First, you said:

Although I am yet to see this 'selective justice' the EFCC practices

then, later on you are saying this:

could it be possibly because the leaders in a particular area are corrupted to the point that they are easier to single out?

If you do not see any 'selective justice' by the EFCC as you stated, then how does the issue of "the leaders in a particular area being easier to single out" arise

Both of these quotes were statements made by you.

Perhaps you can help explain why you are speaking from both sides of your mouth

How long has the efcc been arresting these thieves? Blah blah blah blah im waiting for something more effective to happen with these thieves. All of this is just for show. I won't be impress till i hear that these thieves are stripped of what they stole from the public and locked up for their actions. After all who the hell is the efcc? These same people are thrown in by these same looters just to hype us up in making us feel hopeful. THE HELL WITH THEM BASTARDS CALLED THE EFCC AND THE LOOTERS WHO APPOINT THEM AND PRETENDING!!!

Tonim:

First, you said:

[b][/b]


then, later on you are saying this:


If you do not see any 'selective justice' by the EFCC as you stated, then how does the issue of "the leaders in a particular area being easier to single out" arise

Both of these quotes were statements made by you.

Perhaps you can help explain why you are speaking from both sides of your mouth

Again it seems you are hell bent on taking a soundbite approach as opposed to actually looking at what was said on my path, i don't know wether this is out of genuine misunderstanding or wether you are just trying to be annoying especially since you continue to quote my posts and slap on whatever meaning you want.

Sky Blue:

Apologies if you were offended, so why don't we look at where this all began. Someone posted an article and claimed there is selective justice being perpetrated against the members of a particular ethnic group. I posted a general statement based on observations. You decided to reply to my post specifically. You claim your posts are quite clear and unambigous but i don't believe your point was clear, I mean, what do you mean by the highligted part of your statement which you iterated in your earlier post? That single line I highlighted is shrouded in ambiguity and is quite contradictory especially when the EFCC had gone after people like Uzor Kalu, Odilli and Ibori. So are all those from same place? The irony is that here lies the issue: the actual effectiveness of the EFCC in successfully ensuring the conviction of corrupt public office holders. How many of the ex office holders are actually in jail? Instead of stating the obvious that the EFCC has been a collective failure towards the fight of corruption in Nigeria, period - it becomes a case of "they are focusing too much on my brother"? 

I am not saying this is the case, but could it be possibly because the leaders in a particular area aree corrupted to the point that they are easier to single out? Do we actually have to do statistics to justify prosecution? Perhaps this could be another area where federal character comes into play. Hence EFCC is only allowed to arrest one person from each group even if for whatever reason there might happen to be more obvious corrupt practices in say a particular region. So is this the point? See what I mean by your points aren't necessarilly supportive with the ideals you proclaim? So would a push to have convictions display more "federal character" satisfy? Though I find such a premise quite ludacris these are genuine questions. We could actually go further with this but it is obvious you took some offence at my last post so please don't feel the need to reply, just ignore my postings and have a nice day : )

What is most irritating is that someone who does not seem to be able to see beyond ethnicity is alluding to me sharing those views based on "text bite" approach. The huge irony is that you seem to be unveiling the inability to see beyond ethnicity while you are trying to paint me in same light. After a series of questions I asked which was written in a 'thinking out loud' style just to highlight how confusing your post was, all you could see in a post with the part you keep highlighting is ethnicity. Why don't we play a little game? Why don't you point out the part of my post where I explicitly alluded to ethnicity as opposed to quality of governance?

This is like people being banned from raising the issue of oil when they speak about the Niger Delta like we are all supposed to pretend oil is not there. How could oil be linked to governance you might ask? Well, higher oil derivations hence more money to use for development or steal, oil companies, environmental degradation, insecurity which would mean most of the spending is on containing such insecurity, etc. How could the geographical position of the north influence governance there? Pretty much no oil in commercial quantities have been discovered, less oil derivation, more leniency towards agriculture which means less money, however a historical leniency on the federal government, contracts, historically lower school attendance hence less people to fill up any possible growth in higher level work force, quota system etc.

The issues raised in the previous paragraph ARE THE FACT in Nigeria and I am sorry but I don't believe in trying desperately to be politically correct to the extent whereby I am asked to be blind because such seems like foolishness. It is like asking people to be colour blind when we are actually different colours. The irony is that if you analyse the examples I have used, it has a logical flow to it (flow that is logical to me anyway) and in all of it I consider the opportunity that defines the magnitude of corruption because I am working on the assumption that if everybody was to steal or develop a particular region then how much money would be available to them and what obstacles are there towards development.

However it seems all you saw was ethnicity. If you didn't understand you could have asked me and I would have larified things and sorry to dissappoint but I do not see everything like you do, I treated all regions as being NIGERIA. The only reason I am taking time to actually respond to your seemingly mischevious post is because you keep quoting me and slapping on whatever agenda you want on my posts and again I beg, please leave my posts alone, you do not have to address me. Again sorry to dissappoint but I would definately not be loosing any sleep over the fact that some person I have never met and only engaging with for the first time who wants to be known as "Tonim" and has an 'f' next to their name thinks they have figured out my "mindset". I hope I have been able to clarify a few points not necessarily to you but to anyone who might have had similar 'confusion' over the post. Have a nice day : )

could it be possibly because the leaders in a particular area are corrupted to the point that they are easier to single out?

The bolded part pretty much sums up the mindset behind your reasoning, can't argue with that.

Have a nice day !