₦airaland Forum

I've been playing this game on my laptop for a week now, the graphic is good, the commentary is better than PES and the atmosphere is good but I just don't understand the moves at all.
Difficult to dribble pass player
Your player can tackle the opponent (will just be dancing in front of the opponent)
The shooting are so tame and when you press it harder na over the bar.

Maybe its cos am new to it but for now I will continue with my PES 13 till I get accustomed to FIFA

I just installed the pc version of fifa 13 but I can use the popular Ucom pad with it. Can anyone help me out on how to reconfigure the ucom pad to work with the fifa 13

Noted

Is it a must that my car must steam or pour water from the exhaust in the morning? If it does not steam, does it mean the engine has begin to wear.

What are the thing that can make car engine to wear easily, will carrying four person at the back seat of a car (Camry 96) have a side effect on the car engine.

I need answers to this questions pls.

Since Ribadu didn't compromise his stand they have find a way to rubbish the report through a former head of service. God is watching us in 4D

Lol

I know this is a very intrigue and controversial issue which I don't like discussing but this have been on my mind since the news of the four uniport students killed some days back.

We've being made to believe that what have been destined to happen to us will surely happen, we've also been told that it can be delayed but will surely come to pass. Some people are of the opinion that with prayers your evil destiny can be turned to good. My question is how do we know that what we believe prayer changed it to wasn't what was destined for us in the first place?

Karma is payback time according to what we are told. Any evil men do same will be melted out to them if not more.

Now, let's look at the gruesome killing at Aluu, are those boys destined to die the way they did? Is it Karma that caught up with them? Have the killers being destined to kill those boys? Will karma caught up with the killers of those boys if they were not destined to kill them?

Let's discuss this without insult and tribal sentiment.

I’m sad. The spade of insecurity in this country is alarming and this has forced citizens to take the law into their own hands. JUNGLE  JUSTICE we call it. I call it MURDER.I don't want to dwell on the reasons why these four University of Port Harcourt students - Ugonna, Ilyod, Tekana and Chidiaka had  their lives cut short in this barbaric manner. No1 has the right over another man's life.These boys were caught for alleged theft and tortured for hours and killed. That is the logline.

Despite various recounts as to what might have happened, multiple sources have claimed they were cult boys who went to claim or attack some 1. They didn't meet the person at home and went to the bush to chill and smoke.Then the vigilante were tipped off that robbers were in the area which resulted in them being rounded up.
Another story claimed they were cultists who went to attack a guy and he shouted for help and this drew the attention of the vigilante's in the area."My source who spoke exclusively to me, and confessed to being part of a group called Mafia;s said“These boys are 200 level students of the University of Portharcourt. They were part of a cult group” THE MAFIA’S”. They are not even hardened enough to kill .What they do is collect dues from defaulting members etc.So on this faithful day, they went to Aluu village to ruffle a particular guy who happened to be a rival cult member(Vikins).On getting there, they didn't meet him at home so they decided to chill in the nearby bush.

The word got out that they were around and  a Vikin member ran to the vigilante guys to report that the thieves terrorizing the neighborhood were spotted.Knowing if they were spared,they would retaliate,the Vikin members posing as ordinary students called for teh head of these boys and accused them of orchestrating several robberies in the area.They even arranged for some girls to claim they had been raped"
Ok PAUSE.



Many of us have heard of mob actions before,we have seen alleged thieves paraded on TV.There is something which is never absent"The weapons used,the item stolen/the person attacked.Why were all these components absent?Why didn't we see any reference in that video made to the fact that these boys were thieves?
Who brought up the story of theft in the first place?A cover up?A frame up?Were the vigilantes used as a tool to perpetrate the heinous crime orchestrated by others?

-Why didn't any 1 in that footage say""Stop"?Where were the women of that community.The community head?
-All the voices in that footage called for their heads.One kept ringing in my ear"The yellow one no wan die,die,die,die"".I dint hear a single"NO".
-For a torture session which lasted for hours,why didn't anyone call the police on time?
-Was it a case of jealousy or envy caused by class segregation?

A few people have backed the killings.One said "Na because they be fine boys" Another said"All of you condemning this killing don't know what it means to encounter an armed robber".There was an interesting one"Why all the fuss?This is not the first time,mob killings occur in Nigeria"

True!Let me tell you why this has driven deep into the core of my soul and other Nigerians.There are killings which are done in the spur of the moment,and there are premeditated murders,carefully planned and executed.

Mob actions are usually carried out in the spur of the moment.The thief is usually caught red handed in the act.The beating, torture, burning is done in a twinkle of an eye.So fast that even the fastest reacting police squad wont get there on time.
This is different,there was time,they were paraded,taken from one scene to the other.Yet,no sign of what they did.

This means,are the people Aluu made up of monsters or were their minds infiltrated with such hate against those boys by some 1?Have they been covered up murders in the past?

The callousness and wanton disregard for human life exhibited by those who did this didnt potray them as novices.They have done this before
I have several theories and none would be as legit as the truth(sadly enough,just the 4 of them know what really happened)
But for the benefit of those who are heartless enough to justify these killings

http://misspetitenigeria..co.uk/2012/10/the-uniport-mob-actionthe-untold.html?m=1

Can married couple applied twice I.e the husband as a primary applicant in one with the wife and kids as secondary applicant and the wife applying as the primary applicant in another form ith the husband and kids as the secondary applicants.

The President Still Doesn’t Get It

Mon, 24/09/2012 - SAM NDA-ISAIAH
The Monday Column - Last Word

Again, last week, President Goodluck Jonathan uttered words that have angered Nigerians and which clearly show that our president is living in a different world, all by himself. There are two sore points he raised. First is that the fuel subsidy protests of January were sponsored by opposition politicians. So what’s wrong with that? The second one is that the media have been too critical of his government. The president has lately been working extremely hard to get into a fight with the media. So far, members of the Fourth Estate have largely ignored him. But the way the president has been talking about the media and spoiling for a fight, his wishes would be granted much sooner than later. And when push comes to shove, I wonder how he intends to survive it, considering the serial scandals that have defined his government, most of which are not even in the public domain yet.

And one really wonders why the president is so surprised that the media should be criticising him. He wants them to clap for him after such a huge mess he has made of the country? He expects plaudits from the media after the unprecedented theft of N2.6 trillion under his watch? Under which of his predecessors has this kind of money been stolen in the name of fuel subsidy payments in one year? Somebody should tell the president that the media have, in fact, been too soft on him. If the Nigerian system were working properly like in other countries, the media would have been singing the music of his impeachment and removal from office by now. The most annoying thing is that the president is not even sorry for presiding over that level of thievery, which, even by Nigerian standards, is clearly beyond the pale.

No criminal or murderer has been tried and sentenced in Nigeria since Jonathan became president. Nothing has happened to the MEND murderers who killed several innocent people in Abuja on October 1, 2010, and nothing has happened to the several Boko Haram elements that have been arrested and ... heck, nothing has happened to the several armed robbers and kidnappers that have been apprehended since he became president. And the president does not expect to be criticised for such a laid-back and I-don’t-give-a-damn attitude to governance?

The president went to Malawi a few days ago and told the country to start exporting rice to Nigeria, and he expects the media to give him an award for that? Under President Jonathan, Nigeria started importing fuel from Niger Republic and he thinks people should be laughing with him?

Is there anything Jonathan has done right since he became president? Only recently, it was exposed that he pays bandits N7 billion annually to protect our oil facilities; and these bandits have done the job so well that the theft of Nigerian oil has never been this bad.

Regarding the sponsorship of the January fuel subsidy protests, the president is still talking after it has been exposed that N2.6 trillion was stolen in the name of fuel subsidy? Words fail me in this one. Is the president’s statement not an insult to Nigerians who have consistently been short-changed by his government? And if it was the opposition that organised the protests, so what? What was the opposition supposed to be doing? Watching him and his contractor cronies do as they like with the nation’s wellbeing and do nothing? This president doesn’t just get it and I don’t think he will ever benefit from good counsel. The truth is that he shouldn’t have been president in the first place.



EARSHOT
Grounding Arik Air

Arik Air has been offering a strategic service to Nigeria that no other airline has nearly been able to do. Without Arik Air, there would be many state capitals in Nigeria that would not be served with commercial air travel. Arik Air is the only airline that plies several routes that are considered unprofitable in the business. At the best of times, the commercial airline business is more of a service than a business, but Arik Air has even taken that service responsibility to a higher level. Only in Nigeria would such an airline be grounded for reasons other than safety.

In the course of its work, Arik Air has understandably accumulated a lot of debts. In a serious country, because of its place in the economy of the nation, Arik Air would have been qualified for a bailout. It is for that same reason that President Barack Obama bailed out the auto industry in the United States, an action that has made General Motors become the number one auto manufacturer again, after it was beaten briefly by Toyota of Japan during the US economic crisis. There are basic principles of running a government; no serious government grounds a company as strategic as Arik Air even if it is privately owned. But what do you expect from a government that appoints commodity traders as ministers?

@ Ops, how do I contact you. Send me a mail odukoya@live.com

Any link to watch the match online

No Comment

Something like this happened to me early this year, I just met this lady not as pretty as my wife but something just attracted us together and we started dating, lo and behold I lost interest in my wife completely, I even went to the extend of pushing for divorce, I tried all the trick I knew even to the point of telling my wife that I have a girlfriend that I intend taking as second wife just for her to leave me. One thing I noticed is that she moved closer to God, her prayer was answered as I broke up with the lady some two months later. I worked on my marriage and we are better, stronger and happier than before.

My take is that, there's somebody outside that the Op's friend thinks is better than his wife, and the earlier he broke up with that girl the better for him.

One thing I also noticed about we men is that, we have this tendency to cheat on our wives. 95% of married men cheats on their wivies either once or everytime. If in doubt sample opinion of men at your workplace and you will be surprise with answers you will get but thats another topic for another day.

PART ONE:

The formerly secret files on the Nigerian civil war in the late 1960s show very clear British complicity in the Nigerian government’s aggression against the region of Biafra, where an independence movement was struggling to secede from Nigeria. This brutal civil war resulted in between one and three million deaths; it also significantly
helped shape modern Nigeria, and not least the division of oil revenues between the central government and the regions and people.

Background to civil war

For those in Britain old enough to remember the war in Nigeria in the late 1960s, ‘Biafra’ probably still conjures up images of starving children – the result of the blockade imposed by the Nigerian government in Lagos to defeat the secession of the eastern region, Biafra. For Biafrans themselves, the period was one of immense suffering – it is still not known how many died at this time as a direct result of the war and the blockade, but it is believed to be at least one million and as high as three million.

For those seeking to understand Britain’s role in the world, there is now an important side of the Biafran story to add – British complicity in the slaughter. The declassified files show that the then Wilson government backed the Nigerian government all the way, arming its aggression and apologising for its actions. It is one of the sorrier stories in British foreign policy, though by no means unusual.

The immediate background to the war was a complex one of tensions and violence between Nigeria’s regions and ethnic groups, especially between those from the east and the north. In January 1966 army officers had attempted to seize power and the conspirators, most of whom were Ibos (from the East) assassinated several leading political figures as well as officers of northern origin. Army commander Major General Ironsi, also an Ibo, intervened to restore discipline in the army, suspended the constitution, banned political parties, formed a Federal Military Government (FMG) and appointed military governors to each of Nigeria’s regions.

Ironsi’s decree in March 1966, which abolished the Nigerian federation and unified the federal and regional civil services, was perceived by many not as an effort to establish a unitary government but as a plot by the Ibo to dominate Nigeria. Troops of northern origin, who dominated the Nigerian infantry, became increasingly restive and fighting broke out between them and Ibo soldiers in garrisons in the south. In June, mobs in northern cities, aided by local officials, carried out a pogrom against resident Ibos, massacring several hundred people and destroying Ibo-owned property.

It was in this context that in July 1966 northern officers staged a countercoup during which Ironsi and other Ibo officers were killed. Lieutenant Colonel (later General) Yakubu ‘Jack’ Gowon emerged as leader. The aim of the coup was both to take revenge on the Ibos for the coup in January but also to promote the secession of the north, although Gowon soon pulled back from calling explicitly for this. Gowon named himself as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces and head of the military government, which was rejected by the military governor in the eastern region, Lieutenant Colonel Ojukwu, who claimed, with some justification, that the Gowon regime was illegitimate.

Throughout late 1966 and 1967 the tempo of violence increased. In September 1966 attacks on Ibos in the north were renewed with unprecedented ferocity, stirred up, eastern region officials believed, by northern political leaders. Reports circulated that troops from the northern region had participated in the massacres. The estimated number of deaths ranged from 10,000 to as high as 30,000. More than one million Ibos returned to the eastern region in fear.

In January 1967 the military leaders met in Aburi, Ghana. By this time the eastern region under Ojukwu was threatening secession. Many of Ojukwu’s eastern colleagues were now arguing that the massacres the previous September showed that the country could not be reunited amicably. In a last minute effort at Aburi to hold Nigeria together, an accord was agreed that provided for a loose confederation of regions. Gowon issued a decree implementing the Aburi agreement and even the northern region now favoured the formation of a multistate federation. The federal civil service, however, vigorously opposed the Aburi agreement and sought to scupper it.

Ojukwu and Gowon then disputed what exactly had been agreed at Aburi, especially after the Federal Military Government (FMG) issued a further decree in March which was seen by Ojukwu as reneging on the FMG’s commitment at Aburi to give the eastern region greater autonomy. The new decree gave the federal government the right to declare a state of emergency in any region and to ensure that any regional government could not undermine the executive authority of the federal government. Ojukwu then gave an ultimatum to Gowon that the eastern region would begin implementing its understanding of the Aburi agreement, providing for greater regional autonomy, by 31 March.

PART TWO:

While Biafra was threatening to secede and declare an independent state, the FMG imposed sanctions against it to bring it into line. On 26 May the eastern region consultative assembly voted to secede from Nigeria and the following day Gowon declared a state of emergency throughout the country, banned political activity and announced a
decree restoring full powers to the FMG. Also announced was a decree dividing the country into twelve states, including six in the north and three in the east.

On 30 May 1967 Biafra declared independence and on 7 July the FMG began operations to defeat it. It lasted until January 1970 as an extremely well-equipped Nigerian federal army of over 85,000 men supplied by Britain, the Soviet Union and few others, took on a volunteer Biafran army, much of whose equipment initially came from captured Nigerian supplies and which only later was able to procure relatively small quantities of arms from outside.

The background is therefore very complex and it remains far from clear cut as to where the ‘blame’ lay for the failure of peaceful negotiations and the resort to war. It does appear, however, that the FMG did go back on its agreement at Aburi on the extent of regional autonomy it was prepared to offer the easterners. Before they began to back the FMG unequivocally once war began, British officials had previously recognised the legitimacy of some of Ojukwu’s claims. The High British Commissioner in Lagos, Sir Francis Cumming-Bruce, had told Gowon in November 1966, for example, that the September 1966 massacres of the Ibos in the north ‘changed the relationship between the regions and made it impossible for eastern Nigerians to associate with northerners on the same basis as in the past’. The issue was one of basic ‘law and order and physical safety throughout the federation’. He told Gowon that the FMG had to go ‘a considerable distance to meet the views of Colonel Ojukwu’.

British officials also recognised that the Aburi agreements were ‘extremely woolly on many important points and lend themselves to infinite arguments over interpretation’. By end January 1967 Cumming-Bruce was saying that both Gowon and Ojuwku were ‘seriously at fault and they share responsibility for poisoning of atmosphere [sic]‘.

Then there was the wider question of whether it was legitimate for a region to secede and whether Biafra should have been allowed to establish its independence. Again, a lot of complex issues are involved. British officials feared that if Biafra were to secede many other regions in Africa would too, threatening ‘stability’ across the whole of the continent. Most of the great powers, including the US and Soviet Union, shared this view largely for the same reason.

Yet there appears to be no reason why Biafra, with its 15 million people, could not have established a viable, independent state. Biafrans argued that they were a people with a distinctive language and culture, that they were Christian as opposed to the Muslim communities lumped into the Nigeria federal state, which had, after all, been a colonial creation. In fact, Biafra was also one of the most developed regions in Africa with a high density of roads, schools, hospitals and factories. The struggle for an independent state certainly appeared to have the support of the majority of Biafrans, whose sense of nationhood deepened throughout the war as enormous sacrifices were made to contribute to the war effort.

What is crystal clear is that the wishes of the Biafrans were never a major concern of British planners; what they wanted, or what Nigerians elsewhere in the federation wanted, was simply not an issue for Whitehall. There is simply no reference in the government files, that I have seen, to this being a consideration. The priorities for London were maintaining the unity of Nigeria for geo-political interests and protecting British oil interests. This meant that Gowon’s FMG was backed right from the start. But the files also reveal astonishing levels of connivance with the FMG’s aggression.

Nigerian aggression, British support

British interests are very clearly revealed in the declassified files. ‘Our direct interests are trade and investment, including an important stake by Shell/BP in the eastern Region. There are nearly 20,000 British nationals in Nigeria, for whose welfare we are of course specially [sic] concerned’, the Foreign Office noted a few days before the outbreak of the war. Shell/BP’s investments amounted to around £200 million, with other British investment in Nigeria accounting for a further £90 million. It was then partly owned by the British government, and the largest producer of oil which provided most of Nigeria’s export earnings. Most of this oil was in the eastern region.
Commonwealth Minister George Thomas wrote in August 1967 that: ‘The sole immediate British interest in Nigeria is that the Nigerian economy should be brought back to a condition in which our substantial trade and investment in the country can be further developed, and particularly so we can regain access to important oil installations’.

Thomas further outlined the primary reason why Britain was so keen to preserve Nigerian unity, noting that ‘our only direct interest in the maintenance of the federation is that Nigeria has been developed as an economic unit and any disruption of this would have adverse effects on trade and development’. If Nigeria were to break up, he added: ‘We cannot expect that economic cooperation between the component parts of what was Nigeria, particularly between the East and the West, will necessarily enable development and trade to proceed at the same level as they would have done in a unified Nigeria; nor can we now count on the Shell/BP oil concession being regained on the same terms as in the past if the East and the mid-West assume full control of their own economies’.

PART THREE:

Ojukwu initially tried to get Shell/BP to pay royalties to the Biafran government rather than the FMG. The oil companies, after giving the Biafrans a small token payment, eventually refused and Ojuwku responded by sequestering Shell’s property and installations, forbidding Shell to do any further business and ordering all its staff ou
t. They ‘have much to lose if the FMG do not achieve the expected victory’, George Thomas noted in August 1967. A key British aim throughout the war was to secure the lifting of the blockade which Gowon imposed on the east and which stopped oil exports.

In the run-up to Gowon’s declaration of war, Britain had made it clear to the FMG that it completely supported Nigerian unity. George Thomas had told the Nigerian High Commissioner in London at the end of April 1967, for example, that ‘the Federal government had our sympathy and our full support’ but said that he hoped the use of force against the east could be avoided. On 28 May Gowon, having just declared a state of emergency, explicitly told Britain’s Defence Attache that the FMG was likely to ‘mount an invasion from the north’. Gowon asked whether Britain would provide fighter cover for the attack and naval support to reinforce the blockade of Eastern ports; the Defence Attache replied that both were out of the question.

By the time Gowon ordered military action in early July, therefore, Britain had refused Nigerian requests to be militarily involved and had urged Gowon to seek a ‘peaceful’ solution. However, the Wilson government had also assured Gowon of British support for Nigerian unity at a time when military preparations were taking place. And Britain had also made no signs that it might cut off, or reduce, arms supplies if a military campaign were launched.

The new High Commissioner in Lagos, Sir David Hunt, wrote in a memo to London on 12 June that the ‘only way… of preserving unity [sic] of Nigeria is to remove Ojukwu by force’. He said that Ojukwu was committed to remaining the ruler of an independent state and that British interests lay in firmly supporting the FMG.

Before going to war, Gowon began what was to become a two and half year long shopping list of arms that the FMG wanted from Britain. On 1 July he asked Britain for jet fighter/bomber aircraft, six fast boats and 24 anti-aircraft guns. ‘We want to help the Federal Government in any way we can’, British officials noted. However, Britain rejected supplying the aircraft, fearing that they would publicly demonstrate direct British intervention in the war and, at this stage, also rejected supplying the boats. London did, however, agree to supply the anti-aircraft guns and to provide training courses to use them.

The Deputy High Commissioner in Enugu, Biafra’s main city, noted that the supply of these anti-aircraft guns and their ammunition would be seen as British backing for the FMG and also that they were not entirely defensive weapons anyway since ‘they could also take on an offensive role if mounted in an invasion fleet’. Nevertheless, the government’s news department was instructed to stress the ‘defensive nature of these weapons’ when pressed but generally to avoid publicity on their export from Britain. High Commissioner Hunt said that ‘it would be better to use civil aircraft’ to deliver these guns and secured agreement from the Nigerians that ‘there would be no publicity’ in supplying them.

Faced with Gowon’s complaints about Britain not supplying more arms, Wilson also agreed in mid-July to supply the FMG with the fast patrol boats. This was done in the knowledge that they would help the FMG maintain the blockade against Biafra. Wilson wrote to Gowon saying that ‘we have demonstrated in many ways our support for your government as the legal government of Nigeria and our refusal to recognise the secessionists’. He also told him that Britain does ‘not intend to put any obstacle in the way’ of orders for ‘reasonable quantities of military material of types similar to those you have obtained here in the past’. Gowon replied saying that ‘I have taken note of your concurrence for the usual purchases of arms supplies to continue and will take advantage of what is available now and others when necessary’.

By early August Biafran forces had made major gains against the FMG and had invaded the mid-West region. Commonwealth Minister George Thomas noted that ‘the chances of a clear-cut military decision being achieved by either side now look rather distant’. Rather, ‘we are now faced with the probability of an escalating and increasingly disorderly war, with both sides shopping around for arms’. In this situation, he raised the option of Britain launching a peace offensive and halting all arms supplies. But this was rejected by David Hunt in Lagos and others since it would cause ‘great resentment’ on the part of the FMG against the British government and be regarded as a ‘hostile act’. Instead, the government decided to continue the flow of arms and ammunition of types previously supplied by Britain but to continue to refuse supplies of ‘sophisticated equipment’ like aircraft and tanks.

The decision to continue arms exports was taken when it had already become clear in the behaviour of the Nigerian forces that any weapons supplied would be likely to be used against civilians. It was also at a time when Commonwealth Secretary General Arnold Smith was making renewed attempts to push for peace negotiations after having been rebuffed by Gowon in a visit to Lagos in early July.

PART FOUR:

By early November 1967 the FMG had pushed back the Biafrans and captured Enugu; British officials were now reporting that the FMG had ‘a clear military advantage’. Now that our side seemed like winning, talk of reducing arms to them disappeared; George Thomas now said that ‘it seems to me that British interests would now be served by a
quick FMG victory’. He recommended that the arms export policy be ‘relaxed’ and to supply Lagos with items that ‘have importance in increasing their ability to achieve a quicker victory’. This meant ‘reasonable quantities’ of equipment such as mortars and ‘infantry weapons generally’, though not aircraft or other ‘sophisticated’ equipment.

On 23 November 1967 the Cabinet agreed that ‘a quick Federal military victory’ provided the best hope for ‘an early end to the fighting’. By early December, Commonwealth Secretary George Thomson [sic, not Thomas. need also to check cos he may have been FO minister at this time' he certainly became CW sec by mid 68] noted that the ‘lack of supplies and ammunition is one of things that are holding operations up’. He said that Britain should agree to the FMG’s recent shopping list since ‘a favourable response to this request ought to give us every chance of establishing ourselves again as the main supplier of the Nigerian forces after the war’. If the war ended soon, the Nigerian economy will start expanding and ‘there should be valuable business to be done’. Also: ‘Anything that we now do to assist the FMG should help our oil companies to re-establish and expand their activities in Nigeria after the war, and, more generally should help our commercial and political relationship with postwar Nigeria’.

He ended by saying he hoped Britain could supply armoured cars since they ‘have proved of especial value in the type of fighting that is going on in Nigeria and the FMG are most impressed with the Saladins and Ferrets’ previously supplied by Britain.
As a result Britain supplied six Saladin armoured personnel carriers (APCs), 30 Saracen APCs along with 2,000 machine guns for them, anti-tank guns and 9 million rounds of ammunition. Denis Healey, the Defence Secretary, wrote that he hoped these supplies will encourage the Nigerians ‘to look to the United Kingdom for their future purchases of defence equipment’. By the end of the year Britain had also approved the export of 1,050 bayonets, 700 grenades, 1,950 rifles with grenade launchers, 15,000 lbs of explosives and two helicopters.

In the first half of the following year, 1968, Britain approved the export of 15 million rounds of ammunition, 21,000 mortar bombs, 42,500 Howtizer rounds, 12 Oerlikon guns, 3 Bofors guns, 500 submachine guns, 12 Saladins with guns and spare parts, 30 Saracens and spare parts, 800 bayonets, 4,000 rifles and two other helicopters. At the same time Wilson was constantly reassuring Gowon of British support for a united Nigeria, saying in April 1968 that ‘I think we can fairly claim that we have not wavered in this support throughout the civil war’.

These massive arms exports were being secretly supplied – indeed, massively stepped up – at a time when one could read about the actions of the recipients in the newspapers. After the Biafran withdrawal from the mid-west in September 1967 a series of massacres started against Ibo residents. The New York Times reported that over 5,000 had been killed in various towns of the mid west. About 1,000 Ibos were killed in Benin city by local people with the acquiescence of the federal forces, the New York Review noted in December 1967. Around 700 Ibo males were lined up and shot in the town of Asaba, the Observer reported in January 1968. According to eyewitnesses the Nigerian commander ordered the execution of every Ibo male over the age of ten.

Nigerian officials informed the British government that the arms were ‘important to them, but not vital’. More important than the actual arms ‘was the policy of the British government in supporting the FMG’.

This support was now taking place amid public and parliamentary pressure for a halt to British arms to Lagos, with 70 Labour MPs, for example, filing a motion for such an embargo in May 1968. Yet the real extent of arms supplied by Britain was concealed from the public.

Throughout 1967 and 1968, Ministers had been telling parliament that Britain was essentially neutral in the conflict in that it was not interfering in the internal affairs of Nigeria but simply continuing to supply arms to Nigeria on the same basis as before the war. As the declassified files, referred to above, show, this was simply a lie. For example, Wilson told the House on 16 May 1968 that: ’We have continued the supply… of arms by private manufacturers in this country exactly on the basis that it has been in the past, but there has been no special provision for the needs of the war’.

One British file at this time – mid-1968 – refers to deaths of between 70,000-100,000 by now as ‘realistic’. The Red Cross was estimating around 600,000 refugees in Biafra alone and was trying to arrange desperately needed supplies to meet needs, estimated at around 30 tons a day.

PART FIVE:

Humanitarian suffering, especially starvation, was severe as a result of the FMG’s blockade of Biafra. Pictures of starving and malnourished children went around the world. The FMG was widely seen as indulging in atrocities and attacks against civilians, including apparently indiscriminate air strikes, in an increasingly brutal war in
which civilians were the chief victims.

The files show that Wilson told Gowon on several occasions in private letters that he had successfully fended off public and parliamentary criticism in Britain, in order to continue to support the FMG – clearly showing where the government’s priorities and sympathies lay. As in Vietnam at the same time, Wilson was not going to be deflected by mere public opposition from backing ongoing aggression by key allies, whatever the level of atrocities and casualties.

With federal forces in control by mid-year of Port Harcourt, the most important southern coastal city, British officials noted that ‘having gone this far in supporting the FMG, it would be a pity to throw away the credit we have built up with them just when they seem to have the upper hand’. Britain could not halt the supply of arms since ‘apart from other considerations, such an outcome would seriously put at risk about £200m of British investments in non-Biafra Nigeria’, George Thomson explained to Harold Wilson.

It was also at this point that British officials sought to counter widespread opposition to the Nigerian government by conniving with it to improve the ‘presentation’ of its policies – another example of Britain’s past ‘information operations’ described in earlier chapters. Britain urged the FMG to convince the outside world that it was not engaged in genocide or a policy of massacre and to make public statements on the need for a ceasefire and humanitarian access to Biafra.

High Commissioner Hunt suggested to Gowon that the federal air force be used for ‘psychological warfare’ and to drop leaflets over the Ibo towns which would help the FMG score a ‘propaganda point’. Officials noted that their support for the FMG was under attack and that ‘our ability to sustain it… depends very much on implementing enlightened and humane federal policies and securing public recognition for them’. What was needed was ‘good and well-presented Nigerian policies which permit that support to continue’. Wilson therefore urged a senior Nigerian government official, Chief Enahoro, ‘to make a greater effort to ensure that their case did not go by default’.

The files indicate that these ‘presentational’ issues were much more important to British officials than any actual suffering of the Biafrans themselves. London never did anything significant to press the FMG. British officials ruled out threatening to cut off, or reduce, arms exports to force the FMG to change policies. The issue that most concerned the government at the time was that it would be forced to withdraw or reduce its support for Gowon in the face of public pressure. This, therefore, had to be countered, and the FMG needed to make greater efforts.

By mid-1968 British officials had still had no contacts with Ojukwu and other Biafran leaders; offers from the latter had been refused. So supportive was Wilson of the FMG that he even asked the Nigerians in advance whether they would have ‘any difficulties’ if a British official met a Biafran representative. Chief Enahoro replied that this would be acceptable provided the contacts were ‘strictly private and had no formal character’.

In early August FMG forces had retaken the whole of the southeastern and Rivers states and the easterners were now confined to a small enclave, blockaded from the outside world. Commonwealth Minister Lord Shepherd minuted Harold Wilson saying, that 14 months since Biafran secession: ‘Our support for the FMG finds us in the position in which we are on comparatively good terms with the side which is in an overwhelmingly advantageous position… It is important, therefore, that we should not be manoeuvred by pressure of opinion inspired by Ojukwu’s publicity, into abandoning at this late stage all the advantages which our policy so far seemed likely to bring us’. The same month, the Red Cross estimated 2-3 million people ‘in dire need’ and a similar number were facing shortages of food and medical aid.

Wilson did not succomb to public pressure. The following month he told Gowon that: ‘The British government for their part have steadfastly maintained their policy of support for Federal Nigeria and have resisted all suggestions in parliament and in the press for a change in that policy, particularly in regard to arms supplies’. The Foreign Office argued that ‘the whole of our investments in Nigeria and particularly our oil interests in the south east and the mid-west will be at risk if we change our policy of support for the federal government’.

In November, Lord Brockway and his committee for peace in Nigeria met Wilson and urged him to halt arms sales and to press for a ceasefire, estimating that there could be two million deaths from starvation and disease by the end of the year. Wilson not only rebuffed this plea; the files reveal that two days later he agreed to supply Nigeria with aircraft for the first time in a covert deal.

The Nigerians had been pressing Britain to supply several jet aircraft, specifically to attack the runways used by Biafran forces (and which also needed to be used to deliver humanitarian aid). Wilson said that Britain could not supply these directly but there were such aircraft in South Yemen and Sudan previously supplied by Britain. The Nigerians, he said, should procure the aircraft from them which ‘would not directly involve the British government’. The company to deal with in those two countries was Airwork Limited, which was later to be again used by the British government to conceal its involvement in its covert dirty war in Yemen. The British government also agreed to put the Nigerians in touch with ‘suitable pilots’.

PART SIX:

British arms supplies were stepped up again in November. Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart said the Nigerians could have 5 million more rounds of ammunition, 40,000 more mortar bombs and 2,000 rifles. ‘You may tell Gowon’, Stewart instructed High Commissioner Hunt in Lagos, ‘that we are certainly ready to consider a further application’
to supply similar arms in the future as well. He concluded: ‘if there is anything else for ground warfare which you… think they need and which would help speed up the end of the fighting, please let us know and we will consider urgently whether we can supply it’.

Other supplies agreed in November following meetings with the Nigerians included six Saladins and 20,000 rounds of ammunition for them, and stepped up monthly supplies of ammunition, amounting to a total of 15 million rounds additional to those already agreed. It was recognised by the Defence Minister that ‘the scale of the UK supply of small arms ammunition to Nigeria in recent months has been and will continue to be on a vast scale’. The recent deal meant that Britain was supplying 36 million rounds of ammunition in the last few months alone. Britain’s ‘willingness to supply very large quantities of ammunition’, Lord Shepherd noted, ‘meant drawing on the British army’s own supplies’.

At the same time the Foreign Office was instructing its missions around the world to lie about the extent of this arms supply. It sent a ‘guidance’ memo to various diplomatic posts on 22 November saying that ‘we wish to discourage suggestions’ that the Nigerians, in their recent meetings with British officials, were seeking ‘to negotiate a massive arms deal’. Rather, ‘our policy of supplying in reasonable quantities arms of the kind traditionally supplied’ to Nigeria ‘will be maintained but no change in the recent pattern of supplies is to be expected’. So great is the culture of lying at the Foreign Office, it appears that policy is even to keep its own officials in the dark.

By the end of 1968 Britain had sold Nigeria £9 million worth of arms, £6 million of which was spent on small arms. A quarter of Nigeria’s supplies (by value) had come from the Soviet Union, also taking advantage of the war for its own benefit and trying no doubt to secure an opening into Nigeria provided by this opportunity. British officials consistently justified their arms supply by saying that if they stopped, the Russians would fill the gap. It was Britain’s oil interests, however, that was the dominating factor in Whitehall planners’ reasoning.

By the last two months of 1968, with hundreds of thousands dead by now, the fighting had reached a stalemate. The FMG had taken all Biafran territory apart from a small enclave within it consisting of 3 million people in an area the size of Kent. Biafrans were now dependent on two airstrips for outside supplies which were limited by both Gowon’s and Ojukwu’s refusals to allow sufficient numbers of aircraft to land. Humanitarian agencies were continuing calls for a ceasefire as suffering, especially starvation, had reached crisis proportions. ‘We shall continue to maintain our present policy, despite these heavy pressures on us’, Wilson told Gowon in November. Foreign Secretary Stewart instructed Lord Shepherd, on a visit to Lagos, to tell Gowon of the extraordinary steps Britain was taking to support him. Gowon should realise, Stewart said, that opposition to British policy ‘cuts right across the normal political or party divisions in the country and is especially strong in the various churches’. He also interestingly said that ‘similar feeling is also expressed within the Cabinet itself’ – such was the extremely thin base on which British support for the FMG was being provided. (One wonders about similar memos being written by Tony Blair to George Bush in 2003).

The Wilson government was keen to present itself as engaged in the search for peace – the files show that officials did so knowing that without appearing to be active they would not have been able to justify their support for the FMG. British government activity in peace negotiations invariably sought to avoid the involvement of the United Nations and was intended to support the FMG to maintain a united Nigeria and to achieve a solution on its terms only.

In public, British statements consistently blamed only the Biafrans, not the FMG, for obstructing peace negotiations and the delivery of humanitarian aid. On the latter, there were numerous proposals and counter-proposals made by both sides on the issue of night or dayflights, and river or land routes into Biafra, which obstructed the delivery of humanitarian aid to millions of suffering people. The FMG feared that the Biafrans would use the cover of humanitarian aid supplies to slip in arms deliveries; while the Biafrans believed the FMG would poison the supplies. There is no doubt that Ojukwu and the Biafran leadership were partly responsible for the failure to deliver adequate humanitarian aid, yet so were the FMG. Starvation of the Biafrans was no accident or simply a by-product of the war; it was a deliberate part of the FMG’s war policy.

Several memos by British officials that reached Wilson and other ministers painted a more accurate picture than the one pushed in public. These said that it was as least as much the FMG that were to blame as the Biafrans. Yet this never upset British policy to side unequivocally with Gowon’s FMG.

THE END:

In March 1969 Wilson gave a public interview and lied that ‘we continue to supply on a limited scale arms – not bombs, not aircraft – to the government of Nigeria because we have always been their suppliers’. Not only was this untrue as a result of the agreements late the previous year; on the very same day as this interview, the governm
ent approved the export of 19 million rounds of ammunition, 10,000 grenades and 39,000 mortar bombs – bombs, that is, that Wilson had said Britain was not supplying at all, still less on a vast scale.

A day before the Wilson interview, a Foreign Office official had written that ‘we have over the last few months agreed to supply large quantities of arms and ammunition’ to Nigeria ‘to assist them in finishing the war in the absence of any further [peace] negotiations’. He also noted that ‘we have flown small arms ammunition to Nigeria… using Manston airport in Kent without attracting unfavourable press comment’.

It was therefore perhaps no surprise that Gowon could write to Wilson in April saying that ‘of all the governments in the Western world, yours has remained the only one that has openly maintained its policy of arms supplies to my government’. France, Belgium and the Netherlands, among others, had all announced a halt while the US continued its policy of not supplying arms to either side.

Two senior British RAF officers secretly visited Nigeria in August 1969 to advise the Nigerians on ‘how they could better prosecute the air war’. The main British interest, the files make clear, was to provide better protection of the oil installations, but the brief for the two officers stated that this impression should not be given to the Nigerians. The officers subsequently advised the Nigerians on a variety of tactics on ‘neutralisation of the rebel airstrips’. It was understood that destruction of the airstrips would put them out of use for daylight humanitarian relief flights. It is not clear whether such advice was put into action.

Britain armed the federal government all the way. In December 1969, just before the FMG’s final push that crushed the Biafrans, Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart was calling for stepping up military assistance including the supply of more armoured cars. These supplies by Britain, he wrote, ‘have undoubtedly been the most effective weapons in the ground war and have spear-headed all the major federal advances’.
Biafran resistance ended by mid January 1970. Wilson then sent another message to Gowon saying that ‘your army has won a decisive victory’ and has achieved ‘your great aim of preserving the unity and integrity of Nigeria’, adding: ‘As you know I and my colleagues have believed all along that you were right and we have never wavered in our support for you, your government and you policy, despite the violent attacks which have been made on us at times in parliament and in the press as well as overseas’.

The Deputy High Commissioner in Lagos added: ‘There is genuine gratitude (as indeed there should be) for what Britain has done and is still doing for this country, and in particular for Her Majesty’s Government’s courage in literally sticking to their guns over Biafra’.

The toll of the war was counted in a report for the British High Commission at the end of the month. It referred to a relief agency report estimating 1 1/2-2 million people were being fed with food relief supplies, around 700,000 of whom were refugees in camps dependent entirely on food aid. Three million refugees were crowded into a 2,500 square kilometre enclave in which not only food but medicine, housing and clothing were in short supply. The Biafran economy was shattered, cities were in ruins and schools, hospitals and transport facilities destroyed.

http://markcurtis./2007/02/13/nigeriabiafra-1967-70/

Thanks

I will like to know the difference between these letters on vehicle.
XL, LE GLS, LS etc

What will it take for us to click on the link and read the full interview rather than commenting on just a single line in the whole article.

I need a 96 Camry otherwise known as Orobo, I have a budget of 500k but can increase my offer a little depending on how neat, clean and year of use of the car.

Am waiting.

Kindly send the link to odukoya@live.com

Can it go for 500k. Let me know to arrange for inspection.

Am not the type that like discussion on religion or ethnic issue cos I know how far people go in defending what they believe in even if that thing is wrong.

I can't go home tomorrow cos the Redeem Christian Church of God is having her annual convention. That's bad enough for traffic going to Mowe tomorrow night and coming to Lagos saturday morning. Add that to the fact that Nasfat is holding her own yearly Ramadan night of magesty prayer tomorrow as well you will understand what I mean.

This will affect not only resident of Mowe, Ibafo, Ofada and its environ but other road users traveling out of Lagos.

What can we do to stop this from happening again cos it has now become a monthly occurance.

nolongtin: can any body upload the following if u gat it pls..
FELA UNRELEASED TRACKS-
1.COP-COUNTRY OF PAIN
2-CRFJJ-CLEAR ROAD FOR JAGAJAGA
3-CACMAINHNSFS-CHOP AND CLEAN MOUTH NA NEW STYLE FOR STEALING.
4-CONDOM SCALLYWAGGY AND SCATTER.
5-AKUNAKUNA
6-GOC

My guy these songs were never released, they were strictly shrine songs you can only get them from close pal of Fela (Baba Ani) just like look and laugh but that one manage to get out.

Forever Lives Abami Eda

Messi is ridiculous. Those stats are insane (281 goals, 70 caps, 21 trophies, 77 awards & 19 world records). Best player ever in a few years

Facts emerged in Abuja on Wednesday that the leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party was instrumental to the exposure of the $620,000 bribery scandal currently rocking the House of Representatives.

Investigations by our correspondents showed that the party was aware of the bribe from the initial stage and agreed to the deal.

It was gathered that the PDP was targeting the Speaker of the House, Mr. Aminu Tambuwal, for removal because of the belief that he was too “independent for the party leaders.”

Sources within the top echelon of the party informed our correspondent that members of the committee probing the fuel subsidy payment met with the party’s leadership and they agreed that the investigators should soft pedal on those they said were financers of the party, who also benefited from the subsidy payment regime.

The committee members, led by their chairman, Mr. Farouk Lawan, were said to have been persuaded not to indict these influential members in their report.

Before arriving at this, it was learnt that the leadership of the party had asked the committee to suspend its sitting or stop the probe entirely.

But when it was apparent that the committee members would not allow that because of the pressure from the public and the leadership of the House, the two parties were said to have agreed that the major oil marketers would not be indicted.

A top member of the party said, “We agreed that the money be given to them for logistics as they claimed. We agreed that the committee members should not be hard on the major marketers in their report.

“This is because the party produced these members of the committee. Without our slot, will they be able to be at the National Assembly?

“There is no way that a ruling party will not have a say in the running of the House, especially when its leaders are members of the party.”

The source added that the party was astonished when the report of the committee was released and almost everyone was indicted.

This, the source said, was contrary to the agreement the party had with the committee members, led by Lawan.

He said they recorded the transaction because the party’s leadership suspected that the committee members could renege on their promise.

The source said if the committee members had agreed to the deal, it was possible the deal would not had been made public “now.”

Asked why Lawan was not arrested by security agents at the point of collecting the money, he said there might not be any prove to show that the money paid Lawan actually came from the security agencies.

He said the party’s leadership and the Presidency were further angered when Tambuwal, at the first anniversary of the President Jonathan administration at the Presidential Villa, accused the President of not signing bills presented to him by the National Assembly.

According to our source, exposing the bribe would attract public ridicule for the entire leadership of the House.

“We expect the public to call for the resignation of the Speaker and the entire leadership,” the source added.

Meanwhile, legal practitioners, under the aegis of Public Interest Lawyers League, have demanded the resignation of the Speaker of Tabuwal.

They also demanded the questioning of oil magnate, Mr. Femi Otedola, to determine his level of complicity in the saga.

President of the group, Mr. Abdul Mahmud, said this at a press conference in Abuja, on Wednesday.

However, another group, the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, has raised the alarm over a plot to use the fuel subsidy bribery scandal to remove Tambuwal.

A statement by CISLAC’s Executive Director, Auwal Musa in Abuja, on Wednesday alleged that the executive and some oil thieves were involved in the plot.

It said the two had never been comfortable with Tambuwal’s style of leadership.

In a related development, elder statesman and former Federal Information Minister, Chief Edwin Clark, on Wednesday called for the immediate arrest and prosecution of Lawan and Mr. Femi Otedola over their involvement in the $3m scam.

The Ijaw leader also called for a total overhaul of the way the Federal House of Assembly is currently run, saying the activities of the house had become a shame to the nation.

Clark, who spoke in his Kiagbodo home, Burutu Local Government, Delta State, maintained that the two chambers of the National Assembly, by their actions, had shown that they could not be trusted to make laws for the good governance of the country.

http:///CwITiFug

1)  And it came to pass after these things, on the first day of the first month of the twelfth year after the second millennium, that king Jona son of Bele announced to the people saying; there is no money left in the royal treasury, and the future of the kingdom is in great danger.

2) Therefore, a measure of oil shall no longer sell for three scores of silver and seven, but shall now be seven scores of silver and one. But the people grumbled aloud, and said unto another, what shall it profit our king to gain all these oil money and lose his throne?

3) For it is appointed unto him to reign but once, and after this prison, for many are the atrocities which he has committed.

4)  So they said unto the king, eat thou thy food in peace in the palace, and surround thou thyself with thine women, only touch not our oil price and do thy people no harm.

5) But the king would not listen, and said unto himself, I know my people, they shall only grumble for a while and soon they shall forget.

6) But the people would not forget, for the burden was too much for them to bear, and they said; now unto him that is able to increase the price of oil exceeding abundantly above all that his people can bear or think, according to the greed which worketh in him;

7) Unto him be curses in the streets by the masses throughout all ages, protests without end.

So they took to the streets and gave the land no peace, and there was no going out or coming in throughout the kingdom for two weeks, and the king feared greatly and said to himself, surely these people shall overturn me if I answer them not.

9) So he called the head of the labourers unto the palace, and gave him bags of gold, that they might turn off the wrath of the people against the king.

10) So the king assembled the people and said unto them; a measure of oil shall no longer be seven scores of silver and one, but shall now be four scores of silver, one dozen and one, to this your leaders have agreed. Praise me now therefore for I am a benevolent king.

11) And after all these, the Loudspeaker of the House of People said, let us inquire into the king’s claim that there be no money in the royal treasury. So they appointed Farcrook, son of Lawal.

12) And said unto him, gather ye now all the oil sellers, that we may know who stole from the kingdom. This did him with diligence, and came back with his report saying

13) Thieves abound in the land, and so have the oil sellers stole from the people, and gave them not oil, this they did with the help of Aliyaro the king’s mistress; and the amount he mentioned was unheard of in the land.

14) When the people heard this, they were dismayed, and sorrow gripped their hearts.

15) But the oil sellers went in unto the king in his chamber, and said; rememberest thou O king that the what we stole did we made available to thy campaign, and by thus did we make you king.

16) If thou deliver us unto the people that they may punish us, we will hold not our tongue to tell the people that thou art one of us.

17) And they said unto him, how else shall we destroy the message if not to destroy the messenger? Let us therefore implicate Farcrook the son of Lawal in this matter.

18) So they sent a certain rich man from the West by the name Otedollar, and he took Farcrook into his house and gave him some money, that he may alter the report which he had set before the people.

19) And it was that Otedollar went before an assembly of the people and said unto them, trust ye this man who said we stole from the treasury? Surely he is one of us, for he came unto me in the middle of the night, and he left with his pockets full of money.

20) And the people where amazed, and their hearts bled, for Farcrook was a man in whom they had to their trust.

21) So Farcrook arose, and said; Otedollar is my briber, I did not request. He maketh me to sit down in his Maitama house; he leadeth me beside the chilled champagne.

22) He exploited me greed; he leadeth me in the paths of marked dollars for subsidy’s sake.

23) Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of EFCC, I will fear no arrest: for bribes are with me; my loots and my kickbacks they comfort me.

24) Thou preparest the dollars before me, in the presence of the SSS: thou anointest my mouth with wine; my pocket runneth over.

25) Surely the shame and reproach shall follow me all the days of my life, but I will dwell in the house of PDP forever and ever.

26) And the people wept, but there was no one to console them.

Ogunyemi Bukola

Got this messages from a reliable source now. Early Today: Internecine fracas breaks out between Yoruba, Hausa in Yaba area of Lagos state, around CAC office near Unilag. 13 persons feared dead also another reported fights btw Hausa and Yorubas in Agege area, no casualties reported yet. Details later..,hmm..just hope my country is not drifting towards another failed country, Somalia? Rejoinder!! Pls Disregard the last update, as I reported the internacine wars in Yaba and agege, the Special adviser Lagos state to HE  Information and commissioner for Local Govt and chieftaincy just pinged me, to debunk the story as false and wicked rumours. They told me to inform the general public that they should go about their businesses and personal issues as nothing happened at all at those locations. Pls note at all....

We all know that June 12 is the ultimate culmination of the 1985 coup of survival which Babangida staged for self – preservation.

Let us be frank, the man did not want to leave the place. He was coming out with the idea of diarchy. He sent people like Mukoro Tony Nyiam to study the idea in Egypt, Santiago in Chile, and an admixture of civilian and military leadership. That was what the man was planning until Abiola decided to contest. Of course you know the story of how Abiola emerged as the candidate of the then Social Democratic Party S.D.P. Abiola was able to emerge as the presidential flag bearer as the SDP in Jos as late Major – General Shehu Musa Yar’ Adua discovered that, Ambassador Baba Gana Kingibe was pealing away votes from Atiku Abubakar for Abiola.

The forces of Atiku and Abiola teamed up and worked for Abiola’s victory. What they did was that six people met at the residence of Ambassador Yaya Kwade on Ibrahim Taiwo Avenue in Jos, M.K.O. Abiola, his first son, Kola, Dr. Jonathan Zwingina (later became a senator), Major General Shehu Musa Yar’ Adua himself, Atiku Abubakar and Yaya Kwande. And they agreed, and Abiola himself appended his signature that the forces of Atiku Abubakar will co-operate and that when Abiola emerged as the flag bearer that he would make Atiku Abubakar his running mate. Abiola agreed. He became the flag bearer of the SDP.

While they were there, because we have to be frank, it was not actually a primary, for those of us who were there, Abiola bought the ticket, because of his money power. Where Ambassador Kingibe was spending N500, N2, 000 to buy delegates, Abiola upped the stakes to N10, 000, N20, 000 per delegate. Unknown to Abiola, Babangida’s agents were filming everything live. They captured everything on tape. For example, Abiola gave N10m cash to Lamidi Adedibu. And the late Adedibu was captured on tape with wads of Naira notes shouting to Oyo State delegates “Eyin ara Ibadan, Owo Abiola ti de”, meaning “Folks from Ibadan, Abiola’s cash has landed” (laughs) openly. You know the man was a political jobber, half-illiterate. And suddenly, delegates for Atiku and Kingibe moved and switched to Abiola. Abiola instructed Kola to increase the stakes to N20, 000 against N500 from the others. It was cash and carry for Abiola. They were all caught on tape
and that was the tape that Babangida sent to the State Department here in the United States to justify the annulment among other reasons
So all the trips to Abuja where he allegedly accused Abiola of operating for CIA….

No. He did not even give that reason. It was his crony, Sani Abacha, I am coming back to that issue, and it was Obasanjo who prompted Sani Abacha to stage the November 24, 1993 coup.

There were basically three reasons Babangida annulled the election.

First, the man didn’t just want to go. He wanted diarchy. That was why Olumilua, Adeleke, Ebri, Osoba, Otedola ruled with him for two years.

Secondly, there were deep – seated animosities between him and Abiola. Most Nigerians do not want to hear this that the money kept in Abiola’s account through an arrangement brokered by Babangida was one of the reasons that caused the problem. And of course when Maryam Babangida went to Beijing in China, there were reports that Abiola slept with the woman, which no one knew. Whether it was a lie, it was going to be a lie. These were the personal reasons. Babangida’s personal self entrenchment and the betrayal of each other over Sergeant Samuel Kanyon Doe’s money.

Doe was looking for where to keep the money he had stolen from the Liberian economy. He was looking for a place to keep the money for his wife Nancy and his children. So he approached Babangida. And Babangida told him “hey, I’m president here and I don’t want to put the money in my account. We have a friend who we can use”.

That was how he suggested Abiola and of course, Abiola had investment in Liberia. So the money was paid into Abiola’s Swiss Account.

After Doe died, Nancy, his wife came all the way from London to Nigeria. No Nigerian newspaper, most editors knew, but did not want to carry it. None of them could carry the story, the plan was for…. Babangida had suggested to Doe to go on exile at the thick of the Liberian war. He felt he could go to Saudi Arabia. The late Idi Amin also came to Nigeria and stayed in Sheraton Hotel during that period. Idi Amin called and advised Doe not to go on exile, that with timing, the war may eventually favor Doe. Idi Amin was the one who told him not to go on exile.

The Saudi authorities were ready to take Doe. As it eventually turned out, Doe was killed by Yormie Johnson’s soldiers. So his family, Doe’s families were now in need and they came to Nigeria to ask for what their bread winner had kept for them. Babangida welcomed them, and then he sent for Abiola. Abiola replied that, well the money was paid into the late Simbiat Abiola, his first wife’s account. And that he wasn’t the person holding that account, that it was Kola Abiola and that Babangida should call his first son, Kola. So Babangida felt insulted that this was a friend of both of them who was in need so that he could take care of his family and Abiola was saying all those kind of things. You know how I was able to authenticate the story? Through the late Shehu Musa Yar ‘Adua, because Chris Mamman, who eventually became Chief Press Secretary to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar took me to General Yar’ Adua’s office in Victoria
Island. Nancy Doe, the wife of late Samuel Doe of Liberia is in London, you guys should track her down for an interview. Nigerian newspapers don’t have the resources in the first place to pursue that kind of story and secondly, no editor in Nigeria will dare venture to publish such a story. I told you that Babangida has corrupted virtually all of them either directly or indirectly. It’s just so bad that most editors are on the payroll of the SSS while some are moles in the newsroom. Some editors have to be looking over their shoulders when they are planning stories because you just don’t know who would betray you to the soldiers in power. I doubt whether that culture has changed much. As I have said, we have the finest and the best journalists in the world but the institutional obstacles in media houses are formidable. Nigerian Journalists are poorly paid, there is no insurance and the tools are not there for them to work.
Was Mr. Mamman there during this conversation?

Yes. It was General Yar’ Adua who gave us the story. And he also said it that when Abiola ran into trouble, that he said, that he, Yar’ Adua had warned Abiola that “are you sure”, he was telling Chris Mamman that he told Abiola “are you sure that our friend Ibrahim was ready to leave?” That was what he said he asked him when he wanted to run for the presidency. “I wanted to be president too, the man banned me. Are you sure you would not be banned?” That even if you win the election, are you sure that Babangida was ready to go?” All that with the Doe offer…” and Abiola assured him that he too had done a lot of favors for Babangida in the past, he was the one who gave him money when he struck in 1985, that the two of them had extended favors to each other, and that he did not see a reason why Babangida would not want him to succeed him. This was from the mouth of Shehu Musa Yar’ Adua in the presence of Chris Mamman. But
most newspapers would not carry this story in Nigeria.

Babangida had been saying that Abiola would not last more than sixty days, ninety days. No soldier, no person put any gun on his head.

Have you met Babangida in person before?

I wouldn’t say that I met him one on one. The first time I saw him was in 1985, while I worked with Concord. One of Abiola’s wives had a baby and they were having the naming ceremony. Virtually all the top editors of Concord titles were in Abiola’s house that night at Moshood Abiola crescent at Ikeja; that was the first time I saw Babangida afar. In fact it was at that ceremony, the naming ceremony, that the details of the August 27, 1985 coup were fine tuned. That was where they planned everything. That was where Abiola released the money for the boys…

How much?

Ten million U.S. dollars cash. They wanted money. Babangida and his boys never knew whether the coup would succeed or not. And they needed money. There was no other safe meeting point were Babangida and Abiola would have a conversation. Rafindadi, the National Security Organization, NSO’s boss, had already bugged Babangida’s telephone lines. They used the innocent child’s naming ceremony as a cover – up. Duro Onabule was there that day. I think it was Ebenezer Obey that entertained, there were lots of musicians. I think Sikiru Ayinde Barrister also played that night. So while guests were in front of Abiola’s house, the military guys who came with Babangida, Abubakar Umar and the others retired to the back of Abiola’s house. It was in that place that they struck. They had chosen October 1 st, 1985 as I told you before but acted faster. Buhari is still alive; he should confirm or deny what I am saying… They knew the details. I
am issuing that challenge. Up till today Buhari has not spoken on why he was toppled. He should speak out. Top editors can corroborate what I am telling you now. They know it. May be they’re waiting for Babangida to die and then they would come out with their “exclusive.”