Dear Editor,

May I just respond to Ms Mola and Mr. Sasako's response to my previous posting entitled, "Who is 'Anna Bua'".

No one dispute the fact that many of us can speak or write English well, of course with many years of practice, as Mr. Sasako has pointed out. I agree with Ms. Mola too that writing good English is not a birthright. I must admit that like Mr. Sasako it took me some 20 plus years to be able to write English at this level, but still, I never consider myself to be an expert. If English is not a birthright and it takes me 20 years, and Mr. Sasako 30 years to write English at the level we are at now, I wonder how 'Anna Bua' would be able to write English at the level portrayed in 'her' article after five years of secondary schooling. Given that she had no exposure to the outside world, comes from a rural school in the SI, with no work experience?

May I apologies to 'Anna Bua' if she 'really' does exist, and is a first-year tourism student at SICHE.

Now that these two articles came up in defense of 'Anna Bua', I might consider finding out from the SICHE School of Finance whether any student by the name of 'Anna Bua' really exist at their School.

I'm afraid, but I still stand by my previous article questioning who 'Anna Bua' really is. My real suspicion is that 'Anna Bua' is someone who is involved in the actual decision-making and administration of the SICHE Tourism programme, but is not brave enough to use his real name in the article concerned. I said this because the person who wrote the article is well-versed about the overall structure of the programme, how it evolved, the financial arrangements for the programme, SICHE procedures for recruiting part-time lecturers, and even went to some extent in promoting the programme.

If the SICHE Tourism programme is really what 'Anna Bua' portrays it to be, why should the person who wrote the article concerned use a pseudonym to disguise himself? That was the crux of my previous article.