“The Crimes of Buhari” – By Prof. Wole Soyinka.
The grounds on which General Buhari is being
promoted as the alternative choice are not only
shaky, but pitifully naive. History matters. Records
are not kept simply to assist the weakness of
memory, but to operate as guides to the future. Of
course, we know that human beings change. What
the claims of personality change or transformation
impose on us is a rigorous inspection of the
evidence, not wishful speculation or behind-the-
scenes assurances. Public offence, crimes against a
polity, must be answered in the public space, not in
caucuses of bargaining. In Buhari, we have been
offered no evidence of the sheerest prospect of
change. On the contrary, all evident suggests that
this is one individual who remains convinced that
this is one ex-ruler that the nation cannot call to
order Buhari? Need one remind anyone – was one of
the generals who treated a Commission of Enquiry,
the Oputa Panel, with unconcealed disdain. Like
Babangida and Abdusalami, he refused to put in
appearance even though complaints that were tabled
against him involved a career of gross abuses of
power and blatant assault on the fundamental human
rights of the Nigerian citizenry. Prominent against
these charges was an act that amounted to nothing
less than judicial murder, the execution of a citizen
under a retroactive decree. Does Decree 20 ring a
bell? If not, then, perhaps the names of three youths
– Lawal Ojuolape (30), Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and
Bartholomew Owoh (26) do. To put it quite plainly,
one of those three Ogedengbe – was executed for a
crime that did not carry a capital forfeit at the time it
was committed. This was an unconscionable crime,
carried out in defiance of the pleas and protests of
nearly every sector of the Nigerian and international
community religious, civil rights, political, trade
unions etc.
Buhari and his sidekick and his partner-in-crime,
Tunde Idiagbon persisted in this inhuman act for one
reason and one reason only: to place Nigerians on
notice that they were now under an iron, inflexible
rule, under governance by fear. The execution of that
youthful innocent for so he was, since the
punishment did not exist at the time of commission
– was nothing short of premeditated murder, for
which the perpetrators should normally stand trial
upon their loss of immunity. Are we truly expected
to forget this violation of our entitlement to security
as provided under existing laws? And even if our
sensibilities have become blunted by succeeding
seasons of cruelty and brutality, if power itself had
so coarsened the sensibilities also of rulers and
corrupted their judgment, what should one rightly
expect after they have been rescued from the snare
of power. At the very least, a revaluation, leading
hopefully to remorse, and its expression to a
wronged society. At the very least, such a
revaluation should engender reticence, silence. In
the case of Buhari, it was the opposite. Since leaving
office he has declared in the most categorical terms
that he had no regrets over this murder and would
do so again. Human life is inviolate. The right to life
is the uniquely fundamental right on which all other
rights are based. The crime that General Buhari
committed against the entire nation went further
however, inconceivable as it might first appear. That
crime is one of the most profound negations of civic
being. Not content with hammering down the
freedom of expression in general terms, Buhari
specifically forbade all public discussion of a return
to civilian, democratic rule. Let us constantly
applaud our media those battle scarred
professionals did not completely knuckle down.
They resorted to cartoons and oblique, elliptical
references to sustain the people’s campaign for a
time-table to democratic rule. Overt agitation for a
democratic time table however remained rigorously
suppressed military dictatorship, and a specifically
incorporated in Buhari and Idiagbon was here to
stay. To deprive a people of volition in their own
political direction is to turn a nation into a colony of
slaves. Buhari enslaved the nation. He gloated and
gloried in a master-slave relation to the millions of
its inhabitants. It is astonishing to find that the same
former slaves, now free of their chains, should
clamour to be ruled by one who not only turned
their nation into a slave plantation, but forbade them
any discussion of their condition. So Tai Solarin is
already forgotten? Tai who stood at street corners,
fearlessly distributing leaflets that took up the
gauntlet where the media had dropped it. Tai who
was incarcerated by that regime and denied even the
medication for his asthmatic condition? Tai did not
ask to be sent for treatment overseas; all he asked
was his traditional medicine that had proved so
effective after years of struggle with asthma! Nor
must we omit the manner of Buhari coming to power
and the pattern of his corrective rule. Shagari’s NPN
had already run out of steam and was near
universally detested except of course by the handful
that still benefited from that regime of profligacy and
rabid fascism. Responsibility for the national
condition lay squarely at the door of the ruling party,
obviously, but against whom was Buharis coup
staged? Judging by the conduct of that regime, it
was not against Shagaris government but against
the opposition. The head of government, on whom
primary responsibility lay, was Shehu Shagari. Yet
that individual was kept in cozy house detention in
Ikoyi while his powerless deputy, Alex Ekwueme,
was locked up in Kiri-kiri prisons. Such was the
Buhari notion of equitable apportionment of guilt
and/or responsibility.
And then the cascade of escapes of the wanted, and
culpable politicians. Manhunts across the length and
breadth of the nation, roadblocks everywhere and
borders tight as steel zip locks. Lo and behold, the
chairman of the party, Chief Akinloye, strolled out
coolly across the border. Richard Akinjide, Legal
Protector of the ruling party, slipped out with equal
ease. The Rice Minister, Umaru Dikko, who declared
that Nigerians were yet to eat f’rom dustbins –
escaped through the same airtight dragnet. The
clumsy attempt to crate him home was punishment
for his ingratitude, since he went berserk when, after
waiting in vain, he concluded that the coup had not
been staged, after all, for the immediate
consolidation of the party of extreme right-wing
vultures, but for the military hyenas. The case of the
overbearing Secretary-General of the party, Uba
Ahmed, was even more noxious. Uba Ahmed was
out of the country at the time. Despite the closure of
the Nigerian airspace, he compelled the pilot of his
plane to demand special landing permission, since
his passenger load included the almighty Uba
Ahmed. Of course, he had not known of the change
in his status since he was airborne. The delighted
airport commandant, realizing that he had a much
valued fish swimming willingly into a waiting net,
approved the request. Uba Ahmed disembarked into
the arms of a military guard and was promptly
clamped in detention.
Incredibly, he vanished a few days after and
reappeared in safety overseas. Those whose
memories have become calcified should explore the
media coverage of that saga. Buhari was asked to
explain the vanished act of this much prized quarry
and his response was one of the most arrogant
levity. Coming from one who had shot his way into
power on the slogan of discipline, it was nothing
short of impudent. Shall we revisit the tragicomic
series of trials that landed several politicians several
lifetimes in prison? Recall, if you please, the judicial
processes undergone by the septuagenarian Chief
Adekunle Ajasin. He was arraigned and tried before
Buhari’s punitive tribunal but acquitted. Dissatisfied,
Buhari ordered his re-trial. Again, the Tribunal could
not find this man guilty of a single crime, so once
again he was returned for trial, only to be acquitted
of all charges of corruption or abuse of office. Was
Chief Ajasin thereby released? No! He was ordered
detained indefinitely, simply for the crime of winning
an election and refusing to knuckle under Shagari’s
reign of terror. The conduct of the Buhari regime
after his coup was not merely one of double, triple,
multiple standards but a cynical travesty of justice.
Audu Ogbeh, currently chairman of the Action
Congress was one of the few figures of rectitude
within the NPN. Just as he has done in recent times
with the PDP, he played the role of an internal critic
and reformer, warning, dissenting, and setting an
example of probity within his ministry. For that
crime he spent months in unjust incarceration.
Guilty by association? Well, if that was the
motivating yardstick of the administration of the
Buhari justice, then it was most selectively applied.
The utmost severity of the Buhari-Idiagbon justice
was especially reserved either for the opposition in
general, or for those within the ruling party who had
showed the sheerest sense of responsibility and
patriotism.
Shall I remind this nation of Buhari’s deliberate
humiliating treatment of the Emir of Kano and the
Oni of Ife over their visit to the state of Israel? I hold
no brief for traditional rulers and their relationship
with governments, but insist on regarding them as
entitled to all the rights, privileges and responsibilitie
s of any Nigerian citizen. This royal duo went to
Israel on their private steam and private business.
Simply because the Buhari regime was pursuing
some antagonistic foreign policy towards Israel, a
policy of which these traditional rulers were not a
part, they were subjected on their return to a
treatment that could only be described as a head
masterly chastisement of errant pupils. Since when,
may one ask, did a free citizen of the Nigerian nation
require the permission of a head of state to visit a
foreign nation that was willing to offer that tourist a
visa? One is only too aware that some Nigerians
love to point to Buhari’s agenda of discipline as the
shining jewel in his scrap-iron crown. To inculcate
discipline however, one must lead by example,
obeying laws set down as guides to public probity.
Example speaks louder than declarations, and rulers
cannot exempt themselves from the disciplinary
structures imposed on the overall polity, especially
on any issue that seeks to establish a policy for
public well-being. The story of the thirty something
suitcases it would appear that they were even closer
to fifty – found unavoidable mention in my recent
memoirs, YOU MUST SET FORTH AT DOWN, written
long before Buhari became spoken of as a credible
candidate. For the exercise of a changeover of the
national currency, the Nigerian borders air, sea and
land had been shut tight.
Nothing was supposed to move in or out, not even
cattle egrets.
Yet a prominent camel was allowed through that
needles eye. Not only did Buhari dispatch his aide-
de-camp, Jokolo later to become an emir- to
facilitate the entry of those cases, he ordered the
redeployment as I later discovered – of the Customs
Officer who stood firmly against the entry of the
contravening baggage. That officer, the incumbent
Vice-president is now a rival candidate to Buhari,
but has somehow, in the meantime, earned a
reputation that totally contradicts his conduct at the
time. Wherever the truth lies, it does not redound to
the credibility of the dictator of that time, General
Buhari whose word was law, but whose allegiances
were clearly negotiable.
On the theme of double, triple, multiple standards in
the enforcement of the law, and indeed of the
decrees passed by the Buhari regime at the time, let
us recall the notorious case of Triple Alhaji Alhaji
Alhaji, then Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of
Finance. Who was caught, literally, with his pants
down in distant Austria. That was not the crime
however, and private conduct should always remain
restricted to the domain of private censure.
There was no decree against civil servants proving
just as hormone driven as anyone else, especially
outside the nation’s borders.
However, there was a clear decree against the
keeping of foreign accounts, and this was what
emerged from the Austrian escapade. Alhaji Alhaji
kept, not one, but several undeclared foreign
accounts, and he had no business being in
possession of the large amount of foreign currency
of which he was robbed by his overnight
companion. The media screamed for an even
application of the law, but Buhari had turned
suddenly deaf. By contrast, Fela Anikulapo
languished in goal for years, sentenced under that
very draconian decree. His crime was being in
possession of foreign exchange that he had
legitimately received for the immediate upkeep of his
band as they set off for an international
engagement. A vicious sentence was slapped down
on Fela by a judge who later became so remorse
stricken at least after Buhari’s overthrow that he
went to the King of Afro-beat and apologized.
Lesser known was the traumatic experience of the
director of an international communication agency,
an affiliate of UNESCO. Akin Fatoyinbo arrived at the
airport in complete ignorance of the new currency
decree. He was thrown in gaol in especially brutal
condition, an experience from which he never fully
recovered. It took several months of high-level
intervention before that innocent man was eventually
freed. These were not exceptional but mere sample
cases from among hundreds of others, victims of a
decree that was selectively applied, a decree that
routinely penalized innocents and ruined the careers
and businesses of many.
What else? What does one choose to include or
leave out? What precisely was Ebenezer Babatope’s
crime that he should have spent the entire tenure of
General Buhari in detention?
Nothing beyond the fact that he once warned in the
media that Buhari was an ambitious soldier who
would bear watching through the lenses of a coup-
detat. Babatope’s father died while he was in
Buhari’s custody, the dictator remained deaf to
every plea that he be at least released to attend his
father’s funeral, even under guard. I wrote an article
at the time, denouncing this pointless insensitivity.
So little to demand by a man who was never
accused of, nor tried for any crime,much less found
guilty. Such a load of vindictiveness that smothered
all traces of basic human compassion deserves no
further comment in a nation that values its
traditions.
But then, speaking the truth was not what Buhari, as
a self-imposed leader, was especially enamoured of
enquire of Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor both
of whom, faithful to their journalistic calling,
published nothing but the truth, yet ended up
sentenced under Buhari’s decree. Mind you, no one
can say that Buhari was not true to his word. Shall
tamper with the freedom of the press swore the
dictator immediately on grabbing office, and this was
exactly what he did. And so on, and on, and on……
http://www.osundefender.org/?p=107456

ok noted

Nna,Buhari crime plenty o,na wah o.

So in a nutshell what's he trying to say

the future never forgets to drag the past with it.
MAYDAY.

ON POINT

Makes me wonder what the question is if buhari nd gej are d likely answers.
The truth is, power needed to b rescued from GEJ, Buhari shld not just be the one trusted with that task. A case of "from fryin pan to hell"

ok noted this side by side with she/heppopotamus.

On point

Oguguah:
“The Crimes of Buhari” – By Prof. Wole Soyinka.
The grounds on which General Buhari is being
promoted as the alternative choice are not only
shaky, but pitifully naive. History matters. Records
are not kept simply to assist the weakness of
memory, but to operate as guides to the future. Of
course, we know that human beings change. What
the claims of personality change or transformation
impose on us is a rigorous inspection of the
evidence, not wishful speculation or behind-the-
scenes assurances. Public offence, crimes against a
polity, must be answered in the public space, not in
caucuses of bargaining. In Buhari, we have been
offered no evidence of the sheerest prospect of
change. On the contrary, all evident suggests that
this is one individual who remains convinced that
this is one ex-ruler that the nation cannot call to
order Buhari? Need one remind anyone – was one of
the generals who treated a Commission of Enquiry,
the Oputa Panel, with unconcealed disdain. Like
Babangida and Abdusalami, he refused to put in
appearance even though complaints that were tabled
against him involved a career of gross abuses of
power and blatant assault on the fundamental human
rights of the Nigerian citizenry. Prominent against
these charges was an act that amounted to nothing
less than judicial murder, the execution of a citizen
under a retroactive decree. Does Decree 20 ring a
bell? If not, then, perhaps the names of three youths
– Lawal Ojuolape (30), Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and
Bartholomew Owoh (26) do. To put it quite plainly,
one of those three Ogedengbe – was executed for a
crime that did not carry a capital forfeit at the time it
was committed. This was an unconscionable crime,
carried out in defiance of the pleas and protests of
nearly every sector of the Nigerian and international
community religious, civil rights, political, trade
unions etc.
Buhari and his sidekick and his partner-in-crime,
Tunde Idiagbon persisted in this inhuman act for one
reason and one reason only: to place Nigerians on
notice that they were now under an iron, inflexible
rule, under governance by fear. The execution of that
youthful innocent for so he was, since the
punishment did not exist at the time of commission
– was nothing short of premeditated murder, for
which the perpetrators should normally stand trial
upon their loss of immunity. Are we truly expected
to forget this violation of our entitlement to security
as provided under existing laws? And even if our
sensibilities have become blunted by succeeding
seasons of cruelty and brutality, if power itself had
so coarsened the sensibilities also of rulers and
corrupted their judgment, what should one rightly
expect after they have been rescued from the snare
of power. At the very least, a revaluation, leading
hopefully to remorse, and its expression to a
wronged society. At the very least, such a
revaluation should engender reticence, silence. In
the case of Buhari, it was the opposite. Since leaving
office he has declared in the most categorical terms
that he had no regrets over this murder and would
do so again. Human life is inviolate. The right to life
is the uniquely fundamental right on which all other
rights are based. The crime that General Buhari
committed against the entire nation went further
however, inconceivable as it might first appear. That
crime is one of the most profound negations of civic
being. Not content with hammering down the
freedom of expression in general terms, Buhari
specifically forbade all public discussion of a return
to civilian, democratic rule. Let us constantly
applaud our media those battle scarred
professionals did not completely knuckle down.
They resorted to cartoons and oblique, elliptical
references to sustain the people’s campaign for a
time-table to democratic rule. Overt agitation for a
democratic time table however remained rigorously
suppressed military dictatorship, and a specifically
incorporated in Buhari and Idiagbon was here to
stay. To deprive a people of volition in their own
political direction is to turn a nation into a colony of
slaves. Buhari enslaved the nation. He gloated and
gloried in a master-slave relation to the millions of
its inhabitants. It is astonishing to find that the same
former slaves, now free of their chains, should
clamour to be ruled by one who not only turned
their nation into a slave plantation, but forbade them
any discussion of their condition. So Tai Solarin is
already forgotten? Tai who stood at street corners,
fearlessly distributing leaflets that took up the
gauntlet where the media had dropped it. Tai who
was incarcerated by that regime and denied even the
medication for his asthmatic condition? Tai did not
ask to be sent for treatment overseas; all he asked
was his traditional medicine that had proved so
effective after years of struggle with asthma! Nor
must we omit the manner of Buhari coming to power
and the pattern of his corrective rule. Shagari’s NPN
had already run out of steam and was near
universally detested except of course by the handful
that still benefited from that regime of profligacy and
rabid fascism. Responsibility for the national
condition lay squarely at the door of the ruling party,
obviously, but against whom was Buharis coup
staged? Judging by the conduct of that regime, it
was not against Shagaris government but against
the opposition. The head of government, on whom
primary responsibility lay, was Shehu Shagari. Yet
that individual was kept in cozy house detention in
Ikoyi while his powerless deputy, Alex Ekwueme,
was locked up in Kiri-kiri prisons. Such was the
Buhari notion of equitable apportionment of guilt
and/or responsibility.
And then the cascade of escapes of the wanted, and
culpable politicians. Manhunts across the length and
breadth of the nation, roadblocks everywhere and
borders tight as steel zip locks. Lo and behold, the
chairman of the party, Chief Akinloye, strolled out
coolly across the border. Richard Akinjide, Legal
Protector of the ruling party, slipped out with equal
ease. The Rice Minister, Umaru Dikko, who declared
that Nigerians were yet to eat f’rom dustbins –
escaped through the same airtight dragnet. The
clumsy attempt to crate him home was punishment
for his ingratitude, since he went berserk when, after
waiting in vain, he concluded that the coup had not
been staged, after all, for the immediate
consolidation of the party of extreme right-wing
vultures, but for the military hyenas. The case of the
overbearing Secretary-General of the party, Uba
Ahmed, was even more noxious. Uba Ahmed was
out of the country at the time. Despite the closure of
the Nigerian airspace, he compelled the pilot of his
plane to demand special landing permission, since
his passenger load included the almighty Uba
Ahmed. Of course, he had not known of the change
in his status since he was airborne. The delighted
airport commandant, realizing that he had a much
valued fish swimming willingly into a waiting net,
approved the request. Uba Ahmed disembarked into
the arms of a military guard and was promptly
clamped in detention.
Incredibly, he vanished a few days after and
reappeared in safety overseas. Those whose
memories have become calcified should explore the
media coverage of that saga. Buhari was asked to
explain the vanished act of this much prized quarry
and his response was one of the most arrogant
levity. Coming from one who had shot his way into
power on the slogan of discipline, it was nothing
short of impudent. Shall we revisit the tragicomic
series of trials that landed several politicians several
lifetimes in prison? Recall, if you please, the judicial
processes undergone by the septuagenarian Chief
Adekunle Ajasin. He was arraigned and tried before
Buhari’s punitive tribunal but acquitted. Dissatisfied,
Buhari ordered his re-trial. Again, the Tribunal could
not find this man guilty of a single crime, so once
again he was returned for trial, only to be acquitted
of all charges of corruption or abuse of office. Was
Chief Ajasin thereby released? No! He was ordered
detained indefinitely, simply for the crime of winning
an election and refusing to knuckle under Shagari’s
reign of terror. The conduct of the Buhari regime
after his coup was not merely one of double, triple,
multiple standards but a cynical travesty of justice.
Audu Ogbeh, currently chairman of the Action
Congress was one of the few figures of rectitude
within the NPN. Just as he has done in recent times
with the PDP, he played the role of an internal critic
and reformer, warning, dissenting, and setting an
example of probity within his ministry. For that
crime he spent months in unjust incarceration.
Guilty by association? Well, if that was the
motivating yardstick of the administration of the
Buhari justice, then it was most selectively applied.
The utmost severity of the Buhari-Idiagbon justice
was especially reserved either for the opposition in
general, or for those within the ruling party who had
showed the sheerest sense of responsibility and
patriotism.
Shall I remind this nation of Buhari’s deliberate
humiliating treatment of the Emir of Kano and the
Oni of Ife over their visit to the state of Israel? I hold
no brief for traditional rulers and their relationship
with governments, but insist on regarding them as
entitled to all the rights, privileges and responsibilitie
s of any Nigerian citizen. This royal duo went to
Israel on their private steam and private business.
Simply because the Buhari regime was pursuing
some antagonistic foreign policy towards Israel, a
policy of which these traditional rulers were not a
part, they were subjected on their return to a
treatment that could only be described as a head
masterly chastisement of errant pupils. Since when,
may one ask, did a free citizen of the Nigerian nation
require the permission of a head of state to visit a
foreign nation that was willing to offer that tourist a
visa? One is only too aware that some Nigerians
love to point to Buhari’s agenda of discipline as the
shining jewel in his scrap-iron crown. To inculcate
discipline however, one must lead by example,
obeying laws set down as guides to public probity.
Example speaks louder than declarations, and rulers
cannot exempt themselves from the disciplinary
structures imposed on the overall polity, especially
on any issue that seeks to establish a policy for
public well-being. The story of the thirty something
suitcases it would appear that they were even closer
to fifty – found unavoidable mention in my recent
memoirs, YOU MUST SET FORTH AT DOWN, written
long before Buhari became spoken of as a credible
candidate. For the exercise of a changeover of the
national currency, the Nigerian borders air, sea and
land had been shut tight.
Nothing was supposed to move in or out, not even
cattle egrets.
Yet a prominent camel was allowed through that
needles eye. Not only did Buhari dispatch his aide-
de-camp, Jokolo later to become an emir- to
facilitate the entry of those cases, he ordered the
redeployment as I later discovered – of the Customs
Officer who stood firmly against the entry of the
contravening baggage. That officer, the incumbent
Vice-president is now a rival candidate to Buhari,
but has somehow, in the meantime, earned a
reputation that totally contradicts his conduct at the
time. Wherever the truth lies, it does not redound to
the credibility of the dictator of that time, General
Buhari whose word was law, but whose allegiances
were clearly negotiable.
On the theme of double, triple, multiple standards in
the enforcement of the law, and indeed of the
decrees passed by the Buhari regime at the time, let
us recall the notorious case of Triple Alhaji Alhaji
Alhaji, then Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of
Finance. Who was caught, literally, with his pants
down in distant Austria. That was not the crime
however, and private conduct should always remain
restricted to the domain of private censure.
There was no decree against civil servants proving
just as hormone driven as anyone else, especially
outside the nation’s borders.
However, there was a clear decree against the
keeping of foreign accounts, and this was what
emerged from the Austrian escapade. Alhaji Alhaji
kept, not one, but several undeclared foreign
accounts, and he had no business being in
possession of the large amount of foreign currency
of which he was robbed by his overnight
companion. The media screamed for an even
application of the law, but Buhari had turned
suddenly deaf. By contrast, Fela Anikulapo
languished in goal for years, sentenced under that
very draconian decree. His crime was being in
possession of foreign exchange that he had
legitimately received for the immediate upkeep of his
band as they set off for an international
engagement. A vicious sentence was slapped down
on Fela by a judge who later became so remorse
stricken at least after Buhari’s overthrow that he
went to the King of Afro-beat and apologized.
Lesser known was the traumatic experience of the
director of an international communication agency,
an affiliate of UNESCO. Akin Fatoyinbo arrived at the
airport in complete ignorance of the new currency
decree. He was thrown in gaol in especially brutal
condition, an experience from which he never fully
recovered. It took several months of high-level
intervention before that innocent man was eventually
freed. These were not exceptional but mere sample
cases from among hundreds of others, victims of a
decree that was selectively applied, a decree that
routinely penalized innocents and ruined the careers
and businesses of many.
What else? What does one choose to include or
leave out? What precisely was Ebenezer Babatope’s
crime that he should have spent the entire tenure of
General Buhari in detention?
Nothing beyond the fact that he once warned in the
media that Buhari was an ambitious soldier who
would bear watching through the lenses of a coup-
detat. Babatope’s father died while he was in
Buhari’s custody, the dictator remained deaf to
every plea that he be at least released to attend his
father’s funeral, even under guard. I wrote an article
at the time, denouncing this pointless insensitivity.
So little to demand by a man who was never
accused of, nor tried for any crime,much less found
guilty. Such a load of vindictiveness that smothered
all traces of basic human compassion deserves no
further comment in a nation that values its
traditions.
But then, speaking the truth was not what Buhari, as
a self-imposed leader, was especially enamoured of
enquire of Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor both
of whom, faithful to their journalistic calling,
published nothing but the truth, yet ended up
sentenced under Buhari’s decree. Mind you, no one
can say that Buhari was not true to his word. Shall
tamper with the freedom of the press swore the
dictator immediately on grabbing office, and this was
exactly what he did. And so on, and on, and on……
http://www.osundefender.org/?p=107456

Jesus! all this long post na only me go read am?