₦airaland Forum

The Unwritten Constitutional Provision

Rotational Presidency is expedient for the unity of the various constituents of the polarized state of Nigeria,until such a time when every Nigerian will regard himself as a Nigerian who will relegate his ethnic nationality to second place in his the question of his identity. Although it is not enshrined in the constitution,it an unwritten rule which can make or mar the republic. Undoubtedly,the health of the president and question of who succeeds him has shown us that just as an animal cannot run faster than his tail,it has an enormous role to play in the continued existence of Nigeria as a united nation.

Rotational presidency among the traditional tripods of Nigeria then extending later to the minorities will give every citizen of this republic a true sense of belonging and as such evoke the much needed patriotism necessary to bring about a true Giant of Africa,heralding such a time when such separatist agitations of groups like that of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOP) will go extinct.

It is not in the interest of the continued existence of the nation if the other two tripods of the republic dominate the presidency of the country leaving out the third tripod being the Igbos in spite of the failure of these other privileged members of the republic in the past 50 years to bring about meaningful development and progress in the life and history of the nation. Adequate developments and progress if they had being achieved over the past five decades would have pacified the agitation of the Igbos for an answer to “the Ndi Igbo question in Nigerian politics ” as Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni would put it. Nigeria as a developed African nation with all the opportunities to thrive and survive just like African brothers South Africa,Egypt and Angola would have caused the astute and industrious Jewish-like Igbo people to soft peddle on the quest to clinch the top job of the nation but not eliminating it completely.

We are aware that the “black people” question in US politics found its answer in the emergence of Barrack Obama as the first black president of the United States of America. Although the United States has enormous wealth and opportunities for all people and ranks as the country which its foundation for unity is based on the freedom of every man,the black were still denied the top job of the republic until recently. That political irrelevance became a torn in the subconscious of the vast majority of blacks who have over the years contributed their quota to the development of the world's largest and biggest economic and political entity.

Transformation of An Ideology

In time past,I have always wished that Biafra was a success. As a true son of Igbo land,I have always being sympathetic to the cause of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Sovereign State of Nigeria (MASSOP). Albeit I do not buy into their sometimes violent gorilla tactics. Firstly,as a growing child,I developed this mindset that Nigerians do not have any business living together as one nation. The frequent religious clashes in the North targeted at Christians per se by the Muslims,which end up being an avenue of pillaging,unwanton killing and persecution of the vast majority of the Igbos who are wont to inhabit any part of the globe with easy adaptation traits no more less a supposed part of their country.

With little or no provocation the carnage and attacks are constantly perpetuated until in recent times when reprisal attacks have ensued thereafter causing a significant reduction in the frequency of these massacres. I am one of those who cannot on no account live in the any northern city of Nigeria. We are aware that pockets of violence still crop up unannounced at seldom. My argument is that if after several years of co-existence, frequent occurrence of such events reminds us that the various members of this union are not yet ready to co-habit together.

Secondly as an avid and omnivorous reader,I have read several books on Nigeria history. I have also had a good dose of the accounts of the Nigeria/Biafra war and I ended up with the conclusion that Nigeria is a mismatch. The North never wanted Nigeria,it was the southern people especially the south-east who were at the forefront of a united Nigeria and it back fired on them. In recent times calls for a Sovereign national conferenced underscores the need for a renegotiation of the terms of our unity.

However, Nigeria has weathered these chequered history and storms for 50 years and it seems that we are destined to live together or eventually work out our unity as one nation. Furthermore,wars and conflict are outdated and no more desirable. Nations prefer to to engage in economic emancipation struggle to better the lives of its citizens and re-enact economic colonization as the modern norm. The unpleasantness of wars and conflict is made more glaring by the sophisticated nature of present day wars with its attendant undesirable heavy human casualty. The Nigeria/Biafra civil war took the lives of over 3,000,000 people and an attempt at disintegration will prove more fatal given the current population of over 150 million Nigerians.

Undoubtedly the availability of abundant human and material resources and the recent institutionalization of democracy makes it forward thinking to find a solution to the many problems of Nigeria as a united country rather than opting for the “balkanization of Nigeria” in the words of the Zik of Africa which will have many negative consequences. The irony of the matter is that the powers brokers are indirectly working against the unity of Nigeria through their actions,decisions and marginalization of other members of this union especially the Igbos from the presidential seat of the nation.

No wonder the United States who are good at predicting the future in their ingenuity garnered from substantial investment in Research and Development (R&) have predicted that Nigeria will disintegrate on or before 2015.As captured by the present President of the Pan-Igbo political and socio-cultural organisation Amb. Raph Uwachue “the break-up of countries, some very powerful and prosperous, like the former Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, took place along ethnic lines. They are examples that we must eschew in Africa, already over-fragmented.”

These countries did not willingly opt for the disintegration,it came with the attendants wars which consumed lives and properties of these nations. These nations disintegrated because of their inability to address the fundamental questions of their unity and existence. Today we have the seventh country,Kosovo emerging from the former Yugoslavia as a result of the unresolved ethnic differences. If Nigeria continues the way it is going,we are heading for the Waterloo.

The Ndi Igbo Question in Nigerian Politics

“For this clearly discriminatory attitude towards Ndi Igbo, and in sharp contrast with the unanimous national political concession given to the Yorubas over the M.K.O. Abiola case, cited earlier, it is only right to assert that our beloved co-citizens of Nigeria owe the Igbo Nation unreserved fraternal apology for visiting an unjust and sustained capital political punishment on the entire Igbo nation, vis-à-vis their constitutional right to exercise executive power as president bf our country.” Ambassador Raph Uwechue, OFR

“This callous and contemptuous treatment meted out to Ndigbo is in clear and cruel contrast with the compassionate concession, massively supported by Ndigbo, given to the Yorubas in 1999 to field the two Olus- Falae and Obasanjo, for the presumed presidential slot missed by their kinsman, Chief M.K.O Abiola, in 1993. Surely, what is considered political sauce for the aggrieved Yoruba goose, and rightly so, should equally be tendered to the politically famished Igbo gander.” Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni

The statements which I have empathetically captured above reflects and brings to the limelight “the Ndi Igbo Question in Nigerian Politics” which was not only explicitly discussed in an article by Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni but has continued to prop up in various other articles,presentations,media debates and indeed in everyday conversation of the politics of Nigeria vis-a-vis marginalisation and unity of Nigeria. It is evident that the Igbos and indeed the whole of Nigeria gave the Yorubas a “compassionate concession” in 1999 where by the two Olu-Falae and Obasanjo were fielded for the presidential slot. Former President Obasanjo signed a “pact” with north that he would hand over to far-north in 2007 and it came to pass in 2007 that President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua was elected as president to hold the presidency for the north for a possible eight year tenure after which power will once more rotate to the south.

Unfortunately,two and a half years into the presidency of Yar'Adua who is know to suffer a terminal sickness,it looks gloomy that he will be able to serve out his presidency which implies that the Vice-president who hails from the south-south region will take over the mantle of leadership. This present situation of the nation has brought to bear the issue of rotational presidency which many Nigerians chose to brush aside out of ignorance. Certain elements in the north are ready to subvert the constitution and are currently engaging in the unethical and unreasonable acts of mounting pressure on the vice-president to resign, to pave way for a northern who the ailing and dying president will appoint as vice-president before his inevitable resignation ensuring that the presidency remains in the north till 2015. So I now pose these two questions pose to all Nigerians;

[list]
[li]If rotational presidency is not relevant in our polity,why does the north not advice the incapacitated president to resign and hand over to the vice-president who will peaceful continue the leadership of the nation till 2011 elections where he or anyone would be eligible to contest and win the office based solely on merit?[/li]

[li]Why is it any time it is the turn of Ndi Igbo that Nigerians will remember that the president should be based on merit and why don't Nigerians tell it to the north right now?
[/li]
[/list]

In recent times,I joined Nairaland,a Nigeria Discussion forum on the internet. The question of Governor Babatunde Fashola running for president 2011 was presented for discussion and the broad consensus and opinion of Nigerians who contributed was that he should wait until the other tripods finish their terms before he could contest. I personal presented a post titled “support Igbo presidency 2015” which drew support and also criticisms. Many were sceptical about Igbo presidency in 2015 quickly resorting to the fact that credibility should be the yardstick for the office.

That is where the second question above comes into play. The answer to that question lies in the distrust which the rest of Nigeria harbours towards Ndi Igbo. It is stated better by Prof Omo Omoruyi that “the perceived overall aggressiveness of the Igbos in social and business intercourse creates fright among their competitors who tend to gang up against them. However, the core problem for the Igbos today is clearly traceable to the immediate events that preceded the civil war, 1967-70. The military coup of January 1966 is central to it all. It created fear and distrust of the Igbos that are yet to be purged from the national political system.”

Unfortunately the Igbo may not be patient for too long because if eventually after 16 years of democracy 2015 shared equitably between the Yorubas and Hausas,the Igbos are denied of the top position of this nation,we may be forced to reconsider our membership of the republic. A sincere analysis of the polity shows that power will remain in the north till 2015.Even if Yar'Adua is unable to continue in power,in other to avoid chaos and a possible invitation of military takeover of power,the north will allow the vice-president to serve out the Yar'Adua presidency till 2011 elections. But bet me a “pact” will be made between him and the power brokers in the north for him to step aside for a president of northern origin in 2011.

Also recently,the rumour has spread that the north is poised to hold on to power till 2019.How is this possible? The simple logic is that Yar'Adua may not complete his tenure due to deteriorating health. Even if the Vice-president takes over if Yar'Adua resigns,he will do so with the agreement of handing power over to the north in the 2011 elections. Jostling and disagreement over who gets the office of the vice-president on Yar'Adua's resignation has been rife in the media. If any northern ascends to power in 2011,he will want to seek a second tenure in office come 2015 at the expiration of his first tenure. This will surely negate the principles of the “pact” signed between the north and south in 2007.

Given the fact that the present leadership is so obstinate and insincere about implementing good laws for credible election come 2011,there is the likelihood that the northern president who will emerge in 2011 will follow in that footstep of orchestrating fraudulent elections and therefore perpetuating himself in power and that means that 2015 may prove illusive yet again for Ndi Igbo.

So what should be Ndi Igbo take on this envisaged actions? According to Prof Omo Omoruyi,he opined and asserted equivocally that “ Igbo leaders should address the Igbo question.” He went further to state “I once challenged a friend from the south-east to organize a conference devoted to agenda setting for the Igbo nation in Nigeria. The Igbo like other ethnic nationalities should cultivate "the Igbo Permanent Interest in Nigeria. Today, instead of having a permanent interest, the Igbo leaders want to think of who should be labelled the Igbo Permanent Friend in Nigeria and who should be the Igbo Permanent Igbo Enemy. The Hausa/Fulani is called the traditional Igbo Permanent Friends and the Yoruba is the Igbo Permanent Enemy.”

I totally agree with him. It should now be glaring to the large number of astute and industrious Igbo business men and women,elite,leaders,youths and indeed everyone of Igbo extraction that political power in a polarized state like Nigeria is necessary for economic prowess. We can bring about that needed and necessary progress which Nigeria desires and requires which others have failure to bring about. For 50 long years the other ethnic groups have piloted the affairs with no progress to show for it. We know how forward looking and business like the Igbos are.

The issues of implementing the UWAIS report for credible elections and fiscal federalism which Nigeria desperately need will be achieved with an Igbo president in place. The Igbos are the most democratic of all the major tribes in Nigeria. History shows that the system of government of the Igbos which vested the exercise of power on the “Umunna”, a congregation of kinsmen depicts how democratic the Igbos were before the coming of the colonialist who saw it as threat to their government.

Suffix me to say that the clamour for Igbo presidency is a desire to have that true sense of belonging in our nation Nigeria. Rotational presidency is not an alibi for bad governance,corruption and poor performance. There is no explanation for non-implementation of the viable option such as the UWAIS report for credible elections,insincere anti-corruption crusades,implementation of anti-people policies and other failures of this administration. Also I believe that the three tripods of the republic can produce leaders who will lift Nigerians out our present quagmire and predicament.

However,it not only the other tripods of Nigeria that should be blamed for the plight of Ndi Igbo. As Prof Omo Omoruyi will put it “No doubt, the Igbo people themselves have their share of the blame in this unsavoury saga, especially given the individualistic and blindly opportunistic attitude of some Igbo politicians, scrambling for the crumbs of public office in total disregard of legitimate Igbo collective interest within the Nigerian family.” It is time for Ndi Igbo to put aside their “individualistic and blindly opportunistic attitude” and confront this great monster and use that opportunity if realized to bring about reasonable change and progress in the life of the republic.

In this light,I believe that early preparation is necessary for the Igbos to find the answer to the monstrous Igbo question. Clinching the presidency in 2015 will be determined by the position of Ndi Igbo in 2011. It will be in the interest of the region to reach a “pact” with all the all political aspirants who are likely going to be from the north in 2011 to relinquish power in 2015 paving the way for emergence of a president of Igbo extraction. The Igbo have to present a united front regardless of political affiliation.

This preposition above makes it expedient that we harness the power of the internet for healthy cross-fertilisation of ideas in realising that dream of Igbo presidency come 2015.Given that the best social networking site is Facebook with over 350 million active users,with over 10 million Nigerians using the internet,it came be used as rallying point in support of this goal. It is time for the Igbos to get united and the other constituents of Nigeria should as a matter of urgency realize that peace could elude us if one traditional tripods of the republic should as equity and fair play demands should not be cheated out of power.

Join the group “ SUPPORT IGBO PRESIDENCY 2015” on Facebook, a five (5)years project in which your voice will play a role in the realisation of the Nigeria of our dreams. Invite your friends let us extend its frontiers. Obama used the internet and video games in his successful campaign. Also through this medium ordinary Nigerians like us can push for implementation of policies such the UWAIS report that will ensure that credible elections which will be acceptable to all are held in 2011 even if all the presidential aspirants are from the north such that any leader that emerges will be accountable to us all.

Igbo presidency in 2015 is inevitable. It is a realization of the identity of the Igbo man in Nigerian political scene as true members of the union whereas a departure from giving the Igbos a sense of belonging in the words of Obama that “suppression tribal and religious identity can lead to world.” Inadvertently,Ndi Igbo have to be at the fore-front rallying other Nigerians who will share in this vision and aspiration of Igbo presidency. More so, a united Nigeria where political equity and fairness is paramount for the realization of the Nigeria of our dreams is the best option in this present generation.

The Unwritten Constitutional Provision

Rotational Presidency is expedient for the unity of the various constituents of the polarized state of Nigeria,until such a time when every Nigerian will regard himself as a Nigerian who will relegate his ethnic nationality into consideration. Although it is not enshrined in the constitution,it an unwritten rule which can make or mar the republic. Undoubtedly,the health of the president and question of who succeeds him has shown us that just as an animal cannot run faster than his tail,it has a enormous role to play in the continued existence of Nigeria as a united nation.

Rotational presidency among the traditional tripods of Nigeria then extending later to the minorities will give every citizen of this republic a true sense of belonging and as such evoke the much needed patriotism necessary to bring about a true Giant of Africa,heralding such a time when such separatist agitations of groups like that of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOP) will go extinct.

It is not in the interest of the continued existence of the nation if the other two tripods of the republic dominate the presidency of the country leaving out the third tripod being the Igbos in spite of the failure of these other privileged members of the republic in the past 50 years of our independence to bring about meaningful development and progress in the life and history of the nation.
Adequate developments and progress if they had being achieved over the past five decades would have pacified the agitation of the Igbos for an answer to “the Ndi Igbo question in Nigerian politics ” as Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni would put it. Nigeria as a developed African nation with all the opportunities to thrive and survive just like African brothers South Africa,Egypt and Angola would have caused the astute and industrious Jewish-like Igbo people to soft peddle on the quest to clinch the top job of the nation but not eliminating it completely.

We are aware that the “black people” question in US politics found its answer in the emergence of Barrack Obama as the first black president of the United States of America. Although the United States has enormous wealth and opportunities for all people and ranks as the country which its foundation for unity is based on the freedom of every man,the black were still denied the top job of the republic until recently. That political irrelevance became a torn in the subconscious of the vast majority of blacks who have over the years contributed their quota to the development of the world's largest and biggest economic and political entity.

Transformation of An Ideology

In time past,I have always wished that Biafra was a success. As a true son of Igbo land,I have always being sympathetic to the cause of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Sovereign State of Nigeria (MASSOP). Albeit I do not buy into their sometimes violent gorilla tactics. Firstly,as a growing child,I developed this mindset that Nigerians do not have any business living together as one nation. The frequent religious clashes in the North targeted at Christians per se by the Muslims,which end up being an avenue of pillaging,unwanton killing and persecution of the vast majority of the Igbos who are wont to inhabit any part of the globe with easy adaptation traits no more less a supposed part of their country.

With little or no provocation the carnage and attacks are constantly perpetuated until in recent times when reprisal attacks have ensued thereafter causing a significant reduction in the frequency of these massacres. I am one of those who cannot on no account live in the any northern city of Nigeria. We are aware that pockets of violence still crop up unannounced at seldom. My argument is that if after several years of co-existence, frequent occurrence of such events reminds us that the various members of this union are not yet ready to co-habit together.

Secondly as an avid and omnivorous reader,I have read several books on Nigeria history. I have also had a good dose of the accounts of the Nigeria/Biafra war and I ended up with the conclusion that Nigeria is a mismatch. The North never wanted Nigeria,it was the southern people especially the south-east who were at the forefront of a united Nigeria and it back fired on them. In recent times calls for a Sovereign national conferenced underscores the need for a renegotiation of the terms of our unity.

However, Nigeria has weathered these chequered history and storms for 50 years and it seems that we are destined to live together or eventually work out our unity as one nation. Furthermore,wars and conflict are outdated and no more desirable. Nations prefer to to engage in economic emancipation struggle to better the lives of its citizens and re-enact economic colonization as the modern norm. The unpleasantness of wars and conflict is made more glaring by the sophisticated nature of present day wars with its attendant undesirable heavy human casualty. The Nigeria/Biafra civil war took the lives of over 3,000,000 people and an attempt at disintegration will prove more fatal given the current population of over 150 million Nigerians.

Undoubtedly the availability of abundant human and material resources and the recent institutionalization of democracy makes it forward thinking to find a solution to the many problems of Nigeria as a united country rather than opting for the “balkanization of Nigeria” in the words of the Zik of Africa which will have many negative consequences. The irony of the matter is that the powers brokers are indirectly working against the unity of Nigeria through their actions,decisions and marginalization of other members of this union especially the Igbos from the presidential seat of the nation.

No wonder the United States who are good at predicting the future in their ingenuity garnered from substantial investment in Research and Development (R&) have predicted that Nigeria will disintegrate on or before 2015.As captured by the present President of the Pan-Igbo political and socio-cultural organisation Amb. Raph Uwachue “the break-up of countries, some very powerful and prosperous, like the former Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, took place along ethnic lines. They are examples that we must eschew in Africa, already over-fragmented.”

These countries did not willingly opt for the disintegration,it came with the attendants wars which consumed lives and properties of these nations. These nations disintegrated because of their inability to address the fundamental questions of their unity and existence. Today we have the seventh country,Kosovo emerging from the former Yugoslavia as a result of the unresolved ethnic differences. If Nigeria continues the way it is going,we are heading for the Waterloo.

The Ndi Igbo Question in Nigerian Politics

“For this clearly discriminatory attitude towards Ndi Igbo, and in sharp contrast with the unanimous national political concession given to the Yorubas over the M.K.O. Abiola case, cited earlier, it is only right to assert that our beloved co-citizens of Nigeria owe the Igbo Nation unreserved fraternal apology for visiting an unjust and sustained capital political punishment on the entire Igbo nation, vis-à-vis their constitutional right to exercise executive power as president bf our country.” Ambassador Raph Uwechue, OFR

“This callous and contemptuous treatment meted out to Ndigbo is in clear and cruel contrast with the compassionate concession, massively supported by Ndigbo, given to the Yorubas in 1999 to field the two Olus- Falae and Obasanjo, for the presumed presidential slot missed by their kinsman, Chief M.K.O Abiola, in 1993. Surely, what is considered political sauce for the aggrieved Yoruba goose, and rightly so, should equally be tendered to the politically famished Igbo gander.” Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni

The statements which I have empathetically captured above reflects and brings to the limelight “the Ndi Igbo Question in Nigerian Politics” which was not only explicitly discussed in an article by Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni but has continued to prop up in various other articles,presentations,media debates and indeed in everyday conversation of the politics of Nigeria vis-a-vis marginalisation and unity of Nigeria. It is evident that the Igbos and indeed the whole of Nigeria gave the Yorubas a “compassionate concession” in 1999 where by the two Olu-Falae and Obasanjo were fielded for the presidential slot. Former President Obasanjo signed a “pact” with north that he would hand over to far-north in 2007 and it came to pass in 2007 that President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua was elected as president to hold the presidency for the north for a possible eight year tenure after which power will once more rotate to the south.

Unfortunately,two and a half years into the presidency of Yar'Adua who is know to suffer a terminal sickness,it looks gloomy that he will be able to serve out his presidency which implies that the Vice-president who hails from the south-south region will take over the mantle of leadership. This present situation of the nation has brought to bear the issue of rotational presidency which many Nigerians chose to brush aside out of ignorance. Certain elements in the north are ready to subvert the constitution and are currently engaging in the unethical and unreasonable acts of mounting pressure on the vice-president to resign, to pave way for a northern who the ailing and dying president will appoint as vice-president before his inevitable resignation ensuring that the presidency remains in the north till 2015. So I now pose these two questions pose to all Nigerians;

[list]
[li]If rotational presidency is not relevant in our polity,why does the north not advice the incapacitated president to resign and hand over to the vice-president who will peaceful continue the leadership of the nation till 2011 elections where he or anyone would be eligible to contest and win the office based solely on merit?[/li]

[li]Why is it any time it is the turn of Ndi Igbo that Nigerians will remember that the president should be based on merit and why don't Nigerians tell it to the north right now?
[/li]
[/list]

In recent times,I joined Nairaland,a Nigeria Discussion forum on the internet. The question of Governor Babatunde Fashola running for president 2011 was presented for discussion and the broad consensus and opinion of Nigerians who contributed was that he should wait until the other tripods finish their terms before he could contest. I personal presented a post titled “support Igbo presidency 2015” which drew support and also criticisms. Many were sceptical about Igbo presidency in 2015 quickly resorting to the fact that credibility should be the yardstick for the office.

That is where the second question above comes into play. The answer to that question lies in the distrust which the rest of Nigeria harbours towards Ndi Igbo. It is stated better by Prof Omo Omoruyi that “the perceived overall aggressiveness of the Igbos in social and business intercourse creates fright among their competitors who tend to gang up against them. However, the core problem for the Igbos today is clearly traceable to the immediate events that preceded the civil war, 1967-70. The military coup of January 1966 is central to it all. It created fear and distrust of the Igbos that are yet to be purged from the national political system.”

Unfortunately the Igbo may not be patient for too long because if eventually after 16 years of democracy 2015 shared equitably between the Yorubas and Hausas,the Igbos are denied of the top position of this nation,we may be forced to reconsider our membership of the republic. A sincere analysis of the polity shows that power will remain in the north till 2015.Even if Yar'Adua is unable to continue in power,in other to avoid chaos and a possible invitation of military takeover of power,the north will allow the vice-president to serve out the Yar'Adua presidency till 2011 elections. But bet me a “pact” will be made between him and the power brokers in the north for him to step aside for a president of northern origin in 2011.

Also recently,the rumour has spread that the north is poised to hold on to power till 2019.How is this possible? The simple logic is that Yar'Adua may not complete his tenure due to deteriorating health. Even if the Vice-president takes over if Yar'Adua resigns,he will do so with the agreement of handing power over to the north in the 2011 elections. Jostling and disagreement over who gets the office of the vice-president on Yar'Adua's resignation has been rife in the media. If any northern ascends to power in 2011,he will want to seek a second tenure in office come 2015 at the expiration of his first tenure. This will surely negate the principles of the “pact” signed between the north and south in 2007.

Given the fact that the present leadership is so obstinate and insincere about implementing good laws for credible election come 2011,there is the likelihood that the northern president who will emerge in 2011 will follow in that footstep of orchestrating fraudulent elections and therefore perpetuating himself in power and that means that 2015 may prove illusive yet again for Ndi Igbo.

So what should be Ndi Igbo take on this envisaged actions? According to Prof Omo Omoruyi,he opined and asserted equivocally that “ Igbo leaders should address the Igbo question.” He went further to state “I once challenged a friend from the south-east to organize a conference devoted to agenda setting for the Igbo nation in Nigeria. The Igbo like other ethnic nationalities should cultivate "the Igbo Permanent Interest in Nigeria. Today, instead of having a permanent interest, the Igbo leaders want to think of who should be labelled the Igbo Permanent Friend in Nigeria and who should be the Igbo Permanent Igbo Enemy. The Hausa/Fulani is called the traditional Igbo Permanent Friends and the Yoruba is the Igbo Permanent Enemy.”

I totally agree with him. It should now be glaring to the large number of astute and industrious Igbo business men and women,elite,leaders,youths and indeed everyone of Igbo extraction that political power in a polarized state like Nigeria is necessary for economic prowess. We can bring about that needed and necessary progress which Nigeria desires and requires which others have failure to bring about. For 50 long years the other ethnic groups have piloted the affairs with no progress to show for it. We know how forward looking and business like the Igbos are.

The issues of implementing the UWAIS report for credible elections and fiscal federalism which Nigeria desperately need will be achieved with an Igbo president in place. The Igbos are the most democratic of all the major tribes in Nigeria. History shows that the system of government of the Igbos which vested the exercise of power on the “Umunna”, a congregation of kinsmen depicts how democratic the Igbos were before the coming of the colonialist who saw it as threat to their government.

Suffix me to say that the clamour for Igbo presidency is a desire to have that true sense of belonging in our nation Nigeria. Rotational presidency is not an alibi for bad governance,corruption and poor performance. There is no explanation for non-implementation of the viable option such as the UWAIS report for credible elections,insincere anti-corruption crusades,implementation of anti-people policies and other failures of this administration. Also I believe that the three tripods of the republic can produce leaders who will lift Nigerians out our present quagmire and predicament.

However,it not only the other tripods of Nigeria that should be blamed for the plight of Ndi Igbo. As Prof Omo Omoruyi will put it “No doubt, the Igbo people themselves have their share of the blame in this unsavoury saga, especially given the individualistic and blindly opportunistic attitude of some Igbo politicians, scrambling for the crumbs of public office in total disregard of legitimate Igbo collective interest within the Nigerian family.” It is time for Ndi Igbo to put aside their “individualistic and blindly opportunistic attitude” and confront this great monster and use that opportunity if realized to bring about reasonable change and progress in the life of the republic.

In this light,I believe that early preparation is necessary for the Igbos to find the answer to the monstrous Igbo question. Clinching the presidency in 2015 will be determined by the position of Ndi Igbo in 2011. It will be in the interest of the region to reach a “pact” with all the all political aspirants who are likely going to be from the north in 2011 to relinquish power in 2015 paving the way for emergence of a president of Igbo extraction. The Igbo have to present a united front regardless of political affiliation.

This preposition above makes it expedient that we harness the power of the internet for healthy cross-fertilisation of ideas in realising that dream of Igbo presidency come 2015.Given that the best social networking site is Facebook with over 350 million active users,with over 10 million Nigerians using the internet,it came be used as rallying point in support of this goal. It is time for the Igbos to get united and the other constituents of Nigeria should as a matter of urgency realize that peace could elude us if one traditional tripods of the republic should as equity and fair play demands should not be cheated out of power.

Join the group “ SUPPORT IGBO PRESIDENCY 2015” on Facebook, a five (5)years project in which your voice will play a role in the realisation of the Nigeria of our dreams. Invite your friends let us extend its frontiers. Obama used the internet and video games in his successful campaign. Also through this medium ordinary Nigerians like us can push for implementation of policies such the UWAIS report that will ensure that credible elections which will be acceptable to all are held in 2011 even if all the presidential aspirants are from the north such that any leader that emerges will be accountable to us all.

Igbo presidency in 2015 is inevitable. It is a realization of the identity of the Igbo man in Nigerian political scene as true members of the union whereas a departure from giving the Igbos a sense of belonging in the words of Obama that “suppression tribal and religious identity can lead to world.” Inadvertently,Ndi Igbo have to be at the fore-front rallying other Nigerians who will share in this vision and aspiration of Igbo presidency. More so, a united Nigeria where political equity and fairness is paramount for the realization of the Nigeria of our dreams is the best option in this present generation.

The Unwritten Constitutional Provision

Rotational Presidency is expedient for the unity of the various constituents of the polarized state of Nigeria,until such a time when every Nigerian will regard himself as a Nigerian who will relegate his ethnic nationality to the background. Although it is not enshrined in the constitution,it an unwritten rule which can make or mar the republic. Undoubtedly,the health of the president and question of who succeeds him has shown us that just as an animal cannot run faster than his tail,it has an enormous role to play in the continued existence of Nigeria as a united nation.

Rotational presidency among the traditional tripods of Nigeria then extending later to the minorities will give every citizen of this republic a true sense of belonging and as such evoke the much needed patriotism necessary to bring about a true Giant of Africa,heralding such a time when such separatist agitations of groups like that of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOP) will go extinct.

It is not in the interest of the continued existence of the nation if the other two tripods of the republic dominate the presidency of the country leaving out the third tripod being the Igbos in spite of the failure of these other privileged members of the republic in the past 50 years of our independence to bring about meaningful development and progress in the life and history of the nation.
Adequate developments and progress if they had being achieved over the past five decades would have pacified the agitation of the Igbos for an answer to “the Ndi Igbo question in Nigerian politics ” as Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni would put it. Nigeria as a developed African nation with all the opportunities to thrive and survive just like our African brothers South Africa,Egypt and Angola would have caused the astute and industrious Jewish-like Igbo people to soft peddle on the quest to clinch the top job of the nation but not eliminating it completely.

We are aware that the “black people” question in US politics found its answer in the emergence of Barack Obama as the first black president of the United States of America. Although the United States has enormous wealth and opportunities for all people and ranks as a unique country which its foundation of unity is based on the freedom of every man,the black were still denied the top job of the republic until recently. That political irrelevance became a torn in the subconscious of the vast majority of blacks who have over the years contributed their quota to the development of the world's largest and biggest economic and political entity.

Transformation of An Ideology

In time past,I have always wished that Biafra was a success. As a true son of Igbo land,I have always being sympathetic to the cause of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Sovereign State of Nigeria (MASSOP). Albeit I do not buy into their sometimes violent gorilla tactics. Firstly,as a growing child,I developed this mindset that Nigerians do not have any business living together as one nation. The frequent religious clashes in the North targeted at Christians per se by the Muslims,which end up being an avenue of pillaging,unwanton killing and persecution of the vast majority of the Igbos who are wont to inhabit any part of the globe with easy adaptation traits no more less a supposed part of their country.

With little or no provocation the carnage and attacks are constantly perpetuated until in recent times when reprisal attacks have ensued thereafter causing a significant reduction in the frequency of these massacres. I am one of those who can on no account live in any northern city of Nigeria. We are aware that pockets of violence still pop up unannounced at seldom. My argument is that if after several years of co-existence, frequent occurrence of such events reminds us that the various members of this union are not yet ready to co-habit together.

Secondly as an avid and omnivorous reader,I have read several books on Nigeria history. I have also had a good dose of the accounts of the Nigeria/Biafra war and I ended up with the conclusion that Nigeria is a mismatch. The North never wanted Nigeria,it was the southern people especially the south-east who were at the forefront of a united Nigeria and it back fired on them. In recent times calls for a Sovereign national conferenced underscores the need for a renegotiation of the terms of our unity.

However, Nigeria has weathered these chequered history and storms for 50 years and it seems that we are destined to live together or eventually work out our unity as one nation. Furthermore,wars and conflict are outdated and no more desirable. Nations prefer to engage in economic emancipation struggle to better the lives of its citizens and re-enact economic colonization as the modern norm. The unpleasantness of wars and conflict is made more glaring by the sophisticated nature of present day wars with its attendant undesirable heavy human casualty. The Nigeria/Biafra civil war took the lives of over 3,000,000 people and an attempt at disintegration will prove more fatal given the current population of over 150 million Nigerians.

Undoubtedly the availability of abundant human and material resources and the recent institutionalization of democracy makes it forward thinking to find a solution to the many problems of Nigeria as a united country rather than opting for the “balkanization of Nigeria” in the words of the Zik of Africa which will have many negative consequences. The irony of the matter is that the powers brokers are indirectly working against the unity of Nigeria through their actions,decisions and marginalization of other members of this union especially the Igbos from the presidential seat of the nation.

No wonder the United States who are good at predicting the future in their ingenuity garnered from substantial investment in Research and Development (R&) have predicted that Nigeria will disintegrate on or before 2015.As captured by the present President of the Pan-Igbo political and socio-cultural organisation,Oheneze Ndi Igbo,Amb. Raph Uwachue “the break-up of countries, some very powerful and prosperous, like the former Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, took place along ethnic lines. They are examples that we must eschew in Africa, already over-fragmented.”

These countries did not willingly opt for the disintegration,it came with the attendants wars which consumed lives and properties of these nations. These nations disintegrated because of their inability to address the fundamental questions of their unity and existence. Today we have the seventh country,Kosovo emerging from the former Yugoslavia as a result of the unresolved ethnic differences. If Nigeria continues the way it is going,we are heading for the Waterloo.

The Ndi Igbo Question in Nigerian Politics

“For this clearly discriminatory attitude towards Ndi Igbo, and in sharp contrast with the unanimous national political concession given to the Yorubas over the M.K.O. Abiola case, cited earlier, it is only right to assert that our beloved co-citizens of Nigeria owe the Igbo Nation unreserved fraternal apology for visiting an unjust and sustained capital political punishment on the entire Igbo nation, vis-à-vis their constitutional right to exercise executive power as president bf our country.” Ambassador Raph Uwechue, OFR

“This callous and contemptuous treatment meted out to Ndigbo is in clear and cruel contrast with the compassionate concession, massively supported by Ndigbo, given to the Yorubas in 1999 to field the two Olus- Falae and Obasanjo, for the presumed presidential slot missed by their kinsman, Chief M.K.O Abiola, in 1993. Surely, what is considered political sauce for the aggrieved Yoruba goose, and rightly so, should equally be tendered to the politically famished Igbo gander.” Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni

The statements which I have empathetically captured above reflects and brings to the limelight “the Ndi Igbo Question in Nigerian Politics” which was not only explicitly discussed in an article by Prof Omo Omoruyi,mni but has continued to prop up in various other articles,presentations,media debates and indeed in everyday conversation of the politics of Nigeria vis-a-vis marginalisation and unity of Nigeria. It is evident that the Igbos and indeed the whole of Nigeria gave the Yorubas a “compassionate concession” in 1999 where by the two Olu-Falae and Obasanjo were fielded for the presidential slot. Former President Obasanjo signed a “pact” with north that he would hand over to far-north in 2007 and it came to pass in 2007 that President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua was elected as president to hold the presidency for the north for a possible eight year tenure after which power will once more rotate to the south.

Unfortunately,two and a half years into the presidency of Yar'Adua who is know to suffer a terminal sickness,it looks gloomy that he will be able to serve out his presidency which implies that the Vice-president who hails from the south-south region will take over the mantle of leadership. This present situation of the nation has brought to bear the issue of rotational presidency which many Nigerians chose to brush aside out of ignorance. Certain elements in the north are ready to subvert the constitution and are currently engaging in the unethical and unreasonable acts of mounting pressure on the vice-president to resign, to pave way for a northern who the ailing and dying president will appoint as vice-president before his inevitable resignation ensuring that the presidency remains in the north till 2015. So I now pose these two questions pose to all Nigerians;

[list]
[li]If rotational presidency is not relevant in our polity,why does the north not advice the incapacitated president to resign and hand over to the vice-president who will peaceful continue the leadership of the nation till 2011 elections where he or anyone would be eligible to contest and win the office based solely on merit?

Why is it any time it is the turn of Ndi Igbo that Nigerians will remember that the president should be based on merit and why don't Nigerians tell it to the north right now?[/li]
[li][/li]
[/list]

In recent times,I joined Nairaland,a Nigeria Discussion forum on the internet. The question of Governor Babatunde Fashola running for president 2011 was presented for discussion and the broad consensus and opinion of Nigerians who contributed was that he should wait until the other tripods finish their terms before he could contest. I personal presented a post titled “support Igbo presidency 2015” which drew support and also criticisms. Many were sceptical about Igbo presidency in 2015 quickly resorting to the fact that credibility should be the yardstick for the office.

That is where the second question above comes into play. The answer to that question lies in the distrust which the rest of Nigeria harbours towards Ndi Igbo. It is stated better by Prof Omo Omoruyi that “the perceived overall aggressiveness of the Igbos in social and business intercourse creates fright among their competitors who tend to gang up against them. However, the core problem for the Igbos today is clearly traceable to the immediate events that preceded the civil war, 1967-70. The military coup of January 1966 is central to it all. It created fear and distrust of the Igbos that are yet to be purged from the national political system.”

Unfortunately the Igbo may not be patient for too long because if eventually after 16 years of democracy 2015 shared equitably between the Yorubas and Hausas,the Igbos are denied of the top position of this nation,we may be forced to reconsider our membership of the republic. A sincere analysis of the polity shows that power will remain in the north till 2015.Even if Yar'Adua is unable to continue in power,in other to avoid chaos and a possible invitation of military takeover of power,the north will allow the vice-president to serve out the Yar'Adua presidency till 2011 elections. But bet me a “pact” will be made between him and the power brokers in the north for him to step aside for a president of northern origin in 2011.

Also recently,the rumour has spread that the north is poised to hold on to power till 2019.How is this possible? The simple logic is that Yar'Adua may not complete his tenure due to deteriorating health. Even if the Vice-president takes over if Yar'Adua resigns,he will do so with the agreement of handing power over to the north in the 2011 elections. Jostling and disagreement over who gets the office of the vice-president on Yar'Adua's resignation has been rife in the media. If any northern ascends to power in 2011,he will want to seek a second tenure in office come 2015 at the expiration of his first tenure. This will surely negate the principles of the “pact” signed between the north and south in 2007.

Given the fact that the present leadership is so obstinate and insincere about implementing good laws for credible election come 2011,there is the likelihood that the northern president who will emerge in 2011 will follow in that footstep of orchestrating fraudulent elections and therefore perpetuating himself in power and that means that 2015 may prove illusive yet again for Ndi Igbo.

So what should be Ndi Igbo take on this envisaged actions? According to Prof Omo Omoruyi,he opined and asserted equivocally that “ Igbo leaders should address the Igbo question.” He went further to state “I once challenged a friend from the south-east to organize a conference devoted to agenda setting for the Igbo nation in Nigeria. The Igbo like other ethnic nationalities should cultivate "the Igbo Permanent Interest in Nigeria. Today, instead of having a permanent interest, the Igbo leaders want to think of who should be labelled the Igbo Permanent Friend in Nigeria and who should be the Igbo Permanent Igbo Enemy. The Hausa/Fulani is called the traditional Igbo Permanent Friends and the Yoruba is the Igbo Permanent Enemy.”

I totally agree with him. It should now be glaring to the large number of astute and industrious Igbo business men and women,elite,leaders,youths and indeed everyone of Igbo extraction that political power in a polarized state like Nigeria is necessary for economic prowess. We can bring about that needed and necessary progress which Nigeria desires and requires which others have failure to bring about. For 50 long years the other ethnic groups have piloted the affairs with no progress to show for it. We know how forward looking and business like the Igbos are.

The issues of implementing the UWAIS report for credible elections and fiscal federalism which Nigeria desperately need will be achieved with an Igbo president in place. The Igbos are the most democratic of all the major tribes in Nigeria. History shows that the system of government of the Igbos which vested the exercise of power on the “Umunna”, a congregation of kinsmen depicts how democratic the Igbos were before the coming of the colonialist who saw it as threat to their government.

Suffix me to say that the clamour for Igbo presidency is a desire to have that true sense of belonging in our nation Nigeria. Rotational presidency is not an alibi for bad governance,corruption and poor performance. There is no explanation for non-implementation of the viable option such as the UWAIS report for credible elections,insincere anti-corruption crusades,implementation of anti-people policies and other failures of this administration. Also I believe that the three tripods of the republic can produce leaders who will lift Nigerians out our present quagmire and predicament.

However,it not only the other tripods of Nigeria that should be blamed for the plight of Ndi Igbo. As Prof Omo Omoruyi will put it “No doubt, the Igbo people themselves have their share of the blame in this unsavoury saga, especially given the individualistic and blindly opportunistic attitude of some Igbo politicians, scrambling for the crumbs of public office in total disregard of legitimate Igbo collective interest within the Nigerian family.” It is time for Ndi Igbo to put aside their “individualistic and blindly opportunistic attitude” and confront this great monster and use that opportunity if realized to bring about reasonable change and progress in the life of the republic.

In this light,I believe that early preparation is necessary for the Igbos to find the answer to the monstrous Igbo question. Clinching the presidency in 2015 will be determined by the position of Ndi Igbo in 2011. It will be in the interest of the region to reach a “pact” with all the all political aspirants who are likely going to be from the north in 2011 to relinquish power in 2015 paving the way for emergence of a president of Igbo extraction. The Igbo have to present a united front regardless of political affiliation.

This preposition above makes it expedient that we harness the power of the internet for healthy cross-fertilisation of ideas in realising that dream of Igbo presidency come 2015.Given that the best social networking site is Facebook with over 350 million active users,with over 10 million Nigerians using the internet,it came be used as rallying point in support of this goal. It is time for the Igbos to get united and the other constituents of Nigeria should as a matter of urgency realize that peace could elude us if one traditional tripods of the republic should as equity and fair play demands should not be cheated out of power.

Join the group “ SUPPORT IGBO PRESIDENCY 2015” on Facebook, a five (5)years project in which your voice will play a role in the realisation of the Nigeria of our dreams. Invite your friends let us extend its frontiers. Obama used the internet and video games in his successful campaign. Also through this medium ordinary Nigerians like us can push for implementation of policies such the UWAIS report that will ensure that credible elections which will be acceptable to all are held in 2011 even if all the presidential aspirants are from the north such that any leader that emerges will be accountable to us all.

Igbo presidency in 2015 is inevitable. It is a realization of the identity of the Igbo man in Nigerian political scene as true members of the union whereas a departure from giving the Igbos a sense of belonging in the words of Obama that “suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to war.” Ndi Igbo have to be at the fore-front rallying other Nigerians who will share in this vision and aspiration of Igbo presidency. More so, a united Nigeria where political equity and fairness is paramount for the realization of the Nigeria of our dreams is the best option in this present generation.

Is President Yar'Adua no more a human being like every Nigeria or terrestrial ? Why are we so daft? Why are we trying to become the greatest fools that live on the surface of planet earth? If transplant is needed to get Mr president back to full health,the best body parts needed will be available.When a man suffers kidney failure and then heart failure,I wonder what remains of that person for us to pray for healing and recovery what Yar'Adua needs is a miracle. How I wish he is a Christian. Combined prayers of Pastor Chris and TB Joshua coupled with that of Reinhard Bonnke and Benny Himm will be applied.

The best prayers we can pray for Yar'Adua is for God to prevail and change his heart so that he can resign.This man is suffering sickness that do not have cure.They can only be managed and the burden of leading Nigeria is enough to derail the recovery or his total health.

As for me,I have quit calling for his resignation.Let him continue in power.I did on Nov 9th even before this sickness on my blog on a 10 point discourse on why the president should resign now.Probably He will be the first president to rule from coma.To help us out of this impasse they can arrange for Turai to become VP and then take over leadership in 2011.

I have instead got to focus my energy on Igbo presidency in 2015 provided Nigeria remains united till then.

Source-A National Call on President Umaru Yar'Adua to Step Down on Facebook

State of Confusion! “Shame on detractor’s President Umaru Yar’adua will be back on Friday to address the Nigerian economic summit” Vice President, Goodluck Jonathan (Tuesday 8th Dec 2009) and then on Wednesday 9th Dec 2009 hear Dora Akunyili and the Federal Executive Council “WE DONT KNOW WHEN THE PRESIDENT WILL BE BACK, WE HAVE NO CLUE” Nigerians let us put on our thinking cap no

"Just keep fasting and praying We dont know when Mr president will be back" Dora Akunyili.

My comment

Is President Yar'Adua no more a human being like every Nigeria or terrestrial ? Why are we so daft? Why are we trying to become the greatest fools that live on the surface of planet earth? If transplant is needed to get Mr president back to full health,the best body parts needed will be available.When a man suffers kidney failure and then heart failure,I wonder what remains of that person for us to pray for healing and recovery what Yar'Adua needs is a miracle. How I wish he is a Christian. Combined prayers of Pastor Chris and TB Joshua coupled with that of Reinhard Bonnke and Benny Himm will be applied.

The best prayers we can pray for Yar'Adua is for God to prevail and change his heart so that he can resign.This man is suffering sickness that do not have cure.They can only be managed and the burden of leading Nigeria is enough to derail the recovery or his total health.

As for me,I have quit calling for his resignation.Let him continue in power.I did on Nov 9th even before this sickness on my blog on a 10 point discourse on why the president should resign now.Probably He will be the first president to rule from coma.To help us out of this impasse they can arrange for Turai to become VP and then take over leadership in 2011.

OSLO, Norway - Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Distinguished Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:

I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations - that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.

And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize - Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela - my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women - some known, some obscure to all but those they help - to be far more deserving of this honor than I.
But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by forty three other countries - including Norway - in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict - filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.

These questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease - the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.

Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers, clerics, and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional, and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.

For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations - total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of thirty years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.

In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations - an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this Prize - America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, and restrict the most dangerous weapons.

In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty, self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.

A decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.

Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states; have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sewn, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, and children scarred.

I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations - acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.

I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago - "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life's work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak -nothing passive - nothing naïve - in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism - it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.

I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower.

Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions - not just treaties and declarations - that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: the United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest - because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.

So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another - that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause and to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.

So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths - that war is sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human feelings. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions."

What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?

To begin with, I believe that all nations - strong and weak alike - must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I - like any head of state - reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards strengthens those who do, and isolates - and weakens - those who don't.

The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait - a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.

Furthermore, America cannot insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don't, our action can appear arbitrary, and undercut the legitimacy of future intervention - no matter how justified.

This becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.

I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.
America's commitment to global security will never waiver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.

The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries - and other friends and allies - demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they have shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular. But I also know this: the belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That is why NATO continues to be indispensable. That is why we must strengthen UN and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That is why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali - we honor them not as makers of war, but as wagers of peace.

Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant - the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.
Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe that the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor those ideals by upholding them not just when it is easy, but when it is hard.

I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.

First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior - for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure - and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.

One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: all will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work toward disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I am working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia's nuclear stockpiles.

But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.

The same principle applies to those who violate international law by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur; systematic rape in Congo; or repression in Burma - there must be consequences. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.

This brings me to a second point - the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based upon the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.

It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.

And yet all too often, these words are ignored. In some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists - a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values.

I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America's interests - nor the world's -are served by the denial of human aspirations.

So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear to these movements that hope and history are on their side

Let me also say this: the promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach - and condemnation without discussion - can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.

In light of the Cultural Revolution's horrors, Nixon's meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable - and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty, and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan's efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There is no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement; pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.

Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights - it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.

It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine they need to survive. It does not exist where children cannot aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.

And that is why helping farmers feed their own people - or nations educate their children and care for the sick - is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action - it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.

Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All of these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, or the staying power, to complete this work without something more - and that is the continued expansion of our moral imagination; an insistence that there is something irreducible that we all share.

As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are; to understand that we all basically want the same things; that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.

And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities - their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.

Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint - no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of one's own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith - for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached - their faith in human progress - must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.

For if we lose that faith - if we dismiss it as silly or naïve; if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace - then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.

Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago, "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."

So let us reach for the world that ought to be - that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees he's outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.

Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of depravation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that - for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.

Join this group on Facebook let us form a coalition and fight anti freedom impulses of Nigerian leadership " Friends Of Gbenga Mike Aruleba (AIT)"

America that legalized gay marriage has not produced a gay president.it is nigeria will do it.Probably 500 years to come.If you are still alive,your gay president will come.

“Today, there is the feeling that the Igbos, as a people, are being deliberately sidelined, especially in the sphere of political leadership of the country. No Igbo person is deemed good enough or trusted enough to be put at the helm of affairs, at the apex management position of Nigeria.” Amb.Ralph Uwachue

This is a five (5) year project aimed at ensuring that if and only if Nigeria remains united till 2015 Ndi Igbo will produce the president of Nigeria come 2015.

follow the link http://www..php?ref=sb#/group.php?gid=194526769132

dont mind the developed countries.the whole thing is a hoax.they have been exposed.climate-gate and the danish text.thank God

where are all those who oppose igbo presidency in 2015?

Vanguard Newspapers

By Dayo Bensom Political Editor, Okey Ndiribe & Emeka Mamah
LAGOS—Amid growing concern and uncertainty over President Umar Yar’ Adua’s health, there are indications that the North is divided over a possible successor in 2011 just as the Peoples’ Democratic Party, PDP, governors, particularly those of Northern extraction insist that the President’s successor must come from their fold.

The governors’ position which appears to have shifted attention from Yar’ Adua’s health came to light even as the National Executive Committee, NEC, of the ruling party meets in Abuja tomorrow over the President.

cartoon

Vanguard gathered authoritatively that moves by a section of the North to position the Kwara State Governor, Mr. Bukola Saraki, to run in the 2011 presidential ticket should President Yar’Adua drop out of the race, was opposed by the core-North which preferred a candidate from its zone.

Gov. Saraki, who is from the North-Central geo-political zone, had in company of the Bauchi State Governor, Alhaji Isa Yuguda, visited the President last week in his Saudi Arabia hospital.

Reason why Saraki was being opposed could not be confirmed but Vanguard learnt that it may not be unconnected with the fact that the Kwara governor was seen more as a Yoruba than a Northerner.

A source who spoke to Vanguard said former Vice- President Atiku Abubakar would have been the prefered candidate if he had not pitched his political tent with the opposition.

“If he had accepted Yar’ dua’s gesture earlier on, he would have easily been the successor to the president,” the source said.

ACon VP’s slot

Meanwhile, the National Publicity Secretary of the Action Congress (AC), Alhaji Lai Mohammed, has described as unconstitutional, the reported move by former President Olusegun Obasanjo to sponsor the Governor of Jigawa State, Alhaji Sule Lamido, for the position of Vice-President should the office become vacant. He spoke to Vanguard in a telephone interview, Monday.

Said he: “ It is entirely un- constitutional for anybody to embark on the search for a successor to Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan when he is still occupying that office and President Umar Yar’Ádua is still alive and in office.”

On whether Gov. Lamido may be imposed on the nation as a vice-president, Mohammed argued that apart from Yar’Ádua and Jonathan, over half of the PDP governors and members of the National Assembly were imposed on the nation during the 2007 general election.

He asked: “Did any of these Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) elective office holders come into office through free and fair party primaries? It is the PDP’s undemocratic record that has led this country to its present state,” he said.

According to him: “We are not surprised that they are already shopping for a replacement for Jonathan. Even in the present case what ought to have been done is to have a full consultation within the party.”
He maintained that the Constitution is very clear on the matter.

Said he: “The PDP would nominate another candidate for the office of Vice-President and the candidate would be ratified by the National Assembly. But whatever the PDP is doing, what is important is that the constitution has to be followed.”

He explained that there is a procedure for declaring the office of the President vacant, adding that it had not yet been put in motion.

“If for any reason the office of the Vice-President should become vacant on account of Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan vacating that office and assuming the office of President, the choice of who becomes the next vice-president is entirely that of PDP,” he said.

Relatedly, the National Publicity Secretary of Progressive Peoples Alliance ( PPA), Chief Ben Onyechere, has said the Northern political establishment should blame itself if they should allow former President Olusegun Obasanjo to dictate political decisions to them now that it is their turn to run the affairs of the country.

He was also reacting to media reports that Obasanjo was already shopping for a successor for Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan, in a telephone interview he granted to Vanguard Monday.

Said he: “I would not believe that the wise men of the North would allow Obasanjo to dictate to them what they should do. I think it is mere rumour.”

PPA carpets Obasanjo

He described Obasanjo as a mischievous person, adding that the mind of PPA does not work like Obasanjo’s.
He stated that the issue of shopping for a successor to Jonathan did not arise because the President’s ill-health is a natural phenomenon, adding that anybody could be sick and it is unGodly to do so.

Said he: “How can I comment on the health of somebody who is still living. It is not proper. I hate to discuss President YarÁdua’s health with regard to his official position. We don’t feel such a thing should be discussed.”

Song chides Northern Union

Meantime, the former National Chairman of the Peoples Progressive Alliance (PPA), Mr. Adamu Song, has lampooned the Northern Union (NU), over what he described as its veiled call against the takeover of power by Vice President Goodluck Jonathan in the event that President Umaru Yar’Adua is incapable of performing his constitutional duties due to his protracted illness.

Song said the reasons which the union relied on to oppose Jonathan’s takeover were not only alien to the 1999 Constitution but insulting to Nigerians and the North which it is claiming to champion its cause.

In an interview with Vanguard in Kaduna, yesterday, Song said, “it is insulting for the NU led by the former Senate Leader, Dr. Olusola Saraki to call for caution in a matter that is purely constitutional.

“The union said one of the reasons why it is against Dr. Jonathan’s takeover of power in the event of the President being unable to carry out his functions is because it is against the zoning policy of the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP),” he said.

Igbo Presidency! Boom! Most Nigerians are up in arms against it. Now we remember that we need a credible candidate from any part of the country.Arrant Nonsence.hbWhy not tell it to the North elements and elite who orchrateing some significant power play in Abuja even to the extent insinuating that the VP should resign. We all know that Yar'Adua is incapable of continuing in power.If Nigeria were anyone's enterprise.,would he employ a sick man as Yar'Adua to pilot the affairs.We all know that he didnt get to Aso Rock through a popular vote.What is rife in the polity right now is a fulifilment of the pact between the made by OBJ to rotate power to the North for 8 years. Let us be truthful to ourselves.Let us stop marginalizing the Igbos. As one of the tripods of the Nigerian Nation,they should also have their own turn in 2015.Okay! Why not the VP take over without qualms.Bet me ,if the VP was from the North,Yar'Adua would have thrown in the towel since.

However,rotation of the presidency is not a reason why any incumbent president should not stand up against corruption,eradicate poverty,implement people oriented programmes and ensure that we have a credible elections even if it not going to favour him or her.

As we all know,even if the President resigns,the prtesidency will be zoned to the North in 2011 as many of the already acknowledged presidentaial aspiriants are of the northern origin.In 2011 all the polituical parties will favour emergence of presidsentail candiadates of northern origin.

Well let me inform everyone that Igbo presidency is a solution to the Igbo question in Nigeria.That question must be answered or the Igbos will reconsider their membership of the Nigerian federation amidst the misrule of other traditional tripods of the republic.

Gov Liyel Imoke,what is so extraodinary about the developments in lagos when this man is evacuating beggars

Bro,everyone is in the dark,they do not know whether the man is dead.the powers that be may be hatching a plan to unveil soon.sudden breaking of the news of Yar'Adua death may bring turmoil

@singular

Sorry sir,I didn't know that you are an old man.See won,t you have preferred to leave the cold of london and come and live in a decent lagos? If lagos is like accra where they have 24hrs like you would have been in Eko.Look at Angola,they are developing with full speed,SA is now heaven compared to Nigeria.Small Ghana is insulting Nigeria because their country is better.we have the resources.now they are giving us excuse why we can't have meager 6,000mw by dec 31

Take action? If Nigeria is a sane country can Yar'Adua still continue in Abuja.How many British under performing prime ministers have ever existed? Are you not aware that those who are for the resignation of our sick president who we don't know whether he is dead are being targeted? Just pray that there is no vacuum in Aso Rock for our beloved brothers to come and restore law and order.Less you will spend your all your days in london

Can a man in coma talk?

leave Awolowo out of this,may the soul of the great sage rest in peace.talk in terms of political foundations of the nation.why was the blacks exluded from the leadership of the US for so long because they did not participate in the formation of america.

stop deluding yourselves,acknowledge it that guy is an important personality in the sight of God and man.am not his fan but i can't help it

See Mr Chapelle,
If you are so anti-Nigeria why not just get the hell out of the country? There are millions before you who have done it and your exit will not affect anyone except your family who might miss you. Go to Ghana and start a new life! I dont get some people on here. . . . They hate something so much that they allow it to control their lives.

see how angry you are? i don't blame you.sorry its not your fault it our leaders fault.let me assume you live in lagos.after all the bustling and hustling with traffic even if you drive a range hs,you get back home and their is power outage,you put on the generator which will blast your busy tired head and you sleep and the next day boom! you wake up very angry.sorry.i dont hate nigeria,i want things to be right.we have the money.why should things be this way?

no he is not,but he has got the respect of sane and insane inhabitants of planet earth.he is the most important individual alive.so after God,obama

after enjoying power for so long.now you care about credible candidate in aso rock.you know that it is not feasible right now.how can it be possible when a sick man does not want to resign.he doesn't want to implement fully the UWAIS report.let us be practical and pragmatic.all want is all the political parties presenting an igbo candidate in 2015.then we can have a sense of belonging in this nation.we produced Zik who was at the front line of the struggle more than other nationalist.so give us a chance and see Nigeria turn into Abu Dhabi not dubai.you know that we are good business people

you seem to me a good pentecostal it is not by confessing positive and your actions are negative.it will not work.let the govt start doing positive things.i will start wearing nigeria flag as my designers

I don't believe global warming or whatever one would choose to call it is an oyinbo conspiracy. All you need to do is ask Nigerians who have lived in Oyinbo land for the last 10 to 20 years or more.

Am not asking anybody it is an conspiracy. Those living outside Nigeria should come back.They want a way to get their nations to divest from oil and face other sources of energy which is pretty difficult without the necessary political will.

Have you heard of "climate-gate" the whole thing is a hoax.those 15,000 people gathering in copahegan are scientist and most of them are atheist!

God cannot abandon earth.There is one member of the Britsh Aristocracy who on CNN this morning advised the men and women to go home and spend sometime with their wives.

Even the head of that UN IPCC looks like anti-christ

i am on transit in accra right now.These people are forward thinking.since i got here 3 days ago,I have been feeling like an alien.sometimes I jolt waiting for NEPA to take light and the light is there.there govt is serious

Jayz n Beyonce Attend Traditional Wedding In Naija somewhere in Kano State

How I wish that you live in Nigeria? We are not pacesetters,when others do well,let us imitate them.It is not having a president in coma and all the ugly things happening in Nigeria

Jayz n Beyonce Attend Traditional Wedding In Naija somewhere in Kano State
Jayz n Beyonce Attend Traditional Wedding In Naija

who will buy your oil? this people want to make sure that they crush OPEC.You think they like the high oil price.We have no biz with solar power for now.

My view on the for climate change palaver is blunt and clear cut. Poverty is ravaging the world and according to the UN over 1billion people mostly living in Africa will go hungry this year alone. World leaders shunned the recently organised Food Summit in Rome to raise aids for this hungry people. Now how do you explain the climate change syndrome to an African when he is poor and does not contribute to the carbon emission. World leaders and scientist are gathered in Copenhagen to talk of cutting carbon emission. Obama has promised below expectation as the world's leading carbon emitter while the second runner up China has made a commitment that is reasonable. What is Africa's take on this issue? Buoyed with the highest level of underdevelopment and ravaging poverty which makes us contribute less to the climate change what should be the position of the continent.I think that African Union should be dissolvedI view on the clamours for climate change is blunt and clear cut. Poverty is ravaging the world and according to the UN over 1billion people mostly living in Africa will go hungry this year alone. World leaders shunned the recently organised Food Summit in Rome to raise aids for this hungry people. Now how do you explain the climate change syndrome when he is poor and does not contribute to the carbon emission. World leaders and scientist are gathered in Copenhagen to talk of cutting carbon emission. Obama has promised below expectation as the world's leading carbon emitter while the second runner up China has made a commitment that is reasonable. What is Africa's take on this issue? Buoyed underdevelopment and ravaging poverty which makes us contribute less to the climate change what should be the position of the continent.I think that African Union should be dissolved.We don't drive enough cars and the industries are not there. Its like the recession,its American diseases,they impose it on the world. Now Dubai is owning but it is middle east problem.They refuse to come to Rome late this year when the Pope invited them for aids for food programme for over 1billion people who are hungry. What is climate change? The West and Asia use all the cars and own all the industries.They should send half of all the cars they drive to African countries.They should relocate all industries to Africa,we want the carbon. If it is Africa that causes the climate change they would have abandoned us.Lets us solve the poverty problem of Africa before we talk of climate change.Whatever is changing should change,atleast we know that the only thing constant in life is change.Do these scientist who are mostly atheist think that God will abandon this earth.Was anyone here when the earth was created.

Why Should Obama come to Nigeria?

Join this group on facebook.I formed this group at the height of the Yar'Adua anti-press impulses.I even forgot about the group only stumble upon it to realize that it already has 80members.We can use this group as a front to represent to the national assembly that it is expedient to pass the FOI bill.