₦airaland Forum

~Bluetooth:
Police Public Relations Officer in the state, ASP
Ebere Amarizu, said he could not confirm the
arrest .The protest, which was staged
simultaneously in Abia, Anambra, Akwa Ibom,
Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Ebonyi, Edo,
Enugu, Imo and Rivers states, according to
the MASSOB leadership, was intended to
compel the federal and Imo State
governments to facilitate immediate release
of Uwazurike. The protesters who marched
with placards, rendering popular Biafran war
songs to the admiration of onlookers, were,
however, peaceful, as security agents were
virtually off the streets while the protest
march was on.

The truth is that MASSOB is gradually expanding - a very smart strategy. Their peaceful method remains unbeatable. Nigeria loves violence and has been expecting violence from MASSOB. Nothing is more powerful than ideas. If more people continue to buy into MASSOB's manifesto, the vehicle for the liberation of the oppressed will emerge before we can say jack robinson.
MASSOB is more credible than Save Nigeria Group because these guys are actually getting thrown into jails and in some instances killed; while the SNG is busy singing songs and carrying placards without ruffling feathers. Two different organizations, two different ideas. May the better idea win!

ndu_chucks:
sharaaap, if you have nothing to say. Ogbanje, onye ocha, olodo.

LOL! ndu_chucks reacts more katsumoto. 

Wonder what he's up to now 

Bros Andre, Max doesn't need to say anything. He provides information and leaves the scene, that's his style. I don't think his aim is to debate issues.

Afam:
Who is avoiding the issues here?

I have pointed out the hypocrisy in you when it comes to tribes of soldiers with real comments by you and all you do is beat around the bush and reduce the thread into - Afam is attacking you. Why would I attack you when I have enough information to prove your hypocrisy and double standards?

Someone that talks about Igbo soldiers planning a coup has no moral right to complain about a Yoruba soldier doing anything unless the person is an unrepentant hypocrite.

This is the crux of my comment, deal with is and stop chasing shadows.

LOL, you don't know that guy.
I've come to the same conclusion about him loooooooooong time ago when he wouldn't even condemn inflammatory statements from his tribesmen here.

He says his people are not cowards, and I believe him. I always condemn a fellow Igbo guy here who is way out of line. Why won't he? There is what is called "courage of convictions". If you are convinced of something, you are willing to take the risk of defending it. If you can't take that risk, you may appear weak, or worse -duplicitous.

safeact:
It is now left for d demons at d National Assembly to sit on it and refuse to pass it. Lets us not rejoice yet until we hear what d national assembly would say on that! I believe that some of d devils incarnate among them will try to frustrate d bill.

National assembly is not the problem this time. They are very easy to neutralize. Just throw them some "ghana must go" bags and watch how fast they pass that bill. 

My guy is up to some good. I'm believing more now. . .

It emerged yesterday that Acting President Goodluck Jonathan has forwarded a copy of the report of the Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reforms Committee to the National Assembly unedited.
What this means is that the Acting President has accepted the entire proposals of the panel as the government’s recommendations.

President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua accepted some of the panel’s recommendations and turned down others.
Also yesterday, Jonathan assured Nigerians once again on electoral reforms.
He told protesting members of the Save Nigeria Group (SNG) that he would ensure reforms ahead of the 2011 general election.
Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) Yayale Ahmed, who spoke when he received the SNG letter on behalf of Jonathan, also assured the protesters that he would ensure that the issues relating to the health of President Yar’Adua are handled in accordance with the constitution.

“It was because of the love the Acting President has for you that he directed that I should receive this letter on his behalf. On my honour, I shall ensure that I deliver this letter to him.
“But let me inform you that the Acting President believes strongly in a constitutional democracy and he has promised that your requests would be met. As part of this, he has sent to the National Assembly, the report of the Uwais Committee on Electoral Reforms unedited. He asked me to assure you that your demands would be met,” Ahmed told the rally.

He said other demands of the group would be addressed through constitutional provisions as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.
The Uwais committee had recommended among others the reform of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), independent candidacy, conclusion of electoral petitions before winners assume office and proportional representation of parties in government.

Under the proposed reforms of INEC, the commission’s funding will be a first charge from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the federation.
But the reorganisation of INEC and some other recommendations of the Uwais panel will require amendments of the relevant sections of the 1999 Constitution and Electoral Act 2006 before they can be implemented.

Among the recommendations of the Uwais panel turned down by Yar’Adua are those on the appointment of INEC Chairman through the recommendation of National Judicial Council (NJC) and the conclusion of all election petitions before winners are sworn in. On this, the Yar’Adua government had argued that it would be undemocratic to put a time-limit on the hearing of petitions by the tribunals.
Yar’Adua had forwarded eight bills to the National Assembly for passage, but some of them are in respect of recommendations requiring constitutional amendments.

Some of the bills included those seeking expanded roles for the police before, during and after elections and the reintroduction of the Centre for Democratic Studies (CDS) as well as the one on the Political Parties Registration and Regulatory Commission.
For instance, “A Bill for an Act to further Amend the Police Act 1967 CAP P19 2004 LFN and for Matters Connected Therewith,” the proposed law seeks to amend Section 4 of the Principal Act, which confers on the police the power to maintain law and order nationwide. Yar’Adua wants the section amended by inserting a new section 4(a), which spells out the duties of the police in times of elections.

Yar’Adua first sent an edited version of the Uwais report along with the bills, but when the National Assembly demanded a clean copy of the report, the President later forwarded a copy to them.

http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=168350

Mudley313:
, and dont mind Onlytruth, it has nothing to do wit her being bigger than u, but more wit how women are built (they think more wit their emotions dat why all the logic you're trying to talk wit dis your girl is falling on answering machine), n dats why all dat your former plans of talking to pastors or relatives wont cut it, it takes two (you and her) to tango, even if she listens to logic from pastors n relatives it will eventually still fall apart since evidently u too are not emotionally on d same page right now, n also dont mind Onlytruth's talk of a plan (aka rushing into marriage), u probably would have been regretting it by now cos dis feeling your girl is having now even comes more n quicker in marriage (cos of dat feeling of entrapment), n wit d way she's handling dis now; your marriage would have been one living hell of lovelessness

By "bigger" I meant "she can walk out of the relationship and you would be crying". If that can happen to you, then she is bigger. Of course we all feel sense of loss when we lose our lovers, but be sure you can move on. If not, you have entangled yourself with a "bigger" woman. Simple.

Again if you have a plan, you will understand the concept of time too. Time is valuable to women. If you understand time, you will have the upper hand because you can see all her fears and make your moves to maintain your advantage. Stuff is too complicated to explain here, but harakiri should at least bear my advise in mind.

Mudley313:
, and dont mind Onlytruth, it has nothing to do wit her being bigger than u, but more wit how women are built (they think more wit their emotions dat why all the logic you're trying to talk wit dis your girl is falling on answering machine), n dats why all dat your former plans of talking to pastors or relatives wont cut it, it takes two (you and her) to tango, even if she listens to logic from pastors n relatives it will eventually still fall apart since evidently u too are not emotionally on d same page right now, n also dont mind Onlytruth's talk of a plan (aka rushing into marriage), u probably would have been regretting it by now cos dis feeling your girl is having now even comes more n quicker in marriage (cos of dat feeling of entrapment), n wit d way she's handling dis now; your marriage would have been one living hell of lovelessness

I don't think you understand, but anyone with some real experience in these thing will agree with me. By "plan" I meant goal. Most guys enter relationships without due diligence. Bad idea.  I can see a relationship failing waayy ahead of time.  That is what having a plan ensures. I wouldn't even take 10% of what harakiri went through. It simply won't get that far.

@harakiri

I felt I had to give you this long lecture about love, it might help you make better decisions going forward regarding marriage and dating. It may help others as well.

I have often wondered why men go into relationships without a plan: a goal.
Women don't do that. A woman knows whether she would have 5ex with a man within 5 minutes of meeting him (according to research); and if she would have se'x with him, then she would also likely marry him.

Most men start off relationships without a goal in mind. Why? You don't build a house without a plan, neither would you start a business without a plan. So why marriage? Most people think that marriage is a social decision, but they are wrong.

Marriage is an ECONOMIC decision.

From the first date, to the first child, to your death, you are making economic decisions.
Now, all these three years, you were spending on her, right?
If you had a plan, there is no way you would be stranded now, because you were planning marriage. If you wanted marriage, you would have married her since. If you were not ready, then you should not be keeping her that long  in the first place.

If you wanted to date her only, fine! but still have a plan and ensure that (like in stocks) you do not invest what you cannot afford to lose. No two relationships are the same. The key is to know yourself and your limits as a man.
Avoid women who are "bigger" than you. Only foolish men think that women cannot be bigger. Women can be bigger in so many ways. Size is relative. For every big woman, there is also a big man. By big I mean: looks, finances, sexual compatibility, physical abilities (swagger and fad etc). That all men are equal is a big LIE. Same with women too.

Find your size and marry her. She may not meet your expectation, but your expectation may be above your size which led to your current predicament. Mario Puzo says in his novel "THE LAST DON" -"there are two types of women a smart guy must avoid: one is the damsel in distress and the other is the woman who has more ambition than you". Go figure.

My advise is meant to help you make a better decision when next you meet a woman. Peace and please don't commit "harakiri".

harakiri:
[b]I no dey yankee oooo! Na Las-Gidi i base.[/b]Thanks for the priceless advice man.I'm searching for the shredded pieces of my heart left on the floor.I feel so cold on the inside right now.

Ahh! So naija babes don bad like that?  
Na wa o!
Anyway, 3 years is too long to keep a babe without marriage if you ask me. In 3 years, I for don finish making baby since!
Then marriage go be mere formality.  

@harakiri

Where do you live? You sound like you live in America. . .
Anyway davidylan nailed it with this quote:

davidylan:
your relationship is over. Get used to it. A woman who truly wants you will fight tooth and nail to keep you after 3 yrs. She's adjusted to you leaving her means that was what she wanted all along. She's probably heaving a sigh of relief and planning the new rendezvous while you're here weeping.

There is always a danger of loving a woman more than she loves you. I keep telling my friends not to do it but some them won't listen. The same logic that davidylan put up is the truth. If a man loves a woman he can take any misbehavior from her. If she doesn't love him, even GOD cannot help him. One of my friends has a wife who cheats openly on him -even brings guys to their home; he still proclaims his "love". I called him st.upid. This is why some guys don't believe in marriage.
You loved this girl more than she loved you. So, now you have to lose. Pick up the pieces of your heart and move on. That's life!  

i dint say bosom for tat, i say bosom for tat.

classic. . . moderator script library in action. hehe 

18 platoon:
admin pls post what i write.

Calm down man. Nobody is coming to kill ya yet. Disarm.

18 platoon:
i am hausa/fulani, young, angry and armed. (am a moving train+eurostar london to paris) no brakes until i reach my last station.

we are shivering and shitt'ing our pants.
dis guy sef.  shakes head.

canuck:
. . . Until Islam and Fulanis parachuted in? Is that what you mean? Just asking.

hehehe

Sorry Ikengawo, but foresight is also the ability to understand that current Nigeria can never work. I also have the privilege of American education, both on and off the classroom. Seeing how things are done in America, and imagining that it can ever be done same way in Nigeria is my idea of blindness.

Ok, in America, isn't there public transport agencies police formations: bus, trains, etc? Aren't there:
City police?
County police?
State police?
And several federal police formations?

Those alone guarantee security. Do you see that ever happening in Nigeria?

Instead we will have Sharia police, police protecting important people, one fat a's's police force spread thin all over the country with one helpless boss in Abuja(the so called center of unity).
Try suggesting state police and people start freaking out .

Here in America, every law makes sense. All you need to do is think about the law for a while and the rationale behind it will become as clear as daylight, even simple traffic codes.
I'm not even going to talk about employment laws. America is a country that uses the best human resources she possesses to develop. In Nigeria, we use the least qualified and kill anyone who protests.

Frankly, I might see some hope for a southern Nigeria, but never for a unified Nigeria that includes the Muslim Hausa/Fulani.

Heck, I can post maps too. 

Katsumoto:
I didn't misquote you; I simply copied and pasted what you stated previously. Its on this thread and anyone on this thread can read it.

Of course I stand on that quote. 
So, you never actually thought about that!

Did you ask yourself how a single Igboman called Arthur Nzeribe scuppered Abiola's ambition? Many of us didn't understand what he was doing then, but now I understand more. . .
All the north needs is an assurance that the Igbo would stay in Nigeria, and they would go ahead and do whatever they want. They consider others too weak or too disorganized to challenge them. Now, that doesn't mean things can't change. Some other group can wake up tomorrow to challenge them again like the east did. We haven't seem it yet.

Katsumoto:
Why don't you tell us how Biafran forces would have gotten to Abuja with Shuwa's division so close by in Benue and advancing on Enugu? You are right, I do not know that landscape very well. You are talking up Biafran fighting ability without any information to back it up. So if 5000 Biafrans invaded Lagos, with 30000 Nigerian soldiers in lagos, the Biafrans would have given them the fight of their lives. [/b]Of course they would have fought gallantly but they would have still been killed anyway. [b]And then you conveniently forgot about Murtala's 2nd division which chased the retreating Biafrans all the way to Asaba.

Murtala did NOT chase any Biafrans back, they simply withdrew back to Biafra. There you go again with deliberate sensationalism. I don't know what gives you the impression that only numbers make the difference in wars. Really .
If number is all it takes, Israel won't be existing today. Like I said already, Biafra put up a good fight with limited numbers and resources. The history is there for all to see.

[b]There were no massive deaths because they were not engaged by any forces. They simply strolled to Ore. [/b]If Gowon decided to attack Biafra from all three fronts (Benue, Asaba, and the Ocean) from the start of the war, would Biafran forces have been able to advance to Ore? There were strategic and military failures on both sides and thats why the war lasted so long.

If the Biafrans were invading, all the mid-west leaders like Ejoor would not have been spared. Murtala didn't spare anyone he thought was sympathetic to Biafra, even in the mid-west.

Katsumoto:
I guess you have ignored EzeUche's posts as well as Dede1's tales by moonlight. I guess you have also forgotten your post below:

"Like I've said already, more people ended up dying from terrible leadership over a 43 year period. Don't mistake the emergence of Obasanjo for Yoruba political savvy; if you don't know, it was only possible because the Hausa/Fulani was still afraid of what the Igbo might do if the Yoruba started to seriously threaten secession. The fear of Igboman is the reason behind every political moves since 1970. If the north was 100% sure that the Igbo would stay in Nigeria- they would have still denied your people a chance at presidency, and NOTHING would have happened. Your folks don't seem to think deep on these things. That is part of why savvy Igbo these days strongly reject secession moves because too many people have gained over us in Nigeria because of it."


Achuzia can say anything he wants now; he is entitled to his own interpretation. But most historians and witnesses to the war would tell you that Biafra lost.

There you go again twisting things around. I told you that if not for the fear of Igbo backing the Yoruba to secede from Nigeria, the north would have kept the presidency and I stand firm on that. I asked you: if the north was sure of Igbo support even 60%, and they refuse to hand over to a westerner in 1998, what could the Yoruba have done about that?
Please answer me before accusing me of Igbo supremacy.

Katsumoto:
What Ibime's latest input are you talking about? It has been suggested over the years that the Biafrans were invading Lagos but that suggestion has been countered by several Biafrans arguing that they were going to Liberate Lagos from the Northerners. It is for the sake of debate, that I have entertained such a notion. Logic dictates that they were trying to capture Lagos for several reasons:
1. Lagos was the capital
2. Western region was not in bondage
3. There was no agreement between Ojukwu and the Western leaders; consequently, any force was always going to be unwelcomed.
4. The BEF was not large enough to protect a whole region

There was no way that the BEF could have ended the conflict by just simply marching into Lagos. Lagos had several brigades and there were still brigades in Kaduna that had not yet being engaged in the war. Were there boys scouts in Lagos? If the BEF did not stop at Ore and continued down to Lagos, it would have been caught between Adekunle's brigades in Lagos and the Pursuing brigades under Murtala or whoever was leading it. Attacking Lagos was a good idea but the fact is that Biafra lacked the resources (personnel and equipment) to adequately engage both Murtala and Adekunle's brigades. The only real outcome would have been that the West would have equally become a battleground for a short time.

I will now answer your question about whether Biafra would have marched towards Abuja if it were the capital. The reason that the BEF was able to get to Ore easily was because the mid-west was unprotected. The BEF did not defeat any forces in the mid-west. In fact, it was because the BEF strolled through the mid-west that Murtala's division killed men at Asaba. I suspect that Biafra might have tried to invade Abuja if it was the capital but it would have faced more military resistance in doing so because Shuwa could have easily sent brigades to meet it since Shuwa's troops were already advancing on Enugu. Murtala's brigades from Kaduna would have also been sent down to assist any troops under Shuwa.

However, you look at it, Biafran high command made many strategic errors. Plus Biafra were out-gunned and outmanned.

Your answer reveals how little you know about the distance between East and Abuja. I can call Becomrich to bring the maps 
Frankly, you talk as if the only route to Abuja is through major roads. I boldly say that Abuja is within a stone throw from Anambra and it would be a total waste of resources to engage an advancing Nigerian division with Abuja so close. If those Nigerian divisions were defending Abuja, Biafra would have made serious gains on them. Lagos and the west was just too far and too hostile. That much I admit. Suffice it to say that Biafra was not going to attack western Nigeria with a single division. It just doesn't make sense, which is why some have alluded to a prior agreement. Let's leave that for history.
Forget about the Lagos based divisions. The history of that war shows that the Biafran forces could have given them the fighting of their lives even with limited resources. Biafra proved that throughout the war.
I still maintain that Biafra was NOT attacking the midwest and western Nigeria. I cannot recall of massive deaths caused by the invading Biafrans.

Katsumoto:
Its the constant post-shifting by some that pisses me off. You will observe some boast Igbo supremacy and how they dealt with Nigerian troops but as soon as someone points out that Biafra lost, they turn to victims screaming genocide, blockade, shelling, etc
Its impossible to debate with people who can not stand on one ground.

I hate sensationalism. I don't believe any of the contributors here ever mentioned Igbo supremacy. That is the scare crow your people have used repeatedly against us and our neighbors, leading to the lies and the deaths in Biafra. What is Igbo supremacy
If you mean supremacy of truth over lies, yes of course
But Ibime is NOT Igbo.

Again Achuzia went on record to say these things which I'm starting to believe because, knowing Nigeria and the way it waged the war on Biafra, it doesn't make sense to assume Nigeria simply stopped and didn't kill off all the surrendering Biafran leaders. Why was Achuzia kept incommunicado for 7 years?
Achuzia can say these things now because he understands that times have changed and no one dares touch him now.

Katsumoto:
So the Biafrans were dealing with the Nigerians but the Biafrans surrendered to the Nigerians. There is a difference between what is on record and what was handed down through moonlight story-telling. Some of the information posted above may have some element of truth in it but the fact is that at the end of the day, Biafra was subdued and they surrendered.

I guess you will congratulate Ibime for stating that Lagos was a strategic target but when the arguments suits you, you change your mindand state that the BEF were on there way to Lagos to liberate the West from the clutches of Gowon. I have heard this argument many times from OnlyTruth, Eziachi and others. It appears that you Biafrans can not get your stories accurately. On Monday, you are going to help the Yoruba drive the Hausa soldiers from their soil; on Wednesday, Lagos was a strategic target and you were going to attack it.

I hope Eziachi and OnlyTruth are reading this because we can not keep having multiple hypothetical arguments. So I will from now henceforth argue on the basis that the BEF were attacking the West and were expelled. After the expulsion, they got their a.s.s.e.s handed to them.

If you really follow my posts, you would notice that I hardly enter into areas where I have limited information. In such areas, I rely mainly on logic. I cannot presume to know as much as DEDE1 or Eziachi -unfortunately I was not there when it happened. All I do is to use all the facts we know and then make a logical projection.

I asked you a question earlier in which I wanted to know whether Biafra would have still marched westwards if the capital had been in Abuja. You maintained a stoic silence on that.
Now, Ibime has put up some information which is very logical and could explain part of why Biafra chose to march westwards.

Something still tells me that Biafra was marching to the Nigerian capital at the time which happened to be Lagos, since Nigeria had already declared war and attacked Garkem.
I don't see how a single Biafran division (BEF) could protect the entire west against northern attack. I simply project (based on sound logic and Ibime's latest input) that Biafra was marching to capture the Nigerian capital, and end the war before it escalated into a major conflict.

Biafra could have achieved that if your leaders were a little courageous to stand on the side of truth and history. Your leaders didn't. 

Katsumoto:
Biafra never obtained any form of assurances from the West before advancing. If you have any information to the contrary, then provide it. The minute that the BAF started the advance through the midwest, everyone knew where they were going. From the start of the advance on the 9th of August until the 21st when the retreat started, the Western leaders had almost 2 weeks to contact Banjo.

In the absence of any evidence pointing to an alliance between the West and the East and the consequent advance of Biafran troops towards the West, why would the West remain neutral? Playing defensive is a bad strategy. Would the West have trusted that Biafran troops would not have advanced on its territory again? This is why an agreement was needed before hand. Otherwise you would not know what the otherside is planning. The other question is, why did Ojukwu send troops to the west without an agreement with the West? I have read the letter from Ojukwu to Banjo and that letter does not constitute an agreement.

Let us agree to disagree on that.
I ask you now: If the capital of Nigeria was in Abuja, do you think Biafra would still advance westwards?

^^^
As for the looting, dem never born the monkey that would steal our money. We go simply organize "Boys oye" and all able bodied men will march to his home and burn it down. Theft of public resources is intolerable in the east because we work hard for our money.