https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm1E8_7LlbA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm1E8_7LlbA

Nigeria's Eastern Security Network - Who Are They? What Exactly Do They Represent?
This documentary takes a look at The new para military organization operating in Nigeria's South Eastern region. How and why they came into existence. Enjoy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm1E8_7LlbA

Nigeria's Eastern Security Network - Who Are They? What Exactly Do They Represent?
This documentary takes a look at The new para military organization operating in Nigeria's South Eastern region. How and why they came into existence. Enjoy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm1E8_7LlbA

Why do most of you always resort to calling the President's name whenever something goes wrong?

The president will not and cannot import military wares, it is the duty of the ministry of defense and army generals.

Reports reaching us has it that President Obama is expected to announce Tuesday that he’s sending up to 3,000 military personnel to combat the Ebola virus in West Africa. The question is “Is Ebola now a terrorist organisation?”. Obama will announce the stepped-up offensive against the outbreak, which has killed more than 2,200 people in five West African countries, in an appearance at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

Administration officials said that the U.S. would help to provide medical and logistical support to overwhelmed local health care systems and to boost the number of beds needed to isolate and treat victims of the epidemic. The Defense Department has asked Congress for nearly $500 million in existing funds to be put toward the effort. The money would otherwise be used to support overseas contingency operations, such as the drawdown of troops in Afghanistan.

The new initiatives include training as many as 500 health care workers a week; erecting 17 heath care facilities with approximately 100 beds each; setting up a joint command headquartered in Monrovia, Liberia, to coordinate between U.S. and international relief efforts; providing home health care kits to hundreds of thousands of households, including 50,000 that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) will deliver to Liberia this week; and carrying out a home- and community-based campaign to train local populations on how to handle exposed patients.

read full details at http://www.tvafrique.com/?p=211

Africa Rising, The West Hating: Top 3 Media Enemies of Nigeria’s Progress

With reference to all the recent and past events in Nigeria and the media representation of it thereof, TV Afrique Research Team is delighted to bring to you a well researched topic; The top three media agencies that are working gravely against Nigeria's progress. it has not only become a tradition for these government controlled media agencies to bring Nigeria down but are now competing aggressively against each other to see who does it better.

Without further ado, lets start off the review with the overall winner.

Media Enemy Number One (Overall Winner): BBC

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is a UK based international public service broadcaster headquartered in London. It is the world's oldest national broadcasting organisation[2] and the largest broadcaster in the world by number of employees, with about 23,000 staff.

BBC has always been the first media outfit to report any catastrophic event (e.g. plane crashes, disease outbreaks, system failures, e.t.c), corrupt practices and Nigerian Army defeat by insurgents.
Whenever there is a plane crash in Nigeria, BBC will not only report on the plane crash but will start showing the history of plane crashes and statistics of the deaths by air disasters in Nigeria since 1980s.

Going the Extra Mile to show Nigeria on the negative even if the budget is sky rocket and the mission is dangerous

BBC is ready to spend any amount that will be needed to send in their brainwashed media crew to stay in top hotels in beautiful Nigerian cities while making it a regular routine to wake up in the morning and drive hundreds of kilometres out of the metropolis to film in impoverished neighbourhoods, refuse dumps and abandoned places.


The media crew is well paid which act as an incentive to encourage them in doing their jobs even if it meant going to Maiduguri to accomplish their mission.

In 2010, BBC sponsored four of their top media crew on an all expense paid four months filming trip to go round the dirtiest places in Lagos, Nigeria to show to the world that Lagos is still far from being developed thereby warding off potential foreign investors from Nigeria.
>> The outcome of the four months expensive trip to Nigeria was the production of the worst ever documentary about Nigeria titled "Welcome to Lagos", a three part documentary series aired on BBC 2 in April 2014, video clips of which were also uploaded on the internet and are still there up till now even amid bitter complains by Nigerians.

Intentional Black out on Positive Developments in Nigeria and Africa

As part of a research, we conducted a search on one of the biggest positive developments in Nigeria which is construction of the Eko Atlantic City in Lagos, Nigeria. As of 12th September 2014, a search on BBC website with the query "Eko Atlantic City" returned the result: "Sorry, there are no results for eko atlantic city" While a search with the query string "Lagos" returned results showing a church building that collapsed same day in Lagos. (see images below).

We will complete the remaining part of this report soon. In the mean time, feel free to voice out your opinions, share this page ( http://www.tvafrique.com/?p=192 )and educate others on the damages being done to us by enemies pretending to be friends.

Your opinions matter, please visit http://www.tvafrique.com/?p=192 to comment share and bookmark. Together we can make Africa greater!.

In September 2010 during a TED conference presentation, Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates, who has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to new vaccine efforts, speaks on the issue of CO2 emissions and its effects on climate change. He presents a formula for tracking CO2 emissions as follows: CO2 = P x S x E x C.

P = Population (People)
S = Services per person
E = Energy per service
C = CO2 per energy unit

Then he adds that in order to get CO2 to zero, “probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty close to zero.”

Following that, Bill Gates begins to describe how the first number — P (P for Population/People) – could be reduced. He says:

“The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6WQtRI7A064

Reducing the world population through vaccines
This statement by Bill Gates was not made with any hesitation, stuttering or other indication that it might have been a mistake. It appears to have been a deliberate, calculated part of a well developed and coherent presentation.

So what does it mean when Bill Gates says “if we do a really great job on new vaccines… we could lower [world population] by 10 or 15 percent?”

Clearly, this statement implies that vaccines are a method of population reduction. So is “health care,” which all NaturalNews readers already know to be more of a “sick care” system that actually harms more people than it helps.

Perhaps that’s the whole point of it. Given that vaccines technology help almost no one from a scientific point of view (http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_vaccines_j…), it raises the question: For what purpose are vaccines being so heavily pushed in the first place?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llAG5V7x17A&list=PL29C61B31B4AAB396

Bill Gates seems to be saying that one of the primary purposes is to reduce the global population as a mechanism by which we can reduce CO2 emissions. Once again, watch the video yourself to hear him say it in his own words:
http://www.naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=A155D11345…

How can vaccines actually be used to reduce world population?
Let’s conduct a mental experiment on this issue. If vaccines are to be used to reduce world population, they obviously need to be accepted by the majority of the people. Otherwise the population reduction effort wouldn’t be very effective.

And in order for them to be accepted by the majority of the people, they obviously can’t just kill people outright. If everybody started dropping dead within 24 hours of receiving the flu shot, the danger of vaccines would become obvious rather quickly and the vaccines would be recalled.

Thus, if vaccines are to be used as an effective population reduction effort, there are really only three ways in which they might theoretically be “effective” from the point of view of those who wish to reduce world population:

#1) They might kill people slowly in a way that’s unnoticeable, taking effect over perhaps 10 – 30 years by accelerating degenerative diseases.

#2) They might reduce fertility and therefore dramatically lower birth rates around the world, thereby reducing the world population over successive generations. This “soft kill” method might seem more acceptable to scientists who want to see the world population fall but don’t quite have the stomach to outright kill people with conventional medicine. There is already evidence that vaccines may promote miscarriages (http://www.naturalnews.com/027512_vaccines_m…).

#3) They might increase the death rate from a future pandemic. Theoretically, widespread vaccination efforts could be followed by a deliberate release of a highly virulent flu strain with a high fatality rate. This “bioweapon” approach could kill millions of people whose immune systems have been weakened by previous vaccine injections.

This is a known side effect of some vaccines, by the way. A study documenting this was published in PLoS. Read the story here: http://www.naturalnews.com/028538_seasonal_f…

Here’s the study title and citation: Does Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Increase the Risk of Illness with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic Virus?
Viboud C, Simonsen L (2010) Does Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Increase the Risk of Illness with the 2009 A/H1N1 Pandemic Virus? PLoS Med 7(4): e1000259. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000259

The short answer is yes, seasonal flu vaccines do cause increased susceptibility to the H1N1 pandemic virus. In other words, seasonal flu vaccines could set up the population for a “hard kill” pandemic that could wipe out a significant portion of the global population (perhaps 10 to 15 percent, as Bill Gates suggested).

Conveniently, their deaths could be blamed on the pandemic, thereby diverting blame from those who were really responsible for the plot. As yet another beneficial side effect for the global population killers, the widespread deaths could be used as a fear tool to urge more people to get vaccinated yet again, and the entire cycle could be repeated until world population was brought down to whatever manageable level was desired… all in the name of health care!

The more people around the world are vaccinated before the release of the “hard kill” pandemic virus, the more powerful the effect of this approach.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Bill Gates
Perhaps not coincidentally, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into vaccine programs targeting people all over the world. One such program is researching the development of “sweat-triggered vaccines” that could use specially-coated nano-materials to deliver vaccines to people without using injections.

More interestingly, his foundation has also invested millions in sterilization technologies that have been called a “temporary castration” solution. (http://www.naturalnews.com/028887_vaccines_B…)

It seems that the actions of the Gates foundation are entirely consistent with the formula for CO2 reduction that Bill Gates eluded to in his TED conference speech: CO2 = P x S x E x C.

By reducing birth rates (through sterilization technologies) and increasing vaccine penetration throughout the world population (by using sweat-triggered nano-vaccines), his stated goal of reducing the world population by 10 to 15 percent could be reached within just a few years.

Who will be left alive? The smart people
The interesting thing about all this is that this campaign to reduce global population through vaccines will obviously not impact people who consciously avoid vaccines. And those people, by and large, tend to be the more intelligent, capable people who actually have an improved ability to move human civilization forward with thoughtful consideration.

I can only imagine that those people designing this vaccine-induced population control measure might be sitting around a table chuckling to themselves and saying, “It’s only the stupid people that are going to be killed off anyway, so this is actually helping the future of humankind!” (Their words, not mine.)

In a weird world government kind of way, this effort might actually be based on some distorted vision of philanthropy where some of the most powerful people in the world quite literally believe the way to save humanity is to kill off as many of the gullible people as possible. Vaccines are, in effect, an “evil genius” kind of way to conduct an IQ test on the population at large: If you go get vaccinated every flu season, you’re not too bright and probably don’t engage the kind of strong mental faculties that humanity will no doubt need if it is to face a future where it is now all but obvious we are not alone in the universe.

If humanity is to save itself from its own destruction and compete as an uplifted species in our universe, killing off the least intelligent members of society (or making them infertile) may appear to the world controllers to be a perfectly reasonable approach. I disagree with that approach, but it may be precisely what they are thinking.

In any case, choosing to receive a seasonal flu shot is undoubtedly an admission that you have failed some sort of universal IQ test, whether or not this is the intention of world influencers such as Bill Gates. More importantly, it is also a betrayal of your own biology, because it indicates you don’t believe in the ability of your own immune system to protect you even from mild infections.

Perhaps the world vaccine conspirators figure that if people are willing to betray themselves anyway, it’s not much different for governments and institutions to betray them as well. In other words, if you don’t even care enough about your own health to take care of your health, why should any government care about protecting your health, either?

As you ponder this, also consider something else: The U.S. is going broke due to sick-care costs which are rising dramatically under the new federal health care reform guidelines. Can you guess the fastest and easiest way to reduce those health care costs? If you guessed, “unleash a hard-kill pandemic that takes out a significant portion of the weak or sick people” then you guessed right. Sadly, killing off those most vulnerable to sickness could save the U.S. government literally billions of dollars in sick-care expenditures. Plus, it would save Social Security yet more billions by avoiding ongoing monthly payouts. (Again, I am completely against such an approach because I value human life, but I also know we live in a world where the people in charge have little or no respect for human life and will readily sacrifice human lives to achieve their aims.)

As far as Bill Gates goes, consider his statement in the context of what we’ve discussed here: “The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

It suddenly seems to make a lot of sense when you understand that reducing the population reduces CO2 emissions, and using more vaccines on more people increases the death rate of the population.

Source: http://www.tvafrique.com/?p=177

A 2012 research showed that Ebola virus disease can spread through air.

The virus was able to travel between monkeys that was placed in seperate cages in close range. This means that an infected person could infect others close to him without a direct physical contact. This information is carefully being hidden from the public so as to reduce the rate at which preventive measures can taken thereby increasing the victimization and death toll by ebola. Be warned!.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnQVUf775VE

Source: http://www.tvafrique.com/?p=185

The ICC and international justice itself are on trial. And unless international justice prevails, war crimes committed by African and Western leaders will go unpunished and the perpetrators will thrive in a world where the only standard of justice is impunity.
For this reason alone, the ICC should seriously consider honouring the petition recently filed by Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) and charge Britain with crimes against humanity perpetrated in Iraq from 2003 to 2008.
The US and Britain invaded Iraq in blatant violation of international law in 2003 under the pretext of finding weapons of mass destruction (WMD)

charge Britain with crimes against humanity perpetrated in Iraq from 2003 to 2008
Racialist
Britain claims that the alleged crimes are under investigation and the ICC is not needed, but the idea of a government investigating its military wing for serious war crimes is a fallacy. Especially if it is a government that for years refused to accept liability for atrocities committed in Kenya and elsewhere against freedom fighters and civilians during colonialism.

The ICC is already seen as a racialist instrument of justice selectively picking and punishing Africans. Funded primarily by Europe, the ICC has to measure its financial longevity against its longevity as a court African state signatories and victims of crimes against humanity in general can trust. The New African reported in its March of 2012 issue that the ICC gets 60% of its

Imperialism
Charles TaylorThere is irony in that Charles Taylor, found guilty by the International Criminal Court (ICC) is serving his 50-year sentence in the same Britain that ran colonial gulags and committed war crimes in an illegal war in Iraq. If international justice does indeed win over financial considerations, British General Sir Peter Wall, ex-defence secretary Geoff Hoon and former defence minister Adam Ingram should join Charles Taylor in a British cell, or even better in a Liberian jail.

Throw in Kenya and the ICC becomes caught between a rock and hard place. President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto team whipped up nationalism by accusing the ICC accusers of being an instrument of imperialism and they rode that nationalism to the State House. Amongst the Kenyans and Africans who support the duo, it is the ICC on trial for persecuting Africans.

The case has been floundering and in December 2013 the prosecutor Fatou Bensouda asked the ICC to postpone saying that “Currently the case against Mr. Kenyatta does not satisfy the high evidentiary standards required at trial.”

Testify
What is happening to the witnesses? Intimidation, bribery, pressure to withdraw or just plain fear of going up against the most powerful office in Kenya? We don’t know for sure. But this much I know. If I was a peasant farmer in Kenya getting ready to testify against the men holding the most powerful offices in my country, in a climate where to do so will be seen as traitorous, and for a court whose credentials have been undermined internationally, I would certainly think twice. The ICC should have done a better job of protecting its witnesses especially after the accused took over the reigns of the state and security offices.

But ultimately what is on trial is not the ICC, Kenya or perhaps British officials. It is the very concept of international justice. This concept has been undermined by the United States refusal to ratify and be bound to international rule of law. And for good reason.
The US war against Iraq, a war forced onto the world through lies and arm twisting, with over 100,000 civilian deaths means that Bush and Cheney with Tony Blair alongside them should have been writing their memoirs while on trial for crimes against humanity. Indeed George Bush in 2011, he cancelled a trip to Switzerland where there was a threat of a warrant for his arrest.

Justice caricatured
Further undermining international justice is President Obama’s continuous flaunting of international law through drone missile strikes that often lead to the civilian deaths. His definition of who is terrorist is so broad that anyone, even the farmer who sells food to a terrorist, can be killed. Any attempt by Obama to preach to Uhuru and Kenyans about the importance of the ICC and international justice cannot be taken seriously.

But of all the insidious things though, is the idea that anyone killed by a drone attack is presumed a terrorist until proven otherwise. Anyone can see the dubiousness of this position that lays the burden on the proof on those terrorized and killed by the drones. The idea that there can be international justice turns into a caricature when the world’s leading democracy is also the leader in wanton killings, extra-judicial killings and assassinations abroad.
At the heart of the ICC’s problems is the real question of whether justice perceived as being selectively applied along racialist lines can be accepted as legitimate. If the ICC was to find Kenyatta and Ruto guilty, but with the Kenyan people feeling that justice was not served, that the two were railroaded to give cover to Western perpetrators of war crimes, can we say justice has been served? And if the victim citizens will not support the verdict, can that justice be enforced?

Selective justice
I do not believe that governments can investigate their most powerful citizens. I do not see ex-defence secretary Geoff Hoon getting 50 years in a British court. Indeed Tony Blair and his functionaries should be brought in front of the ICC and join Kenyatta and Ruto on the dock.

I believe that there is a place for the ICC if it is truly in the service of international justice. But not the ICC as it stands today, applying justice selectively while financially beholden to powerful nations that are themselves involved in crimes against humanity.w430.68de7
The way I see it – the burden of proof rests on the ICC to show the world that it can indeed serve the cause of international justice. And bringing the British architects of the war in Iraq to justice is an important first step.

Mukoma Wa Ngugi, an Assistant Professor of English at Cornell University, holds a PHD in English from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He is the author of Black Star Nairobi (Melville, 2013), Nairobi Heat (Melville, 2011) and Hurling Words at Consciousness (AWP, 2006). New African in 2013 named him one of the 100 most influential Africans.

Source: http://www.tvafrique.com/?p=174