MIKOLOWISKA:
your fada is the puppy

Are you a flat head

No, ain't no flatty I'm imagining the look on your pained cone headed face

MIKOLOWISKA:
what did they do.paid loans that were never used.given in bad faith

What's your messiah doing? Secure loans that we barely know what he is doing with them? Just in 2 years, he has beaten the loan records held by the monterous military regimes. Baba abeg hide your face

hatchy:
Wike(d) please where are the projects executed in a Rivers State you are claiming to have executed?

A state that earns so much from federal allocation,13% oil derivation and over 2 billion monthly IGR can only boast of patching the PH- Aba road and empty leisure park while the Governor gallivant every weekend to Europe to watch European league.The state budget is under secrecy and the state house of assembly under his ampit.

Though Amaechi is not a Saint but Wike cannot surpass his achievements in areas of infrastructural development, good governance and accountability.

Where's your aboriginal State?

Okoro ur cousin deserves one
You know what I mean, don't you?

The establishment and the media cartel force these demons on us... Once the media starts refurbishing maybe three criminals, you're compelled to succumb to the dilemma or waste your vote on a perfect but unpopular candidate... That's one of the dangers of capitalism

hardywaltz:
How much did GEJ save?
How did he meet in the External reserves when he stumbled into power ($45billion) and how much did he leave in the reserves when he was booted out of office ($28 billion)?
How much was he able to save in the SWF he GEJ & NOI created?
Abegi we know the drunkard who had zero will power to save..

I bet, had Buhari maintained that pace Jonathan took or did better, you wouldn't have conjectured these sophistries to give that demonic Buhari a saint look. Anyway, an average APC e-rat is gullible enough to sink that integrity apothegm of his pay master, the sanctimonious assays, smh

Evidence of state failure... These ones do not have any atom of confidence in the state again.

LionDeLeo:

Real cock and bull story.

But watch how shildren of 8 roaming with akamu as brains will start sucking the balls of the storyteller.

You don't need to be reasonable, just tell them Buhari did this or that, you automatically have same status as shuku akobe ala mumu.

Really sucks to be that terrible, honestly.

Your mind is conditioned to favour Buhari even in the most controversial issue.
Btw, the article begins with sentiment and ends with melodrama

I knew it was a simulation... Now that the Oshiomoles, Soyinkas, Bakares et al have gone into hiding, all is set for the new dawn - 200 per litre

Both Buhari and my governor Ben Ayade are two sanctimonious and rapacious fraudsters... I would rather nominate another Governor - Etubom Ambode for the award

Common sense is indeed not common. How could he be that easily dragged into the mud? Oh, I heard governance in Kogi is an exclusive for underage dickheads

Is it about taking power back? You're in for a shocker if you don't present a befitting candidate with feasible agenda and track record

Where did you lift this from? Btw, mention me when he wears boxers to Aso Rock gate with a placard protesting deregulation and fuel hoarding

One reason I respect Obasanjo and Sister Ngo... Buhari is an abysmal failure. His thoughts and actions are malignant. These misfortunes are too much to be fortuitous. Say no to economic terrorism... #Buhari_must_go

How many times times did he carry placards protesting against the removal of fuel subsidy and official hoarding?

Doyin2:


Rubbish commentary.

So Ghana with a christian president,also voted out of religious sentiments?


128 countries voted for justice:

West Jerusalem for Israel

East Jerusalem for Palestine.

Are you aware that majority of inhabitants of East Jerusalem,are Palestinians?

Being neutral is injustice.What then is the essence of UN?

And you think those supporting Israel and USA are not being sentimental.

Sentiments can be ascribe to all positions,whether you are for ,against or neutral.

But the question is:

Which of the sentiments reflect justice most?

I think we should leave emotions out of Int'l politics. We should be pragmatic as a nation if we must get it right. "What's our gain" should be the buzzword behind every foreign policy move. Hans Morganthau was right about the issue of morality in Int'l politics. It never real, alway a facade - a means to an end! US has the veto power and she used it. Her decision remains. What's Nigeria's gain? Fvcken good country reputation? If we must call the shot, we take it slowly....Murtala Muhammed would have done it had it been this easy. Gracias!

Jibril659:
yet no success was recorded, thousands died, millions displaced, communities conceded to bh insurgents. Keep deceiving yourself.

The only difference between then and now is Northerners' cooperation and propaganda. Otherwise, nothing has really changed....

Congratulations to General OBJ. He's been a scholarly type with disposition to self development....Unlike others whose only acumen is the acclaimed Integrity

They should come to Calabar where these rapacious oil men are selling fuel for 170 Naira per liter

Honestly speaking, Buhari is trailing the Jonathan’s administration both on the positive and negative aspects...'still waiting for the novelty of this administration

Why is Jonathan still a threat years after relinquishing power? Something must be wrong somewhere

Commendable

yarimo:
In Eedris abdullkarem voice, pdp JAGA JAGA everything SCARTA SCARTA

PDP should go and die! In APC, we have both the ruling and opposition party packed together

It is a fact of History that protracted wars always run at loggerhead with the intended objective which such wars seek to achieve. Such campaigns are insidious, baleful, and malevolent in all ramifications to the actors involved. Of greater damage is the preponderant contingent whose hitherto frightening and cryptic capability is perpetually denigrated and rendered susceptible to attempts at external coercive diplomacy and Schadenfreude. Thus, from the era of “The Art of War” to the “On War” and even contemporary debates, strategists have rebuked protracted campaigns for according to Sun Tzu, “there has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited”.
The most potent of the threats that befalls a nation-state in the 21st century involved in a protracted campaign is not external, but within – the hazard of negative public opinion. A classical instance here is the American 20 year escapade in Vietnam and the concomitant nature of events that culminated in its 1975 withdrawal. The point worth noting is that by the mid 1960s, the war had assumed two fronts: that against the Vietcong and that against the American public opinion. While the hard approach was exclusively bequeathed the Vietnamese, tremendous lies often euphemized as “war propaganda” was utilized at home to cage and control vicious opinions. The logic thus is, if you can’t win the war swiftly, win the people, so as to sustain the much coveted momentum.

Seemingly, the gargantuan Nigerian armed forces has been perpetually harassed by an underdog - the Boko Haram militant group since 2009. The dreaded militant group has astonished onlookers and analysts by defying the superior force unleashed it by the Nigerian army and thus, surviving the government’s onslaughts to this day. From empirical evidences, one could rightly surmise that both contingents are weary. On the nature of the war: guerrilla? irregular? unconventional? of whatever preferred appellation, cognomen or sobriquet, the fact remains that the war against Boko Haram has become a protracted one.

Retrospectively, by the mid 2014, the Nigerian forces were plummeting and descending on the Boko Haram militants like whirling wind in coordinated and uncoordinated sorties. The result was apparent as the militants retreated to the crudest of the interior. With swift consummation and persistent assault it is presumed, the terror group could have been annihilated. However, the then government undermined the power of negative public opinion and its effort and achievement was summarily discredited and slowed down. The resentment engineered by the attempt at winning the war and losing the people was so virulent that stakeholders from the affected region hyperventilated for the trial of the then Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Azubuike Ihejirika at the International Criminal Court for war crimes. Also, the obstinate nature of the President Jonathan’s led administration to negotiate and secure the release of the abducted Chibok School Girls at excruciating and security jeopardising terms meant it cherished winning the war than winning the people. The Jonathan’s government intransigence on maintaining the hard approach than digging deep into the dialoguing alternative transcended it a terror personality to the vantage of a myriad of opinion bigwigs and modulators. At a point in time, President Jonathan’s monotonous lines of reactions and condemnations of major attacks became appalling to some groups who resented and queried the virtue in every move he made, especially on ‘bloody Sundays’. Thus, on hostile opinions, the Jonathan’s administration was castigated beforehand in anticipation for failure, even at moves it was yet to make. Alas, in a seemingly state of paranoia, the administration realised the imperative of telling the people what they want to hear, be it fact, factoid or sophistry and garnering a favourable public opinion by vehemently combating the war on the two fronts. Unfortunately, twilight was nearand the administration had to bow out with neither a victory on the war nor the people.

Upon assuming office in May, 2015, the succeeding administration, led by President Muhammadu Buhari made it one of its core objectives to mesmerize and influence opinions and to a large extent infiltrate and tilt opinion levers through a versatile and sophisticated media team of which a commentator has christened the “Buhari Media Crew” (BMC). There was henceforth a synergy between efforts at winning the theatre and that of winning public opinion. The sophistries and lies churned out became too monstrous and “tangible” to be euphemized. Nevertheless, it achieved its goal of muzzling negative and logical questionings and criticism and graduating daily, a plethora of simpletons and gullible populations who care less about the war situation. Aside the BMCs infiltration of the media hubs, there is a coincidental passivity on the part of news media to cover and feed the public with the latest developments in the theatre, unlike before. Information now filters through and in most cases, from social media and foreign media channels. It appears the war against terror has been won already, but at the theatre. In fact, President Buhari seldom releases statements to condemn terror attacks. It is not coincidental; history has taught him that to wield a positive public opinion, you have to abstain from monochromatic lines of reaction over seeming incessant attacks.

Interestingly, President Buhari, in an onslaught against negative opinion had announced and in fact declared the insurgents in the northeast “technically defeated” by December, 2016. Yet, data concocted by “NewsWeek” claims about 2,306 persons suffered casualties to the terrorists’ conundrums in the troubled region by the first quarter of 2016. The President again, declared the insurgent group finally decimated on December 24, 2016. But this time, not without a package to tame the public sword. That package was regalia, insignia and paraphernalia of assumed fleeing Boko Haram echelons. The purpose of this choreography was achieved for it took less than anticipated time for the media to ‘orgize’ on the feat while other opinion stalwarts rammed the presidency with felicitations and compliments on the job well done.

The second declaration of this veneer of a victory against Boko Haram and the frenzy that ensued was repercussive for it culminated in the introduction of a new word into the lexicon of Nigerian army’s press register. Henceforth, whether major or minor engagement, press releases by the army deliberately describe Boko Haram’s rampages as perpetrations by “remnants” of the defeated group. The psychological effect of such word and its application cannot be overemphasized as the ‘man’ in the public and media became mannequins on subsequent pillages by the terror group. Even the accidental nuking of the Rann IDP camp in January attracted subtle condemnation. When it appeared the “remnant” metaphor was becoming stale and drudging, it was imperative that the public be milked in a more tantalizing paradigm. This manifested in the May 6 release of 82 Chibok School Girls. From a BBC source, the bargaining chip was 5 Boko Haram generals and €2million. Of course, the terms for the release of the girls could be argued to be at variance with the objective of defeating the terror group but it is incontrovertibly at concordance with the goal of winning positive opinion for the government has got to win either (the war or the people) or both!
Recently in June 3, the army announced the instantaneous surrendering of a mammoth figure of 700 Boko Haram militants. Yes, 700! Your guess is as good as mine; such feat is only legendary but situations have crafted it that the government has got to tell the public what they’d love to hear for it is dangerous not to fight the two fronts. The events characterizing the aftermath of the attack of the NNPC oil experts in July, 2017 divulges how ready the government is at being in terms with the public. What would make the army release a statement claimto have rescued a group of persons it did not than goodwill and political meekness? The war against negative public opinion in this protracted struggle against terror militants is so raw and rugged and it has been won already. No degree of attack or mistake as it stands can deform the counterterrorism strategy of the current administration. No abduction or kidnap could instigate or replicate the Chibok School Girls’ reaction. Twice the administration has defeated Boko Haram, severally it has killed Shekau, and severally thousands of militants have surrendered. These are shenanigans, not for the theatre, but for the masses. At least, unlike his predecessor, the Buhari’s government has not lost it all, he has mastered the art and act of modulating negative public opinion, hence, the actual war can be protracted for all it cares!

Charles E. Ekpo is the
Founder and National Coordinator of the History 4 Nation-Building Initiative
The Initiative can be reached at history4nationbuilding@gmail.com

Source: https://mobile.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1992623964350498&id=1982456592033902&_ft_=top_level_post_id.1992623964350498%3Atl_objid.1992623964350498%3Apage_id.1982456592033902%3Athid.1982456592033902%3A306061129499414%3A2%3A0%3A1509519599%3A-3847577765442640149&__tn__=%2As-R

BUHARIjubrin:
The idiot should keep on lying.... Fulani's will soon send him to his grave

He's an elder statesman and should represent and defend his Reconciliation and Amnesty stands by his statements. It's very ignoble to lie against a dead friend

Image Credit: http://dailypost.ng/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/ojuku-gowon.jpg

[b]“People, Politics and Power” [/b]is the appellation of the AIT’s television programme which gave General Yakubu Gowon the platform on Tuesday October 24, to give some primary insights on the conundrum that befell Nigeria from 1967-1970 under his watch. Rather than utilize the opportunity to heal wounds as an elder statesman and the architect of the R3 (reconciliation, reconstruction and rehabilitation) façade, he left millions of Nigerians aghast by ‘lying’ against the person of the Late Gen. Ojukwu.

To an avalanche of average Nigerians, the Civil War which brought the Nigerian polity into cataclysm between 1967 and 1970 remains a truculence with a myriad of tales, myths, legends and even parodies. In fact, the civil war remains one of the historical themes that are shredded in secrecy, leaving room for assumptions, counter-assumptions and ‘official sophistries’. Forty-seven [47] years after, minute or no document is yet to be declassified for even the ‘most irrelevant’ would be a Pandora’s box.

It could be recalled that the violent reactions to the “Unification Decree” [Decree No. 34] of May, 1966 and the aftermath of the July 29, 1966 ‘counter attack’ had exclusively tackled the Easterners with casualty rate running in over 30,000 (Forsyth, 1977) by the eve of the 1967 escalations. This had forced the Eastern Governor Lt. Col. Ojukwu to, in equanimity, take some radical decisions which pitched him at loggerhead with the Gowon-led Federal Military Government. Nigeria had become so hostile for the Igbo that any meeting in Nigeria outside of the geographical delineation of Eastern Nigeria was perceived as a decoy for further slaughtering of the Easters. Lt. General Ankrah provided the needed good office which culminated in the Aburi meeting of January 4/5, 1967.

[center]“The whole world is looking up to you as military men and if there is any failure to reunify or even bring perfect understanding to Nigeria as a whole, you will find that the blame will rest with us through the centuries”[/center]

– that was the opening speech made by Lt. Gen. Joseph Ankrah, the then Ghanaian Head of State, at the Aburi convention called by the former to address the gridlock between Lt. Col. Gowon and Lt. Col. Ojukwu, in January 4, 1967. Also present in the meeting were Comm. J. E. A. Wey, Col. R. A. Adebayo, Lt. Col. H. U. Katsina, Lt. Col. D. A. Ejoor, Maj. M. Johnson, Alhaji K. Salem and Timothy Omo-Bare and five civilians from the Federal and Eastern divides.

In the Tuesday AIT programme, General Gowon gave Ojuwku a warlord figure that was bent on seceding.

“We went there [Aburi] to restore the trust of our country. If we were working together, anyone with conscience will assuage the feelings. But Ojukwu thought otherwise. He had in mind all along, based on what happened to his people in the North, that secession was the only way out”

, Gowon claimed!
The above vituperation by General Gowon is highly tendentious of his outcome of the Aburi meeting which must not be swept under the rug for posterity concerns. It should be noted to all and sundry that the proceeding of the Aburi meetings, to avoid misrepresentation such as this, was on a complete stenographic record and a tape recording.

In the recordings, Ojukwu had stated his position utilizing a metaphor thus,

“it is better that we move slightly apart and survive, it is much worse that we move closer and perish in the collision”

. That clearly was a call for a confederation not secession. Both Katsina, Gowon, and Adebayo accepted the proposed regional autonomy. In enthusiasm, Col. Adebayo vented for the

“repealing of those Decrees that were passed after 15th January, but I think we should revert to what the country was as at 14th January, 1966, that is regional autonomy”

.

After painstakingly studying the recordings of the Aburi Meeting, Max Siollun in his book “Oil, Politics and Violence: Nigeria’s Military Coup Culture” submitted that

“the fulcrum of the agreement of Aburi was that each region would be responsible for its own affairs, and that the FMG would be responsible for matters that affected the entire country”

(pg.158). Ojukwu did not go back and tell lies. He played the recordings of the Aburi proceedings which crystallized situations the way they were. If the recording was a lie, Gowon should have disclosed the truth; a feat he could not achieve, not then, not during the quagmire, not even now. Also, Lt. Gen. Ankrah, who was neutral, would not have wondered why Gowon rescinded on the Aburi agreement for both parties had rejoiced and toasted champagne in celebration of the understanding. Could it mean that Gowon did not realize how much he has given out? Would the “inscrutability” of the concept of regional autonomy to Gowon make the agreement a lie? Why would Gowon delay announcing the outcome of the meeting if not for the rebuke and ‘superior’ argument he was confronted with by various detractors? If truly he had fever as he claimed, why didn’t his aids or the other members of FMG assist in publishing the agreements since tension was already exacerbating?

Why then would Gowon lie against the dead, even before a plethora of evidences against such brazen lie?

Little wonder that aside the dubious “Nigeria 1966” there is yet to be an official document disclosing what happened, how it happened, why it happened and when it happened? The hypocrisy embedded in the Gowon’s ‘no victor no vanquished’ apothegm is highly disgusting to ardent of Nigerian political history. Rather than being a pledge for reconciliation, events and comments such as this, that have transpired overtime have proven that such an epigram was a caricature for while the federalist pursued a ‘just cause’ the antagonists, as it appears, were mere ‘rebels’ and ‘criminals’; it never mattered the grievances, secession was a criminal act and the Easterners deserved the atrocities unleashed them before the war, during the war and even after the war for “Ojukwu’s lies caused the war”.

Who would have thought that a ‘custodian of the civil war tradition’ like General Gowon would mount the airway and cast blames and aspersions 47 years after his acclaimed ‘reconciliation’ and amnesty? Gowon’s vituperation reveals the true nature and position of the cosmetic amnesty he offered the Biafrans and explains why even until now, the mistakes and constitutional challenges that instigated the inferno then is still perpetuated today.

If history must be revisited, it must be relevant to the present. Obviously, distorting the past and lying against the dead is not in any way honourable nor relevant to the present. What is the lesson in Gowon’s statement other than the fact that Nigerian elites are not yet at peace with the East over the ‘3-year gyrations’ of the late 1960s?

When next Gowon appears on the airway, he should narrate what led to war and how he tackled the contradictions during his 5 year reign after the war. He should also address the spill-over effects of the war and the best model and pathway Nigeria can chart now based on the mistakes made in the past. This is the best thing an elder statesman like him could do having been a part and parcel of the mistake that defines today’s complexities that characterize the Nigerian polity.


Charles E. Ekpo is the
Founder and National Coordinator of the History 4 Nation-Building Initiative
The Initiative can be reached at history4nationbuilding@gmail.com

https://web.facebook.com/History4NationBuilding/posts/1991068034506091