₦airaland Forum

Nezan: ^^ I assume you wanted to quote the OP, I dont have issues with that book.

^^^^^^


Yes,

I said, you are correct. I explained why on the second post.


.

Nezan: I think you are the one who has failed to read that book thoroughly. In each of the laws, there is a reversal and practical past experience to back it up. Read the book with an open mind observing all the reversals and you will appreciate the book more.

^^^^^^


Read the book again, this time align each law ( rule ) with the contrast ( for and against ) each rule to have a better understanding of the book.

Rule 1 is 100% correct.

Example: the first time I went to U.S.A. On course, when I came back and informed by Supervisor that, I spent only a little fraction out of the money given to me, he didn't wait for me to finish explaining why and how, he told me the money was given to me for spending, to give others the impression that at least my company takes good care of me. Don't bother on how and why for now.


Rule 2:


The example you gave is not what is termed " your enemy", and doesn't conform to any of the examples given in the book, this is the reason you and your camp didn't get your required result ( defeat your opponent).

Meaning that, the word " your enemy " does not necessarily mean your opponent, ok? You need to understand and differentiate between both.


.

Nezan: I think you are the one who has failed to read that book thoroughly. In each of the laws, there is a reversal and practical past experience to back it up. Read the book with an open mind observing all the reversals and you will appreciate the book more.

^^^^^^

I think you are correct.

.

Yes.


Answer = Yes


He should be given EFCC to head, if he must be given a political office.

.

NO.



Answer = No.


.

I hope the govt. would also include all the families affected by Boko Haram attacks on the rehabilitation program.


...

This is still morning, the picture would be clearer by noon.

alj harem: why not Rocahas ? Why must he be anambran always ?

^^^^^^


If the preference is Rochas, pair him with a VP from north / SW, no problems.

[quote author=Nuzo']Recently, I read a thread about how APC and Buhari might present Tambuwal and Fashola for president. Some people kicked against it stating that the duo are both muslims. Their reason being that the distrust between muslims and christians have deepened in recent times.

Some APC members welcomed this idea. However, this group of people couldn't come up with why they are in support of these duo, instead, they quickly labeled the disagreeing party tribalists and religious bigots.

Now, the question is; why Tambuwal? Somebody who is a known PDP stalwart a choice of these same people who've been condemning PDP? What has he achieved more than other numerous APC members from different zones of the country? Does it mean that sometimes these undue bashing of PDP is a way to get to GEJ and southsouthners? Otherwise, what's the difference between Tambuwal and GEJ?

Some of these covert tribalist have asked the other group to point out any other credible and sellable APC candidate in the



What will go wrong with Ngige/Ribadu candidate? Utomi/Ribadu candidate?

In their eyes, there's nothing wrong in openly stating that Igbos and s/southerners should be excluded from APC and have Hausas and Yorubas take charge of the country. However, one is labeled a tribalist the moment he/she thinks otherwise.

More surprising is when some knowledgeable Nlanders accuse GEJ of dividing Nigerians votes along ethnic and religious lines. They forgot that Buhari has asked muslims to vote for muslims in 2011 elections. He also didn't bother to campaign in the southeast and s/south.

Bottomline is that APC is a welcome development so far its not an instrument of tribalism and religious fundamentalism as some members are showing already.
And to prove all of us wrong, they should present ACN's Ngige as the presidential candidate.[/quote]^^^^^^^^^



.... And pair him ( Ngige ) with a VP they think is the best from SW and the North.

[quote author=Nuzo']Recently, I read a thread about how APC and Buhari might present Tambuwal and Fashola for president. Some people kicked against it stating that the duo are both muslims. Their reason being that the distrust between muslims and christians have deepened in recent times.

Some APC members welcomed this idea. However, this group of people couldn't come up with why they are in support of these duo, instead, they quickly labeled the disagreeing party tribalists and religious bigots.

Now, the question is; why Tambuwal? Somebody who is a known PDP stalwart a choice of these same people who've been condemning PDP? What has he achieved more than other numerous APC members from different zones of the country? Does it mean that sometimes these undue bashing of PDP is a way to get to GEJ and southsouthners? Otherwise, what's the difference between Tambuwal and GEJ?

Some of these covert tribalist have asked the other group to point out any other credible and sellable APC candidate in the south east/south.



^^^^^^^


... And pair him ( Ngige ) with a VP they think is the best from SW and North.



What will go wrong with Ngige/Ribadu candidate? Utomi/Ribadu candidate?

In their eyes, there's nothing wrong in openly stating that Igbos and s/southerners should be excluded from APC and have Hausas and Yorubas take charge of the country. However, one is labeled a tribalist the moment he/she thinks otherwise.

More surprising is when some knowledgeable Nlanders accuse GEJ of dividing Nigerians votes along ethnic and religious lines. They forgot that Buhari has asked muslims to vote for muslims in 2011 elections. He also didn't bother to campaign in the southeast and s/south.

Bottomline is that APC is a welcome development so far its not an instrument of tribalism and religious fundamentalism as some members are showing already.
And to prove all of us wrong, they should present ACN's Ngige as the presidential candidate.[/quote]

Onlytruth: Jonathan, clueless_jona, shoeless fisherman, drunken fisherman, jonagoat, retardeen.

For every ONE Yar adua insult name, there are THREE Jonathan's.
Ratio: 1:3

Wetin Jona do una?

^^^^^^


The bottom line is about controlling the oil in another persons' backyard.

Thank God everybody is awake, anxiously waiting for them.

No amount of preaching would deceive anybody, it's only the dead that stays dumb, huh?

[quote author=Dudu_Negro]would a christian/christian ticket be okay?[/quote]^^^^^^


No, there should be a balance because of the way Nigeria is structured.

The North would rather separate than hear you mention Christian / Christian ticket, not to talk of giving them ticket.

Obiagu1: ^^^

They do not care what you think. They have their bomb and intimidation and gullible Christians in the SW will buy the idea.

^^^^^^^

Note that, there's nothing on earth that would make SS and SE buy into that idea.

The SW would because they benefit from the corrupt status quo and got Muslims among them.

van bonattel: It will never sell, the xtians will see it as an insult, and as at the last time I checked, xtians are up to 50% of this country.

^^^^^^


Christians should be more than 50% of Nigerian population.

Please, don't judge based on northern fictitious figure.


The next census, must have tab for religion to ascertain the exact ratio ( %tage) of Christain : Muslim in Nigeria.

bappahman: Tribalism/regionalism isn't fairness...democracy is not about tribe its abt the voting the right person for the right post

^^^^^^^


Then start lobbying for two best candidates from SE and SS ( of course Christians ), lets see how others ( especially North and SW) would react.


There's also nothing wrong in selecting ( pairing ) two Christians from SS and SE, ok?

This's educative and worth reading carefully.

This information would certainly change the way some people approach business.

I'm already thinking like a billionaire, because a single idea ( or information) would change the life of someone for ever.

Nice piece, before now, I didn't know the man is this conservative and simple minded.


Imagine if his a Nigerian, his fleet of private jets, would lobby to live with only his family in a quarter of a state sized land, own houses he doesn't know their correct location ( address) in all major cities on earth, etc.

peruso: Sensible points.

Some1 pls tell this 9ja i hail guy to calm down why is he so angry.

^^^^^^^


Because the North should not complain, they started it.


He only reminded them and other Nigerians the truth, that there's nothing new under the sun.

[quote author=re@lchange]there is an older agreement which was not honored
it is called the aburi accord![/quote]^^^^^^^


+1000 likes

Why insisting?

They performed well,

1. They're insisting because some people are making money from a planted foreign coach

2. Some are not still happy that Steven K. refused to listen to their enhanced stupidity ( federal character / quota system) in selecting the players, he insisted on merit.


Which country on earth does not promote merit? Must a particular region of the country always insist on dragging everybody backwards?

Thank God for Igbos.

[quote author=PROUD-IGBO]^^^Outrage, can you pinpoint the exact parts of the post you disagree with?; or is it the whole post you find disagreeable?[/quote]^^^^^^


He's just being outrageous huh.

berem: please where in Lagos can i get the book?

^^^^^^


Go to the bookshop in Games ( shoprite) VI.

Rail and functional international airport is highly needed.

Federal govt. should invest ( or encouraged to invest) in Aba and Onitsha for both to start running fast / well, and Nigerians with other African countries would benefit greatly from it.

kingoflag: Well, no insults, but I wouldn't consider you "a rational person" as you self-proclaimed above. Your posts are usually tinged with "ethnic superiority" over others and are largely sentimental as opposed to logical. Again, like I said, this is not to denigrate you,
but to state the facts as I see them.


You claim you never approach issues sentimentally, but that in this instance you would. Well, my brother, that's your prerogative. I, personally, believe in approaching ALL issues LOGICALLY. At the risk of sounding sexist, only women are allowed to approach issues based on sentiments. So, except you have a 4-5 day period every month where you bleed, cramp
and are all types of illogical for no other reason but for what nature bestowed on you, there's absolutely NO excuse, why you should approach decisions just based on sentiments.

Do you really believe that an Igbo man should be made president just because of where he's from and what language he speaks? Do you really believe that a party which Igbos are already distancing themselves for should field an Igbo man as it's Presidential nominee? Do you really believe PDP will field an Igbo man as it's Presidential candidate? If everyone said today "okay, let's field an Igbo man", tell us one QUALIFIED Igbo man whom you think would be acceptable to all.

Nigeria should realize that 2015 is probably the last time she'll have an opportunity to get it right before everything implodes before everyone's eyes. "The right person over ethnicity,religion,
or language" should be the motto when deciding who will lead Nigeria out of the doldrums, not these backwards reasons which a lot of you seem insistent upon.

^^^^^^


You question as regards "QUALIFIED" Igbo person to be given president sound like insult to The Igbos, ok?

SE till next tomorrow parades the most qualified individuals both in Nigeria and in diaspora that would lead Nigeria out of its present state. It is also on record that it's only Igbos that practice what is termed one Nigeria.

Go researching using google and update everybody with your finding.

The truth would always set us free.

Other govt. parastatals and organization should emulate Ihejirika ( COAS), and start repositioning their systems for merit to count first.

scarred: Careytommy, let us not be deceived or just view this development as a 'mere' act. It carries resounding consequences. Catholic seers and protestant prophets alike have spoken about this. This just moves us closer to what we know is coming. In terms of time I cannot tell you, but we are poised for some shaking. The financial upheaval has moved the conversation of one currency closer, issues of identity theft will make RFDs and Chips the norm, biometric information is being demanded on almost all levels and soon this will be linked to our bank accounts, which will make money obsolete.

The Security Council in the UN is asking for greater control and a standing army which will move us closer to the police state, the media is sanitized and all information coming from them is information they want you to know as opposed to what you need to know. Our cultural and moral standing are being debated on a daily basis and the shift is not conservative but liberal, very liberal, in order words anything goes. Believers, trus believers are now the minority and many states and countries have laws that state that believers can be charged with hate crimes for speaking out against what are now accepted norms.

There is cooperation on the parts of governments that is unprecedented and is likely to continue, in truth the plans are in place and what we need is the trigger mechanism to make them all reality. This is chess my friend and the devil just said check.

^^^^^^^



You are very current and following events.


Imagine a country like ours that's not ICT compliant agreed to linking all financial ( account) data to people biometrics.

Is Prof. A.B.C. Nwosu also a liar?

Please read for yourself:







Achebe: Best Late Than Never

Guardian Newspaper
MONDAY, 12 NOVEMBER 2012 00:00 BY A. B. C. NWOSU OPINION - COLUMNISTS  

I AM of the view that the spate of comments elicited from Nigerians and non-Nigerians by Prof. Chinua Achebe’s latest book: There Was A Country is good for our development as a nation because it provides us again with another opportunity for national exhalation of “bad ethnic breath”, so that reconciliation and genuine inter-ethnic mix can happen.

We had the earlier opportunity provided by the Justice Oputa Truth and Reconciliation Committee with Rev. Father (now Bishop) Matthew Hassan Kukah as secretary. I, therefore, read and retain all the comments and interviews by various individuals on the book as I came across them. It has been such a very long time from that horrid period (over 40 years), and we have moved on with our lives, that we should by now be able to reflect on these terrible events without being terrified of them. Achebe’s book has, therefore, come at the right time.

There is, however, this very curious write-up by Kole Omotosho (who is also a writer) titled: “The Trouble With Achebe” on page 19 of The Vanguard October 26, 2012, in which he quoted and agreed with a belittling review of Achebe’s book by William Wallis of the London Financial Times. Omotosho made much of this review. But what did Omotosho really expect on Biafra from William Wallis and London Financial Times? Achebe in his book had castigated Britain for its well-established anti-Biafra, anti-Igbo role in the entire crisis. Bluntly stated, Ndigbo (not only Achebe) hold the British Government responsible for having masterminded the pogrom and genocide against Biafrans, so to many of us, Mr. Wallis wrote what he had to write. So much for the Financial Times, the British, Mr. Wallis and his review of Achebe’s book.

Omotosho should also have quoted Nadine Gordimer, winner of the Nobel prize in Literature, who said that the book “exceeds all expectation”.

I went back to re-read Omotosho’s well-researched novel “Just Before Dawn” published in 1988 by Spectrum Books Ibadan. In his three-page acknowledgements, he had mentioned two persons who particularly excited my attention. The first person is Anthony Kirk-Greene whose two volumes titled: “Crisis And Conflict In Nigeria: A Documentary Source Book 1966-1970”, are a must-read for anyone truly interested in finding out the truth about the Nigerian crisis of 1966 and the Nigeria-Biafra War 1967-1970. The Kirk-Greene volumes are a repository of first-hand information consisting of over 227 broadcasts, press releases, speeches and official reports.

If, therefore, I had Omotosho’s opportunity to meet with Mr. Kirk-Greene, I would have asked questions on two documents namely: Document No. 104 (p.414) titled by Mr. Kirk-Greene as “Awolowo promises West will secede if East does,” dated May 1, 1967. Also, Document No. 109 (p.425) dated May 26, 1967 and titled: “Hassan Katsina’s interview on the Withdrawal of Northern Troops from the West.” These documents are important because the two subjects, as well as the possibility of a “Southern Solidarity” and Aburi Agreement, were extensively and frankly discussed at the Enugu meeting on Saturday and Sunday May 6 and 7, 1967, between Lt.-Col. Odimegwu Ojukwu (as he was then) and Chief Obafemi Awolowo and their teams. Prior to this meeting, the refusal of Yakubu Gowon to withdraw military personnel from the West and Lagos had been given as the principal reason why Chief Awolowo withdrew from the Ad-Hoc Conference on April 24, 1967.

Another person acknowledged was the Igbo legend, Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani (Zik’s long-time confidant and Arthur Nwankwo’s maternal uncle). I would be surprised that Omotosho was hosted by Dr. Ikejiani in Nova Scotia Canada, where he lived after the war, without hearing from him his strong views on the 1952 Western Nigeria elections, the January 1966 Military coup, events in Biafra, which he served loyally as ambassador plenipotentiary, and about his struggles over his “abandoned properties” in Port Harcourt and Lagos. These and other subjects are well-covered in Dr. Ikejiani’s 593-page autobiography titled: “The Unrepentant Nationalist” published in 2007.

In his autobiography, Dr. Ikejiani, who lived in Ibadan in 1952, wrote extensively (pp. 197-200) on the “cross-carpet” episode detailing his role and involvement and named NCNC-elected members who he and others had approached on the aegis of the party not to “cross-over” which they did, the next day. However, Dr. Ikejiani in his autobiography, also said that on reflection, he had come to terms with the “cross-carpet” issue, given that Nigeria comprised of ethnic nationalities that had not yet become a nation. Dr. Ikejiani is revered by Ndigbo and his attitude summarises the Igbo position on that 1952 Western Elections affair. It is not a big deal with Ndigbo who have since gone beyond it. But the “crossing over” or “crossing of carpet” did take place and that is all that has been said. Omotosho begs the question by saying Zik would not have done for the West what Awo did for them. May be; may be not. The bottom line is that Ndigbo generally accept the reality that Chief Awolowo needed to govern Western Nigeria at that time in Nigeria’s development as a nation, and that is really it. Achebe did not dwell on this in his latest book, and so Omotosho’s dismissal of Achebe’s reference to Awolowo (on another matter altogether) and describing Chief Awolowo as Achebe’s “bête noir” is petty and is neither here nor there.


Back to Achebe’s latest book, which I believe is a great work that will serve its purpose when the present furore subsides because the facts and truths raised by the book about Nigeria’s history cannot be submerged. They will always rise to the surface. It is a 333-page, four-part (Part I-IV) book covering from Achebe’s childhood to the Civil War and after, with copious footnotes showing Achebe’s sources and interspersed with poems. I am convinced after reading the book that its aim is not to drag Ndigbo and Nigeria backwards but is meant for us to acknowledge certain events of our national history like the Nigeria-Biafra War, pogrom and genocide, and to analyse those horrific events honestly for ourselves and ask questions why those events occurred so as to guard and protect the country from future occurrences. Denying continually that the events happened especially in the face of weighty evidence is sheer hypocrisy and impedes the development of a national ethos. There is an Igbo saying that ‘a child who does not enquire as to what or who killed his father sooner or later suffers the same fate’.

Some of the facts of our nation’s history, which will facilitate a better understanding of Achebe’s book, which devoted over two-thirds to the 1966 crisis and the 1967-1970 war are as follows: Post-Independence Nigeria had lost its salt and violence had erupted resulting in a military coup in January 1966. The coup was nationally acclaimed especially in Western Nigeria and Lagos for obvious reasons. There was a counter-coup in July 1966 followed by well-orchestrated pogrom against Ndigbo, resulting from the reactions of soldiers and others of northern Nigeria origin to the January 1966 coup, which later came to be regarded as an “Igbo coup”. Following the pogrom, there was exodus of Ndigbo from other parts of Nigeria to their homeland (Eastern Nigeria), thereby creating serious rehabilitation problems. An ad-hoc national conference was convened by the Federal Government under Gowon to defuse the tensions and insecurity arising from the impasse. Chief Awolowo who had just been released from Calabar Prison led the Yoruba to that Ad-Hoc conference.


Continued from yesterday

THE Conference could not continue as a result of the withdrawal of the Eastern Nigeria delegation led by Sir Francis Ibiam because they feared for their safety arising from the continued presence of soldiers of Northern Nigeria origin from the West and Lagos. The impasse and stalemate continued. On Monday May 1, 1967, Chief Obafemi Awolowo delivered an address to the meeting of leaders of thought of the West and Lagos at Agodi Ibadan titled: “The Four Imperatives”. Imperative number three stated that if  “Eastern Nigeria through acts of omission and commission left the federation, the West and Lagos would follow suit.” The exact text of the speech is in “Awo’s Book on the Civil War” (pages 18-24) that is being run now by the Tribune newspaper.

On Saturday, May 6 and Sunday, May 7, 1967, Chief Awolowo led a delegation of the National Conciliation Committee to a meeting in Enugu with Lt.-Col. Chukwuemeka Odimegwu Ojukwu (as he then was) and his team. The meeting failed to achieve its stated objectives. I have read and re-read the transcripts of the Enugu meeting over and over again and cannot find the basis for Odia Ofeimun’s assertion that the Enugu meeting discussed the “creation of states” in Nigeria. I repeat that I find no evidence for this in the transcripts of the meeting as published. Chief Awolowo’s central objective for the Enugu meeting was to persuade Ojukwu for Eastern Nigeria to send representatives to participate at future “National Conciliation” meetings; the Ad-Hoc Conference convened by Yakubu Gowon having become defunct. Also discussed very extensively were the plight of the East as a consequence of the pogrom, the “blockade of Eastern Nigeria”, the Aburi Agreement, “Southern Solidarity, and withdrawal of soldiers of Northern Nigeria origin from the West and Lagos. All these are to be found in the verbatim report of the meeting. Creation of states, which Ofeimun claimed was the “sticking point”, did not feature in the discussions. The parting comment of Chief Awolowo at the Enugu meeting is quoted in full here below: “I am grateful to you (Ojukwu) for the enlightened stand you have taken all along - the stand for freedom and equality for all the regions of the federation. I hope that we shall succeed. May I end by praying the people of Eastern Region that there is no doubt that they are suffering not only for themselves but for others and I do pray that their suffering will not be in vain.”

The stalemate continued and a Sovereign State of Biafra was declared on May 30, 1967 (more than three weeks after the Enugu meeting!). Chief Awolowo became appointed the Federal Commissioner (Minister) of Finance and Vice Chairman of the reconstituted Federal Executive Council, which was inaugurated by then Maj.-Gen. Gowon on June 12, 1967. Nigeria declared war on the fledgling state of Biafra early in July 1967. It was supposed to be a war of national unity, a war “to keep Nigeria one” and was expected to be of a short duration. An operational Code of Conduct had been issued for the Nigerian Army in June 1967 and signed by the Commander-in-Chief, Maj.-Gen. Gowon.

However as it happened, the Nigeria -Biafra war lasted for thirty months in the course of which over two million Biafran children died as a result of a deliberate “Policy of Famine” by the Nigerian government, and defenceless civilians were massacred at Asaba and elsewhere in flagrant disobedience to known codes of conduct of armies, the world over. Many of the starving, kwashiorkor children were evacuated to Gabon and other places and are now permanently “lost” in the Diaspora. Chief Awolowo publicly defended this policy of starvation. When the war ended in January 1970, Maj.-Gen. Gowon magnanimously made his “no victor, no vanquished” and “3Rs” declaration, for which he is still widely applauded by Ndigbo and the world.   However, there were very serious hiccups in the implementation of Gowon’s post-war declaration starting from the obnoxious “twenty pounds” “ex-gratia” award and the infamous “abandoned properties” saga.

Ndigbo have moved on with their lives working on the premise that they have received all the accommodation that existing structures in post-civil war Nigeria would yield to them. They have worked, scratched and clawed their way back into the Nigerian society and economy to the chagrin of all who did not wish them well. Meanwhile, the country drifted from one crisis to another, from one “transition” to another, what Achebe called “Painful Transitions” (p.243), and has not been able to achieve sustained economic growth and development.

Forty years after the end of the Nigeria-Biafra war, the country still struggles along, unable to develop into a well-rounded nation-state that operates a modern economy, and still unable to cater for the basic needs of its over one hundred and fifty million citizens, despite the enormous petrodollars it has earned during this period. Most importantly, the country has failed to define and assert fully what citizenship of Nigeria means in practical terms especially as it relates to the protection of lives and property.

The summary of Achebe’s contention in his latest book is simply that Nigeria can do better and must strive to do better. He proffers solutions and even gives his recipe on how Nigeria can address and improve the present unwholesome state of our politics, our economy and our society. This is what is expected of every patriot. I am convinced that after Achebe’s fiercest critics must have seen and read the book “There Was A Country”, they would find that their abuse has been unfounded and misplaced. It is then that they can participate in a frank national conversation on the book and the redefinition of the future of our country can begin.

To trigger the national conversation, Achebe has said that his latest book seeks to raise questions and perhaps also “cause a few headaches”. For sure, the book has certainly caused many headaches but it is important for the headaches and even belly aches to subside so that the nation can address the questions raised by “There Was A Country”. It is possible that as we examine frankly and dispassionately some of the questions raised, the headaches may develop into severe migraine. It does not matter: the questions need to be raised, addressed and redressed, more than forty years after the end of the civil war, so that Nigeria can move forward faster.

For example, we need to examine whether the January 15, 1966, military coup in Nigeria was truly an “Igbo coup” to foster Igbo domination. Why then did the July 1966 “counter coup” or “revenge coup” degenerate into a pogrom to be followed by the exodus of Ndigbo from all parts of Nigeria? Why did the entire Nigerian populace keep quiet as Ndigbo were hunted down all over Nigeria? Why could the non-Igbo not develop a collective voice against the pogrom? Why was it expedient for soldiers to breach the established military code of conduct in executing the civil war? Why was mass-starvation of innocent Biafran children necessary in a civil war? Was it important to reiterate this wicked policy at international conferences? Why the twenty-pound “ex-gratia” award (irrespective of the amount proven in an account) to further deprive an already devastated people coming out of war from a means of starting all over again? Why were there “abandoned properties” in a country that had become one again? Why the continued marginalisation of Ndigbo as exemplified by its five-states structure compared to the other zones, which have six and seven states? Why can Nigeria not develop to a modern country like the Asian tigers? These are some of the questions arising from There Was A Country that I shall give my views on in an attempt to kick-start a “conversation”.

Continued from yesterday.

WITH regard to the January 15, 1966 coup, being branded an “Igbo coup”, Ndigbo do not believe that it was, given (among other considerations) that Zik was president (albeit ceremonial) and Ironsi was the head of the Army. Ndigbo were not marginalised. So what was an “Igbo-coup” in 1966 supposed to achieve for Ndigbo? Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani was convinced in his autobiography (p.369) that it was not an “Igbo coup”, “even if most of the officers were Igbo and the executors had been misled”. The Special Branch Report on the events of January 15, 1966; Brigadier Hilary Njoku’s blow-by-blow account of how the coup was foiled (“Tragedy Without Heroes”); Peter Enahoro’s 743 page bombshell of a book titled: Then Spoke The Thunder; the published accounts of planners and executors of the coup namely Major Adegboyega (“Why We Struck”), Colonel Gbulie (“Nigeria’s Five Majors”); and now the unpublished manuscript of Major Emmanuel Ifeajuna (revealed in some detail by Odia Ofeimun) have raised very serious doubts reading the branding of the January 15 Coup as an “Igbo coup” for the domination of Nigeria. The facts simply do not add up. I shall stop at this point until the national conversation becomes much more rigorous especially in the scrutiny of the “Ifeajuna Manuscript” (because known facts of the January 15, 1966, suggest that Major Ifeajuna not Major Nzeogwu was the brain behind the coup). For example, the Special Branch Report is explicit that planning of the coup began in August 1965 but Major Nzeogwu joined only in October 1965.

We in the East have been vaguely aware of the “Ifeajuna Manuscript” but did not know that Chief Obafemi Awolowo knew of it and had obtained the actual manuscript (whose major revelation was that the coup-makers intended to make Chief Awolowo Prime Minister) as far back as 1967, as Odia has revealed. Achebe reveals in the latest book that he had read the “Ifeajuna manuscript” having received it from Christopher Okigbo. If only he and Citadel Press had published it!

With this background on the January 15, 1966 coup, why then did the counter-coup, the revenge-coup of July 1966 not stop at “revenge” killings of officers and soldiers of Igbo origin? Achebe had written earlier in one of his published essays and in his latest book that if the “revenge-coup” had stopped with the killing of soldiers and officers, it would have been seen and regarded by Ndigbo as a “horrendous tit-for-tat”, and the exodus of Ndigbo from Nigeria, secession and war would never have taken place. I agree with him. So why then were ordinary civilians killed? Why and how did northern civilians get involved with soldiers in executing the pogrom? Why did the pogrom continue even after the May 29, 1966, broadcast by the military governor of the North; Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu’s appeal for calm to Easterners in the North on May 30, 1966; and the statement issued by the Supreme Military Council on June 8, 1966? Why did Ndigbo have to flee from Lagos and Ibadan? (I fled the University of Ibadan where I was a scholarship student, our Igbo lecturers, professors and Vice-Chancellor, Prof. K. O. Dike, also fled.). How did matters degenerate to this stage as the Federal Government became impotent to protect Ndigbo as citizens of Nigeria? Why did non-Igbos except for very few (like Wole Soyinka, Tai Solarin notably) lose their voices as they looked on at the horrors? Ndigbo ascribe to this silence and acquiescence of non-Igbos that they (non-Igbos) believed that the pogrom served us Ndigbo right. It was a very bad feeling at the time. This bad feeling needs now to be expurgated. But before then, the feeling like expired breath needs to be exhaled.

Ndigbo in 1967 expected Chief Awolowo to speak out especially on the non-implementation of the Aburi Agreement, which had become the “sticking point” on which secession was declared (“On Aburi We Stand”). At the Enugu meeting on Sunday, May 7,  (p.81) Chief Awolowo had said that:

“With regard to Aburi, I was taken into confidence by the military governor of the West, and I can assure you that he was quite as valiant as he could be in seeking to get the decisions taken at Aburi implemented, and during my recent discussions with Gowon, I told him that it was improper, most improper, for any civil servant to sit in judgment over decisions taken by the highest authority in the land”.

He continued: “I have met a lot of people in Western Nigeria; not one of them suggested that the stand you (Ojukwu) took was wrong. On the contrary, they all supported the stand you took (on Aburi)”.

One can, therefore, imagine how horrified Ndigbo and Biafra were when the Biafra Information network reported that apart from Chief Awolowo’s defence of starvation policy, “Awolowo’s attitude towards ceasefire and peace talks proposals were negative throughout. On arrival in London, he said: “The rebels had committed a crime and must be punished”. These statements were quoted verbatim and are reported by Suzane Cronje on page 115-116 in her book: The World and Nigeria, published in 1972. Ndigbo were perplexed by such a drastic change of attitude and since the end of the war, have asked themselves why it was that these things happened.

Ndigbo do not accept that the “Igbo-coup” (spurious as it was) was reason enough to have produced a pogrom of the ferocity of 1966. We believe that the pogrom resulted from deep-seated hatred of Ndigbo. Havard-educated Prof. Amy Chua formerly of Princeton, now of Yale in her 2003 bestseller titled: World on Fire (346 pages) posits that ethnic cleansing assaults and ethnically targeted confiscations in a country are not spontaneous; they are always sponsored and encouraged by governments. In her analysis, such acts are triggered by circumstances such as the January 15, 1966 coup, fueled by hate-filled demagogues, passionately supported by an aroused and angry “indigenous” majority motivated by tremendous feelings of grievance. So it appeared to have been with Ndigbo who had become labelled in a half-insulting and half-admiring manner as “Jews of Nigeria” in the 1960s. Prof. Chua without being specific to the Igbo (who she discussed severally in her book) lists behaviour, which “indigenous majorities” find objectionable as “acting insularly”, indulging in “conspicuous consumption” and the “flaunting of their ethnic pride”.

Achebe in his latest book has been more specific on the tendencies that Ndigbo must put in check as they interact with the others. Ndigbo have listened to Achebe’s admonitions and advice and are using their tongues to count their teeth, but are insisting that the other micro nations in Nigeria should do likewise, because these other ethnic nationalities also have their own faults. It is when the various ethnic nationalities treat each one another with reciprocal understanding and tolerance that a national character will begin to emerge and the nation will face the 21st Century world with hope and optimism.

As we embark on this new journey, Achebe insists that there are no-go areas like pogrom, mass-killings and ethnic-motivated violence. In his lecture: Africa Is People in Paris 1998 he said, “Our humanity is contingent on the humanity of our fellows. No person or group can be human alone. We rise above the animal together or not at all. If we learned that lesson even this late in the day, we would have taken a truly millennial step forward”. I hope that Achebe’s traducers are listening. We all can begin now to build the new Nigeria of our dreams; a Nigeria that caters for the basic needs of its citizens; a Nigeria that is a pride to Africa and Black peoples of the world, if we mean to do so: This is what Achebe’s book exhorts us to do and I suspect this is why he paid a tribute to Madiba, Nelson Mandela at the end of the book.

Achebe has not changed one bit. In the Trouble With Nigeria published in 1983 (almost 30 years ago), he had said:

“I believe that Nigeria is a nation favoured by Providence. I believe that there are individuals, as well as nations who on account of peculiar gifts and circumstances are commandeered by history to facilitate mankind’s advancement. Nigeria is such a nation. The vast human and material wealth with which she is endowed bestows on her a role in Africa and the world, which no one else can assume or fulfill. The fear that should rightly haunt our leaders (but does not) is that they may have betrayed irretrievably Nigeria’s high destiny.” He then asks and answers for us a very disturbing question: “We have lost the twentieth Century; are we bent on seeing that our children also lose the twenty-first? God forbid!”

In his keynote address at the “Guardian Silver Jubilee” in Lagos on October 9, 2008 titled: “What Is Nigeria To Me?,” Achebe said:

“Being a Nigerian is abysmally frustrating and unbelievably exciting. Nigeria needs help. Nigerians have their work cut out for them - to coax Nigeria along the path of useful creative development. We are the parents of Nigeria, not vice-versa. A generation will come if we do our work patiently and well - and given luck - a generation that will call Nigeria father or mother. But not yet.”

He concludes his thoughts on There Was A Country: as he writes (p.252) “Nigeria’s story has not been, entirely, one long, unrelieved history of despair. Fifty years after independence, Nigerians have begun to ask themselves the hard questions: How can the state of anarchy be reversed? What are the measures that can be taken to prevent corrupt candidates from recycling themselves into positions of leadership? Young Nigerians have often come to me desperately seeking solutions to several conundrums: How do we begin to solve these problems in Nigeria? Where the structures are present but there is no accountability.”

This is Achebe for us, a world-acclaimed writer deeply concerned about his people and his country, Nigeria; an extra-ordinary person, very clear-headed but reticent. He is not given to frivolities. Consistency is his hallmark. Whenever he speaks, he is blunt, fearless and to the point, but always measures his words. At almost 82 years of age, he has spoken again that it is not too late for us to mend our ways and salvage our destiny. So fellow Nigerians, what are we waiting for? Let the national conversation begin on the way to truly transform Nigeria into a great nation.

• Concluded.

• Nwosu is a former Minister of Health, Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Merit should be encouraged to strive always, and there would be progress.

Using both of them would really promote co-existence and tolerance in Nigerians.

It wouldn't be a bad idea .

Can he really stop the merger?

I doubt he would be able to stop them.

[quote author=haka_nai]^^^^^What of the Apo six killed in 2005.Who was the IG then remind me? Also was it boko-haram inspired then.Okay how about the over 30 youths rounded up in maiduguri from a community and shot dead by the JTF, with disregard for who is who last year under this IGP.What of Katsina-ala during Obj where the army killed 70 men over the killing of 19 soldiers,what of the sacking of communities in camp 5 delta.Now bring your mind back to several other such incidence of missing people detained by the police and never seen again going on quietly.let me tell you is better you channel your effort towards identifying the culprits involved and narrowing down on the incident than play the usual ethnic hate card.Do you think this extra-judicial killings started today or do you think the stations are purely staffed with a particular ethnic stock or exist only in the east.Its nation wide and the police at different levels depending on the trigger happy ones carry out this act.It has nothing to do with tribe but disregards for the judicial system and corruption.You are in custody and little is done to handle the situation am sorry to say this is where it could end.Its a thing about expendable persons to the police.If MASSOB had not spoken this issue would have remained a story.If it was Hausa corpse or some other tribe which also happen in different police stations accross the nation you will hear nothing since they have nobody.

When AMNESTY international was shouting that extra-judicial killings is rampant in Nigeria i bet people like you would be saying since na them no problem.Today its at your door step.So will you drop the ethnic card and join hands with others to say enough and seek the support of others to get justice now or you will isolate yourselves and further allow the culprits escape under the chaos of tribalism?[/quote]^^^^^^


I have never and wouldn't support extra-judicial killing, it doesn't matter who is involved because a threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice all over the world.