₦airaland Forum

Ayo Adeseun (ACN,  Oyo Central) is an example of those blood-sucking pests we have to remove from our leadership space.




Texas State Budget 2010----> $91 Billion

Texas Legislator Salary------->$600/month(N90,000)

Texas Population --------------> 24 Million
(Texas is roughly the size of Nigeria and waaaaay less populated, but definitely waaaaay richer. YET, see what they pay their legislators?)



Nigerian Budget 2010---------> N4.6 Trillion($31 Billion)  

Nigerian Legislator Salary----> $1,200,000 Million (N182m)

Nigerian Population -----------> 150 Million

Ayo Adeseun is trying to justify these? calling it the cost of a "working democracy" in a country that comparatively makes "peanuts" in revenue every year? with a population of 150million people?  




For full effects:

US Legislator Salary----------->  $174,000 per year

No point stating US 2010 Budget? I will: ( $3.5 Trillion)

Population -----------------> 307 Million (barely double of our's)



I highlighted a state (Texas) with a buoyant oil economy to point out that our rot goes deep and beyond sickening. Yes, Granted, there is corruption everywhere in the world but in light of our people's poverty, our own corruption is unjustifiable and sickening.

I know my people love religion, but God can't fix what we are not ready to fix. My own proposal is that we pay legislators NO SALARY until the Nigerian economy gets to the top 10 in the world.

If you can't serve for free, go and start a business! (God knows we need those ) Let those who care about policy fix this country!


Links:

http://www.laits.utexas.edu/txp_media/html/leg/0205.html

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Texas_state_budget

http://thenationonlineng.net/web2/articles/40976/1/Senate-passes-N46tr-Budget-/Page1.html

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/senate_salaries.htm

http://www.punchng.com/Articl.aspx?theartic=art20101216521371

^^ I agree, Clayton Powell was an interesting figure really, i read about him some years back but did not delve fully into his background. People like Powell just remind you of how human those leaders were. Sometimes, that human need to seek glory and  attention can be funny really.

I think if Clayton Powell and other black politicians had "owned" the movement by using their influence and status to support and guide folks like MLK and even X much better, rather than trying to hug the limelight, the gains of the CRM would have been greater. Anyway it is what it is. The CRM in America brought great gains, but when I look at the state of AA life and influence today despite BO's achievement(we accept he's AA right?) I just can't stop thinking they could have done much better.

We in Africa could have done waaaaay better also, but we are still struggling with our own demons, can't imagine how we got then lost great voices like Lumumba, Sankara and co and still have very little to show for it.


Anyway, back to the speeches. . .

One other thought on Malcolm X:

To me, Malcolm X was not a great, poetic user of words, although he was a forceful charismatic speaker with some hair raising oratorical skills, I'm referring specifically to his words on paper. Unlike MLK, Malcolm does not invoke the same passion on paper that he does when you hear him speak.

I think that confusing and dichotomous nature of his rhetoric (Written vs Oral speech) was due to his intellectual background, he was after all a self educated man and not a poet or Phd scholar like MLK. MLK had both sides covered, he was a gifted writer/speaker, a brilliant weaver of words.

For Malcolm, I think his words tend to stagnate a little on paper, even though they rush out of his throat like a raging fire. That strange contradiction probably contributed to the con image some saw in X.

Just my opinion.

Source: African National Congress
Title: ANC: Mandela: Speech at the funeral of OR Tambo

SPEECH OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE AFRICAN NATIONAL CONGRESS, NELSON MANDELA, AT THE FUNERAL OF THE NATIONAL CHAIRPERSON OF THE ANC, OLIVER REGINALD TAMBO.

JOHANNESBURG, MAY 2, 1993.

Master of Ceremonies,

Our dear Adelaide, Thembi, Dali, Tselane and the rest of the Tambo family,

Your Majesties,

Esteemed international dignitaries,

Fellow mourners,

Comrades:

A great giant who strode the globe like a colossus has fallen.

A mind whose thoughts have opened the doors to our liberty has ceased to function.

A heart whose dreams gave hope to the despised has for ever lost its beat.

The gentle voice whose measured words of reason shook the thrones of tyrants has been silenced. Peoples of the world!

Here lies before you the body of a man who is tied to me by an umbilical cord which cannot be broken.

We say he has departed. But can we allow him to depart while we live!

Can we say Oliver Tambo is no more, while we walk this solid earth!

Oliver lived not because he could breathe.

He lived not because blood flowed through his veins.

Oliver lived not because he did all the things that all of us as ordinary men and women do.

Oliver lived because he had surrendered his very being to the people.

He lived because his very being embodied love, an idea, a hope, an aspiration, a vision.

While he lived, our minds would never quite formulate the thought that this man is other than what the unclothed eye could see.

We could sense it, but never crystallise the thought that with us was one of the few people who inhabited our own human environment, who could be described as the jewel in our crown.

I say that Oliver Tambo has not died, because the ideals for which he sacrificed his life can never die.

I say that Oliver Tambo has not died because the ideals of freedom, human dignity and a colour-blind respect for every individual cannot perish.

I say he has not died because there are many of us who became part of his soul and therefore willingly entered into a conspiracy with him, for the victory of his cause.

While the ANC lives, Oliver Tambo cannot die!

While Umkhonto we Sizwe exists, Oliver Tambo cannot die!

Oliver Tambo cannot die while his allies in the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions remain loyal to the common purpose.

O.R. cannot cease to be, while the millions of our people gather themselves into the democratic organisations that make up our own rainbow coalition.

O.R. cannot be consigned to the past, while those who are with us today from the rest of the world remain as they have been, opponents of the apartheid crime against humanity, proponents of the common vision of justice and peace, defenders of the right of the child, the man, the woman and the beast of the forest to live, to be free and to prosper.

We all know many who have killed in defence of oppression. But we also know that some of these have themselves been victims of oppression.

We know that black and white, across the globe - the Pole, the Greek, the Ethiopian, the Cuban, the Brazilian and the Eritrean, people of all nationalities, are all united in their opposition to apartheid and injustice.

While these exist, Oliver Tambo cannot perish.

Let he or she who dares, stand up and tell us that it will happen that, while humanity survives, it will come to pass that O.R. Tambo will cease to be.

All tyrants, whatever their colour and their shape and their garments, come today and are gone tomorrow. The people, the victims of their tyranny, live on.

All tyrannical systems, whatever the name they give themselves - nazism, colonialism, apartheid, racism are some of their names - all, without exception, come today and tomorrow are no more than a bad memory.

The opponents of tyranny -

the South African, Oliver Tambo,

the South African, Chris Hani,

the South African, Albert Luthuli,

the Indian. Indira Gandhi,

the Indian, Rajiv Gandhi,

the Grenadian, Maurice Bishop,

the Zimbabweans, Herbert Chitepo, Jason Moyo and Josiah Tongogara,

the Mozambican, Samora Machel,

the Swede. Olof Palme,

the Americans, Martin Luther King Jr, John F. Kennedy and[b] Malcolm X[/b],

the Angolan, Aghostino Neto,

the Guinean. Amilcar Cabral,

the Nigerian, Murtala Mohamed,

the Chilean, Salvador Allende,

the Ghanaian, Kwame Nkrumah,

the Egyptian, Abdul Gamal Nasser,

the Motswana, Seretse Khama,

the Swazi, King Sobhuza II,

the woman, the man, the son, the daughter, the unknown soldier, the nameless heroes and heroines for whom no songs of praise are sung

all of them continue, still, to speak to us because they live.

Dear brother:

You set yourself a task which only the brave would dare. Somewhere in the mystery of your essence, you heard the call that you must devote your life to the creation of a new South African nation.

And having heard that call, you did not hesitate to act.

It may be that all of us - your dear wife, Adelaide, your children, those of us who are proud to count ourselves among your friends, your closest comrades - it may be that all of us will never be able to discover what it was in your essence which convinced you that you, and us, could, by our conscious and deliberate actions, so heal our fractured society that out of the terrible heritage, there could be born a nation.

All humanity knows what you had to do to create the conditions for all of us to reach this glorious end.

The are many who did not understand that to heal we had to lance the boil.

There are many who still do not understand that the obedient silence of the enslaved is not the reward of Peace which is our due.

There are some who cannot comprehend that the right to rebellion against tyranny is the very guarantee of the permanence of freedom.

We demand answers from all those who have set themselves up as your critics, but still dare to call themselves democrats.

We want to know - if life itself was threatened, as apartheid threatened the very existence of those who are black, was it not imperative that everything be done to end apartheid~ and if necessary by force of arms!

We want to know - if a crime against humanity was being perpetrated, as did the apartheid system, was it not necessary to ensure that the criminals were isolated and quarantined, and if necessary by the imposition of sanctions!

We want to know - if a social system was established whose central pillars were racial oppression and exploitation, such as the apartheid system was, would it not be correct that such a system be rendered unworkable and such a society ungovernable!

We want to know - when powerful, arrogant and brutal men deliberately close their ears to reason, and reply to the petitions of the dispossessed with the thunder of the guns, the crack of the whip and the rattle of the jail keys, is it not right to bring down the walls of Jericho!

Dear brother, dear friend, dear comrade:

You did all this and continued to maintain tolerance for your detractors and a healthy scorn for your enemies.

Today we stand watching the dawn of a new day.

We can see that we have it in our power to remake South Africa into what you wanted it to be - free, just, prosperous, at peace with itself and with the world.

Let all who value peace say together - long live Oliver Tambo!

Let all who love freedom say together - long live Oliver Tambo!

Let all who uphold the dignity of all human beings say together - long live Oliver Tambo!

Let all who stand for friendship among the peoples say together - long live Oliver Tambo!

Let all of us who live say that while we live, the ideals for which Oliver Tambo lived, sacrificed and died will not die!

Let all of us who live, say that while we live, Oliver Tambo will not die!

May he, for his part, rest in peace.

Go well, my brother and farewell, dear friend.

As you instructed, we will bring peace to our tormented land.

As you directed, we will bring freedom to the oppressed and liberation to the oppressor.

As you strived, we will restore the dignity of the dehumanised.

As you commanded, we will defend the option of a peaceful resolution of our problems.

As you prayed, we will respond to the cries of the wretched of the earth. As you loved them, we will, always, stretch out a hand of endearment to those who are your flesh and blood.

In all this, we will not fail you.

Source:  http://www.polity.org.za/article/anc-mandela-speech-at-the-funeral-of-or-tambo-02051993-1993-05-02

[quote author=isale_gan2 link=topic=672198.msg8369819#msg8369819 date=1306044911]I previously hinted at my "shocking" opinions about Malcolm in my home thread.  I'll link it shortly.  (https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-590933.1792.html#msg8075212)

On Malcolm, I am not an ardent scholar of his either.  Succinctly, I see a lifelong con artist.  A decade or so ago, primarily through the works of Spike Lee and a backlash from young Black Americans due to the disaffection at the dearth of true firebrand Black leaders, there was a resurgence of the legend and myth of the X.  Despite pronouncements to the contrary, I do not see him as being at the level of an MLK.  As a scholar, a speaker of a genuine correctly motivated leader.  I look at him, and I'm sorry, I see a lifelong con artist and self-promoter.  There is doubt his house was firebombed by the people he accused; he may have done it himself - provide proof to the contrary.  At one point, he portrayed himself as a concerned moralistic leader who was simply trying to expose the failings of Elijah Muhammad with regard to inappropriate relationships that Malcolm claimed the man was having with females in the NOI - something Malcolm went about publicising in a truly unimaginable way; come to find out, Malcolm himself was having a relationship with one of those women.  I have a lot of doubts about him.  I don't buy into the hype.  The only thing I know is the dude didn't shoot himself, but he was a media hound before the term even came into being.  

I'll let you digest that.  The big one is too big and might give you a coronary. (God forbid!) I'll see how you deal with the above before I drop it on ya.  

BTW, I know you were kidding, but I don't question his adherence to the NOI version of Islam, and I have no feelings about his marital life; I don't know if he kept Betty in purdah though.  There were issues with one of their children, and later, her child who ended up setting a fire that eventually resulted in the death of Betty.


You didn't say what you thought about the speech, Ballot or Bullet.[/quote]It is a funny coincidence that my comment right below your Malcolm X "expose" post on the other thread would have been a good reply to the post itself, but I won't do that here LOL. You know I did not see that post at that time right? I guess the conversation overshadowed it.

Anyway, Skepticism is good, I believe it refines and strengthens society. I still don't think Mr. Marable's works took anything fundamental away from the reality of Malcolm X's struggles. His personal conflict with Elijah Mohammed and his ever changing method can't nullify his message, work and struggle against oppression. stuffs like this "peeling away" matter can only do damage to folks who view fellow human beings as some kind of demi-gods because of their status or public accomplishments.

Now, we can definitely question his self-aggrandizement and other weaknesses, but that shouldn't take too much away from the message he was trying to pass across or remove from the realities of that period. Malcom X had charisma and he definitely profited from it, that was obvious, but to belittle his message because of his personal battle with Elijah Mohammed or because he courted the media or the limelight will be a bit unfair. Malcolm is still an imperfect human being.

That write up also indicted the FBI and US authorities BTW, I guess we will never know the Truth, we can only guess.

The bit about their disagreement over a love interest is very interesting indeed. The problem wey fine fine girls dey cause sha, I can't count how many revolutions they've cut short. hmm



I saw the quote below in that NYT review. I think the Buhari Vs GEJ "after-election" Nairaland drama group can sure use it:

"extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. ” -Barry Goldwater

[quote author=isale_gan2 link=topic=672198.msg8369537#msg8369537 date=1306037639]Thanks for all your contributions.  Some feedback/discussion might shed more light on some of the featured speakers, and the impact of their speech(s).

I am ambivalent about Malcolm X.  I am curious to know your thoughts on him, Kilode, seeing as you posted two of his speeches.  What I have to say may shock you. lol.

I read the above, The Ballot or the Bullet, and have strong opinions about it.  But I wish to wait till you're around before I tackle it.  I don't want to post and give you ample time to hit me hard.

To All: Please keep the great speeches coming.  [/quote]"I'm speaking as a victim of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I don't see any American dream; I see an American nightmare" -Malcom Omowale X

I'm not a Malcolm X expert, But I've read a fair amount of his work and a few other works on his liberation struggle.

Malcolm X was a freedom fighter, but I will also argue that his greatest conflict was against his own personal beliefs. On his politics, Personally, I think every revolution needs a Malcolm X as much as they need an MLK. They were both struggling for the same things with different tools.

We must also realize that Malcolm was a product of the harsh American system, his progression from an hardcore angry revolutionary to a milder fighter after his cathartic Mecca and African pilgrimages shows an ability to confront the issues around him, learn and honestly decide on what part to take. I specifically like that aspect of his history as I know it.

I know he invites passionate reactions, but hey, he's neither Ghandi nor MLK and he's not perfect, but we cannot deny that he was passionate about his beliefs.

BTW, I think if Macolm and MLK had lived much longer, African-Americans would've been able to make better use of the gains of that civil rights era. another topic

So Isale, what's your "strong opinion" about Brotha Malcom? he was not a good muslim? he kept his wife in purdah? j/k

joecrack:
Na eternity wen God himsef arrange,som of una they joke with,pls everything does nt have to comedy,whats the meaning abacha,osama,loose girls etc in heaven.make God 4give wuna.

See this bros, Your mates don enter paradise finish, you still dey form aggros for earth

lastpage:
@manny4life The highlighted part refers:
You can be a citizen of another country without "voluntarily acquiring" (deliberate action on your part) and taking allegiance to that country THROUGH CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH!
That is, when your parents giv birth to you in the US, for example. It is "AUTOMATIC". You have no say, not your problem, as a baby!

Having said that MOST PEOPLE are still missing the POINT!

This case has NOTHING to do with "dual citizenship".
It is legal and acceptable both in Nigeria and U.S. Lets not waste time on that angle please

The issue that is key in this argument is: The Nigerian constitution says: If you VOLUNTARILY ACQUIRE (Naturalization) CITIZENSHIP OF ANOTHER COUNTRY AND SWEAR ALLEGIANCE TO IT, YOU CANT BE A GOVERNOR IN NIGERIA.

The TEST is whether Ajumobi fulfills those "Red Areas" of my last paragraph!

NOTE: He has said that he did NOT acquire (Not an) American citizenship; just legal Residence.
In which case, he could not have sworn allegiance to another country!

Anything from the above claim, he will certainly have gone foul of the constitution.


As for others like Bukola, Ibori, Mark, Everyday for the thief, "Just one day" for the owner! About time!

Personal Opinion: I think the issue of conflict of interest is what the constitution (like hat of the U.S also) is trying to prevent!
No wonder these our political rulers dont give a darn about the country's development! They dont have "its interest" upper-mos in their heart!

Nuff said.

BTW: Ekt-bear, why do you result to vulgarity, so easily? Calm down naaah?

{I know Ajimobi said he's not a US citizen}



Lastpage I get your point, but what do you think about the judgement below and it's implications for a Nigerian with dual US/Nigerian citizenship who might want to contest for Governorship? first, I will give my opinion on the issue;


MY OPINION: It will be unfair for the Nigerian Supreme Court to rule that a Nigerian born in Nigeria cannot become a Governor or even President simply because they took an administrative oath of allegiance and naturalization in America. I suspect they will agree with Judge Chikere on this issue.

Why: Nigeria is not America, most people's ancestral tie to The Nigerian space clearly goes beyond that yeye 1914 British amalgamation. I will even argue that a Nigerian with Nigerian born parents should be able to contest for any elective post, this is in line with section 28 which automatically gave them Nigerian citizenship because of their parents.

Nigerians with Nigerian ancestry are like Aboriginal American Indians IMO, they are citizens by default. If a NIGERIAN HAS NOT EXPRESSLY RENOUNCED THEIR CITIZENSHIP OFFICIALLY THROUGH A DESIGNATED NIGERIAN AUTHORITY, I see no reason why we should deny them ANY citizenship rights. Except they committed a crime that can nullify that privilege.

MY OPINION: While I understand the issue of CONFLICT OF INTEREST, I think we also have to consider that in the last 30 to 40 decades we have seen an unprecedented economic migration -brain drain- of the Nigerian middle class into North America and Europe. It will be a sad and injurious public policy/Law if the Nigerian Supreme Court gives a ruling that will essentially turn those people into second class Nigerian citizens with no chance of competing for the highest elective post in their country of birth and state of origin. Thereby denying us the opportunity we can derive from their expertise and knowledge.

I'll repeat, Nigeria is not America, This country was created differently and the peculiarities of that creation must be considered. Although I am not a Naturalized Citizen of any country, If I were one, I will like to read the justification for such a ruling for naturalized US citizens who were born In Nigeria, considering that my ancestry predates the present geographical expression called Nigeria. I will definitely want to challenge such decision by campaigning for a constitutional amendment.

To also stress how such a ruling will unduly discriminate against Nigerian born naturalized US citizens for example, We must consider the fact that they can never become US presidents, due to the provisions of Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution. So in essence, they get denied an opportunity to aspire to the the highest offices by both countries! (i guess that also shows that their oath to America get K-leg sef   )

I will like to also point out the bolded part of this provision in the Nigerian Constitution:

"

137(1) A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President

         if— (a)  [b]subject to the provisions of Section 28 of this Constitution, he has

         voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a country other than Nigeria or,

         except in such cases as may be prescribed by the National Assembly, he has

         made a declaration of allegiance to such other country"[/b]

Does that mean that they can go ahead and contest if they fulfill the citizenship eligibility requirements of section 28? because that will make a lot of sense.


Finally, this would have been an interesting legal drama to watch, unfortunately, Ajimobi (by his own admission), is not a US citizen. I wish he was a Naturalized US citizen so this case can get to the Supreme Court and help us in the process of perfecting our laws.

See the NDP candidates Vs INEC case below;

http://www.nigerianmuse.com/important_documents/?u=Odidi_Bello_Dual_Citizenship_Judgement.htm

homerac7:
Kilode n Seanet my guys,

first of all, congratulobia for making d rapture wt me.

How far na, una go show for d welcome gig for Royal King David banquette hall for New Jeru plaza later ds evening? I hear say na Osama dey in charge of "domestic entertainment" allocation ds evening o, make una no dull at all.

Make una holla when una reach, we need to form NL kparakpo dia.

Bros your number is not reachable o, you sure say you dey heaven so?

Anyway, Get a glo sim, Angels just told us MTN network is not good in paradise, but very strong on the other side sha.

Sani Abacha dey hia too o, he runs a day care center

Another worthy ancestor of mine 

https://newsreel.org/titleimages/THOMAS-SANKARA-THE-UPRIGHT-MAN.jpg

Thomas Sankara

On debt

[Thomas Sankara’s Speech [French w/ English Transcript] At The Organisation of African Unity, July 1987. Three Months Later He Was Assassinated.]


Copied from: http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2009/05/10/thomas-sankaras-speech-french-w-english-transcript-at-the-organisation-of-african-unity-july-1987-three-months-later-he-was-assassinated/



“We think that debt has to be seen from the standpoint of its origins. Debt’s origins come from colonialism’s origins. Those who lend us money are those who had colonized us before. They are those who used to manage our states and economies.

Colonizers are those who indebted Africa through their brothers and cousins who were the lenders. We had no connections with this debt. Therefore we cannot pay for it. Debt is neo-colonialism, in which colonizers transformed themselves into “technical assistants”. We should better say “technical assassins”.

They present us with financing, with financial backers. As if someone’s back could create development. We have been advised to go to these lenders. We have been proposed with nice financial set-ups. We have been indebted for fifty, sixty years and even more. That means we have been led to compromise our people for fifty years and more.

Under its current form, that is imperialism controlled, debt is a cleverly managed reconquest of Africa, aiming at subjugating its growth and development through foreign rules. Thus, each one of us becomes the financial slave, which is to say a true slave, of those who had been treacherous enough to put money in our countries with obligations for us to repay. We are told to repay, but it is not a moral issue. It is not about this so-called honour of repaying or not.

Mister President, we have been listening and applauding Norway’s prime minister when she spoke right here. She is European but she said that the whole debt cannot be repaid. Debt cannot be repaid, first because if we don’t repay, lenders will not die. That is fore sure. But if we repay, we are going to die.

That is also for sure.

Those who led us to indebting had gambled as if in a casino. As long as they had gains, there was no debate. But now that they suffer losses, they demand repayment. And we talk about crisis. No, Mr President, they played, they lost, that’s the rule of the game, and life goes on. We cannot repay because we don’t have any means to do so. We cannot pay because we are not responsible for this debt. We cannot repay but the others owe us what the greatest wealth could never repay, that is blood debt. Our blood had flowed.

We hear about the Marshall plan that rebuilt Europe’s economy. But we never hear about the African plan which allowed Europe to face Hitlerian hoardes when their economies and their stability were at stake.

Who saved Europe? Africa. One rarely mentions it, to such a point that we cannot be the accomplices of that thankless silence. If others cannot sing our praises, at least we must say that our fathers had been courageous and that our troops had saved Europe and set the world free from Nazism.

Debt is also the result of confrontation.

When we are told about economic crisis, nobody says that this crisis didn’t come about suddenly. The crisis had always been there but it got worse each time that popular masses become more and more conscious of their rights against exploiters.

We are in a crisis today because masses refuse wealth to be concentrated into a few individual’s hands.

We are in crisis because some people are saving huge sums of money on foreign bank accounts that would be enough to develop Africa. We are in a crisis because we are facing this private wealth that we cannot name.

Popular masses don’t want to live in ghettos and slums. We are in a crisis because everywhere people refuse to repeat the  problems of Soweto and Johannesburg.

There is a struggle, and its amplification worry those with the financial power. Now we are asked to be accomplices for a balancing. A balance favouring those with the financial power. A balancing against popular masses.

No! We cannot be accomplices. No! We cannot go with those who suck our people’s blood and live on our people’s sweat. We cannot go with them in their murdering methods.

Mr President, we hear about clubs – club of Rome, club of Paris, club everywhere. We hear about Group of Five, Group of Seven, Group of Ten, and maybe Group of A Hundred. And what else? It is normal that we too have our own club and our own group. Let’s Addis Adeba becoming from now the center from which will come a new breath. A club of Addis Adeba.

It is our duty to create an Addis Adeba’s unified front against debt. That is the only way to assert that refusing to repay is not an aggressive move on our part, but a fraternal move to speak the truth.

Furthermore, popular masses of Europe are not opposed to popular masses of Africa. Those who want to exploit Africa are those who exploit Europe, too. We have a common enemy. So our club of Addis Adeba will have to explain to each and all that debt shall not be repaid. And by saying that, we are not against morals, dignity and keeping one’s word. We think we don’t have the same morality as others… [to be continued]“

Freedom For All

First Address of Chief Obafemi Awolowo As President of the Action Group
On 28th April, 1951

To the Conference of Party Members at Owo
 
 
Gentlemen,

The pleasant duty of introducing the Action Group has been entrusted to me.
 
On the 21st March of this year, the Action Group was introduced to the public through the Press, and its aims and objectives were clearly set out.
 
Since then the Action Group has been unfolding itself and fulfilling its aims and objectives more by action than by words.  The most eloquent tribute to the growing strength of this young organization is that all those who are gathered here this morning – accredited representatives of the entire Western Region – are members of the Action Group.
 
The aims and objectives of the Action Group have not only been published as I said, but are contained in the Draft Constitution, copies of which have been forwarded to you.  I will not, therefore, take your time by repeating them.
 
There are, however, two items in the aims and objectives which I should like to emphasise, since they are the very basis of the Action Group.  I refer to items (1) and (3).  The two are complementary and they read as follows:
 
(1)    To bring and organize within its fold nationalists in the Western Region, so that they may work together as a united group, and submit themselves to party loyalty and discipline        
(2)    To prepare and present to the public programmes for all Departments of Government, and to strive faithfully to ensure the effectuation of such programmes through those of its members that are elected into the Western House of Assembly and the Federal Legislature.
 
The attainment of these two aims implies [identification] of adherence to basic principles, and [identification] of methods in the application of the principles.
 
If any group of people fail to agree as to basic principles and as to the methods to be adopted in applying those principles, it is impossible for them to work within the same fold, and to submit themselves to party loyalty and discipline.
 
The basic principles which have brought the members of the Action Group together are summarized in the following motto:
 
                        LIFE MORE ABUNDANT
                        FREEDOM FOR ALL
 
It is our belief that the people of Western Nigeria in particular, and of Nigeria in general would have life more abundant when they enjoy:
 
(i)                  Freedom from British Rule
(ii)                Freedom from Ignorance
(iii)               Freedom from Disease and
(iv)              Freedom from Want.
 
In our view, the rule of one nation by another is unnatural and unjust.  It is maintained either by might or by complete subordination, through crafty means, of the will and self-respect of the subject people to the political self-aggrandisement of the tutelary power.  There can be no satisfactory substitute for self-rule.
 
Therefore, British tutelage is to be denounced without any reservation.  In principles,  it is indefensible.  In practice, it has been characterized by extreme planlessness and disregard for the vital interests of the people.
 
After almost 100 years of British Rule, our land is still riddle with unspeakable ignorance, disease and want.
 
An ignorant and poverty-stricken people are the easiest preys to political enslavement and economic exploitation.  Diseases of all kinds follow in the wake of ignorance and want.
 
The basic principles which, therefore, have brought us together within the fold of the Action Group may be stated in the following words:
 
1)      The immediate termination of British Rule in every phase of our political life.
2)      The education of all children of school-going age, and the general enlightenment of all illiterate adults and all illiterate children above the school-going age.
3)      The provision of health and general welfare for all our people.
4)      The total abolition of want in our society by means of any economic polity which is both expedient and effective.
 
Having agreed on these basic principles, it becomes necessary to take the next step, namely:  to agree as to common methods in the application of those principles.  This is a very important step:  because, even though people may agree as to principles, if they don’t agree as to methods of application it would not be possible for them to work together.
 
It is in order to evolve those common methods that some members of the Action Group were commissioned to prepare papers not only on Government Departmental subjects but also on the organizational problems of the Action Group.
 
It will be our duty at this at this Conference to declare our irrevocable adherence to the principles already enunciated and to fashion out from the papers which are already submitted on various subjects what our common methods of application shall be.
 
Once we have succeeded in doing these two things the fulfillment of our aims and objectives is well-nigh achieved.  All that we would need in addition would be persistence and consistency in the pursuit of our principles, and resolution and discipline in the execution of our common methods of application.
 
I would like to say that this, in my humble opinion, is the first time in the annals of Nigeria that a political party is reared on a really scientific basis.  For if all the leading members in the Action Group have more or less identical conceptions as to the principles which shall guide their activities, and jointly evolve common methods of applying those principles, it is my firm conviction that the organization will be successful and lasting.
 
Only we must make sure about two things, namely:  that our principles are just, and that our methods are practical.  For nothing defeats their own ends so easily as unjust principles and impractical methods of approach.
 
With these few remarks, I believe that I have succeeded in portraying to you the rock-sure foundation on which the Action Group is erected.  We are here in this historic Conference to reinforce and to add to the superstructure already built, by the pledge of the leaders inhabiting the two Zones (YORUBA AND MIDWESTERN or WESTERN AND EASTERN) of the Western Region.
 
It is true we speak different languages;  but it does not require any laborious research to discover that, broadly speaking, we originated from common stock; and that in any event our political and cultural associations have been of such long standing as to make us look upon one another as close relations.  And above all, we are Nigerians whom both Nature and Constitution have joined together.  It is within our power to remain together.
 
In the first release of the Action Group it  has been made abundantly clear both in item (5) of the aims and objectives and in the body of the release that it is not the intention of the Action Group to embark on Regional politics exclusively.  It is sheer necessity that has compelled us to decide to get together to put our own house in order.
 
As an earnest of our good faith, the subjects on which policy papers have been prepared are not confined to Regional subjects but cover Central subjects as well.
 
Furthermore, the Action Group is not meant to be an ad-hoc or temporary organization.  It has come to stay and it will live forever.
 
We have promised, and we mean to abide by our word, that if a countrywide organization acceptable to all is established, we would not hesitate to become the Western Regional Working Committee of such an organization.  But it is clear now from all accounts that such an organization will not emerge before the general elections under the new Constitution.
 
It must, therefore, be our hope and our endeavour that as soon as we have duly consolidated and strengthened our position throughout the Western Region, we should, in cooperation with nationalists in other Regions, influence the formation of a countrywide organization on the same realistic and scientific lines as the Action Group.
 
I have no doubt that we all know that the realization of all our aims and objectives depends chiefly on our having a substantial majority in the Western House of Assembly.  With unity, determination and hard work, it should not be difficult for us to get all our candidates elected into that Assembly.
 
We are not fighting for seats in the House of Assembly because we desire power for its sake.  We believe that, in a partial sense though, the new Constitution affords us an opportunity to be of better service to our people.  We are a party – in fact the only party in Nigeria definite ideas and practical programmes for the advancement of Nigeria towards early freedom and prosperity.
 
Our enemies and detractors are already at work.  They are seeking to dwarf our stature in order to delude the public that they are taller than we are.  They are also seeking to divert us from our noble and constructive courses in to the barren land of petty strife and fruitless controversy.
 
I believe I am voicing your sentiments, when I say that we do not  grudge other parties their professed popularity and excellence.
 
But it is mean and cowardly, and an evidence of weakness and utter demerit, for any group of people to attempt to commend themselves to the public by the negative process of belittling and condemning others.  Strong, courageous, resourceful and self-confident people are never afraid of rivals or competitors.
 
It is not an easy matter to resist the temptation of being dragged down the drains of bitter recriminations and press war.  But if we are to attain our objectives we must resolve to pursue our course unflinchingly without paying the slightest heed ‘to the envious, and the asses that bray.’
 
What our people want to know above all things else is not the defect or incapacity of this or that organization, but the plans and programmes which we have for improving their lots and the relative merits of such plans and programmes. 
 
Such plans and programmes we have;  and what is more they are plans and programmes which could be put into execution within a period of five years.
 
Our line of action is therefore clear.  Whilst our enemies and detractors busy themselves with abusing and decrying us, we should direct all the machinery of our publicity towards the propagation of the excellence and the relative superiority of our programmes and the suitability of the men who will put forward to execute them.
 
In this way we would succeed in commending ourselves to the public by our sheer merits and our merits only.  This in my view is a nobler attitude;  and if we remain true to it, we are bound to succeed where our detractors fail.
 
 
Taken from  “Voice of Reason:  Selected Speeches of Chief Obafemi Awolowo” Vol. 1, Fagbamigbe Publishers (1981) Pages 195-200 via: http://www.dawodu.com/awolowo10.htm

Yes. I'm posting from Paradise

Mai Suya:
^^^It might interest you to note that the man has even claimed he is not a dual citizen.

Pray, what then is he?

If his claim is true, then case dismissed.

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=671417.msg8366787#msg8366787 date=1305993204]@ekt_bear,

Go and read the Oath of citizenship of the US.

Excerpt from oath of citizenship of the US:

I hereby declare, on oath,

•that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;

Ajimobi should be very worried.[/quote]What you are concerned about is no longer enforced in the USA. The oath itself has little to no teeth in reality (in regards to most folks with Dual citizenships). Ajimobi has little to be afraid of really. Even the US grappled with situations like that before relaxing their administration of the oath, it's enforcement and implication for naturalized citizens.

One good thing to keep in mind is that Judges are generally not dumb people, they think about the far reaching public policy implications of judicial decisions.

Nigeria as a state, is a federation of several communities bound together by law, circumstance and history. It will be very hard to cut an Ibadan man from his right to the privileges of Nigerian citizenship when Ibadan is still part of Nigeria. IMO

Also a similar case: Nigerian Democrats Party Vs INEC was decided in favor of NDP presidential and VP candidates despite their Canadian and USA citizenships. I see no reason why a governorhip case should be decided differently.

See this explanation by a US lawyer:

Question: But I thought US law didn't permit one to be a dual citizen -- that if you were (by birth or otherwise), you either had to give up the other citizenship when you came of age, or else you'd lose your US status. And that if you became a citizen of another country, you'd automatically lose your US citizenship. So what's all this talk about dual citizenship?

Answer: It indeed used to be the case in the US that you couldn't hold dual citizenship (except in certain cases if you had dual citizenship from birth or childhood, in which case some Supreme Court rulings -- Perkins v. Elg (1939), Mandoli v. Acheson (1952), and Kawakita v. U.S. (1952) -- permitted you to keep both). However, most of the laws forbidding dual citizenship were struck down by the US Supreme Court in two cases: a 1967 decision, Afroyim v. Rusk, as well as a second ruling in 1980, Vance v. Terrazas.

Rules against dual citizenship still apply to some extent -- at least in theory -- to people who wish to become US citizens via naturalization. The Supreme Court chose to leave in place the requirement that new citizens must renounce their old citizenship during US naturalization. However, in practice, the State Department is no longer doing anything in the vast majority of situations where a new citizen's "old country" refuses to recognize the US renunciation and continues to consider the person's original citizenship to be in effect.

The official US State Department policy on dual citizenship today is that the United States does not favor it as a matter of policy because of various problems they feel it may cause, but the existence of dual citizenship is recognized (i.e., accepted) as a fact of life. That is, if you ask them if you ought to become a dual citizen, they will recommend against doing it; but if you tell them you are a dual citizen, they'll almost always say it's OK.

Public policy implications sometimes trump legalistic ones.

Ok, one more Malcom

I once read somewhere that Malcolm X told the US government: "If you won't deal with Brother Martin(MLK, non-violent) You will have to deal with me"

I don't think any government wants too many Malcom X on their streets.


The Ballot or the Bullet
by Malcolm X
April 3, 1964
Cleveland, Ohio



Mr. Moderator, Brother Lomax, brothers and sisters, friends and enemies: I just can't believe everyone in here is a friend, and I don't want to leave anybody out. The question tonight, as I understand it, is "The Negro Revolt, and Where Do We Go From Here?" or What Next?" In my little humble way of understanding it, it points toward either the ballot or the bullet.

Before we try and explain what is meant by the ballot or the bullet, I would like to clarify something concerning myself. I'm still a Muslim; my religion is still Islam. That's my personal belief. Just as Adam Clayton Powell is a Christian minister who heads the Abyssinian Baptist Church in New York, but at the same time takes part in the political struggles to try and bring about rights to the black people in this country; and Dr. Martin Luther King is a Christian minister down in Atlanta, Georgia, who heads another organization fighting for the civil rights of black people in this country; and Reverend Galamison, I guess you've heard of him, is another Christian minister in New York who has been deeply involved in the school boycotts to eliminate segregated education; well, I myself am a minister, not a Christian minister, but a Muslim minister; and I believe in action on all fronts by whatever means necessary.

Although I'm still a Muslim, I'm not here tonight to discuss my religion. I'm not here to try and change your religion. I'm not here to argue or discuss anything that we differ about, because it's time for us to submerge our differences and realize that it is best for us to first see that we have the same problem, a common problem, a problem that will make you catch hell whether you're a Baptist, or a Methodist, or a Muslim, or a nationalist. Whether you're educated or illiterate, whether you live on the boulevard or in the alley, you're going to catch hell just like I am. We're all in the same boat and we all are going to catch the same hell from the same man. He just happens to be a white man. All of us have suffered here, in this country, political oppression at the hands of the white man, economic exploitation at the hands of the white man, and social degradation at the hands of the white man.

Now in speaking like this, it doesn't mean that we're anti-white, but it does mean we're anti-exploitation, we're anti-degradation, we're anti-oppression. And if the white man doesn't want us to be anti-him, let him stop oppressing and exploiting and degrading us. Whether we are Christians or Muslims or nationalists or agnostics or atheists, we must first learn to forget our differences. If we have differences, let us differ in the closet; when we come out in front, let us not have anything to argue about until we get finished arguing with the man. If the late President Kennedy could get together with Khrushchev and exchange some wheat, we certainly have more in common with each other than Kennedy and Khrushchev had with each other.

If we don't do something real soon, I think you'll have to agree that we're going to be forced either to use the ballot or the bullet. It's one or the other in 1964. It isn't that time is running out -- time has run out!

1964 threatens to be the most explosive year America has ever witnessed. The most explosive year. Why? It's also a political year. It's the year when all of the white politicians will be back in the so-called Negro community jiving you and me for some votes. The year when all of the white political crooks will be right back in your and my community with their false promises, building up our hopes for a letdown, with their trickery and their treachery, with their false promises which they don't intend to keep. As they nourish these dissatisfactions, it can only lead to one thing, an explosion; and now we have the type of black man on the scene in America today -- I'm sorry, Brother Lomax -- who just doesn't intend to turn the other cheek any longer.

Don't let anybody tell you anything about the odds are against you. If they draft you, they send you to Korea and make you face 800 million Chinese. If you can be brave over there, you can be brave right here. These odds aren't as great as those odds. And if you fight here, you will at least know what you're fighting for.

I'm not a politician, not even a student of politics; in fact, I'm not a student of much of anything. I'm not a Democrat. I'm not a Republican, and I don't even consider myself an American. If you and I were Americans, there'd be no problem. Those Honkies that just got off the boat, they're already Americans; Polacks are already Americans; the Italian refugees are already Americans. Everything that came out of Europe, every blue-eyed thing, is already an American. And as long as you and I have been over here, we aren't Americans yet.

Well, I am one who doesn't believe in deluding myself. I'm not going to sit at your table and watch you eat, with nothing on my plate, and call myself a diner. Sitting at the table doesn't make you a diner, unless you eat some of what's on that plate. Being here in America doesn't make you an American. Being born here in America doesn't make you an American. Why, if birth made you American, you wouldn't need any legislation; you wouldn't need any amendments to the Constitution; you wouldn't be faced with civil-rights filibustering in Washington, D.C., right now. They don't have to pass civil-rights legislation to make a Polack an American.

No, I'm not an American. I'm one of the 22 million black people who are the victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million black people who are the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy. So, I'm not standing here speaking to you as an American, or a patriot, or a flag-saluter, or a flag-waver -- no, not I. I'm speaking as a victim of this American system. And I see America through the eyes of the victim. I don't see any American dream; I see an American nightmare.

These 22 million victims are waking up. Their eyes are coming open. They're beginning to see what they used to only look at. They're becoming politically mature. They are realizing that there are new political trends from coast to coast. As they see these new political trends, it's possible for them to see that every time there's an election the races are so close that they have to have a recount. They had to recount in Massachusetts to see who was going to be governor, it was so close. It was the same way in Rhode Island, in Minnesota, and in many other parts of the country. And the same with Kennedy and Nixon when they ran for president. It was so close they had to count all over again. Well, what does this mean? It means that when white people are evenly divided, and black people have a bloc of votes of their own, it is left up to them to determine who's going to sit in the White House and who's going to be in the dog house.

lt. was the black man's vote that put the present administration in Washington, D.C. Your vote, your dumb vote, your ignorant vote, your wasted vote put in an administration in Washington, D.C., that has seen fit to pass every kind of legislation imaginable, saving you until last, then filibustering on top of that. And your and my leaders have the audacity to run around clapping their hands and talk about how much progress we're making. And what a good president we have. If he wasn't good in Texas, he sure can't be good in Washington, D.C. Because Texas is a lynch state. It is in the same breath as Mississippi, no different; only they lynch you in Texas with a Texas accent and lynch you in Mississippi with a Mississippi accent. And these Negro leaders have the audacity to go and have some coffee in the White House with a Texan, a Southern cracker -- that's all he is -- and then come out and tell you and me that he's going to be better for us because, since he's from the South, he knows how to deal with the Southerners. What kind of logic is that? Let Eastland be president, he's from the South too. He should be better able to deal with them than Johnson.

In this present administration they have in the House of Representatives 257 Democrats to only 177 Republicans. They control two-thirds of the House vote. Why can't they pass something that will help you and me? In the Senate, there are 67 senators who are of the Democratic Party. Only 33 of them are Republicans. Why, the Democrats have got the government sewed up, and you're the one who sewed it up for them. And what have they given you for it? Four years in office, and just now getting around to some civil-rights legislation. Just now, after everything else is gone, out of the way, they're going to sit down now and play with you all summer long -- the same old giant con game that they call filibuster. All those are in cahoots together. Don't you ever think they're not in cahoots together, for the man that is heading the civil-rights filibuster is a man from Georgia named Richard Russell. When Johnson became president, the first man he asked for when he got back to Washington, D.C., was "Dicky" -- that's how tight they are. That's his boy, that's his pal, that's his buddy. But they're playing that old con game. One of them makes believe he's for you, and he's got it fixed where the other one is so tight against you, he never has to keep his promise.

So it's time in 1964 to wake up. And when you see them coming up with that kind of conspiracy, let them know your eyes are open. And let them know you -- something else that's wide open too. It's got to be the ballot or the bullet. The ballot or the bullet. If you're afraid to use an expression like that, you should get on out of the country; you should get back in the cotton patch; you should get back in the alley. They get all the Negro vote, and after they get it, the Negro gets nothing in return. All they did when they got to Washington was give a few big Negroes big jobs. Those big Negroes didn't need big jobs, they already had jobs. That's camouflage, that's trickery, that's treachery, window-dressing. I'm not trying to knock out the Democrats for the Republicans. We'll get to them in a minute. But it is true; you put the Democrats first and the Democrats put you last.

Look at it the way it is. What alibis do they use, since they control Congress and the Senate? What alibi do they use when you and I ask, "Well, when are you going to keep your promise?" They blame the Dixiecrats. What is a Dixiecrat? A Democrat. A Dixiecrat is nothing but a Democrat in disguise. The titular head of the Democrats is also the head of the Dixiecrats, because the Dixiecrats are a part of the Democratic Party. The Democrats have never kicked the Dixiecrats out of the party. The Dixiecrats bolted themselves once, but the Democrats didn't put them out. Imagine, these lowdown Southern segregationists put the Northern Democrats down. But the Northern Democrats have never put the Dixiecrats down. No, look at that thing the way it is. They have got a con game going on, a political con game, and you and I are in the middle. It's time for you and me to wake up and start looking at it like it is, and trying to understand it like it is; and then we can deal with it like it is.

The Dixiecrats in Washington, D.C., control the key committees that run the government. The only reason the Dixiecrats control these committees is because they have seniority. The only reason they have seniority is because they come from states where Negroes can't vote. This is not even a government that's based on democracy. lt. is not a government that is made up of representatives of the people. Half of the people in the South can't even vote. Eastland is not even supposed to be in Washington. Half of the senators and congressmen who occupy these key positions in Washington, D.C., are there illegally, are there unconstitutionally.

I was in Washington, D.C., a week ago Thursday, when they were debating whether or not they should let the bill come onto the floor. And in the back of the room where the Senate meets, there's a huge map of the United States, and on that map it shows the location of Negroes throughout the country. And it shows that the Southern section of the country, the states that are most heavily concentrated with Negroes, are the ones that have senators and congressmen standing up filibustering and doing all other kinds of trickery to keep the Negro from being able to vote. This is pitiful. But it's not pitiful for us any longer; it's actually pitiful for the white man, because soon now, as the Negro awakens a little more and sees the vise that he's in, sees the bag that he's in, sees the real game that he's in, then the Negro's going to develop a new tactic.

These senators and congressmen actually violate the constitutional amendments that guarantee the people of that particular state or county the right to vote. And the Constitution itself has within it the machinery to expel any representative from a state where the voting rights of the people are violated. You don't even need new legislation. Any person in Congress right now, who is there from a state or a district where the voting rights of the people are violated, that particular person should be expelled from Congress. And when you expel him, you've removed one of the obstacles in the path of any real meaningful legislation in this country. In fact, when you expel them, you don't need new legislation, because they will be replaced by black representatives from counties and districts where the black man is in the majority, not in the minority.

If the black man in these Southern states had his full voting rights, the key Dixiecrats in Washington, D. C., which means the key Democrats in Washington, D.C., would lose their seats. The Democratic Party itself would lose its power. It would cease to be powerful as a party. When you see the amount of power that would be lost by the Democratic Party if it were to lose the Dixiecrat wing, or branch, or element, you can see where it's against the interests of the Democrats to give voting rights to Negroes in states where the Democrats have been in complete power and authority ever since the Civil War. You just can't belong to that Party without analyzing it.

I say again, I'm not anti-Democrat, I'm not anti-Republican, I'm not anti-anything. I'm just questioning their sincerity, and some of the strategy that they've been using on our people by promising them promises that they don't intend to keep. When you keep the Democrats in power, you're keeping the Dixiecrats in power. I doubt that my good Brother Lomax will deny that. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for a Dixiecrat. That's why, in 1964, it's time now for you and me to become more politically mature and realize what the ballot is for; what we're supposed to get when we cast a ballot; and that if we don't cast a ballot, it's going to end up in a situation where we're going to have to cast a bullet. It's either a ballot or a bullet.

In the North, they do it a different way. They have a system that's known as gerrymandering, whatever that means. It means when Negroes become too heavily concentrated in a certain area, and begin to gain too much political power, the white man comes along and changes the district lines. You may say, "Why do you keep saying white man?" Because it's the white man who does it. I haven't ever seen any Negro changing any lines. They don't let him get near the line. It's the white man who does this. And usually, it's the white man who grins at you the most, and pats you on the back, and is supposed to be your friend. He may be friendly, but he's not your friend.

So, what I'm trying to impress upon you, in essence, is this: You and I in America are faced not with a segregationist conspiracy, we're faced with a government conspiracy. Everyone who's filibustering is a senator -- that's the government. Everyone who's finagling in Washington, D.C., is a congressman -- that's the government. You don't have anybody putting blocks in your path but people who are a part of the government. The same government that you go abroad to fight for and die for is the government that is in a conspiracy to deprive you of your voting rights, deprive you of your economic opportunities, deprive you of decent housing, deprive you of decent education. You don't need to go to the employer alone, it is the government itself, the government of America, that is responsible for the oppression and exploitation and degradation of black people in this country. And you should drop it in their lap. This government has failed the Negro. This so-called democracy has failed the Negro. And all these white liberals have definitely failed the Negro.

So, where do we go from here? First, we need some friends. We need some new allies. The entire civil-rights struggle needs a new interpretation, a broader interpretation. We need to look at this civil-rights thing from another angle -- from the inside as well as from the outside. To those of us whose philosophy is black nationalism, the only way you can get involved in the civil-rights struggle is give it a new interpretation. That old interpretation excluded us. It kept us out. So, we're giving a new interpretation to the civil-rights struggle, an interpretation that will enable us to come into it, take part in it. And these handkerchief-heads who have been dillydallying and pussy footing and compromising -- we don't intend to let them pussyfoot and dillydally and compromise any longer.

How can you thank a man for giving you what's already yours? How then can you thank him for giving you only part of what's already yours? You haven't even made progress, if what's being given to you, you should have had already. That's not progress. And I love my Brother Lomax, the way he pointed out we're right back where we were in 1954. We're not even as far up as we were in 1954. We're behind where we were in 1954. There's more segregation now than there was in 1954. There's more racial animosity, more racial hatred, more racial violence today in 1964, than there was in 1954. Where is the progress?

And now you're facing a situation where the young Negro's coming up. They don't want to hear that "turn the-other-cheek" stuff, no. In Jacksonville, those were teenagers, they were throwing Molotov cocktails. Negroes have never done that before. But it shows you there's a new deal coming in. There's new thinking coming in. There's new strategy coming in. It'll be Molotov cocktails this month, hand grenades next month, and something else next month. It'll be ballots, or it'll be bullets. It'll be liberty, or it will be death. The only difference about this kind of death -- it'll be reciprocal. You know what is meant by "reciprocal"? That's one of Brother Lomax's words. I stole it from him. I don't usually deal with those big words because I don't usually deal with big people. I deal with small people. I find you can get a whole lot of small people and whip hell out of a whole lot of big people. They haven't got anything to lose, and they've got every thing to gain. And they'll let you know in a minute: "It takes two to tango; when I go, you go."

The black nationalists, those whose philosophy is black nationalism, in bringing about this new interpretation of the entire meaning of civil rights, look upon it as meaning, as Brother Lomax has pointed out, equality of opportunity. Well, we're justified in seeking civil rights, if it means equality of opportunity, because all we're doing there is trying to collect for our investment. Our mothers and fathers invested sweat and blood. Three hundred and ten years we worked in this country without a dime in return -- I mean without a dime in return. You let the white man walk around here talking about how rich this country is, but you never stop to think how it got rich so quick. It got rich because you made it rich.

You take the people who are in this audience right now. They're poor. We're all poor as individuals. Our weekly salary individually amounts to hardly anything. But if you take the salary of everyone in here collectively, it'll fill up a whole lot of baskets. It's a lot of wealth. If you can collect the wages of just these people right here for a year, you'll be rich -- richer than rich. When you look at it like that, think how rich Uncle Sam had to become, not with this handful, but millions of black people. Your and my mother and father, who didn't work an eight-hour shift, but worked from "can't see" in the morning until "can't see" at night, and worked for nothing, making the white man rich, making Uncle Sam rich. This is our investment. This is our contribution, our blood.

Not only did we give of our free labor, we gave of our blood. Every time he had a call to arms, we were the first ones in uniform. We died on every battlefield the white man had. We have made a greater sacrifice than anybody who's standing up in America today. We have made a greater contribution and have collected less. Civil rights, for those of us whose philosophy is black nationalism, means: "Give it to us now. Don't wait for next year. Give it to us yesterday, and that's not fast enough."

I might stop right here to point out one thing. Whenever you're going after something that belongs to you, anyone who's depriving you of the right to have it is a criminal. Understand that. Whenever you are going after something that is yours, you are within your legal rights to lay claim to it. And anyone who puts forth any effort to deprive you of that which is yours, is breaking the law, is a criminal. And this was pointed out by the Supreme Court decision. It outlawed segregation.

Which means segregation is against the law. Which means a segregationist is breaking the law. A segregationist is a criminal. You can't label him as anything other than that. And when you demonstrate against segregation, the law is on your side. The Supreme Court is on your side.

Now, who is it that opposes you in carrying out the law? The police department itself. With police dogs and clubs. Whenever you demonstrate against segregation, whether it is segregated education, segregated housing, or anything else, the law is on your side, and anyone who stands in the way is not the law any longer. They are breaking the law; they are not representatives of the law. Any time you demonstrate against segregation and a man has the audacity to put a police dog on you, kill that dog, kill him, I'm telling you, kill that dog. I say it, if they put me in jail tomorrow, kill that dog. Then you'll put a stop to it. Now, if these white people in here don't want to see that kind of action, get down and tell the mayor to tell the police department to pull the dogs in. That's all you have to do. If you don't do it, someone else will.

If you don't take this kind of stand, your little children will grow up and look at you and think "shame." If you don't take an uncompromising stand, I don't mean go out and get violent; but at the same time you should never be nonviolent unless you run into some nonviolence. I'm nonviolent with those who are nonviolent with me. But when you drop that violence on me, then you've made me go insane, and I'm not responsible for what I do. And that's the way every Negro should get. Any time you know you're within the law, within your legal rights, within your moral rights, in accord with justice, then die for what you believe in. But don't die alone. Let your dying be reciprocal. This is what is meant by equality. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

When we begin to get in this area, we need new friends, we need new allies. We need to expand the civil-rights struggle to a higher level -- to the level of human rights. Whenever you are in a civil-rights struggle, whether you know it or not, you are confining yourself to the jurisdiction of Uncle Sam. No one from the outside world can speak out in your behalf as long as your struggle is a civil-rights struggle. Civil rights comes within the domestic affairs of this country. All of our African brothers and our Asian brothers and our Latin-American brothers cannot open their mouths and interfere in the domestic affairs of the United States. And as long as it's civil rights, this comes under the jurisdiction of Uncle Sam.

But the United Nations has what's known as the charter of human rights; it has a committee that deals in human rights. You may wonder why all of the atrocities that have been committed in Africa and in Hungary and in Asia, and in Latin America are brought before the UN, and the Negro problem is never brought before the UN. This is part of the conspiracy. This old, tricky blue eyed liberal who is supposed to be your and my friend, supposed to be in our corner, supposed to be subsidizing our struggle, and supposed to be acting in the capacity of an adviser, never tells you anything about human rights. They keep you wrapped up in civil rights. And you spend so much time barking up the civil-rights tree, you don't even know there's a human-rights tree on the same floor.

When you expand the civil-rights struggle to the level of human rights, you can then take the case of the black man in this country before the nations in the UN. You can take it before the General Assembly. You can take Uncle Sam before a world court. But the only level you can do it on is the level of human rights. Civil rights keeps you under his restrictions, under his jurisdiction. Civil rights keeps you in his pocket. Civil rights means you're asking Uncle Sam to treat you right. Human rights are something you were born with. Human rights are your God-given rights. Human rights are the rights that are recognized by all nations of this earth. And any time any one violates your human rights, you can take them to the world court.

Uncle Sam's hands are dripping with blood, dripping with the blood of the black man in this country. He's the earth's number-one hypocrite. He has the audacity -- yes, he has -- imagine him posing as the leader of the free world. The free world! And you over here singing "We Shall Overcome." Expand the civil-rights struggle to the level of human rights. Take it into the United Nations, where our African brothers can throw their weight on our side, where our Asian brothers can throw their weight on our side, where our Latin-American brothers can throw their weight on our side, and where 800 million Chinamen are sitting there waiting to throw their weight on our side.

Let the world know how bloody his hands are. Let the world know the hypocrisy that's practiced over here. Let it be the ballot or the bullet. Let him know that it must be the ballot or the bullet.

When you take your case to Washington, D.C., you're taking it to the criminal who's responsible; it's like running from the wolf to the fox. They're all in cahoots together. They all work political chicanery and make you look like a chump before the eyes of the world. Here you are walking around in America, getting ready to be drafted and sent abroad, like a tin soldier, and when you get over there, people ask you what are you fighting for, and you have to stick your tongue in your cheek. No, take Uncle Sam to court, take him before the world.

By ballot I only mean freedom. Don't you know -- I disagree with Lomax on this issue -- that the ballot is more important than the dollar? Can I prove it? Yes. Look in the UN. There are poor nations in the UN; yet those poor nations can get together with their voting power and keep the rich nations from making a move. They have one nation -- one vote, everyone has an equal vote. And when those brothers from Asia, and Africa and the darker parts of this earth get together, their voting power is sufficient to hold Sam in check. Or Russia in check. Or some other section of the earth in check. So, the ballot is most important.

Right now, in this country, if you and I, 22 million African-Americans -- that's what we are -- Africans who are in America. You're nothing but Africans. Nothing but Africans. In fact, you'd get farther calling yourself African instead of Negro. Africans don't catch hell. You're the only one catching hell. They don't have to pass civil-rights bills for Africans. An African can go anywhere he wants right now. All you've got to do is tie your head up. That's right, go anywhere you want. Just stop being a Negro. Change your name to Hoogagagooba. That'll show you how silly the white man is. You're dealing with a silly man. A friend of mine who's very dark put a turban on his head and went into a restaurant in Atlanta before they called themselves desegregated. He went into a white restaurant, he sat down, they served him, and he said, "What would happen if a Negro came in here? And there he's sitting, black as night, but because he had his head wrapped up the waitress looked back at him and says, "Why, there wouldn't no nigger dare come in here."

So, you're dealing with a man whose bias and prejudice are making him lose his mind, his intelligence, every day. He's frightened. He looks around and sees what's taking place on this earth, and he sees that the pendulum of time is swinging in your direction. The dark people are waking up. They're losing their fear of the white man. No place where he's fighting right now is he winning. Everywhere he's fighting, he's fighting someone your and my complexion. And they're beating him. He can't win any more. He's won his last battle. He failed to win the Korean War. He couldn't win it. He had to sign a truce. That's a loss.

Any time Uncle Sam, with all his machinery for warfare, is held to a draw by some rice eaters, he's lost the battle. He had to sign a truce. America's not supposed to sign a truce. She's supposed to be bad. But she's not bad any more. She's bad as long as she can use her hydrogen bomb, but she can't use hers for fear Russia might use hers. Russia can't use hers, for fear that Sam might use his. So, both of them are weapon-less. They can't use the weapon because each's weapon nullifies the other's. So the only place where action can take place is on the ground. And the white man can't win another war fighting on the ground. Those days are over The black man knows it, the brown man knows it, the red man knows it, and the yellow man knows it. So they engage him in guerrilla warfare. That's not his style. You've got to have heart to be a guerrilla warrior, and he hasn't got any heart. I'm telling you now.

I just want to give you a little briefing on guerrilla warfare because, before you know it, before you know it. It takes heart to be a guerrilla warrior because you're on your own. In conventional warfare you have tanks and a whole lot of other people with you to back you up -- planes over your head and all that kind of stuff. But a guerrilla is on his own. All you have is a rifle, some sneakers and a bowl of rice, and that's all you need -- and a lot of heart. The Japanese on some of those islands in the Pacific, when the American soldiers landed, one Japanese sometimes could hold the whole army off. He'd just wait until the sun went down, and when the sun went down they were all equal. He would take his little blade and slip from bush to bush, and from American to American. The white soldiers couldn't cope with that. Whenever you see a white soldier that fought in the Pacific, he has the shakes, he has a nervous condition, because they scared him to death.

The same thing happened to the French up in French Indochina. People who just a few years previously were rice farmers got together and ran the heavily-mechanized French army out of Indochina. You don't need it -- modern warfare today won't work. This is the day of the guerrilla. They did the same thing in Algeria. Algerians, who were nothing but Bedouins, took a rine and sneaked off to the hills, and de Gaulle and all of his highfalutin' war machinery couldn't defeat those guerrillas. Nowhere on this earth does the white man win in a guerrilla warfare. It's not his speed. Just as guerrilla warfare is prevailing in Asia and in parts of Africa and in parts of Latin America, you've got to be mighty naive, or you've got to play the black man cheap, if you don't think some day he's going to wake up and find that it's got to be the ballot or the bullet.

l would like to say, in closing, a few things concerning the Muslim Mosque, Inc., which we established recently in New York City. It's true we're Muslims and our religion is Islam, but we don't mix our religion with our politics and our economics and our social and civil activities -- not any more We keep our religion in our mosque. After our religious services are over, then as Muslims we become involved in political action, economic action and social and civic action. We become involved with anybody, any where, any time and in any manner that's designed to eliminate the evils, the political, economic and social evils that are afflicting the people of our community.

The political philosophy of black nationalism means that the black man should control the politics and the politicians in his own community; no more. The black man in the black community has to be re-educated into the science of politics so he will know what politics is supposed to bring him in return. Don't be throwing out any ballots. A ballot is like a bullet. You don't throw your ballots until you see a target, and if that target is not within your reach, keep your ballot in your pocket.

The political philosophy of black nationalism is being taught in the Christian church. It's being taught in the NAACP. It's being taught in CORE meetings. It's being taught in SNCC Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee meetings. It's being taught in Muslim meetings. It's being taught where nothing but atheists and agnostics come together. It's being taught everywhere. Black people are fed up with the dillydallying, pussyfooting, compromising approach that we've been using toward getting our freedom. We want freedom now, but we're not going to get it saying "We Shall Overcome." We've got to fight until we overcome.

The economic philosophy of black nationalism is pure and simple. It only means that we should control the economy of our community. Why should white people be running all the stores in our community? Why should white people be running the banks of our community? Why should the economy of our community be in the hands of the white man? Why? If a black man can't move his store into a white community, you tell me why a white man should move his store into a black community. The philosophy of black nationalism involves a re-education program in the black community in regards to economics. Our people have to be made to see that any time you take your dollar out of your community and spend it in a community where you don't live, the community where you live will get poorer and poorer, and the community where you spend your money will get richer and richer.

Then you wonder why where you live is always a ghetto or a slum area. And where you and I are concerned, not only do we lose it when we spend it out of the community, but the white man has got all our stores in the community tied up; so that though we spend it in the community, at sundown the man who runs the store takes it over across town somewhere. He's got us in a vise. So the economic philosophy of black nationalism means in every church, in every civic organization, in every fraternal order, it's time now for our people to be come conscious of the importance of controlling the economy of our community. If we own the stores, if we operate the businesses, if we try and establish some industry in our own community, then we're developing to the position where we are creating employment for our own kind. Once you gain control of the economy of your own community, then you don't have to picket and boycott and beg some cracker downtown for a job in his business.

The social philosophy of black nationalism only means that we have to get together and remove the evils, the vices, alcoholism, drug addiction, and other evils that are destroying the moral fiber of our community. We our selves have to lift the level of our community, the standard of our community to a higher level, make our own society beautiful so that we will be satisfied in our own social circles and won't be running around here trying to knock our way into a social circle where we're not wanted. So I say, in spreading a gospel such as black nationalism, it is not designed to make the black man re-evaluate the white man -- you know him already -- but to make the black man re-evaluate himself. Don't change the white man's mind -- you can't change his mind, and that whole thing about appealing to the moral conscience of America -- America's conscience is bankrupt. She lost all conscience a long time ago. Uncle Sam has no conscience.

They don't know what morals are. They don't try and eliminate an evil because it's evil, or because it's illegal, or because it's immoral; they eliminate it only when it threatens their existence. So you're wasting your time appealing to the moral conscience of a bankrupt man like Uncle Sam. If he had a conscience, he'd straighten this thing out with no more pressure being put upon him. So it is not necessary to change the white man's mind. We have to change our own mind. You can't change his mind about us. We've got to change our own minds about each other. We have to see each other with new eyes. We have to see each other as brothers and sisters. We have to come together with warmth so we can develop unity and harmony that's necessary to get this problem solved ourselves. How can we do this? How can we avoid jealousy? How can we avoid the suspicion and the divisions that exist in the community? I'll tell you how.

I have watched how Billy Graham comes into a city, spreading what he calls the gospel of Christ, which is only white nationalism. That's what he is. Billy Graham is a white nationalist; I'm a black nationalist. But since it's the natural tendency for leaders to be jealous and look upon a powerful figure like Graham with suspicion and envy, how is it possible for him to come into a city and get all the cooperation of the church leaders? Don't think because they're church leaders that they don't have weaknesses that make them envious and jealous -- no, everybody's got it. It's not an accident that when they want to choose a cardinal, as Pope I over there in Rome, they get in a closet so you can't hear them cussing and fighting and carrying on.

Billy Graham comes in preaching the gospel of Christ. He evangelizes the gospel. He stirs everybody up, but he never tries to start a church. If he came in trying to start a church, all the churches would be against him. So, he just comes in talking about Christ and tells everybody who gets Christ to go to any church where Christ is; and in this way the church cooperates with him. So we're going to take a page from his book.

Our gospel is black nationalism. We're not trying to threaten the existence of any organization, but we're spreading the gospel of black nationalism. Anywhere there's a church that is also preaching and practicing the gospel of black nationalism, join that church. If the NAACP is preaching and practicing the gospel of black nationalism, join the NAACP. If CORE is spreading and practicing the gospel of black nationalism, join CORE. Join any organization that has a gospel that's for the uplift of the black man. And when you get into it and see them pussyfooting or compromising, pull out of it because that's not black nationalism. We'll find another one.

And in this manner, the organizations will increase in number and in quantity and in quality, and by August, it is then our intention to have a black nationalist convention which will consist of delegates from all over the country who are interested in the political, economic and social philosophy of black nationalism. After these delegates convene, we will hold a seminar; we will hold discussions; we will listen to everyone. We want to hear new ideas and new solutions and new answers. And at that time, if we see fit then to form a black nationalist party, we'll form a black nationalist party. If it's necessary to form a black nationalist army, we'll form a black nationalist army. It'll be the ballot or the bullet. It'll be liberty or it'll be death.

It's time for you and me to stop sitting in this country, letting some cracker senators, Northern crackers and Southern crackers, sit there in Washington, D.C., and come to a conclusion in their mind that you and I are supposed to have civil rights. There's no white man going to tell me anything about my rights. Brothers and sisters, always remember, if it doesn't take senators and congressmen and presidential proclamations to give freedom to the white man, it is not necessary for legislation or proclamation or Supreme Court decisions to give freedom to the black man. You let that white man know, if this is a country of freedom, let it be a country of freedom; and if it's not a country of freedom, change it.

We will work with anybody, anywhere, at any time, who is genuinely interested in tackling the problem head-on, nonviolently as long as the enemy is nonviolent, but violent when the enemy gets violent. We'll work with you on the voter-registration drive, we'll work with you on rent strikes, we'll work with you on school boycotts; I don't believe in any kind of integration; I'm not even worried about it, because I know you're not going to get it anyway; you're not going to get it because you're afraid to die; you've got to be ready to die if you try and force yourself on the white man, because he'll get just as violent as those crackers in Mississippi, right here in Cleveland. But we will still work with you on the school boycotts be cause we're against a segregated school system. A segregated school system produces children who, when they graduate, graduate with crippled minds. But this does not mean that a school is segregated because it's all black. A segregated school means a school that is controlled by people who have no real interest in it whatsoever.

Let me explain what I mean. A segregated district or community is a community in which people live, but outsiders control the politics and the economy of that community. They never refer to the white section as a segregated community. It's the all-Negro section that's a segregated community. Why? The white man controls his own school, his own bank, his own economy, his own politics, his own everything, his own community; but he also controls yours. When you're under someone else's control, you're segregated. They'll always give you the lowest or the worst that there is to offer, but it doesn't mean you're segregated just because you have your own. You've got to control your own. Just like the white man has control of his, you need to control yours.

You know the best way to get rid of segregation? The white man is more afraid of separation than he is of integration. Segregation means that he puts you away from him, but not far enough for you to be out of his jurisdiction; separation means you're gone. And the white man will integrate faster than he'll let you separate. So we will work with you against the segregated school system because it's criminal, because it is absolutely destructive, in every way imaginable, to the minds of the children who have to be exposed to that type of crippling education.

Last but not least, I must say this concerning the great controversy over rifles and shotguns. The only thing that I've ever said is that in areas where the government has proven itself either unwilling or unable to defend the lives and the property of Negroes, it's time for Negroes to defend themselves. Article number two of the constitutional amendments provides you and me the right to own a rifle or a shotgun. It is constitutionally legal to own a shotgun or a rifle. This doesn't mean you're going to get a rifle and form battalions and go out looking for white folks, although you'd be within your rights -- I mean, you'd be justified; but that would be illegal and we don't do anything illegal. If the white man doesn't want the black man buying rifles and shotguns, then let the government do its job.

That's all. And don't let the white man come to you and ask you what you think about what Malcolm says -- why, you old Uncle Tom. He would never ask you if he thought you were going to say, "Amen!" No, he is making a Tom out of you." So, this doesn't mean forming rifle clubs and going out looking for people, but it is time, in 1964, if you are a man, to let that man know. If he's not going to do his job in running the government and providing you and me with the protection that our taxes are supposed to be for, since he spends all those billions for his defense budget, he certainly can't begrudge you and me spending $12 or $15 for a single-shot, or double-action. I hope you understand. Don't go out shooting people, but any time -- brothers and sisters, and especially the men in this audience; some of you wearing Congressional Medals of Honor, with shoulders this wide, chests this big, muscles that big -- any time you and I sit around and read where they bomb a church and murder in cold blood, not some grownups, but four little girls while they were praying to the same God the white man taught them to pray to, and you and I see the government go down and can't find who did it.

Why, this man -- he can find Eichmann hiding down in Argentina somewhere. Let two or three American soldiers, who are minding somebody else's business way over in South Vietnam, get killed, and he'll send battleships, sticking his nose in their business. He wanted to send troops down to Cuba and make them have what he calls free elections -- this old cracker who doesn't have free elections in his own country.

No, if you never see me another time in your life, if I die in the morning, I'll die saying one thing: the ballot or the bullet, the ballot or the bullet.

If a Negro in 1964 has to sit around and wait for some cracker senator to filibuster when it comes to the rights of black people, why, you and I should hang our heads in shame. You talk about a march on Washington in 1963, you haven't seen anything. There's some more going down in '64.

And this time they're not going like they went last year. They're not going singing ''We Shall Overcome." They're not going with white friends. They're not going with placards already painted for them. They're not going with round-trip tickets. They're going with one way tickets. And if they don't want that non-nonviolent army going down there, tell them to bring the filibuster to a halt.

The black nationalists aren't going to wait. Lyndon B. Johnson is the head of the Democratic Party. If he's for civil rights, let him go into the Senate next week and declare himself. Let him go in there right now and declare himself. Let him go in there and denounce the Southern branch of his party. Let him go in there right now and take a moral stand -- right now, not later. Tell him, don't wait until election time. If he waits too long, brothers and sisters, he will be responsible for letting a condition develop in this country which will create a climate that will bring seeds up out of the ground with vegetation on the end of them looking like something these people never dreamed of. In 1964, it's the ballot or the bullet.

Thank you.

Murtala Mohammed
Africa Has Come Of Age
Delivered On the 11th of January 1976 at an extra-ordinary meeting of the OAU

http://kanoonline.com/smf/index.php?topic=4413.0;wap2

Context according to Abu-Fatima  via link above:

"Initially, Murtala showed little interest in attending the conference; Obasanjo was making preparations to make an appearance in his place. Suddenly an event happened that made him changed his mind and compelled him to make the historic and flamboyant appearance at the conference where he gave the powerful Africa has come of Age speech.
 
On the 3rd of January 1976, the American Ambassador to Nigeria , Mr. Donald Easum, brought a letter addressed to the Nigerian Head of State from the United States President Gerald Ford. The same letter was sent to many African leaders. Murtala was furious. Not only did the Federal Military Government take the bold and unprecedented step of releasing President Ford’s letter to the press, it also issued a strong response to it later that evening calling it a “gross insult” and in sum, telling the Americans to go to hell. This event triggered Murtala’s decision to attend the conference and deliver his message to the world"
 

Excerpt of his conclusion(I can't find the full speech)

“Mr. Chairman, when I contemplate the evils of apartheid, my heart bleeds and I am sure the heart of every true blooded African bleeds. . . Rather than join hands with the forces fighting for self-determination and against racism and apartheid, the United States policy makers clearly decided that it was in the best interests of their country to maintain white supremacy and minority regimes in Africa. . .

Africa has come of age. It’s no longer under the orbit of any extra continental power.
It should no longer take orders from any country, however powerful. The fortunes of Africa are in our hands to make or to mar. For too long have we been kicked around: for too long have we been treated like adolescents who cannot discern their interests and act accordingly.

For too long has it been presumed that the African needs outside ‘experts’ to tell him who are his friends and who are his enemies. The time has come when we should make it clear that we can decide for ourselves; that we know our own interests and how to protect those interests; that we are capable of resolving African problems without presumptuous lessons in ideological dangers which, more often than not, have no relevance for us, nor for the problem at hand."


”There was thunderous ovation from the Africa Hall and Murtala Muhammed went back to his seat - Abu Fatima

Murtala Ramat Mohammed was killed 34 days after making this speech, OBJ became Supreme Military Head of State after his death.

Speech at Ford Auditorium
by Malcolm X
February 14, 1965 (the day after his house was bombed)
Detroit, Michigan
http://www.sojust.net/speeches/malcolm_x_bombing.html

Context: At this stage in his career Malcom X had already travelled the world went to Europe, Mecca and Africa, left Elijah Mohammed's Nation of Islam and was aligning himself with the broader continental African movement, also his house just got firebombed.

(this is just a "brief" excerpt of his speech, the rest can be found at the link) Malcolm x does long book-length speeches and I don't want the spambot to ban me.

There are four different types of people in the Western Hemisphere, all of whom have Africa as a common heritage, common origin, and that's the--those of our people in Latin America, who are Black, but who are in the Spanish-speaking areas. Many of them ofttimes migrate back to Spain, the only difference being Spain has such bad economic conditions until many of the people from Latin America don't think it's worthwhile to migrate back there. And then the British and the French had a great deal of control in the Caribbean, in the West Indies. And so now you have many people from the West Indies migrating to both London--rather both England and France. The people from the British West Indies go to London, and those from the French West Indies go to Paris. And it has put France and England since World War II in the precarious position of having a sort of a commonwealth structure that makes it easy for all of the people in the commonwealth territories to come into their country with no restrictions. So there's an increasing number of dark-skinned people in England and also in France.

When I was in Africa in May, I noticed a tendency on the part of the Afro-Americans to, what I call lollygag. Everybody else who was over there had something on the ball, something they were doing, something constructive. For instance, in Ghana, just to take Ghana as an example. There would be many refugees in Ghana from South Africa. But those who were in Ghana were organized and were serving as pressure groups, some were training for military--some were being trained in how to be soldiers, but others were involved as a pressure group or lobby group to let the people of Ghana never forget what's happening to the brother in South Africa. Also you'd have brothers there from Angola and Mozambique. But all of the Africans who were exiles from their particular country and would be in a place like Ghana or Tanganyika, now Tanzania, they would be training. Their every move would still be designed to offset what was happening to their people back home where they had left.

The only difference on the continent was the American Negro. Those who were over there weren't even thinking about these over here. This was the basic difference. The Africans, when they escaped from their respective countries that were still colonized, they didn't try and run away from the problem. But as soon as they got where they were going, they then began to organize into pressure groups to get governmental support at the international level against the injustices they were experiencing back home.

And as I said, the American Negro, or the Afro-American, who was in these various countries, some working for this government, some working for that government, some just in business--they were just socializing, they had turned their back on the cause over here, they were partying, you know.

And when I went through one country in particular, I heard a lot of their complaints and I didn't make any move on them.

But when I got to another country, I found the Afro-Americans there were making the same complaints. So we sat down and talked and we organized a branch in this particular country, a branch of the OAAU, Organization of Afro-American Unity. That one was the only one in existence at that time. Then during the summer, when I went back to Africa, I was able in each country that I visited, to get the Afro-American community together and organize them and make them aware of their responsibility to those of us who are still here in the lion's den.

They began to do this quite well, and when I got to Paris and London--there are many Afro-Americans in Paris, and many in London. And in December--no, November--we organized a group in Paris and just within a very short time they had grown into a well-organized unit. And they, in conjunction with the African community, invited me to Paris, Tuesday, to address a large gathering of Parisians and Afro-Americans and people from the Caribbean and also from Africa who were interested in our struggle in this country and the rate of progress that we have been making.

But since the French government and the British government and this government here, the United States, know that I have been almost fanatically stressing the importance of the Afro-American uniting with the African and working as a coalition, especially in areas which are of mutual benefit to all of us. And the governments in these different places were frightened because they know that the Black revolution that's taking place on the outside of their house--

And I might point out right here that colonialism or imperialism, as the slave system of the West is called, is not something that's just confined to England or France or the United States. But the interests in this country are in cahoots with the interests in France and the interests in Britain. It's one huge complex or combine, and it creates what's known as not the American power structure or the French power structure, but it's an international power structure. And this international power structure is used to suppress the masses of dark-skinned people all over the world and exploit them of their natural resources.

So that the era in which you and I have been living during the past ten years most specifically has witnessed the upsurge on the part of the Black man in Africa against the power structure.

He wants his freedom.

Now, mind you, the power structure is international, and as such, its own domestic base is in London, in Paris, in Washington, D.C., and so forth. And the outside or external phase of the revolution, which is manifest in the attitude and action of the Africans today is troublesome enough. The revolution on the outside of the house, or the outside of the structure, is troublesome enough. But now the powers that be are beginning to see that this struggle on the outside by the Black man is affecting, infecting the Black man who is on the inside of that structure. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.

The newly awakened people all over the world pose a problem for what's known as Western interests, which is imperialism, colonialism, racism, and all these other negative isms or vulturistic isms. Just as the external forces pose a grave threat, they can now see that the internal forces pose an even greater threat. But the internal forces pose an even greater threat only when they have properly analyzed the situation and know what the stakes really are.

Just by advocating a coalition of Africans, Afro-Americans, Arabs, and Asians who live within the structure, it automatically has upset France, which is supposed to be one of the most liberal--heh!--countries on earth, and it made them expose their hand. England the same way. And I don't have to tell you about this country that we are living in now.

So when you count the number of dark-skinned people in the Western Hemisphere you can see that there are probably over 100 million. When you consider Brazil has two-thirds what we call colored, or nonwhite, and Venezuela, Honduras and other Central American countries, Cuba and Jamaica, and the United States and even Canada--when you total all these people up, you have probably over 100 million. And this 100 million on the inside of the power structure today is what is causing a great deal of concern for the power structure itself.

Not a great deal of concern for all white people, but a great deal of concern for most white people. See, if I said "all white people" then they would call me a racist for giving a blanket condemnation of things.

And this is true; this is how they do it. They take one little word out of what you say, ignore all the rest, and then begin to magnify it all over the world to make you look like what you actually aren't. And I'm very used to that.

So we saw that the first thing to do was to unite our people, not only unite us internally, but we have to be united with our brothers and sisters abroad. It was for that purpose that I spent five months in the Middle East and Africa during the summer. The trip was very enlightening, inspiring, and fruitful. I didn't go into any African country, or any country in the Middle East for that matter, and run into any closed door, closed mind, or closed heart. I found a warm reception and an amazingly deep interest and sympathy for the Black man in this country in regards to our struggle for human rights.

While I was traveling, I had a chance to speak in Cairo, or rather Alexandria, with President Nasser for about an hour and a half. He's a very brilliant man. And I can see why they're so afraid of him, and they are afraid of him--they know he can cut off their oil. And actually the only thing power respects is power. Whenever you find a man who's in a position to show power against power then that man is respected. But you can take a man who has power and love him all the rest of your life, nonviolently and forgivingly and all the rest of those ofttime things, and you won't get anything out of it.

So I also had a chance to speak to President Nyerere in Tanganyika, which is now Tanzania, and also Kenyata--I know that all of you know him. He was the head of the Mau Mau, which really brought freedom to many of the African countries. This is true. The Mau Mau played a major role in bringing about freedom for Kenya, and not only for Kenya but other African countries. Because what the Mau Mau did frightened the white man so much in other countries until he said, "Well I better get this thing straight before some of them pop up here." This is good to study because you see what makes him react: Nothing loving makes him react, nothing forgiving makes him react. The only time he reacts is when he knows you can hurt him, and when you let him know you can hurt him he has to think two or three times before he tries to hurt you. But if you're not going to do nothing but return that hurt with love--why good night! He knows you're out of your mind.

And also I had an opportunity to speak with President Azikiwe in Nigeria, President Nkrumah in Ghana, and President Sekou Toure in Guinea. And in all of these people I found nothing but warmth, friendship, sympathy, and a desire to help the Black man in this country in fighting our problem. And we have a very complex problem.

Now I hope you'll forgive me for just speaking so informally tonight, but I frankly think it's always better to be informal. As far as I am concerned, I can speak to people better in an informal way than I can with all of this stiff formality that ends up meaning nothing. Plus, when people are informal, they're relaxed. When they're relaxed, their mind is more open, and they can weigh things more objectively. Whenever you and I are discussing our problems we need to be very objective, very cool, calm, collected. But that doesn't mean we should always be. There's a time to be cool and a time to be hot. See, you got messed up into thinking that there's only one time for everything. There's a time to love and a time to hate. Even Solomon said that, and he was in that Book too. You're just taking something out of the Book that fits your cowardly nature. And when you don't want to fight, you say, "Well, Jesus said don't fight." But I don't even believe Jesus said that.

Also I am very pleased to see so many who have come out to always see for yourself, where you can hear for yourself, and then think for yourself. Then you'll be in a better position to make an intelligent judgment for yourself. But if you form the habit of listening to what others say about something or some one or reading what someone else has written about someone, somebody can confuse you and misuse you. So as Afro-Americans or Black people here in the Western Hemisphere, you and I have to learn to weigh things for ourselves. No matter what the man says, you better look into it.

And a good example of why it's so important to look into things for yourself: I was on a plane between Algiers and Geneva and it just happened that two other Americans were sitting in the two seats next to me. None of us knew each other and the other two were white, one a male, the other a female. And after we had been flying along for about forty minutes, the lady, she says, "Could I ask you a personal question?"

I said, '"Yes." She said, "Well--" she had been looking at my briefcase, and she said, "Well, what does that X--" she says, "What kind of last name could you have that begins with X?" So I said, "That's it--X." And she said, "Well, what does the 'M' stand for?" I said, "Malcolm." So she was quiet for about ten minutes, and she turned to me and she says, "You're not Malcolm X?"

You see, we had been riding along in a nice conversation like three human beings, you know, no hostility, no animosity, just human. And she couldn't take this, she said, "Well you're not who I was looking for," you know. And she ended up telling me that she was looking for horns and all that, and for someone who was out to kill all white people, as if all white people could be killed. This was her general attitude, and this attitude had been given her--this image had been given her by the press.

So before I get involved in anything nowadays, I have to straighten out my own position, which is clear. I am not a racist in any form whatsoever. I don't believe in any form of racism. I don't believe in any form of discrimination or segregation. . .

^^ Lumumba! One of my worthy ancestors.

I will post Omowale Malcolm X when I get a minute. We celebrated his birthday 2 days ago.

Good thread Isale!

[quote author=isale_gan2 link=topic=590933.msg8362778#msg8362778 date=1305930492][flash=460,380]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twkh0YiInPM[/flash][/quote]Ah! Circa 1998, good times, great memories. . .

@Gbawe, my initial assumption was that ACN as a minority party cannot participate or vote in the election of a majority HOA leader. I stand corrected

Now that it is clear that they can participate beyond press releases, I see no reason why they shouldn't use that leverage to their advantage.

Although I still maintain that it will be of little benefit to the people of the SW if the PDP is going to control the actions of the Senate President and House leader anyway. I'm judging based on the past activities of buffoons of like Bankole, Mark and other PDP money-sharers

. . .but of course, he has to partake and participate. It's a no brainer really.

Iroko cannot be a saboteur of SW progress.

I think the man is stealing my thunder  j/k

LOL@ "they make the right noises"


Anyway, since more politicians are now speaking of restructuring and fiscal federalism e.t.c, can we get them to push for a proposal or bill, commence a massive public campaign on the issue and initiate for some kind of referendum to get this done?

The Talking has to end so we can start the Acting

Nigeria cannot afford to wait forever.

@Gbawe, I get the point of what ACN wants, I do not disagree with that at all. Let me rephrase my bewilderment;

I'm wondering why an opposition party is allowed to participate in an election/selection to pick the principal HOA officers of a majority party.

I'm assuming that David Mark as Senate President is also the PDP Senate Majority Leader. No?

Is the Position of Senate President different from that of Senate Majority Leader in the Nigerian Senate?

Who is the Senate Majority leader?
Who is the Senate Minority Leader?
What of House Majority Leader
House Minority nko?

Who votes to pick Senate and House Minority leaders? everyone too?

American system:

Elected at the beginning of each Congress by members of their respective party conferences to represent them on the Senate floor, [b]the majority and minority leaders serve as spokesmen for their parties positions on the issues.

The majority leader has also come to speak for the Senate as an institution.

Working with the committee chairs and ranking members, the majority leader schedules business on the floor by calling bills from the calendar and keeps members of his party advised about the daily legislative program.

In consultation with the minority leader, the majority leader fashions unanimous consent agreements by which the Senate limits the amount of time for debate and divides that time between the parties

^^^^^^^
That is the American Style Senate we are supposedly practising. It appears we have reformed that to suit our padi padi oil-money-sharing politics.

Please enlighten me If I missed anything.

I still don't get the kind of democracy we practice, ACN picking PDP House of Assembly officers is simply insane.

No wonder these people keep raping Nigerians so easily, They are their own constituencies, once they get to the Senate, our system forces them to become padi padi.

It makes no sense for a country to have that kind of consensus in it's highest law making body. It kills necessary opposition, improverishes our polity and stunts the growth of different ideas/ideologies.

Only a military-made constitution can come up with that kind of arrangement sha.

Beaf:
Fiscal federalism is not about more money going to the states. That is the same monkey de work baboon de chop mentality that see's the various regions producing zilch, while the ND bears the unfair burden.

You are very right, I agree but I have a little reservation. See below:

Lets adopt the "if you don't work, you can't eat approach." It is immoral for the regions to continue recieving free money, instead of paying taxes to the centre as happens in all normal economies. It is understandable that target is not immediately acheivable, but we must lay solid plans to hit it sooner than later; also, we must begin taking immediate transitional steps.

True again, but that plan should include some kind of "Marshall Plan" for those states and regions with little to no income from mineral resources at least in the near term, or we require them to merge with other states.

Actually I prefer we de-emphasise statehood and carve our administrative governments out of cities, towns and local government with close cultural ties. We cannot afford to reduce the power of the FG then replace it with these 36 tin gods we call state governors.

I prefer we give more responsibilities to cities, towns and or local govts, give them the responsibilities for making local laws(with teeth) that are sensitive to local cultural and social values, local law enforcement, utilities, attracting businesses and managing local infrastructure.

We can have the regions as administrative hubs for budgetary and uniform law making purposes. The FG should simply manage Defence, foreign relations, Monetary policies, Federal law enforcement, Universal Federal Laws (which should be limited) e.t.c

Let those that can't swim sink. Such an attitude will go a long way to ensuring the country develops and fixing worsening issues like the almajiri problem (without free money, there will be no almajiri).

Sounds kinda harsh, but Yes, they should merge if they can't cope. If you don't have mineral resources, you have creativity and human resources. A few Nigerian states are as big as some European countries.

Liberalise Land, property and mineral right laws, remove state of origin gradually and kill that Federal character nonsense, let everybody pay pre-determined taxes to the center and keep the rest for themselves, their city, state or region as it applies.

If we can't do this then let us have a confederacy where we are only joined together by common Defence and Foreign policy + maybe currency. Or everybody just go their separate ways.

We just cannot continue to manage this system as it currently stands.