atlwireles:
Poverty is truly a bad thing. The sociological and physiological damage it leaves in a people are way more harmful, than their physical appearances. Because Ayeni bought Nitel, he should not contribute to the political campaign of his choice? Money is the life blood of politics, as our system matures, more billions will be spent by politicians and their supporters to win elections. That's the way it works around the planet. What we should ask of them, is a public disclosure of the people donating. No secret accounts or payments from unknown parties. PDP and GEJ did the right thing, by having a public fundraiser, where you and I can point to who gave what.

Rich people will always be at the front of table, that's life. Don't cry about it, just try your best and become one of them.

GEJ till 2019.

-----------------------

Don't mind these guys that only talk about the 'ideal' only when GEJ is involved.

Sibabasibaba1:


-----------------

I don't know what your argument is and the mentality you are talking about. People must donate to campaigns. It is unusual for people to fund their campaigns alone. There is nothing wrong with funding campaigns as long as no law is contravened. It is also normal for people who fund campaigns with a view to benefiting in the long run through concessions and contracts. The rich elite the world. There is nothing you can do about it. This happens every country. It is all about interests--commercial and otherwise. Stop all these hypocrisy. Has it become wrong because GEJ is involved? Your concern should be if any law is broken and if due process is followed by the time they will be 'recouping' their 'investments'.

Calm down dude. I'm not saying it is illegal or sponsorship to stop. However, be discrete at least. Announcing 21billion naira campaign donations to a poverty stricken nation screams insensitivity and lack of consideration for the masses to me. We are not a developed country yet. Not every thing that is good for another country is necessarily good for us. Other factors should also be put into consideration. The only good thing I see about this is that our money is not being used for the campaign, but then again, you and I know it's our money that is being indirectly used for the campaign.

Sibabasibaba1:


---------------

If you like vote for Tafawa Belewa, that's your business. What is posted there is to feed your intellect-if you have any. If you think that any politician, including your Lord and master, GMB, cares about you, then you must be living in Pluto.

Dude we know nobody cares about u, but GMB care about Nigeria and that's what's important. Not baseless rantings from a maggot. Take ur lectures elsewhere homie. You've lost this.

asodeboyede:
Privatisation gone padi-padi!

That y I hate privatisation, do u know this guys destroys government sector n sell it to themselves, that Tunde ayeni might just b a zombie. The Real owner might b Jonah sef.

I totally agree with u FYI he is chair man skye bank

fkaz:
The same Tunde ayeni bought mainstreet bank,Ibadan & yola power disco(phcn) recently, is like the man is ready to buy nigeria if jona will sell

PervRocker:
Dude we know nobody cares about u, but GMB care about Nigeria and that's what's important. Not baseless rantings from a maggot. Take ur lectures elsewhere homie. You've lost this.

-----

Typical of Buhari supporters. Insults. I keep wondering if that is the only thing they teach you guys in your meetings. Buhari cares about Nigeria and he did not stop his supporters from killing fellow Nigerians when he lost in 2011.

I hope you will not join in killing Nigerians in 2015.

At least he cares about people living pluto! Wat of GeJ?

Sibabasibaba1:


---------------

If you like vote for Tafawa Belewa, that's your business. What is posted there is to feed your intellect-if you have any. If you think that any politician, including your Lord and master, GMB, cares about you, then you must be living in Pluto.

Sibabasibaba1:


-----

Typical of Buhari supporters. Insults. I keep wonderinf if that is the only thing they teach you guys in your meeting. Buhari cares about Nigeria and he did not stop his supporters from killing fellow Nigerians when he lost in 2011.

I hope you will not join in killing Nigerians in 2015.

did buhari go into the streets killing people? Did u see him leading an army of civilians to massacre? U brainless jonathanians embrace ignorance and blame him cos he is a direct threat to ur "jesus" and his corrupt cabal that has been shamelessly sucking their own country dry tryna out-do each other on who steals the most dollars and I'm sure u must be one of the lap dogs benefitting from the stolen billions meant for the upkeep of this country. The people who support buhari are not paid, we are individuals with genuine love for this ship called Nigeria the ur "jesus" is almost done sinking. The hurricane that will sweep ya'll out is coming and its coming fast,its mild on the upright and fierce on the wicked/corrupt. Scientists just developed a new name for it, tell ur pay-master that Hurricane-Buhari is coming for him and his cohorts.

kkkp:
They keep selling our properties to themselves and call it privatization.

actually we have no property. NITEL was dead before they sold it.

chamboy:
That y I hate privatisation, do u know this guys destroys government sector n sell it to themselves, that Tunde ayeni might just b a zombie. The Real owner might b Jonah sef.

In fact, God sees it all!

Sibabasibaba1:
Ayeni has not done what isn't done in other climes. That is how it is done everywhere in the world. If you know anything about the elite policy network theory, you will know that in every country, the elites rule. Even if Buhari comes in tomorrow, nothing will change. The only thing that will change is that another set of elites will share our commonwealth. Is it not Tinubu and his cronies that run Lagos? Hypocrisy is when you condemn one bad act because you are not involved and keep mute on a similar act when you are involved. I will leave you with part of an essay I wrote 6 years ago on where power lies in the US communication policymaking: I used the elite policy network theory to illuminate my points.
-------------------------



Elite policy networks, as we noted earlier, is another theory that will help us understand where power lies in the making of communication policy in the USA and who has benefited. The theory sees policies as serving the interests of the dominant class in the society. The theory is all about links and connections. It explains how circle of friends and associates pull the secret strings that produce or review policies. Wright Mills (1956: 292) notes that “ the conception of power elite and of its unity rests upon the… coincidence of interests among economic, political, and military organisations. It also rests upon the similarity of origins and outlook, and the social and personal intermingling of the top circles from each of these dominant hierarchies”.

For instance, in the mid 1980s, Hollywood producers used their links with the White House to influence the FCC to drop rules that curb the networks’ control over program production. The Hollywood producers, who may lose business if the change went through, pressurised President Ronald Reagan, who had long- term ties with the movie industry. “The President, in turn, called in the FCC chair for an unprecedented informational talk. Congress, responding to Hollywood lobbyists, added its pressure. The FCC withdrew its plan to deregulate the networks’ program-making role” (Head and Sterling, 1990:435). This confirms Mosco (1979: 128) position that “…evidence suggests…a considerable amount of industry influence is exerted not directly on the commission but through the Congress by the control that broadcasters have over the access of representatives. … Any proposal to insulate the commission from industry influence would therefore have to deal with the complex of relationships in which the commission is embedded”.

Another example comes from the 1996 Telecommunication Act. The camaraderie between the then President Bill Clinton’s government and the computer community, influenced the Act to a large extent. From Aufderheide (1999: 40), we can trace the White House connection that shaped the Act. According to her, “…The Clinton-Gore campaign strategically positioned itself as forward looking on technology issues, making friends in the computer community and handsomely collecting campaign contributions from computing and telecommunications companies in the process”. And on assumption of office, after winning the presidential elections in 1992, Clinton and Gore appointed as FCC chairman, their friend, Reed Hundt, with an implied term of reference of handling the regulatory details of the Act when enacted. Hundt reveals his links with the duo thus: “I had been Al Gore’s friend since high school and an adviser to him in his 1990 presidential campaign…I had known Bill Clinton since we were in law school together (Hundt, 2000: ix).

Explaining the part he would play as FCC chairman in the shaping of the Act, he adds: “My duty, as I saw it, would be to fulfil Al’s vision for the information highway. …We would cause new technologies to spread across the country. …The Democratic Congress would rewrite the 1934 Communications Act to replace monopoly with competition, in accordance with Al Gore’s wishes. …From the White House, Vice President Gore would negotiate the new law with Congress, and at the FCC I would handle the fascinating details of issuing the regulations that put any necessary law into specific meaning and effect” (Hundt 2000: 7).

So from the perspective of this theory, we can be infer that communication policies can actually originate from any meeting of friends and associates at any location. Positions are also ‘allocated’ at such meetings to ‘dependable’ persons that would help frustrate opposition. The theory also helps us understand how policies cloaked in the garb of ‘public interest’ may actually be aimed at furthering a group’s ambition or at protecting shared industry and political interests.

We will again use the 1996 Telecommunication Act as an example. Hundt (2000: 4-5) illuminates this for us: “The day after the November 1992 election, Al Gore’s closest advisers sat in attendance on the Vice President-elect on his modest suite at the Colonial Hotel in Little Rock. … Al proceeded down a list of things to do, assigning everyone some task. …I had long wanted the opportunity of public service. …If the Vice- President wanted to cause change in this part of the economy, he needed someone dependable at the FCC”. Hundt goes further to let us into the meetings where the specifics of the Act were drafted: “A dozen of us met at least once in two weeks in Al’s west wing office. …In order to promote economic growth, the group wanted to stimulate investment in new communication technologies. … To these ends, Al and his team crafted a policy that reversed the century-old ordering of the information sector into separate monopolies, each tightly regulated by FCC and the local governments… (Hundt, 2000:8-9).

Again, Hundt provides us with another apt illustration of elite power networks’ relevance in the analysing US communications policy: “The night I was sworn in, Betsy and I went to the White House…to a jazz concert hosted by Ameritech, the Midwestern Bell telephone company. …Ameritech’s fate depended on how the administration chose to rewrite the nation’s communication laws. The company’s corporate officers sat with the President. I was in the back of the room with Quello. … But from the quaint, edenic politics of friendship, I had won the job I wanted” (Hundt, 2000: 17). And Ameritech, too, benefited from its closeness with government. According to Aufderheide (1999: 59), when the Congress finally passed the bill, it addressed specific concerns “from a variety of perspectives. Ameritech, which already had a burglar alarm business, was exempted from the clauses restricting Bells from entry into the service, which hooks up to phone lines”.


From the foregoing, therefore, it will be safe to say that the real power in the making of communications policy in the USA lies in the hands of the dominant class in the society and large corporations since they have the wherewithal with which they can bankroll election campaigns, influence political appointments and lobby regulators as well as legislators. Aufderheide (1999:41-43), description of the unprecedented lobbying in the Congress before the enactment of 1996 Telecommunication Act captures this point better:

"As the House bill was put to vote in July 1995, Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) called the process ‘living proof of what unlimited money can do to buy influence and the Congress of the United States’.… Those with more money probably got more of what they wanted.… By contrast, consumer, religious, minority, disabled, and other constituencies profoundly affected by communication decision making were hardly represented with PAC money, and many advocates on behalf of civil rights, the poor, children, and other vulnerable constituencies found it difficult even to raise telecommunications as a significant social rights and justice issue in the press, legislators’ offices, or at foundations. … In short lobbyists for communications and mass media interests profoundly influenced and often drafted, legislation…"

It, therefore, goes without saying that large corporations and the dominant class have benefited from US communications policies. Of course, they cannot spend money to influence policies without benefiting.

I can swear by d plate of eba & egusi soup am currently eatin dat u didn't type all diz, na copy & paste ni


F**ka*

MichaelSokoto:

I can swear by d plate of eba & egusi soup am currently eatin dat u didn't type all diz, na copy & paste ni


F**ka*

--------------

You are very intelligent. But the problem is that that your intelligence did not make you see this: "I will leave you with part of an essay I wrote 6 years ago on where power lies in the US communication policymaking".

PervRocker:
did buhari go into the streets killing people? Did u see him leading an army of civilians to massacre? U brainless jonathanians embrace ignorance and blame him cos he is a direct threat to ur "jesus" and his corrupt cabal that has been shamelessly sucking their own country dry tryna out-do each other on who steals the most dollars and I'm sure u must be one of the lap dogs benefitting from the stolen billions meant for the upkeep of this country. The people who support buhari are not paid, we are individuals with genuine love for this ship called Nigeria the ur "jesus" is almost done sinking. The hurricane that will sweep ya'll out is coming and its coming fast,its mild on the upright and fierce on the wicked/corrupt. Scientists just developed a new name for it, tell ur pay-master that Hurricane-Buhari is coming for him and his cohorts.

--------------

Yea, violence is what Buhari supporters know best. Every word of theirs reeks violence. And their actions valorize it. We have been seen the hurricane since 2003. And I know that it is your 'genuine love' for Nigeria that drove you guys to murder innocent Nigerians in cold blood in states across Northern Nigeria in 2011. This time, that hurricane will clear Buhari's supporters first.

wisov:
At least he cares about people living pluto! Wat of GeJ?

---------

You are right. the 72 virgins Buhari supporters crave are in Pluto. Hence he cares about them.

Sibabasibaba1:

--------------

Yea, violence is what Buhari supporters know best. Every word of theirs reeks violence. And their actions valorize it. We have been seen the hurricane since 2003. And I know that it is your 'genuine love' for Nigeria that drove you guys to murder innocent Nigerians in cold blood in states across Northern Nigeria in 2011. This time, that hurricane will clear Buhari's supporters first.

jonathans snipers and army in d creeks led by Asari nd Tompolo don't reek of violence ryt? I pity u, next time u feel like demeaning somebody's name, don't just bring mere allegations, imitate wat I just did, name names and maybe,just maybe I might take u serious.

PervRocker:
jonathans snipers and army in d creeks led by Asari nd Tompolo don't reek of violence ryt? I pity u, next time u feel like demeaning somebody's name, don't just bring mere allegations, imitate wat I just did, name names and maybe,just maybe I might take u serious.

------------

It is your god, Buhari, that makes inciting statements. It's either he whips up religious sentiments in his speeches by calling for the 'sharialisation' of Nigeria or he is calling muslims to vote for muslims. At times, he calls for baboons and dogs to be soaked in blood. At times he says that the army attacking Northern islamic terrorists is an attack against the North. All these are inciting and some of the statements gave impetus to the killings of 2011.

Jonathan has never made any violence-laden and inciting statement. It is Buhari's propensity for violence that influenced his supporters. And that violence will clear them this time around. I have yet to see anybody who has monopolised violence.

NgeneUkwenu:
That jonathan has exactly 156 Days to spend in Aso Rock is not even contestable! The only debate in the mouth of the people is, where he would be heading to! ICC or Okiriki

The Transgendered specie, I pray may you not die of heartache by Feb. 15, 2015 because your unnecessary hatred for the Man of the Moment, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan may be your undoing