These people forget so soon that they had a DOS. And were raising funds for arms. Kanu ordered for the heads of 2000 citizens after Ikonso's death. This your yeye AI want to twist everything around. Something we saw with our eyes!
Shadow225: Question 11: If Nnamdi Kanu is not responsible for crimes of IPOB then why was Osama Bin Laden responsible for 911
Chatgpt: Great question — and the difference between Kanu/IPOB and Bin Laden/Al-Qaeda is huge in law, structure, evidence, and command hierarchy. Let me break it down clearly.
---
✅ 1. Al-Qaeda was a tightly organised military-style organisation
Al-Qaeda under Bin Laden had:
A defined hierarchy
A military council
Training camps
Operational commanders
Cell leaders
Funding pipelines
Written fatwas and orders
It functioned like a covert army.
So if an operation happened, it was almost always:
✔️ planned ✔️ approved ✔️ funded ✔️ and coordinated
by the central leadership.
---
✅ 2. Bin Laden personally ordered 9/11
This is the key difference.
The 9/11 Commission and intelligence agencies proved:
Bin Laden conceptualized the attack
He approved the hijacking plan
He selected and assigned the hijackers
He approved funding
He communicated through Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
He received progress updates
He recorded recruiting videos for the attackers
So his responsibility was direct, intentional, and documented.
This is why he was held responsible.
---
❌ 3. IPOB is NOT structured like al-Qaeda
IPOB is:
Decentralised
Politically oriented
Mostly media/radio driven
With ESN being a loose vigilante-style force
A mix of legitimate members, opportunistic criminals, and splinter groups
There is no evidence IPOB had:
a military council
organised terrorist cells
centralised command
structured planning of attacks
documented orders linking Kanu to specific killings
The Nigerian government itself has repeatedly admitted fragmented groups are committing crimes “in the name of IPOB.”
---
❗ 4. Terrorist responsibility requires COMMAND + CONTROL
International law requires BOTH of these:
A. Effective Command
The leader must have real control over the people who acted.
B. Intent + Knowledge
The leader must have ordered, endorsed, or knowingly allowed the attacks.
Bin Laden → yes for both. Kanu → not proven in court.
---
🔥 5. A group being “designated terrorist” is not enough
If you apply your logic literally:
Every member of IPOB
Every donor
Every listener of Radio Biafra
…would be guilty of terrorism automatically. That is not how any legal system works.
A group can be unlawful or terrorist, but liability for violent acts still requires evidence of specific connection.
---
🔍 6. Example: Boko Haram vs random “bandits”
Shekau was responsible for Boko Haram terrorism because:
He commanded
He ordered
He controlled funding and fighters
But if random bandits claim “We are Boko Haram,” Shekau is not legally responsible unless they are proven to be under his control.
Same principle applies to Kanu/IPOB.
---
🧠 7. So the difference is simple:
Question Bin Laden Nnamdi Kanu
Did he found the group? Yes Yes Did he command attacks? Yes Not proven Did he plan or approve specific killings? Yes (9/11) Not proven Was the organisation structured like an army? Yes No Was the link between leader and operations direct? Yes No evidence Did he admit responsibility? Yes, openly No admission
---
✔️ Conclusion
Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 because he ordered and controlled it. Nnamdi Kanu cannot be automatically responsible for every IPOB-linked crime because no evidence shows he planned, ordered, or controlled them.
If Nigeria had evidence Kanu did what Bin Laden did, the prosecution would have presented:
communication links
funding trails
operational directives
chain-of-command proof
…but they didn’t. That’s why the legal situation is not equivalent.
---
If you want, I can explain how Nigerian law defines terrorist command responsibility, or compare IPOB vs Boko Haram vs Niger Delta militants to show how courts treat leaders differently.
All these are trash! AI knows nothing about IPOB! What it knows is what it has been fed. We all saw live when Kanu inaugurated IPOB and ESN! They were in uniform and structured! Not some ragtag miscreants They had command structure and all that! If I may ask who was Ikonso? Who was gentle the yahoo? And all that? How was sit at home enforced?
Peter Obi has said he would have supported former U.S. President Donald Trump’s plans to eliminate terrorist groups in Nigeria if he were Nigeria's president at the time. Obi made the remark while speaking at a leadership forum, where he outlined the key priorities he would pursue if elected president.
Peter Obi should stop talking rubbish! Is he even a security man! The security of any country is as good as it's armed forces. No matter the president, no matter the talking! It is the armed forces that will still do the job, not the president.
This is exactly the same thing Gumi is doing! Should we then call for the arrest of Peter Obi because he spoke in support of a terrorist? Would that be fair?
If we use this same logic all these IPOB apologist are using, we can clearly say that Tinubu has nothing to do with the verdict or anything concerning Kanu. Did you see Tinubu in the court? Did he make any comments about the verdict? So why call his name? You say Kanu is not responsible for things he said, so why accuse the president for things he didn't say or do?
Do you think these terrorists just act indiscriminately? They're being ordered by someone. That person ordering them is the real terrorist. Did you see bin laden on the planes that destroyed the twin towers? No! But he was the ringleader because he gave the order. If the one giving orders does not give orders, no one will be terrorized.
gidgiddy: Last weekend, I came across a documentary online of an incident that happened in Ethiopia, a terrible incident. An armed rebel group invaded a village and left destruction. Survivors narrated how the armed men stormed into the village, shooting in all directions. People were rounded up, men seperated from women. The men were lined up and shot, while some of the women were sexually assaulted in front of their children. Many houses were looted then burnt
I thought that this was terrorism and violence. However, Justice Omotosho, the judge that handled the case of IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has made us know that terrorism and violence is all about "talking". The Judge rendered his judgement in which he kept saying Nnamdi Kanu said this, said that, ordered this, ordered that, made broadcast.
In other words, "Nnamdi Kanu talked". The judge could not tell anyone that Nnamdi Kanu's words led to violence, killings or harm. He couldn't do this because unlike social media, courts are not places of speculation, you have to prove anything you allege.
The judge called Kanu a terrorist based on spoken words alone, he reduced a very serious issue such as terrorism and violence to what words come out of a persons mouth. What sort of terrorist goes to announce his plans of violence on Radio first?
Armed men invaded Yelwata, Benue State, and burnt over 200 people alive. Can you imagine if I go to Yelwata and tell them that what happened to them is not terrorism, that terrorism is if the killers had gone on Radio to announce or order that they be burnt?
Or that what happened in the village in Ethiopia was not violence or terrorism because the armed men should have announced it on Radio only
Omotosho has shown us how bad the judiciary has become. Crime is mainly about what was done, not what was said. When a judge believes that terrorism is all about spoken words, Radio broadcasts, sit at home orders,which is still spoken words, in a country where communities are being invaded daily, people killed or abducted, property destroyed, then we are in a big mess.
Someone should tell the judge that terrorism is about the use of violence, and violence must be an action. No amount of spoken words amounts to an action. No amount of words amounts to violence. A judge who believes that spoken words alone amounts to violence or terrorism, has no business presiding over court affairs.
You turned around and sentenced a man to life in jail based only on the words that came out of his mouth? You reduced terrorism to mere words alone? A terrorist is determined by what he says and not what he does?
He's not making sense at all! You don't make peace or concessions to someone who is not ready to first of all show remorse for lives lost and also step back a little bit. So many people have tried interceding on this matter but Kanu has refused to bulge
You create a militant group and give them order to kill. It's the same thing as a military general giving order to his subordinates to go and kill! Who's responsible for the deaths? The general!
Kukutente23: I'm interested in understanding how saying something or issuing threats constitutes "acts" of terrorism
Fergie001 =DeepSight any lawyer in the house help with the legal definition of acts of terrorism for the sake of enlightenment
Gerhards: Yes, he has been sentenced, hope it will bring back 3 people who died in the Eruku chiurch and stop the terrorists activities in Kwarra state, talk about chasing shadow
Oga, the journey of a thousand miles begins with a step. At least another one of those terrorist is down. This is not the time for Whataboutism! Anywhere a terrorist is down, all good men should be happy 😊😁
NgeneUkwenu: The terrorism and Prevention Act 2013 as amended in 2022, of which Kanu was convicted of, made no provision for life sentence.... The offence carries the maximum punishment which is DEATH no addiction or minus. The judge should not because, he wanted to temper justice with mercy, import or lessen the punishment in variance with the act.
The Federal Govt. should as a matter of urgent national importance approach the Appeal court for the reinstatement of the correct punishment..
I arise!
The life imprisonment was a chess masterpiece move if Kanu appeals the judgement, it will be corrected to death sentence. If he doesn't, he's sentence starts immediately.
Sheik gumi shud have been kpai by now Buh still walking freely
No wahala
You people like pointing at Gumi! Please show us proof where Gumi ordered terrorist to kill nigerian citizens or armed personnel! Acting as an intercessory to bandits or terrorist does not make you a terrorist. At least, the likes of Peter Obi said IPOB is not a terrorist organisation. He's as free as air till date.
For you to even have a chance of winning the government, You have to report the kidnapping to the police, follow due process according to law and show proof that the police was negligent in their duty. Therefore, your chances of winning is practically zero.
peleson1: Is inec working for the country or is inec working for APC?
The courts that the evil set of politicians use to shop for evil verdicts and inec roles in being more political than being independent will consume this country
Truth is that nothing will stop PDP from fielding candidates in 2027 general elections
INEC is a federal agency. It is not subject to state high court orders
nairavsdollars: Reacting to the incident at a press conference, Wike said he was simply misinterpreted, as he “wouldn’t have called a military personnel a fool”.
“Some people said I said the boy is a fool. What I meant is you cannot carry out an illegal order. That is what I meant. I didn’t say, ‘Military, you are a fool.’ I couldn’t have said that,” he clarified. Huh
Quoting Section 251 of the Constitution, Mr Adetumbi contended that INEC does not fall within the category of agencies that place the case exclusively before the Federal High Court. He asked the court to dismiss the objection and proceed with the substantive suit.
He is very correct.
What the court granted is non interference. It did not compel inec to monitor the exercise. We all know that if inec doesn't monitor the exercise then it's all in futility.
3Ceagle: First time in a very long time I am reading something that pleases the heart from this country'. Nigeria has been first in the worst things one can ever imagined in the past 10 years. So the question will be, how did we get this bad. The answer is APC.
APC knew Jonathan's plan to remove fuel subsidy was good and also many other planned policies like SURE-P but they deceived Nigerians, gaslight the then government, brought insecurity to the nation and gave us an ineffective ruler in the person President Buhari. They were basically playing chess with lives of Nigerians.
They cannot stand now to say, they have improved the indices. The question I will asked them is from what Base have they improved the living standard? Is it from the time of Obasanjo, Yar'Adua or Jonathan?
A good leader does the right thing! Not the popular thing. GEJ was not a good leader. Even Obi will not be a good leader. You observe that after the subsidy removal, Obi backtrack that he never said he was going to remove subsidy immediately but in phases, that he was going to fight criminality first. But Tinubu stood his ground! Today, you're saying why did Tinubu oppose GEJ! Opposition is a normal thing in a democracy. You measure a good leader by the actions they take, not because of the price of rice and beans.
Charles Soludo, Anambra state Governor said, “In the fullness of time, we will get the record out of how somebody deliberately and intentionally destroyed the public education system in Anambra state”
If you’re getting frustrated because someone is doing what you couldn’t even think about, just go home relax and get a life, because idleness and serial looses can get into someone mental health.”
StoryHaven: No. We have a clueless person at Aso Rock. Say the truth, it won't stop your monthly stipends.
This is one of them! They score the economy based on the price of beans and rice. Once dirty politicians put food in their stomach, they forget about everything else!
Mrexcell: Same bully is still respecting other african leaders.
Respect how? Someone that invited African leaders to the white house and started mocking them. Telling them how to speak English! Tell me one African leader that's in good terms with him or has not been threatened!
Which boss? A retired officer? Is it the constitutional duty of a military officer ( not even an order rank officer) to guard someone that's not a government official? While at the same time provoking a representative of the commander in chief of the Armed forces? Someone his oga will have to salute to!
Politicstoday: Section 218 of the 1999 constitution(as amended):
A Minister in Nigeria(Wike for instance) does not have the right to command a soldier.
Constitutional & Legal Basis Under Section 218 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended):
Exclusive Command Authority: 🚨The President, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, has the sole power to determine the operational use of the armed forces and to appoint senior officers. No Ministerial Command Over Soldiers:
The Minister of Defence (or any other minister) is a civilian political head of the ministry. Their role is policy formulation, administration, and oversight—not operational command. Chain of Command: Operational orders to soldiers flow only from the President Chief of Defence Staff Service Chiefs Commanders in the field.
A minister cannot issue direct orders to troops.
Hope you learn something
What you post is rubbish! You should be asking yourself if the soldier has a constitutional duty to be there! The minister has a constitutional duty to be there. You can be arrested as a trespasser If you're in the wrong place even at the right time! The duty of an army officer is to either be at the barrack or be at a duty post assigned by authorities. A retired officer is not an authority
Politics › Re: Was Nnamdi Kanu Sentence Fair? - Chatgpt Replies by Misterone: 3:31pm On Nov 24, 2025
if Kanu appeals the judgement, it will be corrected to death sentence. If he doesn't, he's sentence starts immediately. 
