Are You Pro Violence or Anti Violence in Just Your Country or Worldwide?

It is September 11 in the u.s+ and a Friday, plus a big chunk of Gambians are sadly still pro violence, explicitly or implicitly? Some may be too young to remember September 11, but you probably read about it. By and large, even 'successful' violence tends to do more harm than good, almost throughout history. You can temporarily laugh with 'successful' violence, but you will likely regret it, small or big. Without disrespect to the u.s, if my country (the Gambia) is in violence through misinterpretations or evil copying of the 'protest' you taught them, then my focus will be how to teach or calm down the Gambia first. The evolution of human beings in regards to violence should be studied with honesty , individually and in groups. By groups, I mean gender, race, party, country, etc. Yes! We cannot condemn a whole group, but we can certainly describe groups by average, where it may help. Those who resort to violence first are called the 'aggressor(s)' in chapter 49:9, but we can call them the devils or less evolved in secular language. I also mean those who refuse to condemn violence are explicitly or implicitly pro violence . Many of the youths are ill taught, evolving, and sometimes still in 'normalisation' of violence. So we must 'exhort them to truth and patience', or be condemned as among the 'lost' as per ch.103. So shame on every political leader who fails to strongly condemn the violence. Shame on even the journalists, the ambassadors, the other big voices, etc that are not condemning these nasty resorts. Violence is not human, it is uncivilised or by underdeveloped humans, but can they develop in character?

Development is not just material things, except to prostitute minded adults and a percentage of the children. Character development is even much more vital , so the question of at what age did you develop to say 'no more resorting to violence first' is one stage and it may be different from the age of saying 'no more supporting of violence or the aggressor(s). The world is becoming a village, so you should learn from others' mistakes and try to teach others with gratitude. Can you remember or do you need cameras? Well, some oppose cameras because it will reveal the aggressors and much more.

You may not remember your own, but study the children. Even before children talk, they tend to resort to violence even where they are simply mistaken. Good parents will try to stop such violence as soon as possible, but questionable parents may try to justify it in some circumstances or describe it as 'children are children'. No! Even children evolve differently. Good parents encourage children to report, use dialogue, reciprocal-law examples , and many other good ways to resolve conflicts. Should I ask: do average females evolve from violence before males, in fear or just goodness? Will they charge me with sexism against males, or should I brag that I evolved from resorting to violence before billions of women. OK Jarga, you can preach without bragging or where is your evidence? Well, the first to evolve may not mean the most in evolution. Some people get the first stage and fail the second stage. How many Gambian+ females are committing or supporting the violence with words or inaction? Some females stopped violence because they avoid mutual hurting, but what percentage of them enjoy watching violence or having men (soldiers) fight for them as aggressors or as defenders? Fast forward, at what age does the Arab male versus black, white, Asian male stop resorting to violence over disagreements or which words as 'hurtful' ? I mean there is a dangerous mindset of 'understanding' or 'normalising' violence between individuals and groups. The age of a strong culture of cameras will reveal the first aggressor but only teaching and teaching the hard way may adjust the mindsets. The questionable Yahya Jammeh used to say: "Even animals have stopped fighting, Gambians stop fighting. ..' fist fighting is one form of violence too many Gambians sadly normalise in circumstances that many evolved individuals will choose better. Of course I am not referring to all Gambians, but how many Gambians scream, insult, or resort to assault even during Ramadan (fasting)? How many of those who do not resort to violence implicitly support violence with , but, but, but, or inaction? How is it in your respective countries from mindset to actions? Yes, Gambians are largely docile, but a big chunk of Gambians do commit or normalise violence. I mean the mindset of violence is ‘ok’ is sadly in many Gambians long before the questionable colonisers set foot in the Gambia or the electricity was invented and lacking to all, but the less evolved choose violence as 'love or smart'? I understand even some neighbouring countries are going through power outages, but why do Gambians want to choose violence? Show me your love through peaceful protests for high learning opportunities, including researchers access store (RAS). Show me you can study and research for hours with patience, not just you can violently protest for hours and days. You can come up with excuses for violence, but the non violent ones, in and beyond the Gambia, will be witnesses against you. You can even claim how can you study or research without electricity, but countless daylight and months or years of relatively good electricity supply did not produce your 'development '. God's cameras are recording what percentage of your day you spend on which types of learning versus working or fun, fun, fun.

Children of fun, born through fun (s*x), may adore fun first, but at what age do you value learning versus learning enough? Remember you have counterparts in the Gambia, Africa, and worldwide. How excited do you get when learning or truth comes versus material fun and questionable kindness. Some may ask how this is related to violence, but I am connecting how mindsets from the homes, streets, workplaces, etc up to the state House may need to adjust. Did Barrow or the president in your respective countries ever strongly condemn violence while they were in the opposition? They can give excuses why they do not want cameras in the workplaces, but it can reveal too much fun is tolerated while work is pending...

So when probable negligence leads to lack of over priced electricity until someone dies at the hospital, then there is a difference between first degree murder, second to third degree murder, manslaughter, etc. Your first collective resort should be how to embrace a strong culture of cameras and other means to improve work character at Nawec, the hospital, etc. That requires efforts you may skip and prefer violence? Second steps can include suing the government to the official court of man, court of social media, court of God, etc. Again, you may skip such for violence. Many of you fail to understand that reactionary choices are still choices, subject to judgement. The worst of the opposition+ leaders may use mainly the young females dancing their butts as a fun rally and use mainly the young males towards violence. You need learning rallies or better than rallies for our age: demand a detailed plan for each ministry, department, etc. Some of your parents bore you out of reckless gambling for wealth, repeatedly chose questionable leaders out of reckless gamble, and you still cannot see the dangers of reckless gamble? I am not soft against Adama Barrow or even Yahya Jammeh, and I have some verifiable receipts to prove it. I was much more brave than you and your parents during brutal Jammeh, but even then I opposed violence. I am not insulting you but telling you facts and trying to teach you bravery is not quick resort to violence or normalising violence.

If we notice Barrow, Tinubu, Mahama, or anyone intentionally denying you electricity , we will react more than the countless times I publicly berated Barrow and others. The negligent neighbour who burns his or her trash in the day versus the night are different, even if all can be sinful. So the different types of violence you vividly inflict, including burning tires on the roads, can certainly suffer or kill some people like other negligent choices by the government and other adults. No sane government will also fail to react to such, including the use of tear-gas and arrests. Questionable opposition leaders may not just fail to condemn the unnecessary violence by the youths, but they may condemn necessary government reactions. Was Barrow, Tinubu, Mahama, etc like that as opposition, then Karma is a hard test upto against private citizens? Anyone who votes for these opposition leaders that refuse to strongly condemn such acts of violence is guilty of supporting violence and violent leaning groups. God may punish such regardless of who wins, on earth and/or beyond. However, learning or the window of 'repent, amend, and proclaim ' may be open as a test. Who will be the first opposition leader, first media house, first Ambassador, etc to strongly condemn these violence with astute words? You can voluntarily do it on your social media pages or good journalists can question you before God and the angels.

I understand Ambassadors should not be involved in politics, but this is primarily a question of pro violence and anti violence. It is indeed possible for countless Ambassadors to condemn the violence without endorsing a candidate or discouraging peaceful protests. If they claim anyone who condemns the violence is siding with Barrow, then they are admitting the protests are secondarily political and the violence is primarily politics, a tactic for government overreaction or to cowardly step down? No sane president will step down due to protests over power outages, but some questionable presidents or even 'independent' security officers may overreact to violence. Sometimes your life could be at risk when facing angry, insane , violent youths, so who will proportionately 'curse' those who refuse to learn and are too impatient? If you are a peaceful protester, stop protesting because violence has started. The guilty opposition leaders fully understand that Barrow will not step down over such protests, but they are praying or wishing for the government's over-reaction to use it to rally votes.

Well, I am saying to Barrow, Tinubu, Mahama, etc to also learn how to use such situations to rally votes. What kind of a citizen will vote for an opposition that explicitly or implicitly supports violence to bring down a government when you have about three months to vote? There are many ways to educate the nonviolent Gambians + to realize some of these opposition leaders may be much worse than Barrow. The worst of the youths and which parties are not confident that they can defeat Barrow through the polls, so illusions tell them violent protests will work or are worth gambling? My type does not want to see Ghana, Nigeria, etc burning , so you think I am going to allow it in my precious Gambia? Barrow or which group will print the T-shirts that says: I won't vote for candidates or parties that refuse to condemn violence...' Please do not put the name Barrow or any party on it. I suspect such T-shirts should be able to sell well in every country. Am I anti-violence in every country ? Where is the anti violence Lord, please end the man made violence on earth.

They are calling for Friday prayers, so should I get prepared for prayers or continue writing? How good or weak will the sermons of the Imams be compared to mine? They may use good or questionable hadiths to support or oppose violence. I am a Quhr-aahn and conscience leaning Imam. What! Jarga, are you an Imam without a mosque or church? Keep debating that but look at this verse:

[Quran Chapter 49]
9. If two groups of believers fight each other, reconcile between them. But if one group aggresses against the other, fight the aggressing group until it complies with God's command. Once it has complied, reconcile between them with justice, and be equitable. God loves the equitable.

10. The believers are brothers, so reconcile between your brothers, and remain conscious of God, so that you may receive mercy.

The chapter is called huhjuh-raht, which can translate as Chambers, rooms, country, continent, etc. So what can the Gambia or Africa+ (chamber) learn from the chapter or just the quoted verses? Groups, fight, aggression. Parties are groups, but the youth groups against civilian groups and/or government groups. Fight does not always mean physical fight, but the leaning certainly focuses on 'aggression ' is a dangerous escalation that should be fought in which smart ways? Sometimes as little as words can quench a fight . Be it internal or external groups, or even two individuals, the verses are hinting to stop the aggressor (violence), then investigate further towards lasting peace. You can also see the verse recommends if the guilty repents+, then do not endlessly punish the guilty. So the first three opposition parties to sincerely repent should or may be weighted on other things in these elections ; but the other ones should be suspended by voters, meaning do not vote for such parties for five to twenty years. First to repent and sincere repentance may be two different things. If countless people start saying I am not voting so and so party for refusing to strongly condemn the violence, then the opposition may at least start hypocritical condemnation and good journalists can then push back.

The irony is Gambians were universally condemning D level tribal remarks a few weeks ago, but we cannot have universal condemnation of violence? The Quhr-aahn condemns all forms of evil, but it teaches us to tolerate words by fighting back with better words; to avoid evil actions and collectively fight evil actions (sins between creatures). Although I am not defending the Barrow administration on electricity supply, I think they are guilty of many important things. Barrow refused meaningful efforts on a strong culture of cameras and if such existed, such violence could have been deterred or easier to solve. So I am honestly an undecided voter, but certainly not voting for candidates who use words like 'I understand the frustration of the youths', with little or no condemnation of the violence? You should categorically condemn the violence, demand calm, produce enough reading + material, etc. If they can spend days in violence or questionable rallies, can they read or listen to detailed messages per ministry? Let journalists push all the opposition leaders and prominent voices to urge 'stop the violence', and urge study before voting. I do not agree that anyone will be better than Barrow, Tinubu, Mahama, etc. Those who say so are just desperate idiots with near zero imaginations and little understanding of realities. Remember candidates who refuse to condemn such violence are prone to support violence if the results are close or trivial irregularities occur come election time. So the best of us must fight such parties or candidates. They seem too hungry for power and will use ignorant naive youths as 'free rebels' or hooligans. May God bless Showlove Trinity: let's learn, let's work, let's have fun.

By Jarga Kebba Gigo
An Activist and Transformer
Author of Juts Quhr-aahn