₦airaland Forum

Omo_Tier1:
"This is one of the reasons the Civil Service is still innately corrupt because those Directors, DGs know the leadership is only paying leap service to financial prudency in managing the country's wealth."

Absolutely right!

Eko Ile:
https://i54.tinypic.com/34odkx2.jpg

So funny, but so telling! A good example of a picture that is worth a million words!

eku_bear:
Most Ghanaian immigrants will probably have migrated to the SW part of Nigeria over any other zone. So more interaction with Yoruba than Hausa, Igbo, etc.

Also, the big deportation of Nigerians Ghana did in the 60s affected mostly Yoruba (google about this, you'll find a nice journal paper discussing it.)

Similarly, "Ghana-must-go" mostly affected Ghanaians in the SW.

Regarding Fashola's statement (and Gbenga Daniel who said something similar regarding Ogun State vs. Ghana), it is just powerful rhetoric to compare yourself to the accomplishments of another nation. In West Africa, Ghana is the only real other competitor. So makes sense to evaluate against them.

I think this is one of your most objective, serious and well-though-out posts of recent.

I agree 99% with all the points you made here; they are just so plausible and convincing.

But I know as soon as one of the usual suspects wittingly or unwittingly ignites the
fire of ethic bashing in the thread, you would be one of those who might find it very hard not to
fight back if they find their ethnicity 'under attack'.

In fact the subtle ethnic coloration of the thread, both in its title and subject matter, makes it so
'volatile' that I can see the NL ethnic warfare breaking out sooner rather than later.

ifyalways: "IMO,the judgement serves her right.

She had options if she so hated the child(send him back to the dad,abandon him somewhere,abscond and leave him behind for the grandparents)"

Excellent points!

She must have been fully aware of all these other options that you so well pointed out, each of which would have been far better than taking the life of the innocent boy.

But she decided to choose the most devilish and most abominable of all options, murdering the poor child!.

So I fully agree with you - she deserves to die, too!

Has anybody got any update on this story, please ? Any news about the fate of the kids, especially the six-month-old baby?

If any NLder comes across any new development in this highly touching unfolding story, he/she should please post it on this thread immediately.

Kidnapping innocent persons and holding them against their will is very sickening; but when the kidnapped are kids, a six-month-old baby and two toddlers aged only two-and-a-half years, it makes it even more sickening and more repulsive.

Only the most wicked and most depraved minds could be so callous and evil as to have subjected three children of these ages to the harrowing experience of kidnapping and all the consequent psychological pains and agony of separation that it must have caused to the parents and the innocent children!

lagerwhenindoubt:
who gave you expo     

Let me put this simple challenge to you:

1. Just print out ALL MY POSTS on NL (only 57 of them in total!)

2. Select YOUR BEST 57 POSTS and print them out too.

3. Give the two sets to anybody you trust, such as a close family member or a friend, who has an adequate level of linguistic knowledge and expertise to assess the quality of English in our respective posts.

4. Tell the person doing the assessment that one set of the posts was written by you, and the other by a forum member with whom you are engaged in a debate as to who has a better mastery of the English language (He/she wouldn't know which set is yours, as neither of us used a real name).

5. And be honest enough to post the raw scores on NL, for all to see!

moderatorr:
boko haram's failure to detonate a single bomb yesterday is a sign of end times on their path. --

Ameen, in God's/Allah's name!

moderatorr:
did you skip primary school or what?

lagerwhenindoubt:
He must have skipped primary-secondary-university and went straight to adult education - you can see his challenges (literally) 

Yes, you are both right! If that was how best I could write, then I must have been a primary school drop-out!

Even a primary school pupil, or a good student in an adult literacy class, should have been able to identify and correct the mistakes you alluded to in that post of mine, because they were such glaringly obvious and simple typographical errors.

But why didn't I correct them? It was simply because the moderator, very strangely, DENIED me the technical facility to do!

Immediately I sent the post, I saw the mistakes and went for the 'modify' button to correct them, only to get a message that I couldn't do so because the post was LOCKED. I tried again, and again later but still without any success.

How come I could/still can edit all my previous posts but not this particular one that I would certainly have wanted to edit more than all the others, given that it was about the evaluation of texts? This is what I find so baffling!

Did somebody, somewhere, somehow, decide to help you in this our mini-debate on the use of English by denying me the facility to correct these typographical errors, so that you could at least have something with which you could have a go at me?

Mr 'moderatorr', are you really not one of the moderators on NL, as your moniker cynically eerily implies?
If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's most probably a duck!

But why did I make those mistakes in the first place? It was simply a case of Chomsky's 'linguistic performance' manifesting some of its well known features; I was typing the post while doing a whole load of other things simultaneously - and I couldn't edit later!.

If either of you has studied linguistics well enough, he/she could easily relate this particular context to the Chomskyan theory. 

But try assessing me on the other parallel aspect of the theory, namely 'linguistic competence'; just randomly pick ANY of my other posts, which the moderator (moderatorr?) allowed me to edit, read it, assess the technical quality of the language and then get back to me with your feedback, PLEASE.

Onlytruth:
@LogicPower

Another beautiful examples are Mozambique and Zambia
Mozambique has the longest coast in South Eastern Africa, while Zambia is completely landlocked.

Zambia is richer by half.

So, what matters is what people are doing inside the country to grow the economy, not all these nature endowed stuff.
Some Nigerian journalists who returned from Mozambique stated that they have never seen a worse country.
One said he was happy to see a country that Nigeria is better than, hehe!

I agree all these present some good and valid instances whereby a land-locked country is doing better economically than a country with a long coastal area. However, they might still be exceptions, rather than the norm. !

I am not an economist (I only studied economics in secondary sch), but I still believe that having access to the sea offers a big, obvious economic advantage to a country, while being land-locked is such a big, obvious disadvantage to a country.

I also believe that ethnically homogeneous societies tend to be less susceptible to political instability than countries that are made up of several unwilling, often warring, ethnic entities.
And the more stable a country is, the greater its potential for achieving rapid economic growth.

So I still think these two factors (access to the sea and ethnic homogeneity) would offer some added advantages to the SW, which the North would not have, in the event of a break-up.

But does it mean any country with all the three advantages I mentioned would necessarily fare better than any country that does not have them? My answer is, of course, a big NO.

This is simply because there is a whole plethora of OTHER FACTORS that can help determine the economic progress of a country.

And we were also taught in secondary school that although economics as a subject is described in our textbooks as a 'science', it is very much different from physical sciences, hence its 'laws' are not as 'scientific' as, say, those of physics. 

But all the same, I think you did justice to the topic by spicing your highly logical and enlightened arguments with those concrete examples that appear so effortlessly comprehensible, even if they happen to be exceptions rather than the rule.

moderatorr:
young imbe.cile , what is wrong with the english? 'When i wipe ma shoe hatters go insane' -GEJ to his wife.

Evaluation of a speech or or text can be done at different levels, based on different criteria,  linguistic and extra-linguistic.

And how well we it is done depends, to a very large extent, on the expertise and experience of is doing it.

So if at your own level you could not find anything wrong with the English, even after knowing all the contexts in which it was delivered, then it simply means we are not operating at same level of linguistic expertise and experience!.

President JEG; In America alone, we have about 25,000 medical doctors that are from Nigeria and that is a society where if you treat somebody and something happens, you will be taken to court UNLIKE HERE THAT MEDICAL DOCTORS CAN KILL PEOPLE AND NOBODY CARES(emphasis mine)

Can it get any worse? Please tell!

A president of a country publicly telling the world in "a National Lecture: “Nigeria in Transformation” -----held at the INTERNATIONAL HALL OF THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS (emphasis mine)" that in America, they take legal actions against doctors if ANYTHING happens to a patient as a result of a doctor's negligence, but in the very country where is the president and Commander-in-Chief, "MEDICAL DOCTORS CAN KILL PEOPLE AND NOBODY CARES"!

I never expected a president of a country to have lowered himself so badly, publicly, as to be expressing this kind of helpless, hopeless and empty lamentations that we ordinary citizens are reduced to making: 'this and that cannot happen in a developed country'!

I thought a president is beyond this pointless, useless whining.

I thought a president that is so much impressed by the system of a foreign country which ensures prosecution of negligent doctors should be seen (or in this case heard) either actually announcing the necessary steps he has taken taken to ensure things work as well in his country, or at the very least, pledging to take take those steps!

I thought it is ordinary people like you and me, the helpless lot, who are so much profoundly frustrated with our malfunctioning system, yet so severely limited in our ability to change things, who have the right to whine, and whine, and wish and pray that we get a leader who could help bring about the change we we so badly need, whereby negligent doctors could be prosecuted, for instance, as in the US?

I thought you and I are the ones who should be lamenting, as we always do, that in our country "medical doctors can kill people and no[b]body (or any part of the 'body', not even the sick, rotten and empty head of the body) cares"[/b]    

I think more and more people are now becoming convinced that we really have a terribly incompetent person at the helms.

With each passing day, GEJ makes us feel like we badly miss OBJ, who even at much older age, with those military dictatorial tendencies of his, and with no PhD, has proved to be much more coherent, more eloquent, more refined and MUCH MORE INTELLECTUALLY ROBUST!.

JEG: “A country (Nigeria) where we have good people in athletics, in academics, why can’t we fix our country and that is the kernel. If we have this people, fantastic people all over the world, medical doctors. In America alone, we have about 25,000 medical doctors that are from Nigeria and that is a society where if you treat somebody and something happens, you will be taken to court unlike here that medical doctors can kill people and nobody cares. They don’t employ butchers, they employ doctors. So, for us to have 25,000 medical doctors working there, that means we have the people”

The more GEJ talks (unscripted) IN ENGLISH, the less he would strike you as a PhD who spent years in the academia.

You do not need to be a linguist to be disappointed by the quality of his expressions in the above excerpt, both in form and content; hardly presidential, and even less intellectual.

I wish I could know how eloquent he is in IJAW!

Doctokwus: " Am one of dose who feels Jonathan shd b gven a chance and for us all to wish him d best;but dt speech he gave at d church service is one of d most UNINSPIRING,UNIFORMED,LACKLUSTRE,UNTIMELY speeches to av eva come out frm any nigerian ruler.--

What d country needs now is a leader dt can galvanise us and tel us d impossible is probable;d probable is likely and d likely is assured,nothing less,particularly at dis turning point of our country's history."


Doctor, please start writing in Standard English!. Your fascinatingly insightful, balanced and well-informed post clearly deserves to be rendered in a much better form than this sub-standard, juvenile writing.

"She (the ten-year old sister of two of the abducted kids) pleaded with the people holding her sisters to please allow them to re-unite with the family, adding that “God will bless them if they do this for us”."

I had to try, unsuccessfully, to hold back tears when I read this highly moving entreaty from such a little innocent girl.

In her pure innocence, she must have thought that the invocation of the name of God could soften the evil and devilish hearts of the disgusting scumbags to release her little dear sisters!.

Committing just any crime is bad enough, but committing a particularly heinous crime such as kidnapping against very young children as in this case, makes the crime particularly despicable.

One can only hope that the trauma of the little kids would end soon, and the animals-in-human-skin who committed this bestial act are eventually caught and dully punished.

I normally do not support capital punishment, but if someone is found to be so inherently as evil and wicked as to have kidnapped children as young as these, I believe such a beast has effectively forfeited his/her rights to be allowed to continue to live among humans, hence IT should be put down, for the greater good of the society!

Mannylex:
What has this man done to deserve all of this unwarranted insults ---

Here is my answer, as to what he has done to somewhat deserve the 'unwarranted insults':

He falsely claimed to have all what it would take to steer to safety our fast drifting ship that is carrying over 150 millions of us; he even wasted so much of our resources to go round on board the ship persuading and, almost literally, begging people to trust him and believe in his capabilities and competence to check the drift and chart an entirely new, safer course for us.

But ever since he has taken control, he simply allows the ship to continue to drift further and sink deeper, thereby making us even more concerned about our collective fate and individual lives, and thus disappointing everybody, including those who had confidence in him.

He now tells us to pray to God the Almighty to steer the ship to safety for us!

Worse still, he adds that we should not compare him to any great personalities of the past or the present.
In fact he is telling us that we should not even compare him to anything that is traditionally associated with bravery and courage, such as a lion or an army general!.

But if he knew that he is such a fncking chicken-hearted corward, why did he insist on being allowed to take control of a sinking ship with over 150 million of us on board?

So this is what your man has done to deserve our calling out and shouting at him; we are really terrified that the way he is steering our ship we are heading only to one direction - sinking deep down the sea.

If he had not taken control of our collective destiny, if he were merely staying in his creeks, or anywhere else for that matter, enjoying his life as a private citizen with his good family members, how many people do you think would give a hoot about him?  

It is just so, so sad how ethnic, sectarian and regional sentiments and divisions have killed this our otherwise great nation!

Idealkocep:
I am not A General. But you are the commander in-chief of Nigeria Armed froces. I think we need to ammend that part of the constitution that gives him double power; president and Commander in-chief. He can get to presidency by Luck but surely he can't govern the country by Luck. A good leader should always think ahead of his detractors and render them incapable rather than complaining.

Excellent points!

Can you imagine a Commander-in-Chief of one of the largest armed forces in Africa foolishly and unwittingly implying that all the generals under his command should be more powerful, more stoic, more courageous, more daring than him?

This lily-livered fish-brained of a president is only making us to begin to long nostalgically for the the era of OBJ.

Doctokwus: D part I dnt like is him saying he's commended by d presidents of US,South Africa and Gabon.
U.S has always had its strategic interests,has he 4gotten dis same U.S suported Saddam Hussein,Hosni Mubarack of Egypt,evn Ghaddafi to some extent til d bubble burst?
As for S Africa and Gabon,I wudnt sincerely b proud as a nigerian pres to b supported by d current presidents of dose 2,no nation shd evn b proud of dem"


Pinkrex: "Exactly my disappointment in his whole speech.

How can he appraise his competence by words from foreign nations

He hasn't even gotten a pass mark from his Aso rock yet the worlds of Obama satisfies his incompetence"


The whole speech is so dumb, but I also believe that the dumbest and most embarrassing part must be this very one the two of you have highlighted; a whole president of a country like Nigeria returning home from an international gathering only to be so shamelessly and foolishly feeling so excited that some foreign leaders had praised him!

If you add this to the way he so ungracefully and disgracefully stood in front of Hillary Clinton with his two nervous hands timidly folded at his back, listening to her like a secondary school boy would to his school principal, you cannot but agree that we have never had a president who is so clearly deficient in all what it takes to act, sound, and appear presidential!.  

And I think it would really amount to expecting too much of him for anybody to reasonably believe that he could ever be up to the daunting task of salvaging and re-directing this wrecked country back on the right course, and to the promised land.

Onlytruth: "Minus SE and parts of SS; SW would not be economically better than the North believe me."

I find it very, very difficult to believe this, simple because of the three obvious advantages I think the SW has over the North: access to the sea, much higher level of educational advancement and ethnic homogeneity.

Evil Brain:
In the unlikely event that Nigeria were to split up, the north and the SS would be the biggest losers and the SW the best off.

The north would be land-locked and would depend entirely on the southern nation(s) for all their imports. Plus they would lose all the free money they've been getting from oil leading to a major economic crisis.

The SS on paper would be the richest, but in reality, their politicians would get most of the wealth as they currently do leaving the ordinary people to feed on scraps. The average SS man wouldn't even be able to farm because of all the pollution. The gap betwwen the rich and the poor will get even wider than it currently is leading to instability and eventually, Libya-style chaos.

The SE would do fairly well they'd get a little oil and they'd make a good living trading with the surrounding nations.

The SW would likely end as the richest of all the nations. They already have a diverse economy, excellent man-power and fairly good governance. The removal of oil revenue will lead to less rent-seeking, less corruption and ultimately more wealth for everybody. Plus they are likely to serve as the economic hub of the entire region, the same way London serves most of western Europe. This is less likely to happen though if the Yorubas kick out those from other tribes. If the SW can keep its best people, then they'll be the big winners.

Simply the best post so far, IMHO!.

I tried very hard to find a single point I could disagree with, but I couldn't!

I initially believed that after the North, the SE might be the second biggest 'loser', but I now agree with you that the SS might lose more than the SE, thanks to the cogent points that you put across so excellently and plausibly.

ekt_bear:
A 20 year agreement in which oil revenues are still shared out (with the amount shared out diminishing), that I can see. But year 21, everyone finally completely has gone their separate ways.

No nation is going to sign away its territorial rights. . . ain't gonna happen. And if they do sign it, the coastal nations will renege.

I agree with you 100% here. It would not be fair, and even if something like that were to be signed, it is very likely that some new generations of leaders of the oil-producing nations, as you stated, would get it revoked at some point. I am not even sure if there is any precedence anywhere in the world.

kasiem:
I think the SSers will suffer it most, cos, when their leaders pockets the proceeds of their oil, there wouldn't be any other survival dint for them. Naturally, they're indolent and barbaric; their polluted lands will be of no farming benefit to them.
In the north, i dont see the backwardness as suffering to them, cos, backwardness is like a way of life to them. The proceeds of their farms will feed them, and it'll be "to hell with technological advancement and civilisation". The igbos will have the problem of unity, but, they'll surely advance at a high pace.

Although I take exception to your use of some uncharitable stereotypes to describe the people of SS, I agree with you about the badly polluted and degraded lands of the region and how that would potentially severely limit their self-sufficiency in food production.

In spite of this, however, I do not personally believe that the new SS nation would 'suffer the most' if Nigeria is divided, considering the vast natural resources (oil and gas) with which the region is blessed.

I also partly agree with your prediction that the massive arable land of Arewa would be very important for their survival, as they could at least be able to meet most of their food needs.

I laughed though at your witty, albeit condescending, characterization of what might sum up the general attitude of Arewa (core North) towards the perceived backwardness of their new country; "to hell with technological advancement and civilisation"

efisher:
SW will be most peaceful, SE will grow very fast, SS will be the richest, NC will be a battle front and core north will keep retrogressing! Sorry but that's d hard fact.

Though eventually things might not necessarily work out exactly as you envisaged for each of the new state that would emerge, I very much see your predictions as quite reasonable and plausible, considering the prevailing internal socio-economic and geo-political realities of each of the regions that would become new nation states.

CyberG:
Nigerians practically "RUN" away from Nigeria because their fathers and current leaders have created a hopeless country where all efforts to get ahead by your own efforts, hard work and intelligence will mostly lead to frustration and under-achievement in life!

The gist of what you have stated in your post is, unfortunately, the obvious truth about the situation in our beleaguered country.

To be able to 'climb up', you would probably need more 'connections' than sheer hard work, skills, intelligence, experience, competence, expertise, dedication, honesty, integrity, etc.

Although it can be argued that 'connections' do also count in the developed countries, it cannot be as widely, badly, flagrantly and inimically as in our own case.

If the systems of those developed countries had been as self-destructive as ours, in sacrificing competence, hard work, intelligence, etc, on the altar of 'connections' or any such other vested interests, they would not have been that developed!

SNTHESIS: "chei  !!! get a refund from the school u attended o! o shey na ghana u go?"


GEMMA11: "Teach me. --- What is wrong with the expression I used?"


The phrase in bold from your post below is what SNTHESIS was alluding to:

Quote from: Gemma11 on August 25, 2011, 01:06 PM
I just recently returned from Nigeria after years and was expecting to see a big improvement due to the positive comments I constantly read here on NL but not much has changed. . . .In fact things were a lot worst!


Indeed there is an obvious grammatical mistake in the highlighted phrase; in English, we cannot use the adverbs 'a lot of', 'a little', 'slightly', 'far', etc. to modify an adjective that is in its[b] superlative[/b] form, such as 'worst', best, tallest, etc.

We can only use such adverbs to modify adjectives that are in the comparative forms, worse, better, taller, etc.

So if you had written '--things were a lot worse' no any 'grammar-savvy' guy, like SNTHESIS, go worry u.

And I think it would have been much better for you if you had tried to find out from someone whether or not something was really wrong, grammatically, with the expression, before replying SNTHESIS the way you did; your reply, and I am sorry to say this, appears to be more embarrassing than the original grammatical mistake!

[/color]

Rafaell:
@LogicPower, I dsagree wt U totaly over d alegations made agnst Udezue on use of words & ataching bias & sentmentalism on issues bein dscussd. my guy I have seen insults, abuses, curses, evn punchs bein thrwn (U kno wat I mean) at Ibos & dscussants loyal 2d Biafran cause, in so many threads on NL. I kno hw many timx I hav come in 2quell such fights. So dnt single out Udezue; Ibos hav even suferd mo as vctims of this acusatn because it jus seems lik its jus them agnst otha tribes,  even d Yorubas

Rafaell, I am not in any way oblivious of any of the points you raised here; I have seen some Southerners here hurling far nastier, dirtier and more virulent ethnic insults against the Igbos than what Udezue has thrown against the Northerners.

And I have also seen some Igbos heaping equally venomous ethnic insults against other Southern nationalities.

I consider both as equally inappropriate. In fact my very first comment on NL (reproduced below) was prompted by the first stream of such tribal insults I came across just after joining the forum:

"[color=#006600]Considering the intensity and profundity with which the Igbos and Yorubas on this and other discussion forums hate each other; considering how these two major Southern nationalities hate and are hated equally intensely by the Hausa-Fulanis; considering how the three are viewed with suspicion and mistrust by the rest of the Nigerian nationalities; considering how even among the minority nationalities we occasionally witness violent inter-ethic conflicts; considering all this,I personally believe that we are all condemned into a quagmire as a country - doomed if we break up, doomed if don't!"

So you see, right from the moment I joined NL, I registered my strong sense of disapproval of such ethnic insults, regardless of who insults which ethnicity.

(Having been around for sometime now, however, I am inclined to believe that most of the online tribal invective here does not necessarily translate into an ethnic hatred; hence in hindsight, I would not have used the words 'hatred' and 'hate' myself in that post to denote the ethnic rivalries between the nationalities)   

I believe it would be better if we always try to avoid ethnic and sectarian prejudices and stereotypes; we all love our respective ethnic backgrounds, i.e. who we are; we all, therefore, feel bad when our entire ethnic group is subjected to uncharitable, stereotypical insults.

udezue:
Ndu chuks and Alj Harem, are northerners. A backward set of uneducated people whose cultures promote wickedness and barbarism --

udezue:
A nation with sizeable Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri will continue to lack progress because they are a people of stone-age. They look to Mecca

.

udezue:
I can honestly say that when Biafra is actualized no northern soul should be allowed to reside in the new nation

udezue link=topic=762253.msg9181631#msg9181631 date=1316504417:
MM's name should be removed if Nigerians have any sense of decency but I will be a fool to expect them to have such a thing. Its just rare in Nigeria. Tufiakwa unu.

It would be quite reasonably expected, and even understood, that a debate on a topic as sensitive and controversial as an alleged genocide during a bitter, brutal civil war could re-open old, unhealed wounds.

Such a debate could even lead to some people, wittingly or unwittingly, inflicting some fresh wounds on others, due to the huge avalanche of raw emotions that would typically be let loose from both directions!

But judging from your quoted comments above, Mr. udezue, I can dare say that you are one of those who have completely allowed themselves to be ruled mainly by emotions and sentiments, as far as this debate is concerned.

As many reasonable posters from both sides of the argument have demonstrated, it is perfectly possible to argue this topic out sensibly, logically and with mutual respect; after all, that is the supposed purpose of bringing up the topic and throwing it to a debate in the first place.

I am afraid, all your venomous insults and open display of such unbridled ethnic prejudices and fallacious stereotypes against the Northerners, as shown in your posts, do not in anyway whatsoever add anything of value to your side of the debate.

And even if we were to believe you, for the sake of an argument, that the 'Southern cultures' are superior to the 'Northern cultures', your language and logic in the comments quoted above would, unfortunately, make it pretty difficult for you to convince any impartial observer that YOU are 'more enlightened', 'more educated' or 'better-cultured' than the two supposedly Northern posters you lambasted so badly, so unnecessarily!

Onlytruth:
I see you side-stepped my comment to repeat yours. Well, I repeat same response:  

How did 1 'side-step' your comment?.

1. I was responding to a specific, quoted part of a comment made by another poster (htajz) not you; unless you are the same person, which I couldn't know.

2. I wanted to answer his/her question 'why Murtala is celebrated and not Biafran commanders' by giving him/her MY OWN OPINION as to why.

3. I stated very clearly that I had expressed that my opinion in my earlier post on the thread.

4. I simply went straight to my original post and copied and pasted the relevant portion of my opinion that I considered, rightly or wrongly, to be a possible answer to his question!.

5. If you, or anybody for that matter, had made a comment on my original post, how would you reasonably expect me to incorporate such YOUR comment (or anybody's) in this particular context?

htajz:
nobody is celebrating those biafran commanders, why are we celebrating murtala
mohammed --?

Here's my opinion as to why  -- in my earlier post on this thread:

" -- if Murtala had not subsequently become a head of state; if he had not shown such a great vision; if his government had not demonstrated such a purposeful, responsible and committed leadership that earned him so much acclaim in Nigeria and across the African continent, if all these had not been the case, the country's biggest airport would not have  been named after him, talk less of 'seeing his face' on any of our currency notes.

-----

And it can even be argued that the extraordinarily shocking corollary effect of assassinating a serving head of the government of a country is in itself capable of garnering huge, widespread, non-partisan national sympathy for the assassinated leader; to some extent, that too could have contributed to celebrating Murtala as a national hero."

mitofag:
I am glad she has never seen that much money in her life and hopefully she will never see it. Fingers crossed

that warms my heart. Now can we get back to something more important?

In modern day thievery, looting, money-laundering and other forms of sophisticated financial malfeasance, the perpetrators do not have to see the money physically.

So anybody who believes she has now proved her innocence simply because she had not seen that amount of money in her life is simply being fooled.

Afterall, the allegation was that she was an accomplice in a money laundering scam, which she did not address specifically and directly.

She might be completely innocent of this allegation, but the jury would remain out until we are acquainted with more concrete evidence that could decidedly convince us either way.

wesley80:
MM is not celebrated today as a hero because of his war 'heroics', There are no celebrated heroes of the civil war in Nigeria today because we all accepted the episode as unfortunate and buried most of the details in the spirit of national reconciliation. If we were to pick national icons based on the war, the likes of Black scorpion would have monuments in their names and 'Ojukwu' would be a slur! Quit the mischief.n their names and 'Ojukwu' would be a slur! Quit the mischief.

Excellent points!

If I may add, Murtala is regarded as a hero because of the achievements, real or perceived, of his short-lived administration; these include a serious, determined and demonstrably committed effort to fight corruption, and a very assertive, pan-Africanist foreign policy that provided a practical, purposeful leadership the continent was badly yearning for at that time.

In the six months of that administration, Nigeria led the rest of Africa in a dual-tracked struggle for independence for the remaining African countries, and against the menacing forces of neo-colonialism that were targeting the newly independent African states.

As you have rightly pointed out, both sides in that avoidable fratricidal armed conflict might have committed war crimes; I personally believe that most of the alleged cases of war crimes might have been committed by the Nigerian side against innocent Biafran civilians, including children and women; this was simply because they were taking the war to the Biafrans and they were using such overwhelming, arguably disproportionate, force.

However, it was in recognition of these realities of the war, and in a drive for national reconciliation, as you also rightly pointed out, that the so-called policy of no-winner, no-vanquished was introduced.

And as per the letter and spirit of that policy, there was no single military officer from the Nigerian side that was celebrated as a national hero purely on accounts of his war heroics.

Thus, if Murtala had not subsequently become a head of state; if he had not shown such a great vision; if his government had not demonstrated such a purposeful, responsible and committed leadership that earned him so much acclaim in Nigeria and across the African continent, if all these had not been the case, the country's biggest airport would not have  been named after him, talk less of 'seeing his face' on any of our currency notes.

In fact, it can be argued that if Murtala's administration had been allowed to stay longer, it might have ended up manifesting all the typical leadership deficiencies and short-comings of an African government, and thus Murtala would have ended up as an Abacha, or an IBB!

And it can even be argued that the extraordinarily shocking corollary effect of assassinating a serving head of the government of a country is in itself capable of garnering huge, widespread, non-partisan national sympathy for the assassinated leader; to some extent, that too could have contributed to celebrating Murtala as a national hero.

Thus IMHO, so long as nothing new happens that could drastically change all or some of the above possible reasons for 'lionizing' Murtala, so long would he remain a national hero, and so long would his name and 'face' continue to be so immortalized.

Onlytruth:
In Iraq, Saddam Hussein was hanged by his people for committing genocide against fellow Iraqis.

In Nigeria, we name our busiest international airport (and gateway) after a well documented genocidist and murderer of his fellow citizens. We even throw in an icing by adding his picture and name to our most used currency denomination.

I am afraid your analogy does not hold here. The issue of who is celebrated as a national hero and who is vilified, indicted and punished for war crimes in reality boils down to the question of who is the victor and who is the vanquished at the end of an armed conflict.

Do you know how much the name 'Saddam' had dominated every single aspect of the Iraqi national life before his Baath government was ousted by the US-led coalition forces? Do you know how his pictures had adorned pages of almost every textbook in the country? Or how his statues had littered every corner of almost all the cities of the country?  

Was it not only AFTER Saddam was vanquished that everything about his legacies was removed, and the dictator himself was eventually captured and executed?

Were Murtala and those who fought on the Nigerian side so defeated as Saddam? If not, it would be naive to have expected them to suffer similar fate - of having their names and faces removed from public places?

Demdem and Beaf,

Please enough of this childishness, or at least leave your dear parents, children, etc out of it!.