₦airaland Forum

attackgat:
Stop talking like a fool. You only have to go back into Nigerian history to know what is right and what is wrong. Zik was a well educated man who went to Ghana in the 1930's and established a Newspaper where he wrote about Nigeria having independence, a bit like Kanu was running Radio Biafra, talking about Biafran independence. Maybe Kanu used more crude language but the message was still the same with that of Zik, the independence of the indigenous people of the land from a higher power.

Zik eventually returned to Nigeria, just like Kanu did, and continued his crusade for independence for which he suffered persecution from the British authorities.

If we are to follow your logic, it means that Zik, Awo and other nationalist had no right to agitate for independence. The British created Nigeria, they wrote the constitution of the time that had no provision for independence.

Today, a lot of Nigerians appreciate Zik and others for for agitating and getting independence, yet, the same Nigerian finds it strange that Kanu is agitating for the independence of his own people.

What is the difference between what Zik did and what Kanu is doing? It is still all about the independence of a group of people from a higher power, is it not?

The only difference is that the British are a civilised people while Nigerians are not. Zik and others could never have defeated Britain in a war of independence at the time. But the British knew that to hold anyone against their will perpetually was wrong. When Zik and others showed that they had the support of the people, the British conceded independence.

If the British had wanted, they could have thrown Zik and others in jail, charged them with treason, executed them, gunned down their supporters and kept their control of Nigeria.

The moral of the story is that any group of people have a right to agitate for their independence and they have the inalinable right to be eventually granted their independence if it is truly what they want because whatever the constitution says, the constitution is never greater than the people. Wether they eventually suffer after independence is their business.



Nigeria is just not yet civilised.

freshest4live:
I am not Yoruba, and to say that the lgbos were the only ones killed during the religious crises in the North is false. Every group has been marginalized in one way or the other, what we need is dialogue on how to coexist as a nation, bringing all the previous killings of southern christians over things like cartoon, to the table, a new constitution orva penalty that guarantees such criminals would no longer be spared, not this noise of secession because it is much more difficult and may lead to conflict.

attackgat:
Stop talking like a fool. You only have to go back into Nigerian history to know what is right and what is wrong. Zik was a well educated man who went to Ghana in the 1930's and established a Newspaper where he wrote about Nigeria having independence, a bit like Kanu was running Radio Biafra, talking about Biafran independence. Maybe Kanu used more crude language but the message was still the same with that of Zik, the independence of the indigenous people of the land from a higher power.

Zik eventually returned to Nigeria, just like Kanu did, and continued his crusade for independence for which he suffered persecution from the British authorities.

If we are to follow your logic, it means that Zik, Awo and other nationalist had no right to agitate for independence. The British created Nigeria, they wrote the constitution of the time that had no provision for independence.

Today, a lot of Nigerians appreciate Zik and others for for agitating and getting independence, yet, the same Nigerian finds it strange that Kanu is agitating for the independence of his own people.

What is the difference between what Zik did and what Kanu is doing? It is still all about the independence of a group of people from a higher power, is it not?

The only difference is that the British are a civilised people while Nigerians are not. Zik and others could never have defeated Britain in a war of independence at the time. But the British knew that to hold anyone against their will perpetually was wrong. When Zik and others showed that they had the support of the people, the British conceded independence.

If the British had wanted, they could have thrown Zik and others in jail, charged them with treason, executed them, gunned down their supporters and kept their control of Nigeria.

The moral of the story is that any group of people have a right to agitate for their independence and they have the inalinable right to be eventually granted their independence if it is truly what they want because whatever the constitution says, the constitution is never greater than the people. Wether they eventually suffer after independence is their business.



Nigeria is just not yet civilised.

mpianya39:
Unity beggars don upgrade to another level

So because every group has been marginalized we have to keep quiet too
I don't really understand how you guys reason but make no mistake cox is either biafra or death

(in Nnamdi Kanu voice) when we finish with the Zoogerian they will beg us to go

freshest4live:
Secession is not the answer, if nations secede over every challenge they face then we would have an average of 20 secessions annually.
Now there's even a recent Kenyan cry for secession as well over perceived marginalization, and Secessionist are all over in our modern day world, you see why the U.N can't take all seriously.
Sudan seceded because there was an agreement after so many years of war and instability. The Government agreed in 2005, and the referendum for South Sudan took place 2011, but South Sudan was definitely not ready for this and the U.N regrets till ddate.

maclatunji:
Do you have the capacity to actually debate or discuss effectively or you can only do the pervasive Nairaland mediocrity? If you lack the capacity for intelligent discourse, just go play in other threads that will allow you display your mediocrity.

louqas:
As they always do the igbos protest whenever they lost out in the power game and start playing the victim card on others.....threatening others for their loss forgetting that others were suffering while they held sway in the corridors of power.
Even as at 1966 when the igbo political traditional and military elite sponsored their young men to plot a coup so that they will have full control of the whole country , the igbos were controlling commerce , trade , industry , civil service, military and even only second to yorubas in education ....... yet they were not satisfied and had to kill other tribes and regions leaders so that igbo men will rule it over the rest.

Fast foward 1999 to 2015 they held sway controlling the ministry of finance education CBN, NSE , SGF , SENATE PRESIDENT and even president (most igbos see gej as an igboman)and many federal appointments while yorubas were protesting marginalization by FG.......they were suffering and at the same time strategizing on how to enter the corridor of power which they did

Then those that lost out now wants the country broken just because they lost elections ,

Selfish greedy lot

mpianya39:
Unity beggars don upgrade to another level

So because every group has been marginalized we have to keep quiet too
I don't really understand how you guys reason but make no mistake cox is either biafra or death

(in Nnamdi Kanu voice) when we finish with the Zoogerian they will beg us to go

mpianya39:
Unity beggar

eagleeye2:
Gbagam...
What even baffles me is why anyone will view the quest for an independent Biafra as a call to BATTLE. The OP, is a well known religious and tribal bigot and I am not surprised by what he wrote up there. The same people speaking against Kanu (whom I don't always agree with his tactics) will never condemn the murderous Fulani herdsmen. They will never condemn, the trigger happy armed forces men who kill harmless Nigerians with impunity. They will never condemn the Above the Law Arewa Youths. They will never condemn the FG who flagrantly disobey court rulings. And I can go on and on.
Lastly, if Kanu's agitations is a call to battle, what of Zazzaky and his movement? Maclatunji.

Nonaira1:
That's the million dollar question. That same line you quoted, I've heard it repeatedly from the mouths of unity beggars.

Each time I wonder who the Bleep did Igbo offend up there in heaven that God cursed us with such brain dead people as our country's men. Like which of the angels did we offend?

Honestly Nigerians continues to prove the statement racist whites has about black people accurate because only a very shallow minded, poor mentality nigger would think because "others are marginalized too and not just igbos" is a good defense against independence. Just because the rest of them accept the backwardneess that is nigeria as it is and also accept the slave mentality does not mean they should expect others to follow them in that part.

The guy that made the crab in the box ideology when addressing blacks should look no farther than nigeria when looking for example. Unity beggars or one nigerian or whatever people call them nowadays are a perfect example of the black men crab in the box behavior. A huge perfect example

Rihamz:
Nigeria will be worse than this two countries mentioned above,especially the biafran republic. Has it ever occured to you that the so called marginalisation and under development you people always refer to is imposed on you by your fellow brothers and sisters. All the money being pumped into your region finds its way into the pockets of your elites. What you should be demanding for is accountability from your leaders.

freshest4live:
You don't get it, my point is that so called marginalization theory is no longer an excuse for secession. Nigeria's unity is non negotiable, but we can always debate the framework of the unity.

attackgat:
Stop talking like a fool. You only have to go back into Nigerian history to know what is right and what is wrong. Zik was a well educated man who went to Ghana in the 1930's and established a Newspaper where he wrote about Nigeria having independence, a bit like Kanu was running Radio Biafra, talking about Biafran independence. Maybe Kanu used more crude language but the message was still the same with that of Zik, the independence of the indigenous people of the land from a higher power.

Zik eventually returned to Nigeria, just like Kanu did, and continued his crusade for independence for which he suffered persecution from the British authorities.

If we are to follow your logic, it means that Zik, Awo and other nationalist had no right to agitate for independence. The British created Nigeria, they wrote the constitution of the time that had no provision for independence.

Today, a lot of Nigerians appreciate Zik and others for for agitating and getting independence, yet, the same Nigerian finds it strange that Kanu is agitating for the independence of his own people.

What is the difference between what Zik did and what Kanu is doing? It is still all about the independence of a group of people from a higher power, is it not?

The only difference is that the British are a civilised people while Nigerians are not. Zik and others could never have defeated Britain in a war of independence at the time. But the British knew that to hold anyone against their will perpetually was wrong. When Zik and others showed that they had the support of the people, the British conceded independence.

If the British had wanted, they could have thrown Zik and others in jail, charged them with treason, executed them, gunned down their supporters and kept their control of Nigeria.

The moral of the story is that any group of people have a right to agitate for their independence and they have the inalinable right to be eventually granted their independence if it is truly what they want because whatever the constitution says, the constitution is never greater than the people. Wether they eventually suffer after independence is their business.



Nigeria is just not yet civilised.

freshest4live:
Yes l am a Unity Beggar just like the Northern lgbos and the Ohaneze's.

maclatunji:
Not hard, misguided. Freedom from what? Did a group of other tribes in Nigeria fight an Independent Igbo nation to form Nigeria? No.

So, where did the subjugation come from? It is actually a construct you have created for yourselves. Learn to understand which concepts apply to you.

Is a non-Southeasterner governing any Southeast state in Nigeria? No.

If you claim Nigeria has not benefitted you then wake-up and smell the coffee, you negotiate not agitate.

Or you want to insist on a suicidal mission of secession to prove your misplaced concept of 'freedom'?

I know you are just playing to the gallery to get customary likes.

freshest4live:
You don't get it, my point is that so called marginalization theory is no longer an excuse for secession. Nigeria's unity is non negotiable, but we can always debate the framework of the unity.

zenmaster:
@ maclatunji
You need to contact NK for a face-to-face debate

krendo:
Nigeria is getting beyond salvage my dear!

warripekin:
some people live and act like they own Nigeria more than others. The fact remains, for Nigeria to survive, we must restructure now and equity, justice and fairness to all must be obtained. Nigeria as we know it can not survive, politically or economically. The fossil fuel we so much rely on is gradually becoming irrelevant. The German legislature has passed a law banning the use of injection fuel propelled cars by 2020 and most western nations are following suit. Electric car technology has and will disrupt injection fuel technology. Tesla is the next big thing to happen to the auto industry. This will overwhelmingly affect Nigeria and most oil producing countries . We must restructure or burst besides this present government have gone a borrowing without anything to show for what they are borrowing for. The time for real change has come and yes any and every ethnic group has a right to want out of Nigeria after all,dey no tie our unblical cord together. Even if it is tied together we have a right to cut it and go our separate ways. Siemese twins still get separated by surgery. For those who truly love Nigeria, time to negotiate is now and not bitting about the bush.

maclatunji:
The Southeast is claiming to be the champion for 'restructuring' Nigeria. Yet, it did almost nothing about it for the 5 years "its son" Goodluck Jonathan was in power. It is just the case of being dubious and deceitful.

zenmaster:
MASSOB was there long before IPOB.
Nigeria is a zoo that needs to be restructured.

Yyeske:
OP, stop wasting your data on incorrigible and brainwashed IPOB miscreants, you'll only have insults

maclatunji:
Do you have the capacity to actually debate or discuss effectively or you can only do the pervasive Nairaland mediocrity? If you lack the capacity for intelligent discourse, just go play in other threads that will allow you display your mediocrity.

krendo:
When did you discuss to enter or accept a union with other tribes? Nigeria was imposed on us by the British!

Ipob are protesting against a state that celebrates its ability to exclude the Igbos from full participation in government, military and the economy and they have a right to do so under article 1 of the UN charter to which Nigeria is a signatory to!

maclatunji:
MASSSOB was way reasonable and very people bothered with them. By the way, the MASSOB leader has disowned IPOB, what else?

maclatunji:
I have taken time to engage the IPOB-inspired Biafran agitators whose propaganda is often also expressed by some Igbo contributors to radio phone-in programmes and there is a trend.

They are quick to list their perceived 'injustices' against Igbos and the Southeast as justification for their agitation. Meanwhile, they fail to realize that their agitation is likely to make the condition of the people they claim to be fighting for worse.

Let us say Nnamdi Kanu was not initially caught when he sneaked into Nigeria and was successful with his agenda to raise agitation in the Southeast. Depending on how successful he would have been, hundreds to thousands of people would have died in the region and there still would be no Biafra. Don't forget, this is not 1967 where a regional system exists and neither are we having military rule where some Southeastern officer can seek to commandeer troops in a secession bid. Any attempt to raise the issue of secession is just a call for suffering on the people of the Southeast. Whatever suffering you might think you are experiencing now will be like paradise to a conflict situation.

I am sure some responder would quickly type- 'we want a referendum like the United Kingdom held for Scotland.' My reaction- stop engaging in dubious analysis and postulations.

The legal framework and political structure of the United Kingdom with its constituent nations is not the same as Nigeria. The Nigerian constitution does not give any window for separation or secession including a referendum. Even insisting on one will still in all likelihood lead to trouble.

So, instigating trouble and getting people in harm's way is not going to help the Southeast and no foreign country will do anything tangible about it too. Their interests are firmly with Nigeria not a rag-tag bunch of secessionist agitators too closely aligned to a discredited Jonathan administration.

Harsh? Well, you need a reality check before you get people killed for nothing.

Rihamz:
Now the simple question is Does Nnamdi kanu enjoys 100% support of his region?

Lightening:
You said intellectual? There was nothing intellectual about the trash you typed and therefore deserves a trashy response. We are tired of this union and we must have Biafra. Call it anything you like, that's your cup of tea. This coming from an Islamist fool like you makes it most nauseating