician of violence (genocide?) >has been advocating and what Mumu tells us is the making in Kailahun, not too far from Kenema? Words >and ideas have have an uncanny way of assuming a materiality of their own. A third armed force controlled >and answerable to fiefdom partriarchs(would be warlords?) would only lead to further destruction and loss >of lives.I rest my case.
>
If, after all the cyber energy we have expended, you still see no fundamental difference between a chiefdom militia under the control of the central government through the Provincial Secretary and the Paramount Chief (which I have proposed) and what you label as "armed force controlled and answerable to fiefdom partriarchs(would be warlords?)" then perhaps I was correct in my initial asseesment that nothing could be gained by continuing our exchange. Frankly, I do not believe that you are not still able to see the difference between a decentralized force as a matter of central government policy and one that autonmously arises out of people's frustration over the fact that the central government is not up to its job. Hence, you have just confirmed what I suspected all along, which is, that you are perhaps so interested in hearing the clatter coming off your computer's keys that keeping even a fruitless debate going is a reward in itself. Hence, labelling and misrepresentations become not the end, but the means to it.
Let's move on to something else. Those who want to see the difference between the two systems of local defense will see it. Those who would rather not, even if it stood stark naked in front of them, won't see it. Those who would prefer to wallow in accusations and labelling of every "ism" would continue to have a field day. Meanwhile, our people suffer.
Take care.
Kelfala M. Kallon