₦airaland Forum

@Big B1,

Yes, your admitting that mistakes where made in the past is good and far better than dismissing such allegations.

I am aware that no one is perfect but it is very important that we face issues the way they are and make amends if need be.

Take care and enjoy the weekend too.

On the Admin, no one is bashing him, I guess honest comments are being made and these comments are hamrless as long as they are being made in good faith.

You will be joking if you imagine I will spend my time arguing with you even when the article you searched and referenced made nonsense of what you are trying to say.

Rather than attempt to redeem your credibility that you have rubbished by your many lies here you are trying to confuse yourself with articles on the internet, good luck. Your style of selective reading, understanding or thinking is bad.

I hope other people will read the article and make up their minds based on the information presented.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Strategic ambiguity about Ansar al-Islam
By Bryan Keefer
November 7, 2003

In recent weeks, a number of Bush administration officials have renewed efforts to build a rhetorical linkage between Ansar al-Islam, an Al Qaeda-backed terrorist group operating in Iraq, and Saddam Hussein. Despite the slim evidence of any operational connection between the two, these officials have continued to use strategically ambiguous language to imply a connection.

Prior to the war, Ansar al-Islam operated in Kurdish-controlled areas in the northeastern Iraq, a region that had been outside of Saddam's control since the Gulf War in 1991. At the time, administration officials suggested the group was directly connected to the Iraqi dictator. In his February speech to the United Nations, for instance, Secretary of State Colin Powell suggested that there was contact between Saddam and the group, and cited it as a potential link between the Iraqi dictator and Al Qaeda.

However, evidence found at a Ansar al-Islam training camp in March indicates that the group had ties to Al Qaeda, but it did not demonstrate a connection to Saddam. At this point, the strongest evidence to date for a linkage was presented by General Richard Meyers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who told the Senate Armed Services Committee on July 24 that "We do know that Iraqi intelligence service had people involved back and forth" with the group. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz also claimed there were unspecified "links" between Saddam and the group in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 9, stating that both Saddam and Ansar al-Islam "went to very great lengths to bury and hide the links that they had with one another. So you have to recognize, we'll probably see only the tip of the iceberg, but we certainly see links."


In short, the evidence is muddled, but there is little proof of a direct connection between Saddam and the group, particularly prior to the war. Rather than acknowledging this, members of the Bush administration have repeatedly attempted to link Ansar al-Islam with the deposed dictator (and thereby help justify the war) by claiming that the group operated in Iraq prior to the war, while pointedly neglecting to mention that the area in which it operated was not under Saddam's control.

Most recently, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made three such claims in separate interviews last Sunday, as Matthew Yglesias pointed out on the American Prospect's Tapped weblog. On NBC's "Meet the Press," Rumsfeld stated that "The Ansar al-Islam was already in Iraq. There were Al Qaeda already in Iraq. The Iraqis were engaged in terrorism themselves. They were giving $25,000 to suicide bombers' families, who would go in and kill innocent men, women and children." On "Fox News Sunday," Rumsfeld claimed that "There's an organization called Ansar al-Islam, which was in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was there, it was functioning, and Saddam Hussein knew all about it." And on "This Week," he stated, "take the terrorist organization Ansar al-Islam. It was in Iraq. Saddam Hussein knew it was in Iraq. It was functioning." All of these statements, as Yglesias points out, clearly suggest that Saddam had a hand in the organization's operations.

Rumsfeld, however, is only the latest in a long line of administration figures who have made similar claims in the last several months. In July 24 testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) asked Meyers, "Prior to the initiation of hostilities in Iraq, Secretary Rumsfeld indicated that he had bullet-proof evidence that there were Al Qaeda elements within Iraq,  But the implication, obviously, of the secretary's comments was that within Baghdad, within the control of the Saddam Hussein regime there were Al Qaeda elements. Have you found any of those elements?" Meyers answered that "The elements that we know have a direct connection to Al Qaeda are the Ansar al-Islam elements that I think you were referring to because they were up there in northeastern Iraq before the Iraqi conflict began." While this is technically true, it unfairly implies that Saddam had some control over this group and therefore a link to Al Qaeda.

At an August 20 press conference, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher stated in response to a question that "Iraq has been on our terrorist list before the war. Iraq was a place that harbored terrorists. So terrorism existed in Iraq. And we know groups like Ansar al-Islam, Al Qaeda-associated groups operated in Iraq before the war."

On September 8, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice stated on the "Sean Hannity Show" on ABC Radio that "Well, we do know that there are some foreign jihadists coming in. We're not sure what organizations. One is probably Ansar al-Islam, which was an organization that was operating in Iraq before the war, up in the north."

And in September 25 testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Paul Bremer, Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, claimed that "Saddam Hussein supported terrorism. He was identified as a state sponsor of terrorism for almost 20 years. He played host to terrorists to Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas. There were connections with Al Qaeda over the last decade. There was particularly a strong connection with an Al Qaeda-related group called Ansar al-Islam." He went on to note that members of the group had escaped into Iran and recently re-entered Iraq.

These comments echo assertions by Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney attempting to link Saddam to Al Qaeda and the September 11 attacks by virtue of geography (there is no evidence linking Saddam to the attacks directly). In a July 30 interview with Jim Lehrer, Rice asserted, "What we knew going into the war was that this man [Saddam Hussein] was a threat,  He was sitting astride one of the most volatile regions in the world, a region out of which the ideologies of hatred had come that led people to slam airplanes into buildings in New York and Washington. Something had to be done about that threat. And the President was not prepared to simply allow this brutal dictator with dangerous weapons to continue to destabilize the Middle East." Cheney made a similar linkage between Saddam and the September 11 attacks in a September 14 appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," claiming that "If we're successful in Iraq ,  we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

There is little doubt that such comments reinforce perceptions that Saddam Hussein had substantial ties to Al Qaeda and was involved with the September 11 attacks, neither of which are supported by hard evidence. As the Bush administration must be aware, geographic proximity does not imply an operational connection. To continue to make such strategically ambiguous statements is utterly disingenuous.

4 Play:
We can ignore the fact that terrorists set up training camps and operated with total impunity in both nations before the Americans came in. That is perhaps the essence of a terrorists "haven",a place where terrorists can operate training camps without anyone challenging them .It is only when they are challenged in in their own "safe havens" that they respond in kind with widescale suicide bombings ,like in Iraq and Afghanistan

Another clear lie being sold here. Iraq was never a terrorist haven nor was it ever a nation that had training camps for any terrorist groups.

Now far can one go to tell a lie? We have heard enough and are really tired of these blatant lies.

Reverend:
@4Play

It goes without saying. Please name one Islamic state that[b] is not[/b] a haven for every type of fanatical terrorist on the planet?

Islamic State = Mentally deranged unstable people with inferiority complexes

Iraq was not an islamic state under Saddam and there was never a single case of suicide bombing or suicide attack in Iraq for more than 30 years.

Iraq remained a secular state, reason why it had a christian as Saddam's vice president.

With the illegal invasion we shall see a fully islamic republic of Iraq that may just be another Iran.

By the time all these things completely play out then the US will realise that a "free and democractic middle east" according to them will easily mean a middle east where the presence of influence of the US will not be tolerated.

Let us hope we see real democracies in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia and we will know how far. Remember we have seen democracies bring Hamas to power and the present government in Iran.

Just as late Ford stated before he died, the US should not be going round trying to convert nations to practice democracy. Not to even mention that these democracies are being spread with bombs.

From yahoo news, shocking information.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=

New facts emerge in Iraqi slayings case

WASHINGTON - A Marine squad that had just endured casualties from a roadside bombing ordered five unarmed Iraqi civilians out of a taxi, and the squad leader shot them one by one, witnesses have told naval investigators.

ADVERTISEMENT

Four Marines have been charged in the deaths of 24 civilians, including women and children, that occurred immediately after a bombing in Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005, killed one Marine and injured two others. In addition, four officers who were not there during the killings but were accused of failures in investigating and reporting the deaths have been charged.

The killings have led to the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war.

According to one witness, quoted in the report by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service obtained by The Washington Post, a white taxi happened upon the scene shortly after the explosion. The Marines' squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, ordered the passengers, five unarmed Iraqis, out of the car, witnesses said.

The Post said naval investigators found that the five Iraqis were shot by Wuterich as they stood there.

"They didn't even try to run away," according to one witness, a young Iraqi soldier working with the Marine squad. "We were afraid from Marines and we saw them behaving like crazy. They were yelling and screaming."

After the taxi inhabitants were shot, the report found, the Marines raided nearby houses, firing indiscriminately, using both grenades and guns, in a bloody, door-to-door sweep, killing 14 unarmed inhabitants, in just 10 minutes.

One 13-year-old girl was the lone survivor in the second house, losing five family members, including her mother and 3-year-old sister and 5-year-old brother.

"He fired and killed everybody. The American fired and killed everybody," Safah Yunis Salem told investigators.

The four Marines charged last month with murder for the Haditha deaths are: Wuterich; Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz; Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt; and Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum. They all face a maximum penalty of life in prison.

Defense attorneys have disputed the idea that the shootings were in revenge for the roadside bombing, saying their clients were doing what they had been trained to do: responding to a perceived threat with legitimate force.

Navy investigators interviewed hundreds of witnesses, including Marines, Iraqi soldiers and civilians. The Post said the report is sometimes fragmented and contains conflicting testimony of the events that day.

@Big B1,

You have failed to answer the simple question that I asked but I am not surprised, it is common for people that are not straightforward to play games with words when you ask them simple questions.

IBB implemented what you are advocating today and it did not stop him from massive looting of public funds, so why should we implement something that did not work before as regards IBB and Abacha?

If you do not have any answer to the question just let it pass, do not waste your energy playing games with words and claiming that smart ones can see the answers. We do not need more maradonas in Nigeria, we want straight forward and honest people.

As regards my comment on moeny not being everything, don't get unnecessarily excited I was refering to IBB that thinks that with his money he get pay his way through anything, certainly not you.

@MAMAJAMA,

I have been wondering where a lot of good posters have gone to after I took a month's break on this forum.

As regards Seun, I sincerely hopes he overcomes his sometimes irrational ways of doing things.

I was banned once (on the technology forum) for responding to an insult from someone I believe is his friend for about 30 minutes or so and believe me I felt bad when I noticed I was unbanned.

No doubt, a lot of good people have left this forum for different reasons. I am a moderator of an issues based forum here but whenever I am less busy I drop by and respond to posts that interest me.

Take care.

4 Play:
it seems that there are more people here who care more about Iraq than Iraqis

Hypocrisy at its zenith here.

If why replaced the words Iraq and Iraqis with USA and Americans respectively we would get the true picture of what the writer and others like him represent even when Americans think otherwise.

streetcyph:
dude, make sense quick. what r u saying, he does not take decisions based on principles and unrivalled integrity? sometimes when i read some of the junk you nigerians post i just nod my head.

we have all seen the candidates, it is left for us all to decide who is the best for lagos.

here is an article i wrote in the punch newspaper not too long ago about mr. pedro Afam and co, read.

Pedro’s decision to contest on the platform of the LP reveals the victory of idea and vision over opportunism. It also put paid to an accusation that he could not rise up to big situations and take weighty decisions if voted into office. [/b]Incidentally, Pedro,the so-called political upstart, is the only deputy governor still in the governorship race in the country, the rest having been schemed out by their bosses! So, what does his candidacy mean for the people of Lagos State? [b]First of all, it widens choice in the governorship race. Put against the rancour and divisions within the AC and, lately the PDP in the state, Pedro’s candidacy holds the hope of a sane tenure. Rather than engage in needless conflict and infighting, his campaign team is busy developing its agenda for moving Lagos forward.

That you are still posting here even when you believe Nigerians here post junk shows that you are a believer of junk posts otherwise you would have taken your campaign to forums that don't tolerate junks.

This thread is not about your article on Mr Pedro, my question remains a simple one - When did he realise that Labour Party is the best option?

Before or after he was schemed out of AC?

Would he have joined Labour Party if the governor supported him and AC gave him the ticket?

Why turn simple questions into complex and lenghty ones?

Answer the simple questions posed.

For your information I live and work in Nigeria so you are on your own as regards your comment on hiding in foreign lands.

As for your response proper, it failed to address, let alone answer any of the 2 questions asked, maybe it is an oversight or a mistake.

It seems you know everything about IBB and his being sorry for his past mistakes but the onus lies with IBB himself to tell Nigerians that (even though he squandered a good opportunity at the Oputa Panel) and not you.

So, answer the 2 questions so we can move ahead and let us leave the campaign style responses as these won't sell.

A better approach would be to face the issues, make amends and move on but if you imagine that Nigerians would be hoodwinked into forgetting everything that happened in the past without any apologies by the man responsible for so many sufferings then you better think again.

Money is not everything and I believe you ought to know this by now.

@Easyy,

Well, your task is a noble one, carry on and best of luck.

Only God knows what would have become of this forum if these defenders of anything US have not gotten responses that helped in clarifying issues.

I find it supremely difficult to understand how someone will blindly and unconditionaly support a nation regardless of atrocities being commited by the nation even when the citizens of that nation have voiced opposition to what their leaders are doing.

Enjoy.

@Easyy,

Happy new year.

You get time well well. It does not make sense to continue to discuss with people whose sole aim is to ensure that no matter what the US does that no one should point it out.

Take care.

Reverend:
To all the people in this thread that are trying to make him out as some kind of matyr or hero I pity you and think you need help.

Can you point to any post that tries to make him out as a kind of hero before you start pitying anyone or thinking someone needs help?

No serious or experienced web programmer will be willing to work onsite for any project unless the price is well worth it.

In this technological age I do not believe you need to tie people to a particular location to get any job done especially if it is online unless you are ready to pay heavily for it.

As regards how hard or easy the job is, any good web programmer can work on any project regardless of the tools the programmer is comfortable with, after all it is all about inserting, updating/modifying or deleting data and the level of priviledges.

Good luck.

@Mckren,

Exactly my point, we must learn to separate the issues from the personalities.

Agreeing with a sound recommendation from a "bad" person is not the same as supporting the person.

@Big B1,

Honestly, you are boxing yourself in unnecessarily. Why do you push for a 'positive change' with so much passion on one hand and avoid or dismiss any comment that does not support IBB or even Adenuga completely?

It calls into question what your real motives are. It puts you in a situation where you cannot comfortably contribute to issues without one asking what is he up to this time?

While you believe the recommendation will do wonders, I have asked two questions that require answers[b] - Did IBB and even Abacha not do the same thing? Can these men be absolved of corruption based on their decisions to implement what you are advocating for today?[/b]

When did he realise that Labour Party was a good party?

After he was schemed out of AC abi?

We need men that will take decisions based on principles and unrivalled integrity.

To begin with the "Force" should be dropped from the name The Nigeria Police Force.

It seems that it is only in Nigeria that the Police uses the word Force, maybe this is partly responsible for the way they bahave forgetting that their jobs do not require the use of force or excessive force while dealing with the public.

oje:
@Stenach,

I agree with you. I don't know what BigB1 and Eassy are saying;

That you don't know what they are saying doesn't make their positions wrong.

oje:
I repeat;
The beautiful write up buy most of these guys in support of Saddam does not convince me at all,

The write up is not meant to convince anyone, the write up only presented positive things Saddam did while in power, I did not see a single sentence that kind of absolved Saddam of any of his many heinous crimes.

This is where people make mistake and end up getting unnecessarily upset - a forum is not where you convince people, we may discuss and share information on anything, it is left to the readers to make up their minds based on the information presented.

We should be focused with making sure that information presented are factual, correct and devoid of misinformation, lies etc.

I have noticed that those that easily resort to abuses on this forum are those that are bent on "convincing" others to agree to a certain predetermined position and when readers disagree it becomes another issue.

oje:
The same guy can write a very good story about Abacha and you will think He was a saint.
a writer is saying dying by hanging is most brutal than amongst injections and shooting, etc,
if he died by firing Squad (shooting) he would still have something to say about it being the worst form, humans can be very shallow minded!!

Be careful with name calling because what you label others maybe attributed to you effortlessly. You can agree or disagree with anyone without name calling and still make your points.

McKren:
Please I did not say persecute but prosecute.

The clarification necessary well well jooo.

McKren:
Afam I support most of what you say on this blog but this latest talk about Nzeribe makes nonsense of all of them. It will do my heart a great pleasure if you could please retract your statement. Because I enjoy your views a lot.

Nzeribe, Ubas, Chukwumerije, Orji can only be remembered in Igbo hall of shame. People are celebrating the fact that Nzeribe has lost his Senatorial seat.

I do not believe in blanket condemnation or commendation of anyone regardless of the person involved.

Nzeribe drew up a list and circulated same to other senators and suggested this simple and yet effective method be used to catch corrupt officials, what he did matters to me not who he is.

Same way Chukwumerije presented one of the most compelling cases against the 3rd term on the floor of the senate.

We must tackle issues raised and leave the personalities involved otherwise we may lose out as regards suggestions or recommendations simply because certain people are not liked for any reasons whatsoever.

This is similar to the problem we have today as regards ethnicity where certain good recommendations are thrown to the trash can simply because the people making such recommendations come from a particular part of the country, this is bad and it does no one any good.

Meanwhile, thanks for enjoying my views, it is the same level of openness and objectivity that I have brought to bear on the Nzeribe issue.

Take care.

I can't wait to see him return and maybe prepare to rule Nigeria after spending some time in jail.

Big B1:
@AFAM:
First, the purpose of this topic is not to solve corruption problem in Nigeria; The purpose of this topic is finding a better way to empower the standard of living in Nigeria.
By enforcing the leaders and their families to live in Nigeria and utilize our resources will indirectly bring major improvement.

You are being evasive here and it does not make any sense, the bottomline remains the issue of corruption unless you are discussing another thread entirely.

Big B1:
Second, do you really believe that you and Mr Nzeribe's proposal will solve corruption in Nigeria?
Quote by AFAM:
Go and study more; believe me, this will never solve anything. Big boys already figured out a way to beat this strategy.

I believe Nzeribe's proposal would have a lot of corrupt officials like IBB stripped of any ill gotten wealth in no time and he would not be living in a mansion on the hilltop unless he shows Nigeria how his salary and all entitlements could have built it for him.

Go and study more? Thanks, no need for that, I do not believe in the idea of making simple tasks complex.

Big B1:
Finally, stay focused and no need to get personal.

I am focused, I am worried that any comments that have anything to do with IBB or any of his fronts like Adenuga gets you really worked up and yet you claim you do not have anything to do with him.

I do not need to get personal as there are a lot of information in the public domain that anyone can lay his/her hands on to know that IBB was corrupt and hugely responsible for institutionalising corruption in Nigeria.

That you can campaign for a better Nigeria and yet not see any single wrong doing by IBB is the strangest position I have seen a Nigerian take for over 10 years.

OLadi:
@ AFAM

IBB did it back then, now imagine all LG chairmen, Governors, Senators, Legislators, doing it. only if you guys will see the state Nigeria is, not even to talk security wise, or healthcare or the sorry states of the schools. we don't have anything to lose with this. For once lets all work together and make something work

@Oladi,

I live and work in Nigeria, I feel the pain the average man feels in Nigeria.

I believe forcing people to change their life styles isn't right because it will ultimately mean that some Nigerians (read the children) will be deprived of their freedom of choice as regards schooling or working especially if their parents can afford the bills.

What we need is a system that checks and balances what elected or selected officials do while in office.

Many people criticize Nzeribe today but so far he remains the only senator that had suggested the best way to rid Nigeria of corruption as far back as the 1999- 2003 administration.

His suggestion? Ask any Nigerian the source of his wealth for example Mr A has a mansion, all that he needs to explain is how he came about the money to build the mansion, Mr B buys a private jet, he should tell us where the money came from, simple and practical ways of fighting this monster called corruption.

Big B1:
Unbelievable and Amazing.

It is sad that we can't discuss and share ideas like brothers without getting personal.

@ AFAM and @ McKren respectively, that was uncalled- for.

I'm not related to IBB, it's not even close and I don't work for him; but he has my 100% support because at this point in Nigeria, he's the only one that can bring changes effectively, efficiently and unitedly.

Is that a crime?

See, if you want us to discuss as brothers then you must demonstrate a certain level of objectivity.

It seems strange that on one hand you clamour for a better Nigeria and on the other you either dismiss or ignore any valid comments against IBB when infact you should defend them if you believe the accusations are out of place.

The way you react when IBB is mention versus people like OBJ leave s one thinking that your motive is far from objective.

This is an open forum and no one gains anything by quarelling with anyone but we should try to be fair in our discussions and at all times if possible.

Nothing personal, I will rather say my mind than pretend about what I think.

Take care.

4 Play:
@Afam

Oh boy get a life

I do have one, do you?

Why do you stand to gain when you always attempt to turn or twist very clear issues into something else?

The only reason why I even bothered to comment on the percentage of christians in iraq is that Saddam had a christian as his deputy (something unheard of in the middle east), not to argue about the exact percentage or the precision of the number of christians in that country.

Iraq under Saddam remain a secular state and not an islamic one and it is important to highlight the difference.

Big B1:
FYI: I believe this policy was partially implemented for couple of years back in the days; infact, (off the record) because of this policy I attended public school for almost a year. It wasn't a decent experience, but it motivated my folks to empower the standard of education in Nigeria during this period.

It is a bright strategy, trust me.

Why do you keep playing games with words?

Yes, you may have attended public school but the fact remains that IBB (maybe your own dad) implemented it but we are all aware of what he did in office.

Put differently, it will not stop anyone from stealing from Nigeria as we do have references to point to.

There is a huge disconnect between your clamour for this policy and your continued support (even though understandably) for IBB and all that he stands for even when a lot of Nigerians are against what he represents.

4 Play:
@Afam

Iraqis are muslims (97 percent) and only 3 percent of them belong to other religions other than Islam of which christianity is just one of them.

No sir, the 3% does not cover non christians in my statement and that is a fact.

4 Play:
Iraq being a muslim society has no qualms with the death penalty .If they are going to hang other ordinary criminals,hardly suprising that they will want to hang a mass murderer

It may interest you to know that Saddam was liked by the Western nations because it refused to turn Iraq into an islamic nation, he chose secularism and that explains why Iraq had a christian as a vice president.

The death penalty was re-introduced in 2004 to pave way for a very possible death sentence for Saddam

4 Play:
The only qualms I have with the hanging was the pace of it,none of the other cases except Dujail were examined and the Kurds were not happy with this

I do not think many people are opposed to the hanging for reasons other than those you stated because majority of the complaints have been about the speed and the intent as regards revenge and vengeance as against justice.

The bottomline? If Saddam could be hanged for signing the death warrants for people already sentenced to death via the law courts for a failed assasination attempt then Bush should also be executed for the same offence.

Even the jugde is billed to be executed and the head of the team that led the investigation, what sort of useless judgement is this.

Saddam could easily have bagged the death penalty for the gassing of the Kurds since the victims were never tried nor was the act condemned by the Saddam government (even though countries like the US never condemned it at that time since Iraq was considered a friend since they had a common enemy, Iran).

Reverend:
One point where your story falls down is 'Milking Countries Dry'

Both the US and the UK have invested far much more in Iraq than they could ever possibly hope to gain!

And that is because things did not go according to plan in the failed illegal invasion of Iraq.

Had any of the countries known what they do know today, none of them would have contemplated invading Iraq.

Countries do not need aid, they need fair trade policies and equity. by the way, in most cases, close to 40% or more of the aid money never gets to the intended recipient because the giver still syphons some of the funds while executing or implementing the aid program.

Afam:
I do not think that it will make any difference afterall IBB had his kids in Nigeria and I believe same thing happened under Abacha and we all know the result of their stewardship while in office.

There should be a limit to what people should demand from their leaders. People's right to choose what they want should not be removed from them because they are running for elective offices.

I still maintain that we saw an IBB that did what some are advocating and the results are there for all well meaning Nigerians to see.

So, why bother with a policy that failed to have any impact in the past?

bioye:
It bothers me that some people are trying to use this thread as an avenue to propagate hate and attack muslims. I believe your faith does not encourage you to do this.

I think the reproduced post above is out of order and trying to excuse this will be an effort in futility.