₦airaland Forum

Simple: Acute myopia and ignorance

naijaking1:
^^^
Did Ibru or Akingbola write the SAS?
Yet some of them have been persecuted for "giving out loans without adequate or no colleteral"
Your hypocrasy stinks to high heaven

Try not to make such declarative comments on issues you are less knowledgeable.

The Statements of Accounting Standards (SAS), which is published by the NASB, defines guidelines and principles to be observed in the preparation of financial statements. Specifically SAS 10 & 15 applies to Accounting by Banks and Non-Bank Financial Institutions. It is the SAS that defines how much provisioning should be made for non-performing loans, and has nothing to do with the due process of how the loan was granted (which is where collateral falls). Every company in Nigeria is expected to comply with the relevant SAS (or ICAN substitute for smaller entities). Failure to adhere to the SAS is tantamount to doctoring your books.

realmen:
the simple fact is that provisioning for non performing loans as stages and percentage, and banks according tho the financial standard being used b4 sanusi came in, spread the provision over a period of time. but sanusi just came and said the all banks must do 100% provision. that makes many of them to made provision in excess of their liquidity or leaving them with insufficient deposit base.
that explain why many of the banks are feeling relunctant to submit their financials to cbn then to publicize it. they prefer to be paying the penalty of 10k per day than to expose their yash or to be the first to show poor figures.
now , sanusi (CBN) want to go back to the old stye to spread the provisioning.

Thats incorrect and a misrepresentation of the facts.
There are standards for classifying loans as non-performing assets and provisioning for them, which are clearly defined in the SAS 10 as
- Interest and/or Principal outstanding for over 90 days but less than 180 days to be classified as 'Substandard' and provisioned at 10%
- Interest and/or Principal outstanding for over 180 days but less than 360 days to be classified as 'Doubtful' and provisioned at 50%
- Interest and/or Principal outstanding for over 360 days to be classified as 'Lost' and provisioned at 100%
So if the loan has been outstanding for a year, you will need to provision 100% for it.
Sanusi didn't write the SAS, the NASB publishes it and the current version has been in existence before Sanusi came into office. He simply required that the bank adhere to it and provide a true picture of their state.
In fact, the CBN got a waiver from NASB to suspend the paragraph requiring 1% general provisioning on performing loans to reduce the burden on the banks for the 2009 year (see http://www.nasbnigeria.org/news.php?news_id=7). He is also trying to review the requirements to make it easier for banks to provision, but it would be wrong to make the changes and apply them retroactively.

@Beaf
I see that you are still preaching your 'decentralization' nonsense. 
You are yet to detail how this your 'decentralization' will work and its feasibility.
You are simply misinforming and misleading those that are less knowledgeable.

Onlytruth:
Yea, I understand Igbo better. 
Was 1966 the first time Igbo were killed in the north?

Back to school.

unfortunately I dont speak fluent Igbo
If you have a point to make, proceed, else stop wasting bandwidth and storage space.

Onlytruth:
You expect me to answer that when you refused to answer my question? I am not your teacher. If you don't know the answer to that then why are you here arguing?

Seems you struggle with English comprehension. I have already given my answer in the previous post.

Onlytruth:
I have some questions for you on that: Was that the first time northerners embarked on a killing spree of Igbos in the north? Was 1966 even the third time?
And after 1966 has there not been countless killing of Igbos in the north?

When you have answered these questions, the lying party here becomes obvious! 

If you have evidence to the contrary please share
You can start with 1953 riots (or 1945 if you want to go further back)

Onlytruth:
Anyway, for the records, I don't bend facts. What I don't accept is marchiavellianism. If Gowon stopped the killings in the north (after the third wave of massacre against Igbos), the conflict could never have reached the civil war stage. There was a lot of restraint by eastern leadership then. The lie is that Ojukwu simply rushed off and declared Biafra after Gowon took over. There were series of events that preceded Biafra. The liars are those who discount those events.

You bend facts and misrepresent the truth when you make it seem like if the Northerners woke up one morning, smacked their behinds, and decided to go on a killing spree of the 'innocent' Igbos. There were preceding events in which the Igbos were not innocent.

Onlytruth:
The Senate presidency controlled by Igbo in the 1999-2003 dispensation was actually negotiated by the northern controlled government of Adulsalami Abubakar and was the same arrangement that produced Obasanjo. So don't credit that to Obasanjo!
As soon as Obasanjo took over, he started killing people all over the country (including Bola Ige from the same west), and did everything he could to undermine the Chuba Okadigbo's leadership of the Senate. As soon as Obasanjo settled in, he launched a war against Igbo leadership of the Senate and anyone who stood against him was neutralized.
When he "won" (actually stole it ) a re-election in 2003, he continued. When he was severally called out by the Igbo, he played a "God father" on Igbo by ensuring Igbo was completely schemed out in the new government of Yar adua.
You guys must think Igbo people are blind to these things. I'm glad that it was an Igbo Senate president -Ken Nnamani that killed Obasanjo's third (and life term) project. That muderfkcer will meet his waterloo soon.

You didnt answer the question of why they were removed?
what about ken Nnamani, how did he become senate president under Obasanjos watch?
Obasanjo must dislike Igbos so much that he made Soludo CBN governor and iweala minister of finance

Also irking to the northerners was, subsequent to the january coup, the photograph of the sardauna laying prone with his head under Nzeogwu boot, allegedly displayed by some Igbos in Kano.

From Major General Oluleye, 2nd in command of the 5th Battalion in Kano

A carefully orchestrated political violence erupted in Kano and spread to Katsina, Funtua, Sokoto, Maiduguru, and other places in a sporadic manner. The 5th battalion became extremely stretched in curbing the disturbances. Every Igbo person paraded himself as ironsi. Unwittingly, the Igbos displayed the photograph of Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto, in a prone positrion with his head under the jungle boot of major Nezeowu. It was displayed in homesand shops of the Igbos. Whee people did not notice the photograph; the would invite their attention to it. To the Nolrtherners they usually said, you see your papa under the foot of Nzeogwu.The intensity of the operations agaisnst the Igbos in the north was thus precipitated and accentuated by the Igbos themselves. The northerners planned dutifully as the Igbos continued to behave unchecked. The result was catastrophic. Most of the supreme commander's advisers, official and unofficial, were Igbonization-oriented and consequently their pieces of advise even through commissions were directed towards the selected aim which was far from being in the national interest

Onlytruth:
@ Azuka.O

You sound new to nairaland. Believe me we've been through this same issue multiple times here and the same folks from the west always justified the killing of innocent Igbo children both in the pogrom and the civil war itself.

Because they lack real rationale for their support of the evil acts, they always sound like a broken record (by implication): Igbos killed northerners and others first (at my count, about 12 politicians), therefore one dead corrupt politician from the north and west is equal to 5000 dead Igbo civilians and children, leading to 50,000 dead Igbo.
In their warped mindset, Igbo had to be dealt with enough for them not to retaliate! Do these people understand anything about human mind at all? 

You paint a picture of if the 50,000 igbos were killed the morning after the coup
1. There was a coup in which several northern leaders were killed by an Igbo dominated group
2. The igbo senate president handed over power (unconstitutionally) to an igbo military officer
3. the coup plotters were never prosecuted talk less of being punished
so what is your defence that it was not an 'Igbo affair'. 
Do you think the north were going to fold their hands and wait till the Igbos were ready to pity them?
You cannot claim to be the innocent victim. All parties are guilty.

To be honest, I think the Hausa is more understanding and sophisticated than the Yoruba on this issue. They know that there can never be peace in Nigeria until the Igbo is assuaged. Guess who tried most to marginalize the Igbo in the political leadership and standing in Nigeria? It wasn't a northerner. It was Obasanjo! Under him, Ndigbo could only be the deputy senate president. I believe the Yoruba is the main enemy politically speaking in Nigeria. So don't be shocked by views from people like Biina and his  kid brother called bk/babe97 whose Igbo father fled after impregnating his mother, so now he lives to hate Igbo people.

deputy senate president? typical lies and trying to rewrite history.
So where were Enwerem and Okadigbo from and why were they removed?

Nigeria is such a funny country! Mind you, same people are today calling for "revolution", "restructuring", "true federalism", "national conference" and all other similar terms .
I cannot laugh again.

Its people like you that hold Nigeria back with your tribalism

Azuka.O:
The military was not in govt between 1960 and Jan 1966, so I don't know why u brought this up. The casualties of the first coup were mainly civilian rulers because it was a civilian govt. The casualties of the 2nd coup were mainly military rulers because the military was in power. So pls let's not argue on technicalities, since this is not a law court.

You said: "It is typical that retaliations are worse than the initial attack. The north tried to make sure that there would no reprisals from the igbos.".  That is why I said you were trying to justify the senseles and systematic murder of innocent Igbo civilians, an attempt to eliminate an entire race. As I said, pray such fate does not befall you in future.

I said that the killing of non-Igbo leaders in the Jan 1966 coup was not good at all. But the North retaliated in July by killing the head of state (Igbo) and other Igbos in govt. That was not enough. The murderous gang went after helpless children, women and men and sought to wipe out a race and you tell me that you know where the North is coming from on that. Tufia! I will never support evil.

Dimka from the Middle-Belt killed Murtala Mohammed in the 1976 coup. Why didn't the North go from house to house to wipe out the Middle-Belters? Orkar/Ogboru carved out the North from Nigeria and attempted to kill Babangida in the 1990 coup, why didn't the North retaliate by wiping out the Middle-Belt and Bendel (there was no Delta then) people?

When a Danish cartoonist made a caricature of Prophet Mohammed, what was the connection with the killing of Igbos in the North? Did Igbos descend from Denmark? Or was the mother of the cartoonist an Igbo woman?

For several decades the Igbos have been targetted for elimination in the North for no just cause. Today it is happening to the Jos people. Tomorrow it may happen to you. What I expect from people like you who have the advantage of going to school and seeing the light is to condemn any act of injustice wherever you see it. When Abiola was denied his mandate, I shouted in my corner and through the media that it was an injustice. When Obasanjo wanted to mess up his VP Atiku, I shouted that it was wrong and unjust. When Ribadu was treated like a common thief by Yar'Adua, I shouted too. When Jos children and women were murdered some weeks ago, I shouted; I was horrified, even though the Jos people participated in the killing of Igbos in 1966/67. It does not matter if the victim is your enemy; once you see injustice anywhere, condemn it in its entirely. Few guys like Soyinka raised their voices and wanted the ugly descent into anarchy to stop but were imprisoned.

The mass murder of Igbos in the North in their thousands was the main reason Igbos felt they were not wanted in Nigeria. And Igbos also felt very disappointed that other Nigerians (from the West, Mid-West and present-day South-South) kept quiet and even tacitly gave their support while they were being eliminated by Northerners. 40 years after that ugly incident, the least any right-thinking person can do is to acknowledge that the massacre of Igbo civilians in 1966/67 was completely and inexcusably wrong and unwarranted. There should be no iota of justification for that senseless act whatsoever.

Is this suppose to be a game with pre-defined and accepted rules? There was a coup in which Northerners (both civilian and military) were the main victims. The north retaliated, be it at a more aggravated level and you are now playing the victim card. Why dont you suggest that the same exact number of people should have been killed?  You are the one that is talking technicalities.

I have said already that I was not trying to justify nor approve the pogrom, but it would be disingenuous to condemn the north solely, when they were the victims up to the counter coup. You can accuse the north of over^10 reacting, but you cannot accuse them of firing the first salvo. If the father of A kills the father of B, and B kills A, his father, and the entire A family of A, I dont not approve of B's action but I can appreciate where he is coming from, cos A started it.

As to the case of dimka, he was summarily executed a few weeks after his aborted coup, and the likes of Danjuma didnt harbor him. Same applies to Orkar etc. Ironsi did no such thing. If Ironsi had executed Nzeogwu & co, it would have gone a long way to pacify thought that it was an 'Igbo coup'. Since the events of 1966, there has been no love lost between the north and the Igbos. Subsequent actions are just a continuation of it.

The Jos events didnt start with the recent attacks and have been ongoing for a while. It is disingenuous to sample just the last event in isolation.

It is often Igbos that have a colored definition of justice, and never see anything wrong in the decision and/or actions of their kinsmen. We are in such a bad state as a nation because several of our leaders from the different parts of the country were bad and selfish, but some posters would like us to see Ojukwu as a flawless leader, Ironsi as being innocent and Ifeajuna and co as heroes, while the north are responsible for all Nigeria's problems. Thats simply BS. There is enough blame to go around all the tribes.

This is hilarious to say the least

@Ajanlekoko
Theoretically, entropy bars you from creating your losses system

Kobojunkie:
We only got a bit of the session to work. Whatever the reason for the interjection, I do not believe Malema had to go as far as he did. He could have simply asked what that information had to do with what he said. Not descend to the level that he did. People get interjected every day. This man went too far.

Again this is not a BLACK ON WHITE issue. This is a racist with anger issues loosing his temper when he ought not to.

Its obvious Malema has issues and simply seized the opportunity to make some racist remarks. I just dont think the reporter was innocent.
Won't be surprised if there was an history between Malema and that reporter/bbc/white journalists.
Whichever it is quite entertaining

The other video though is quite offensive

Kobojunkie:
What? Journalists can't make say anything anymore?

This incident has nothing to do with BLACKS AND WHITES. This is about Malema's reaction to a journalist who happens to be white. I have liived in Sandton and so see nothing in him stating that Malema lived in Sandton. The reaction from Malema was uncalled for, and rude.

What has Malema living in Sandton got to do with him asking MDC to stop campaigning from Sandton and go back to Zimbabwe?
The interjection was irrelevant and simply mischievous.

Malema's response was a bit overboard but I think the reporter was also being mischievous with his interjection.

More detailed report

Malema’s outburst against a BBC journalist

In an astonishing attack, the ANC Youth League’s president today called a BBC journalist a “bastard” and an ”agent”.
Julius Malema was addressing the media on the ANCYL’s recent visit to Zimbabwe. He criticised Zimbabwean opposition party the Movement for Democratic Change, saying they should go back to Zimbabwe instead of working from offices in Sandton, Johannesburg.
British Broadcasting Corporation journalist Jonah Fisher interjected, saying Malema lived in Sandton — unleashing a barrage of insults.
“This is a building of a revolutionary party and you know nothing about revolution so here you behave or else you jump,” he said, speaking from Luthuli House in the Johannesburg CBD.
Fisher attempted to respond, but Malema did not relent.
“Chief, can you get security to remove this thing here?” he requested of staff present on Luthuli House’s 11th floor, the venue for most party media briefings.
“If you are not going to behave we are going to call security to take you out. This is not a newsroom this, this is a revolutionary house and you don’t come here with your white tendency. Don’t come here with that white tendency, not here, you can do it somewhere else.
“If you’ve got a tendency of undermining blacks even where you work you are in the wrong place.”
To which Fisher replied: “That’s rubbish.”
Malema then asked him to leave saying: “,  Rubbish is what you have covered in that trouser, that is rubbish.”
“You are a small boy, you can’t do anything. Bastard, go out, you bloody agent.”
The BBC declined to comment when contacted after the briefing.
The attack was preceded by a general one on the media by Malema.

Full Video: http://www.sowetan.co.za/multimedia/video/malemajournalist.wmv
Source: http://www.sowetan.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=1130339

Time to put those farca boys in their place. MP must not make any stupid selection choices.

arkinses:
Lol, just had a wierd thought. If Man City, Tottenham, Aston Villa and even Everton like, make dem pack themselves for the 4th position, Europa league winners have an automatic UEFA Champions league qualification. Chai! I laugh in Terry G,      lets go win it boys

Who dey deceive u? Europa League winner only get automatic qualification into the Europa League group stages!
UCL spot? na yam? I laugh in kolo

I want benfica to score and extra time

paddy_lo:
No me neither, i dont think First bank is in trouble, besides oil prices have rebounded and will continue to do so till perhaps 2012,
The issue is the hypocrisy of Sanusi,in asking for immediate and full provisioning for other banks(in effect making them insolvent),while giving first bank a yr to do it

Now he has apparently seen the foolishness of his action,and the CBN is now proposing new Provisioning regimes for banks ranging from 1 - 3yrs(see my link in 2nd post above)

Would that require that the loan be non-performing for a year?

paddy_lo:
CBN Proposes New Loan Provisioning Regimes


In a bid to adjust to the current economic realities necessitating lending to the critical sectors of the economy, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has proposed for banks new loan provisioning regimes and a framework for collateral adjustments for lost facilities. The board of the CBN is expected to approve this proposal – which will lead to a longer period of loan provisioning – when it meets in the middle of this month in Abuja,  . . . . . .
http://www.proshareng.com/news/singlenews.php?id=10096

Basically Sanusi has finally seen the light?, He now believes in Forbearance and giving the Banks a longer period to provision for bad loans,
How come he didnt realize(what every central banker should know),that if u squeeze the banks too hard, u shut down the economy of any nation,
U cant go about asking banks to do huge provisioning,which reduces available capital, and expect banks to then turn around and increase lending

seen the light? You seem to be confusing issues.
There was a provisioning scheme in place that the banks were not adhering to. The CBN made them comply and resulted in some banks being insolvent. Should Sanusi have enacted a review and back dated it?

honeric01:
yes o, i believe even if this match end up not favoring us, we still have other matches left and i foresee Madrid dropping points.

Have you looked at the schedule? Barca still have away games at Espanyol, Villarreal and Sevilla, while Madrid are hosting Valencia and Bilbao. Still active in the CL, Barca are more likely to drop points than Madrid. Who ever wins this game wins the league IMO. A draw gives Barca the edge on paper, but Madrid has the true edge cause of the schedule.

Azuka.O:
@ Biina, I guess you are from the North.  For the first time in Nigerian history, I ve seen a Northerner that agreed that there was a 'pogrom' in the North against Igbo people in 1966/67. Unfortunately, rather than condemn the killing of about 50,000 civilians in cold blood as mindless and wicked, you are trying to justify it. I hope such fate does not befall you and your family in future so you will understand the pain and horror of it.

I was not trying to justify the pogrom, but rather trying to describe the events that got us to the civil war. I do not believe the pogrom, nor the 1966 coup was the genesis. While I condemn the pogrom (as a tribe shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of individuals), I also do understand where the North seem to be coming from.

Ojukwu refused to accept a junior as head of state because the Gowon and co said that their coup was not a coup. So Ojukwu told them if the military hierarchy had decided to remove the head of state, the most senior officer in the army (Brig Ogundipe) should take over. Simple. Ojukwu still accuses Gowon as being the initiator of indiscipline in the Nigerian Army.

That is nonsense coming from ojukwu. Indiscipline in the army was engendered by the 1966 coup, when Ifeajuna & co killed their superior officers. Asking mutineers/coup plotters to honor seniority is just being silly. Murtala & co can claim not to be coup plotters on the grounds that they didnt want to take control of the government, but they cannot deny being mutineers, and that means they have no respect for seniority.

You people still accuse Ojukwu of declaring Biafra for personal reasons but u said During the first round of pogrom, the Igbos ran back to the east, but Ojukwu sent them back to the north guaranteeing their safety. What does that tell u? Can someone who did not believe in Nigeria send his people back to Nigeria to be murdered again if he had initially wanted to opt out of Nigeria? After the first pogrom, Gowon assured Ojukwu that it would not happen again; so Ojukwu told Igbos to go back to the North. And they were massacred again.

Ojukwu himself was a divisive force in the government by failing to recognize Gowon. How did he think a divided government would be able to maintain order. He should have let those Igbos stay in the east until the government was united and coherent. Its amusing that Ojukwu would not recognize Gowon as a leader, wanting autonomy in the east, but would take Gowon's word as being sufficient to guarantee the safety of his people in the north. What evidence did he have that Hassan Katsina, Governor of the North was on the same page?

Why is it so difficult for you people to acknowledge that the cause of the Civil War was the senseless massacre of innocent Igbos in the North? In Rwanda, those who massacred their neighbours during the Rwandan genocide have confessed and the nation has moved on. Why is it so difficult for Northerners and other Nigerians to accept that they showed unmerited wickedness to the Igbos by the pogroms of 1966/67?

That is jumping into the middle. The pogrom didnt happen out of thin air, and the actual war didnt start till after the declaration of Biafra

Igbo officers executed a coup in Jan 1966 and killed mainly non-Igbos. That was bad - very bad. Northern officers had a countercoup in July 1966 and killed Ironsi (head of state) and other Igbo officers, and took over power. Was that not justice enough? What was the business of civilian women and children with the coup that they had to be killed in cold blood several months after the coup? Have you ever heard any Igbo man complain about the killing of Ironsi in a revenge coup?

Akintola, Balewa and Sardauna (and the people in his house) were all military personnel? It is typical that retaliations are worse than the initial attack. The north tried to make sure that there would no reprisals from the igbos. The civil war resulted from bad judgements from several individuals in key positions, but the masses paid the price.

If Igbos were killed in their thousands in a country they had championed independence for; and they were assured to return and were still killed in their thousands, was that not a clear sign that they were not wanted in that country? And if Ojukwu and Gowon signed an accord at Aburi but Gowon came back to rescind on his promise, was that not a clear signal that he could not be trusted going forward? Lets tell ourselves the truth please.

The killings happened in a particular part of the country and only reflected, at the least, laxity on the part of the government, and possibly complicity. It is difficult for a divided government to protect its citizens. The igbos were safe in the east and should have remained there. Ojukwu sending them back worsened things.

RE: SANUSI’S FIRST BANK: THE MAN’S HYPOCRISY AND DOUBLE STANDARDS

http://www.firstbanknigeria.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Hs6PU3BCKLY%3D&tabid=419&mid=1529

Onlytruth:
Did it really matter what the Hausas thought? What did the Yorubas think of the whole thing? Were they not the other major tribe in Nigeria? That is the main question. If the Yorubas didn't share the same thoughts, there is nothing the Hausas could have done about the situation. You can't kill 50,000 on mere hunch or suspicion or thought. And if Yorubas were at least neutral, the Hausa could not have fought and won the war alone.

Like I said before, WHAT DID THE YORUBAS THINK? WHAT DID THEY DO?Don't make this look like Hausa only thinggy.

So it is more relevant what the yorubas thought than the Hausa's that carried out the counter coup?
The Yorubas were  embroiled in their own local political conflict (operation weti e), and while the likes of Akintola were allied to the north, Awolowo was on the other side (from prison), and Ademoyega was one of the coup plotters.

You almost fooled the gullible with your indignation about Murtala's face on our currency after committing mass murder against same so-called "fellow Nigerians". God has already paid him in kind. As for Ojukwu and his refusal to turn Nigeria upside down by allowing a less qualified officer than himself to take over, where have we been for the past 43 years? Answer: in the gutter! For the very same reason. A cart does not pull a horse. It doesn't work that way. That is why other countries that were peers with Nigeria 40 years ago have all dusted Nigeria. Malaysia and Asian tigers come to mind.

There was coup in which the highest ranking office in Ironsi had already been killed by junior officers. Asking coup plotters to recognize seniority is stupidity. If they had any regards for seniority, they wouldnt be coup plotters.

The ONLY TRUTH in your whole piece! Gowon created 12 states to undermine Biafra and the East. Food for thought. At the end, state creation brought unprecedented division in Nigeria and destroyed the nation. Today, a Yorubaman from Ogun state will struggle to get a job in Ondo state.

Typical. You try to remove the speck from the eyes of others while ignoring the sawmill operating in your own eyes.

How can it be an implicit declaration of war when the north was the first to threaten secession a year earlier, but only turned after it completely seized power? Who declared war on the north for threatening secession? If the north seceded, would there have been war? So, how could Biafran secession imply war? Your twists and turns are typical! Na wa o!

The north never declared an independent state. Ojukwu did.
Anywhere in the world, the declaration of an independent state within a sovereign nation without the consent of the incumbent government is an implicit declaration of war.

There goes the typical signature of the group of people who handed over Nigeria to mass murder and mediocrity for 43 years! Today they are yapping all over the place for "restructuring". Idiots!

That the guy ran away is a fact. You are free to approve of his action, as I am also free to disapprove of it. I have no respect for anyone that would lead millions to their deaths and not give up his own life for same cause.

Hear it loud and clear: OJUKWU WAS CARRYING OUT THE WISHES OF HIS PEOPLE - THE EASTERNERS!  If you don't like that historical fact, go hang! No amount of twists and turns can change that.

Again, you are free to immortalize Ojukwu in your mind, as I am free to classify him as another bad leader that exploited his people for his selfish interests.

I think the first main seed of distrust between the North and Igbos was sowed when Azikwe tried to impeach the Sardauna/Balewa led NPC in 1964. Coupled with subsequent allegations (by Ejoor and Gowon) of Banjo and Ojukwu planning a coup, the January 1966 coup, and the subsequent events of an Igbo senate president handing over power to an Igbo military officers, all seem to confirm the suspicions of the Hausas that the Igbos were intent on seizing power.

Ironsi's not prosecuting nor punishing the coup plotters simply wiped out any element of doubt that was left in the northerners and they decided to carry out their own justice. They simply wanted revenge and seem they didnt want the possibility of the Igbos retaliating and thus they tried to wipe out as many of the Igbos as possible. The  excuse given by the northerners was that if they didnt act quickly enough, the Igbos would finish the job that they started in January 1966.

Gowon didnt lead the coup. Murtala (always irritates me to see his face on a currency like if ws a national hero )and danjuma were more prominent actors. The coup plotters wanted to secede and the need to keep Nigeria one was mostly in the interest of outsiders. Gowon's ascension was supposed to be a concession on the part of the core northerners, who felt that Gowon being from the middle belt and a christian provided a middle ground. they were not willing to accept a pure southerner talk less of an Igbo. But there was a  problem right from the start, Ojukwu refused to recognize Gowon as being the head of state and supreme commander in chief on the grounds that Gowon was a junior officer to him.

The lack of coherence in government, and likely complicity on the part of the northern soldiers, led to continued killing of the Igbos. The Aburi accord failed to resolve the issues, as Gowon reneged on the agreement (claiming he had implemented everything in the 'spirit of the agreement' and accused Ojukwu of using the media to further his ulterior motives). Gowon created the 12 states, said to be a bid to undermine Ojukwu, and Ojukwu subsequently declared biafra. Gowon initiated a police action into biafra annd Ojukwu responded in kind, and the civil war began.

My issues with Ojukwu stem primarily from my evaluation of him being intelligent and not one to make too many mistakes
1. Ojukwu should have known the consequence of refusing to recognize Gowon and not resigning from the Army
2. During the first round of pogrom, the Igbos ran back to the east, but Ojukwu sent them back to the north guaranteeing their safety. There was no basis for the guarantee. If he hadnt sent them back, the second round of pogrom would have likely been avoided
3. After the second round of pogrom, the Igbos that had returned were more or less safe in the south east. Declaring Biafra was more in response to the creation of the 12 states than the pogrom.
4. He must have known that the declaration of an independent state within a sovereign nation was an implicit declaration of war, and that Biafra was in no position to win the war. The amount of ground they lost in the first few weeks was testament to this. Ojukwu knew where the war was headed.
5. Even when the war had gone south, he was inviting journalists and trying to use the suffering of the people to get political sympathy from the international community
6. At the end, he ran away. He wasnt man enough to die for the cause he had sent so many to an early grave for.
7. His execution of Banjo & co hints to key officers disagreeing with the way things were going.

Some feel that Ojukwu was carrying out the wishes of his people, I suspect he used the opportunity to try and achieve his personal ambition and simply played the other leaders.

AjanleKoko:
biina, hush!
I go soon call Lyon for you

dis no be champions league. We have won 2 of the last 3 la liga.
I no fit talk too much, Saturday go soon come.

khanye:
Do you remember this biina?

https://www.blaugranas.com/media/galeria/25/1/5/1/5/n_f_c_barcelona_especial_barca_madrid-205151.jpg

dat na last season. stop living in the past.
Saturday go soon come.

The two defences are useless  

Like Haliburton, dem go soon sweep am under carpet