₦airaland Forum

Am actually amazed that many posters are not dismissing these proposals as just another conspiracy theory as they have done in the past whenever i have raised the dangers posed by the IMF to nigeria's economy.

Looks like the IMF are up to their old tricks with nigeria again, if nigeria devalues the naira this will mean that we will be exporting oil at a grossly reduced price, conversely it will also mean that we will be paying more for imports, long term effect will be increase in food prices, reduction in profits for domestic businesses and a rise in unemployment for the average nigerian.  If this goes ahead there will be mass riots and chaos, nigerians do not need their living standards to plummet any further, enough is enough.

^^^^^

so true thamesmead, im also waiting for the US govt to start clamouring for the people of saudi arabia to rise up against the  Saudi Royal family who head one of the most brutal dictatorships in the middle east.

^^^^^^

very well put Ibime, knowledge as they say is power.

I like the way you summarised Castro's rise to power.

I am totally in awe of Castro as he made enormous sacrifices for his people.

The only people who hate him are the criminal cabal who run the US govt and members of the corrupt Cuban ruling class who were forced to flee Cuba when their benefactor - Batista was overthrown in 1959.   These shameless traitors all fled to Miami and under the instruction and guidance of the US govt began hatching plans to murder Castro, fortunately for Castro most of these plans were foiled by Cuban intelligence operatives.

Its on record that the Cuban intelligence uncovered a total of 638 known plots to murder Fidel Castro since 1962 all with the backing of the CIA !!!!

Just to go back to what you said earlier about the fruit company that used to own half of Cuba - i beleive the name of the company was United Fruit,   - its now known as Chiquita,  this company also owned 85% of the land in Guatemala which it used to grow bananas, the former president of Guatemala a guy by the name of Arbenz - another left wing intellectual tried to redistribute the land , and give it back to the people - unfortunately, he was toppled by the CIA and replaced with a dictator.

I agree with you about Castro's decision to toe the communist route, i beleive he did not start out with the intention of becoming a communist, he merely wanted right past wrongs and end the poverty, misery and exploitation imposed on his people by the elite and the US govt , but he was forced to run to Russia because of the imminent threat of invasion from america.

If russia had not placed missiles in  Cuba, the US would have invaded the country and Cuba would have ended up like Haiti, Grenada, Guatemala, Chile and all those other latin american countries now being run by US backed dictators.

I therefore think that the placing of missiles in cuba was a very good tactic and this is why i am in support of nations having access to nuclear weapons as they can be used as an effective tool for negotiation and non aggression treaties.

Notice how the US govt had no option than to enter into a non aggression treaty with Cuba as soon as they realised that there might be a retaliatory attack against them from the  soviet union?

The US govt is a criminal organisation with no moral compass.

JeSoul:
Well, Castro is 100% right on that.

More interesting to me in all this is the fact that world-class tyrants and dictators and human rights abusers such as Castro and Dinner-jacket who themselves have squashed and severely punished similar movements in their own countries, all coming forward to "praise" the revolution in Egypt . . . hmmmm

Castro is definitely not a tyrant, dictator or human rights abuser - he liberated his country from a US supported tyrant and dictator known as Batista who allowed the mafia to run gambling and prostitution rackets all over Cuba.  Castro got rid of all of these parasistes who were destroying Cuba and succeeded in alleviating poverty and  exploitation of his people at the hands of Batista and the US govt.

Under the Batista regime US multinationals were allowed to take over 90% of the land and use it to grow sugar   the Cuban people were not allowed to own land and many were forced to work on the US owned sugar plantations for a pittance.

Before Castro took over black cubans faced terrible racial discrimination and many could not afford to get an education, the few who did, could not get jobs as they were condemned to a life of second class citizenship in their own country.  Castro overhauled all of that and provided free education for all Cubans irrespective of race up to university level, Castro also introduced access to free medical care to all of its citizens, a feat not even acheived by the US, a world super power!! 

Castro also was responsible for helping many african countries fight to liberate themselves from colonial and aparthied rule.  He sent 300, 000  troops to Angola to help the MPLA who were fighting to rid themselves from Portuguese colonial rule while the US govt which claims to be defenders of democracy funded and assisted the UNITA the opposition group which was backed and funded by the racist apartheid regime of south africa!!!
Needless to say Castro's Cuban troops DEFEATED and humiliated UNITA.

Castro  has been behind the struggle of every african nation to rid itself of white domination and exploitation, Cuba sent medical doctors and various other professionals to various african countries to assist in treating the sick and wounded during various liberation struggles (Congo, Angola, South Africa)

If anything Castro is an inspirational figure and a symbol of great courage, selflessness and the triumph of good over evil.

chaircover:
My thoughts exactly. They marry the man for his money. Do they think the man is stupiid enough not to know that is the reason she married him? He then treats her & her family with little respect.

It is the same money he used to catch her is what he will use to catch a younger and firmer model in the university campus. It is then you hear them consoling themselves "at least he comes home at night" " he sends me to Dubai" " he bought me a jeep" . . . . .

Then they go out one fine afternoon and bump into the Mr Poor that they dressed down 5 years ago and discover that he is now even richer than their so called moneybags husbands.

I agree, 17.5K is not a lot, but with a capable, industrious and devoted woman beside him coupled with his ambition, his handwork, his optimism & the true genuine love that they share for each other the17.5k can go a long way. We are also talking about a country where one phonecall or presenting one business card can open numerous doors

IMO, the girl should have made it quite clear from the beginning that the guy wasnt good enough for her rather than carry on with the relationship. Why wait for a proposal before dropping the bombshell? I think that was just plain wicked.

i agree, in many ways i can understand where women in nigeria are coming from, there is a lot of poverty in nigeria and many nigerian women are looking for a way out of it, however a balance must be struck, its either women in nigeria choose to go for a man who doesnt have much and who may never have much but will just keep ticking along with the basics and who is more likely to treat you well, respect your family and make you feel valued and loved or go for the rich guy who in the majority of cases will be accompanied with a massive ego and abusive behaviour, lets not even begin to talk about the crap the woman will have to put up with from the man's family.

Women have to make a decision about what is important to them in life - money or peace of mind.  Do you want to be treated like a piece of furniture or like a human being?

By the way everything in life is a gamble therefore there is no guarantee that things will always go according to plan.

Just to add - marrying a rich man (especially in nigeria) is no guarantee of happiness, in the west i can understand the attraction because if the marriage fails - the woman is entitled to a share of the man's property,especially if she has kids for him.  In nigeria its different - if the marriage fails the woman leaves with nothing, at the end of the day the thing that shoudl be uppermost in the woman's mind is - Am i going to be happy with this person, will he treat me well, does he respect me and my family.  If the answers to any of those questions are negative - i would advise the woman not to bother.
In my opinion its better to have your self respect and sanity rather than be a glorified pro.

As long as your friend is hard working and is able to provide the basics ie food and shelter for his prospective family then i think that shows that he is on the right path.  A life partner should be your best friend as well as your spouse.  

Tell your friend not to get married until he finds a woman who is genuinely interested in him as a human being, has the same values as him and is not looking for a meal ticket  ( i know not very easy to find )

Slavery gave rise to capitalism:

The slave trade was vital to the new capitalist world, writes Charlie Kimber

Slavery was not a one-off event – a single horror confined to the 18th century or simply to Africa.

It was one of the products of the rise of capitalism, and in turn it gave a great boost to capitalism’s growth. The black historian Eric Williams wrote that slavery “fertilised the entire productive system”.

Profits derived from the “triangular trade” accounted for between a quarter and a third of the entire new investment made by the British ruling class in the years around 1770.

The slave plantations were crucial sources of cheap raw materials for emerging industries, as markets for British goods and as a source of considerable profit.

A big portion of the money made from slaves was invested in industrial production – in canals, railways, ships and new productive techniques.

The firm of Boulton & Watt, Britain’s most important maker of steam engines, was dependent for a period upon slavery.

Colonial conquest was also important. The historian Robin Blackburn writes, “The profits of the plantations and the slave-based trades probably constituted the largest single source of imperial gains. But Ireland and India greatly swelled the revenues available to Britain’s ruling class.”

Slavery was a fruit of the first wave of capitalist globalisation. It was a central part of the process which Karl Marx called “the primitive accumulation of capital”.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=10966

[quote author=Jenifa_ link=topic=599690.msg7726541#msg7726541 date=1297653202]well i'm in the US. so I got mostly the US perspective of the slave trade.
didn't learn much about British involvements

but of course it all makes sense. duh jamaica
I just never thought of it because of the way I was taught.

when I think slave trade, I think southern US, cuba, brazil, haiti etc.
I'm not thinking of st lucia, st. kitts or t&t or jamaica etc.


but thanks for the lessons. lol[/quote]The british built their economy on the slave trade, it was the slave trade that laid the foundation for their industrial revolution, as the cotton, sugar and tobacco cultivated by african slaves in the carribean, south america and north america was then exported to places like bristol, liverpool and london to be converted into manufactured goods. 

British Corporations which made their money on the back of slavery :

barclays bank, (banking and finance)
Lloyds of london, (insurance)
Tate and Lyle (sugar exports)

The above corporations were invovled in loaning of money to slaveowners
handling monetary transactions of slavery;
insurance of slaves and slave ships;
using slave labour to grow sugar

Contrary to popular opinion the british were not in favour of the aboliton of slavery, they actually deviced many means to avoid it:

Within days of the 1807 anti-slavery act coming into force, British slave traders were already deploying a number of ruses to circumvent it.

Ships were built in Britain and, if the builders felt they could evade the eyes of the law, they were fitted out for carrying slaves. Often it proved more convenient for the vessels to sail with the goods to be traded for slaves, and receive their “special fittings” en route.

Those who benefited included the banks, insurance companies, shipbuilders, sail and later engine makers, and the manufacturers of goods exchanged for men, women and children in Africa.

Slave-owners in the Southern US states, Cuba and Brazil, and the owners of slave-worked plantations and mines, all continued to make large profits from this illegal trade.

Britain even reduced the import duties that imposed penalties on slave grown sugar in the 1840s.

That led to an increase in the exportation of the enslaved from Africa to Cuba and Brazil, as slave grown sugar became much more competitive.

It was cotton that led to the phenomenal economic growth of Lancashire and the north west of England, particularly Liverpool and Manchester.

Some 80 percent of it came from the Americas, where it was grown and packed by slaves.

Compared with the campaign against slave grown sugar, this complicity appears to have worried very few people.

Were there just too many people working directly and indirectly in the import, export, and manufacturing of cotton?

Were those making their millions from it just too influential?

Prior to the 1807 act Liverpool had pleaded that it would collapse without the open trade in enslaved Africans.

In fact it grew, and much of its growth was still based on the “nefarious trade” – which would only start to diminish in the 1860s.

The trade finally stopped when the enslaved in Cuba and Brazil were emancipated in the 1880s, by which time up to 20 million Africans may have lost their lives as a result.

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=10962

the truth of the matter is that Obama's (CIA) envoy was sent NOT to convince Mubarak to step down but to play for time UNTIL the americans could find a replaceemnt.

Unfortunately for Mubarak the opposition against him was so extreme that he had no choice other than to step down despite support for him to remain until September by the US.

^^^^^^^^

I see that you have preferred to post an article from the washington post which is a newspaper partly owned and controlled by super rich jewish american oligarchs who have a vested interest in disinforming the public because of their links with the zionist state of israel. 

I note that despite posting their version of the story you still missed some glaring issues which i highlighted in the article that i posted.

First of all does it not seem odd that the person they sent to give Mubarak a "gentle nudge" in the right direction was the son of a former CIA spy who was responsible for bringing down a democratically elected president in Iran 50 years earlier?

A man who in the past was responsible for getting Egypt to attack a fellow arab country in order to secure US economic interests in the region and who was responsible for negotiating the implementation of harsh austerity programmes on the egyptian populace following instructions from the  IMF.

Also in your version of the story - Mubarak talks about stepping down AFTER finishing his term not immediatly - this should indicate to you that the plan was for him to remain UNTIL they could usher in a new US approved puppet.

Again your story talks about Mubarak giving reassurances that he would not seek reelection - Unless Mubarak was on a suicide mission there is no way in hell he would consider running for re-election after the overwhelming opposition that his people have shown for him since 25 January, therefore i think it is an insult to the intelligence of the egyptian people for the americans to say that they sent an envoy to negotiate such an issue.

Obama's Envoy to Egypt Frank G. Wisner II   is a member of a well known CIA family, son of one of America's most notorious spies, the late Frank Gardiner Wisner (1909- 1965), the mastermind  behind the CIA sponsored coup which toppled the government of  Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran in 1953.

A mysterious American Envoy, retired US diplomat Frank G. Wisner II was rushed to Cairo on January 31st at the height of the protest movement for top level meetings with Hosni Mubarak.

Frank G. and Hosni were close friends, going back to late 1980s, when Frank G. Wisner was ambassador to Egypt (1986-1991).

Wisner served as ambassador at the height of the Gulf War. He played a key role in the negotiation of the 1991 agreement which committed Egypt not only to participating in the Gulf War against Iraq but also to a package of devastating macro-economic reforms under the guidance of the IMF.

This 1991 agreement was directly dictated by Washington and instrumented through the US embassy in Cairo.   

Frank G. Wisner was sent to Egypt on the explicit request of president Obama "to negotiate a resolution to the protest movement".

His discussions with Egypt's president were a prelude to Mubarak's  speech on Tuesday February 1st in which he confirmed that he would not resign as president until the holding of new elections scheduled for the Fall of 2011. In a public statement, Wisner confirmed that Mubarak should be allowed to stay in office.

The meetings behind closed doors between Wisner and Mubarak were part of an intelligence agenda. Washington had no intention of pushing towards a resolution of the protest movement. Its priority was regime change. Wisner's mandate was to instruct Mubarak not to to resign, thereby contributing to triggering an atmosphere of social chaos and uncertainty, not to mention the deliberate destabilization of Egypt's monetary system resulting from billions of dollars of capital flight. 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23113

Kobojunkie:
Let us not play WORD GAMES HERE . .  . you were WRONG to say the US was involved at all in the protest. I am so in awe, right  now of the group of men/women who planned the protest. They actually DOCUMENTED IT ALL . . .  THE PLANNING TO IMPLEMENTATION of their SCHEME . . . Imagine that !!!! It was all DOCUMENTED.

Nobody is playing word games here - i am simply clarifying what i said to you earlier.  Whether you want to accept it or not the US and their intelligence services have links to some of the protesters, this does not mean that the protest is fake it just means that it has been infiltrated by elements with a hidden agenda.  As i said earlier you need to broaden your horizons, the US govt is run by highly intelligent and sophisticated minds - its not for nothing that they are currently the most powerful nation on the planet.

They was no mention of any backing from the CIA -- matter of fact, America was barely even mentioned through out the documentary.  That you claim a meeting that happened back in 2009(with more than one activist group  by the way) as reason for this shows you are seriously clueless and desperate to link any and everything. Of course protest groups would want to meet with Obama after his DEMOCRACY FOR EGYPT speech at an Egyptian University, but it is not believed that the same democracy group back in 2009 were in this.

You reason like a child, who in their right mind would openly admit to having links to the CIA, especially if that same group were trying to win the support of their own people

If anything, there backing was from some junior members of the Egyptian army . . . Please go see it rather than coming in to push baseless stories around and poo-pooing the work of these brilliant egyptians. JEEEZZZ

Stop running with RUMOURS and learn facts. The Funding of the Egyptian Army was as a result of a contract signed with Egypt and is the reason why the Egyptian Army, yes, the same army the people of Egypt are proud of, and TRUST more than those in Government, EXISTS.

Really so the US decided to spend $1.5 billion dollars per annum  of US taxpayers money just to back up a contract with a foreign nation?  Why would they do that, in every contractual relationship each party derives something beneficial out of it -  are you telling me that the US stood to gain nothing from giving the humungous sum of $1.5 billion dollars to the egyptian govt every year?
 
Apart from what i have stated as america's need to have egyptian leaders in power  who support   neo liberal economic policies there is the added factor that Egypt has been cooperating with the US for years in the torture of people labelled by the US govt as "terrorists" ie individuals  who are perceived as a threat to US national security - that definition is very broad and many people are said to fall within  it.

People who fit into that interpretation can be transported to countries in which torture is legal.  Egypt is a major participant in this  programme which is known as Extraordinary Rendition.

The US funding the army has NOTHING to do with funding OPPOSITION. The US, in all this DID NOT, I REPEAT, DID NOT step in to STOP the protesters or INTERFERE in their getting their way. Stop pretending it did. If anything, it is revealed that Turkey called for Democracy, and the US interacting with Mubarak demanded that the people be heard in all this, even with the 1.2 billion dollar annual funding of the EGYPTIAN ARMY. Also, please go research how that money is actually spent and what countries actually benefits from it. Also, last news, there are no plans in the works to cut off that fund, even with the overthrow of Mubarak.

Did you hear me say that the US stepped in to stop the protesters - the US govt is too clever for that - that is not how the operate, no, what they did was openly show support for the protesters, BUT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS THEY WERE WORKING WITH THEIR STOOGES AND INFILTRATORS AND LOOKING FOR  A WAY FOR THESE PEOPLE TO HIJACK THE REVOLUTION AND TAKE IT IN ANOTHER DIRECTION.  That is the way they work, that is what covert activity is all about,.

Also you say i should research how the military aid was spent, i dont need to because during one of the clips i watched of the protests , there was one particular clip in which some protesters were shown keeping tear gas cannisters with the logo: " MADE IN THE USA" emblazoned on the sides, as souvenirs.  The tanks, F16 fighter jets,  tear gas, rubber and live bullets being used by the Egyptian army were all bought from the US with the military funds given to it by the US.

AjanleKoko:
@OP,
It was actually Bukola Saraki that did that, not OBJ.
I hear some states are considering leasing land to some countries in the Middle East for farming purposes; there sin't anything particularly wrong with that. We're not utilizing the land well enough anyway. Even in Lagos where large tracts were ceded to bogus families for supporting the incumbent Tinubu government, they've not done anything with the land rather than try to sell at exorbitant prices to developers.

Not that there's no room for improvement though; these government functionaries should push for reforming the obnoxious Land Use act, and try to see how we can get land utilized via public-private sector vehicles. That's a more realistic approach than just distributing land for the sake of land itself. Our economy needs to finance housing for our population, provide jobs to the employable workforce, and also other amenities.

Of course, it's in the black man's DNA to 'own' land; even in medieval Europe, the standard for wealth was land ownership. But owning tracts of land is not wealth in itself; that can be clearly seen in the case of Zimbabwe. At the end of the day, the land has been distributed more equitably, but the country has significantly dropped in foreign exchange earnings on the export of cash crops like tobacco and cotton. The new land owners plant yams, cassava, potatoes, crops that cannot bring the country wealth, and cannot necessarily expand in production. Essentially, Mugabe has taken his country back two hundred years, to the pre-slavery era, when he could have gone the SA approach and forced the white farmers into some sort of BEE-style arrangement - you want to work the farms, go ahead. But we own half of everything, and you will still pay tax to the government.

At the end of the day, it's not about blind hatred of the white man.

thanks for your comments.

After watching the attached link what struck me about this arrangement was the fact that this sort of offer could have been made to indigenous people, the govt could have assisted them with subsidies similar to subsidies that the americans and europeans give to their own farmers and this would then mean that nigeria would not have to rely on importing dairy and other food products from europe and america.  I  just find it really odd that we can invite in white farmers to do somethihng that our own people are quite capable of doing.  Where do all our graduates from veterinary and agricultural colleges in nigeria end up?  surely dairy and cattle farming would be an area that they would excel in.

Another thing i discovered is that we import so much food ($1.8billion annually)  apparently we spend $150 million per month on cereals like rice, wheat and barley, - cant these be grown by indigenous people in nigeria?

My focus is on growing food for domestic consumption rather than growing of cash crops for export.  We have been tied into this harmful cycle of producing cash crops and exporting raw materials  without caring about domestic issues, this is economic policy which serves the interests of foreign multinationals and not the indigenous people.  we sell them cheap raw materials and cash crops  and in return we buy their expensive manufactured finished products - this is an extremely destructive cycle that needs to change.

Kobojunkie:
Oh!! You did watch that, did you? In all you saw in that documentary with the organizers telling you of their stories and their backgrounds and their own mentors, pray tell, where in that did the organizers mention that they got backing from the US? Please I await your answers cause I watched the very same documentary, and wished you all did too.

Kobojunkie, you need to broaden your horizons and read more broadly, try and understand american foreign policy and it will help you understand issues like this a bit more.  There is nowhere in the world that any group openly comes out to declare to the world that it is involved in covert activties to destabilise or undermine its own govt in collaboration with a foreign govt.  Try reading up on the CIA and how they operate around the world.

Does it make sense to you that a group of people who are engaged in covert activity with a foreign intelligence organisation will go on national tv to declare openly to their own people that they are being backed by the same country who have kept them in bondage for the past 30 years?

Kobojunkie:
^^^ Just so I understand where we are here. Are you saying then that you do not agree with most all of what @Deejay20, and @Cap28 have posted so far on this then? Cause my understanding is they have been trying to insinuate that the US has been the one pushing/backing the protesters.

Kobojunkie please read and understand posts before commenting on them - hear is what i said in my previous post:

cap28:
deejay 20 you are on point as usual, america doesnt really want Hosni Mubarak out, however in the face of overwhelming opposition they have no choice, in order to ensure that Mubarak's successor does not turn out to be someone hostile to their economic interests ie neo liberal capitalism they set up and fund various think tanks or "progressive" groups comprising westernised egyptians like Freedom House (the progressive youth movement who were in the pics you put up there with Condoleeza Rice and Hilary Clinton) Freedom House has links with the US intelligence services and is funded by the US govt.  I have heard that this movement played a very major role in organising the protests , this is not to say that the revolution itself is not genuine it is very genuine - the concerns of the people are legitimate, however there are some elements within that revolution that may try to seek to hijack the original purpose of that revolution and move it in a different direction - a direction which is more in line with what their financiers (the US) want ie a continuation of the same neo liberal economic policies which have caused the economic hardship that the egyptians are challenging.  I just hope this does not happen, I think this is why Mubarak was instructed by the US not to step down until september, i beleive the americans are hoping that they can use the interim period to try and find a replacement puppet, again i hope the egyptians see through their plan.

Please re read the highlighted sentences - at no point did i say that the entire protest was being backed by the US, what i did say though was that there are certain elements within the protest who are being backed and funded by the US, they belong to groups like Freedom HOuse which is a US sponsored group with links to american intelligence (CIA) these people are seeking to take the movement in a direction which is diametrically opposed to what the majority of egyptians in the country want - they have been put there to ensure that whoever takes over from Mubarak will not be  hostile to the US's neo liberal economic policies.

The americans were funding Mubarak to the tune of $1 billion dollars per annum in order to protect him from overthrow from opposing groups within Egypt - now that they have found overwhelming opposition towards him do you think they will let the egyptians choose someone who is hostile to their economic interests in the country?

A few years ago, i think in 2005, Obasanjo leased some land in Kwara state to some white zimbabwean farmers who were kicked out of zimbabwe by Mugabe. These farmers were granted leases of up to 25 years to grow various food crops and breed cattle, they seem to have done well out of it so far and many of them have branched out into the production of other food products such as yoghurts, ice cream and fresh milk.

What i want to know is this, why hasnt the nigerian govt given more incentives to indigenous nigerians to go into the production of food? Surely it would make sense for this activiity to be carried out by indigenous people rather than allow foreigners into our country to adopt an activity which should be run and controlled by the indigenous people.

Does it make sense to have allowed people who have a track record of exploiting africans the right to come into our country to make even more money? If these people could treat black zimbabweans so badly and dispossess them of their own land in their own country what stops them from trying to do the same to us?

I would appreciate views on this.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umj8-U2sg4E

archive:
Change the record

I'll change the record when you face up to reality and stop pretending as if what happened in the past has no bearing on what is happening to the black race today.

archive:
I'm not sure what you're talking about but I was referring to all of those posters that continue to cry and moan about something that never affected them directly nor (if I'm not mistaken that posters on here are not black american) affected their ancestors. Forget about 'black man' solidarity. It's a vain and pointless concept. African NATIONS are what matter now. Learn from the past but use it to work on the current. Instead of solutions, all I read from some are these tired arguments about how the black man is being suppressed. We don't help ourselves, and that is the plain truth

The fact that you as a black person had to leave your own country and go abroad to acheive a decent standard of living indicates that you along with many african people ARE directly affected by africa's past legacy ie colonialism and exploitation of our economies by the west.  If you and a european person with the same qualifications were to go to live in any part of africa today to look for the same type of employment , the european would have access to better employment opportunities than you, the same principle would apply if both of you were to go to australia, canada, south africa, far east asia and the carribean - there is nowhere in the world that any black person has an equal chance with a european - even in africa - why do you think that is the case?

You say black man solidarity is a vain and pointless concept - funny you should say that because whites dont think that at all - thats why they set up NATO, the IMF, the world bank WTO etc, they know unlike you that real power comes from collective organisation and thats why they control how you and i live in this world, whether you want to accept it or not you do not have the same opportunities in this world as your white or even asian counterparts.  Whites unlike blacks prefer to identify with their own people, you only have to travel outside europe or north america and see how expatriate whites always stick together and network amongst their own people, ive been to countries in africa where whites live in gated communities and do not interact with the indigenous people, i also have friends who've worked in the middle east and its the same thing there too - white expatriates stick together and prefer to be around their own people, how come its only blacks who don't think its necessary to maintain solidarity with their own?

Since you beleive that black solidarity is pointless - id like to hear what your own solutions are.

AjanleKoko:
It's amazing that the US, a country with such a dark recent history (Jim Crow, slavery, the KKK, etc) should be spoken of so glowingly by Africans.
Simply amazing. Black people definitely have a lot to learn about life.

You are right, i find it puzzling myself that africans speak in glowing terms about america given its racial history. 

Its really bizarre, i mean these are people who enslaved our ancestors, brutalised and degraded them and denied them their humanity.   Today people of african descent or origin  in america continue to experience discrimination and are treated as inferior to the white race because of this terrible legacy and yet africans love america - i dont understand it.

amazonia:
America is blessed, because the society knows, that all rules and Laws are made
to protect them. And these laws and rules are always under close scrutiny to make
sure they are serving the purposes intended. Amendments are made when necessary.
to increase the benefits of the rules to citizens.

America is a country run by a small and powerful elite who put their own interests before the interests of the people. The original constitution was drafted by members of the american ruling class - ie the slave owners, merchants, financiers and politicians  - these people's aim was not to provide a democratic system of govt but to protect their own interests and perpetuate themselves in power.

Everything that the american people have today ie workers rights, women's rights, voting rights was not given automatically by the elite but had to be fought for by the people.

Over the years changes were made to the constitution but this was not done voluntarily by the govt but only when people rose up and fought the system  - a good example is the blacks fighting back in the 1950s and 60s  to end the JIm Crow system - if america was a country that beleived in equality, fairness and justice there wouldnt be such a huge gap in terms of education and living standards between white americans and black americans.  The whites already had a 400 year head start over blacks and it will take many generations for that gap to narrow, furthermore whites are in the majority, occupy the majority of postions in govt and are in control of economic policy - it is therefore unlikely that they will create a system which will weaken their own position and strengthen the position of blacks.

DeeJay20:
Nice to here from you cap28,

I just found out that Zbigniew Brzezinsk is President Barack Obama's mentor, hmmm

I shall post the info soon.

In the mean-time Mubarak has resigned but the dude handling the transition is not
totally a "Hands free" Leader,

Just see Clip

[flash=200,200]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTKeuRhaIU4[/flash]

Hi Deejay, yeah i know about Obama's link with Brezinski, Brezinski mentored Obama when Obama was a student at Columbia university and i think Brezinski was a Professor of Political Science at the same institution, he was instrumental in Obama's rise to the top.

Another person that Obama has links with is Henry Kissinger former National Security Adviser under Nixon in the 70s.

See an analysis of Obama's background by american historian - Webster Tarpley:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MouUJNG8f2k

DeeJay20:
Sorry Dude! I dont do Conspiracies, i do Hard facts. And conspiracy just means "secret/hidden agenda's".

Dude you need to really look at things objectively.Knowledge is widespread in todays world, so deceit
has gotten more sinister,

And you live in America, so you must understand that the USA always Hedge's their bets.

Or dont you know that?

Its not about Initiating/controlling every event, but about steering it to your own desired cause.

Here's a quote from one of the USA most influencial National Security Advisors in Modern times

[The] major world powers, new and old, also face a novel reality: while the lethality of their military might is greater than ever, their capacity to impose control over the politically awakened masses of the world is at a historic low. To put it bluntly: in earlier times, it was easier to control one million people than to physically kill one million people; today, it is infinitely easier to kill one million people than to control one million people.

Zbigniew Brzezinsk:
National Security Advisor under President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/opinion/16iht-YEbrzezinski.1.18730411.html

deejay 20 you are on point as usual, america doesnt really want Hosni Mubarak out, however in the face of overwhelming opposition they have no choice, in order to ensure that Mubarak's successor does not turn out to be someone hostile to their economic interests ie neo liberal capitalism they set up and fund various think tanks or "progressive" groups comprising westernised egyptians like Freedom House (the progressive youth movement who were in the pics you put up there with Condoleeza Rice and Hilary Clinton) Freedom House has links with the US intelligence services and is funded by the US govt.  I have heard that this movement played a very major role in organising the protests , this is not to say that the revolution itself is not genuine it is very genuine - the concerns of the people are legitimate, however there are some elements within that revolution that may try to seek to hijack the original purpose of that revolution and move it in a different direction - a direction which is more in line with what their financiers (the US) want ie a continuation of the same neo liberal economic policies which have caused the economic hardship that the egyptians are challenging.  I just hope this does not happen, I think this is why Mubarak was instructed by the US not to step down until september, i beleive the americans are hoping that they can use the interim period to try and find a replacement puppet, again i hope the egyptians see through their plan.

Excerpts from Harold Smith's unpublished memoirs, 12 March 1992 where he details how the British press collaborated with the British govt to keep nigerians in the dark:

Professor John P. Mackintosh wrote a book of 650 pages and concluded that, if the Northern politicians could command their own Region, the North could rule Nigeria in perpetuity as the North had a majority of the seats.

This was played back to me by a retired journalist on behalf of the Guardian when I tried to get that newspaper to take an interest in how Dr Azikiwe and Awolowo had been cheated of power by the British. The Guardian has no interest in British machinations overseas, treason, election rigging or whatever. They want to know nothing, but if pressed further, they will say that they know it already and anyway it is not important.

There are many other mysteries here, and I happen to know quite a few of the answers as I was closely involved in the British plots against Zik and Awo. An additional mystery is why the Guardian prefers to bask in its ignorance. Actually, the Guardian is not so naive. They already know what happened in Nigeria, but if they admit it they will feel obliged to publish. They play the same game as the British Government and are presumably on the payroll. Geoffrey Taylor of the Guardian is coy and will not reveal what his experience is of Nigeria. Walter Schwarz was there during the Civil War in the late 60's and before that was employed on the best informed and prestigious magazine, 'West Africa.'


The 50% Northern fix was only stage one of the master plan. Stage two was to keep the Southerners out of the North and to collect the maximum legitimate vote for the NPC. What that vote was we shall never know, because the win was essential and the numbers were juggled when and where necessary. Stage three was to destabilise Zik and place him under the control of Okotie Eboh. This was the stage at which I came in. It was my job to guarantee the safety of Okotie Eboh's Warri seat. My colleague Charles Bunker's job was to funnel large sums of money from British multinationals like Shell and BP to Okotie Eboh, who used the money to keep the bankrupt NCNC on the road. (He also funnelled vast sums to a Swiss Bank through middle men in the City of London). Okotie Eboh was the vital link man between the NCNC and the NPC. Stage four in 1962 was to destroy Awolowo, and the final stage was intended to remove Zik from the largely ceremonial post of President and scatter the NCNC to the wind.

The British plot to destroy Nigerian independence was responsible for the deaths of up to two million young people in the bloody civil war which was the direct consequence of this evil. The Guardian would not listen to me in 1960, and they therefore have good reason not to come clean now. These people were only journalists and not the sort of people one would expect to be responsible or to aspire to a sense of honour, therefore we should not look for contrition. The paper was once great but has long been heavily infiltrated by the SIS and the CIA. Its radical stance is largely due to these agents who find this cover most protective.

Nigeria is controlled by a Northern-based military regime as it has been for the past thirty years. There has been no true democracy in Nigeria and there is no certainty we shall ever see it. Sadly, we will never know whether Awolowo might have been the great leader Nigeria and Africa so desperately needed in the 1960's; a handful of grubby hacks helped see to that.

Harold Smith - 12 March 1992

http://www./harold_smith/harold_smith_frm.htm

Harold Smith goes on to give a detailed analysis of how nigeria's independence was nothing more than a sham:


"When I suggest that the British Government meddled with the democratic elections in Nigeria, I write as an authority. I was chosen by his Excellency the Governor General, Sir James Robertson, to spearhead a covert operation to interfere with the elections. The laws of Nigeria were a sham and largely window-dressing to conceal, not mirror, the reality of where power lay. I drafted some of those laws. The Factories Act I drafted was applauded by African leaders as the greatest piece of legislation to be placed on the Nigerian Statute Book.

"The National Provident Fund that I pioneered introduced a practical and simple worker savings plan for the largest African nation. Some major institutions, in themselves worthy and popular, were flawed and corrupt, as were the Employment Exchanges and Trade Testing Organisation. I was in charge of the administration of those bodies and revised the codes of procedure under which they operated. These structures did not become corrupt after Independence; they were rotten before the British handed over power to a small and elite group of Africans, who were for the most part thoroughly alienated from their native soil and their compatriots. If they had not been, we would have handed over to a more pro-British group."

"The new leaders and civil servants were for the most part Britishers with black faces. And they continued to rule as the British had ruled, espousing fine ideals and pragmatically wheeling and dealing and fixing to keep the show on the road. It must be remembered that British colonial power was autocratic, dictatorial power. The British did not practise democracy in Nigeria. They talked about it as a device to legitimise the transfer of power. There was a need to legitimise a new sovereign state. But the British to the end were fixing and cheating, and of course educated Africans were fully aware of this. These were the dictated terms of the sham Independence".

http://www./harold_smith/harold_smith_frm.htm

Harold Smith, a former colonial officer in pre independent nigeria had this to say in his unpublished memoirs about britain and their activities in pre independent nigeria:

"The supreme betrayal of a new sovereign nation of which I write took place when the British retreated from Nigeria, the African giant, in l960. The last great act of the British Government was to hold democratic elections in l956 and l959 to choose the leaders who would inherit supreme power over this vast territory. It seemed that the Nigerian people did not want as its national leaders those educated Nigerians who had campaigned for freedom from British rule. For the election results gave majority power to the leaders of the then backward and feudal North, who had worked closely with the British and were sad to see them go. The British were well satisfied with the election results, though many Nigerians were baffled at the outcome."

"What I now reveal in the following chapters is that the British Government interfered with the elections so as to achieve Northern domination of Nigeria. The consequences of this abandonment of the rule of law by the British Government is recorded in the turbulent and bloody events which were to produce the Biafran Civil War which grasped the attention of the world due to its daily presence on every nation's television screens. The pictures of starving children and homeless refugees will not soon be forgotten. Since the fraudulent handover of power to the Northern leaders in l960, not only has there been this bloody civil war which caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Nigerians including many women and children, but five heads of state have been assassinated and there have been three military coups".

"I was one of the British officers serving on the headquarters staff in Lagos, chosen by the Governor General, Sir James Robertson, to mastermind the covert action to rig Nigeria's elections. This secret operation hatched in Whitehall was of course a gross betrayal of trust by Prime Ministers Sir Anthony Eden and Mr Harold Macmillan. The orders which arrived on my desk from the Governor General before the elections for the Western Regional Government in 1956 were quite illegal and in direct contravention of Nigerian and British law. As a consequence of these illegal orders, I was to lose my career and my health. These orders were not only illegal but also immoral, and I refused to carry them out. I also refused many inducements. The authorities wanted me to promise never to reveal how the British Government rigged the results of Nigeria's General Elections"

http://www./harold_smith/harold_smith_frm.htm

SEFAGO:
Wow so cap28 you are igbo?


No wonder you love to complain about victimization by white people, white media, asian people, asian media, green people, green media against black people

complain, complain, complain, whine, whine, whine!!!!



I wish I had so much time to do that

You remind me of those slow witted africans during the times of the transatlantic slave trade who thought white men were kindly benign saviours, - they were usually the first ones to be shackled, manacled and thrown into the holds of the slave ships - one day you will wake up but not before you have a very rude awakening!!!

Katsumoto:
You see a discussion about the Civil war as Yoruba vs Igbo; I see it as Nigerian history. Or was it only Yoruba and Igbo that fought the civil war? I am sure Hausa, Fulani, Tiv, Efik, Ibiobio, Kanuri, Bini, etc all fought in the Civil war. My interest in these types of topics is my damn business.

You are free to open a thread extolling the virtues of whomever pleases you. I will however, restrict my participation to correcting factual inaccuracies, lies, and distortions to the best of my ability. At least I have never made an incendiary comment about any ethnic group or race; the same can't be said for you.

Actually i find quite a lot of your posts concerning the nigeria - biafra civil war to be quite tribalistic.
If i were to take a quick survey of the discussions that you spend the most time on i am very sure that i will find that you spend a disproportionate amount of your time on discussions which focus on igbo vs yoruba issues, you obviously have some unresolved issues regarding igbo people, but hey im no shrink , seek help if you feel the need for it.

If it were that your intention was simply to clarify issues surrounding the nigerian civil war your views wouldnt be so crassly biased in favour of your kinsmen, people see through deceit and yours is very glaring, you can dress up your sinister intentions as much as you like but your devious agenda is all too obvious in your smirking, snide and one sided "analysis".

By the way you are not an authority on the nigerian - biafra war - so spare me the "im here to correct factual inaccuracies" - you are just like the rest of us on here -  trying to distinguish fact from fiction.

fstranger3:
And that was from your Ibo brother, MAX SIOLLUN


Did I burst your bubble?

I am so sorry.

sorry mate - you didnt burst my bubble:

"Thomas Umunnakwe Aguiyi-Ironsi was born to Mazi Ezeugo Aguiyi's[1] Ohuhu-Igbo family on March 3, 1924, in Umuahia-Ibeku, present day Abia State, Nigeria. When he was eight years old, Ironsi moved in with his older sister Anyamma, who was married to Theophilius Johnson, a Sierra Leonean diplomat in Umuahia. Ironsi subsequently took the last name of his brother-in-law, who became his father figure. At the age of 18, Ironsi joined the Nigerian Army against the wishes of his sister"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_Aguiyi-Ironsi

try and get your facts right for once okay!!

Katsumoto:
Once again, you have your wires crossed. My posts about Ogundipe was in response to OnlyTruth calling him a coward. I was merely defending the record and memory of a soldier. Where did I make derogatory comments about Ironsi? Jumping into the middle or end of a conversation without understanding the context of such a conversation is daft in my opinion.

I don't do comparisons between people or tribes but I will respond if a lie is been told about someone or an event. I have often defended Ojukwu's decision to stand up for Ndigbo but not his decision to go to war. You can check former posts if you want.

BTW, why are you always so emotional and angry?

No need to go on the defensive.  

My post was merely a response to your obvious attempt to crow about the acheivements of Ogundipe - i felt it was necessary to put you in the picture about Ironsi's achievements as well - do you have a problem with that?

You seemed to be basking in the sycophantic praise showered on you by one of your followers and i thought i might as well balance out the facts.

For a man who claims not to do comparisons between tribes you seem to spend an awful lot of time getting embroiled in yoruba v igbo debates in respect of the nigerian civil war, hardly the mindset or actions of a non tribalistic person!!

I am not ALWAYS angry and emotional , i just get irritated when people like you twist and distort facts in order to suit your bigotted agendas.