₦airaland Forum

No one knows who Biafra National Guard are. I suspect its another ficticious organisation.

Deadlytruth:
I have not changed position. In the prevailing circumstances Ojukwu's insistence on Aburi Accord or nothing else was already a disguised declaration of a separate republic. Awolowo's announcement that 'if the East was allowed to go the West too would go' was an indication that Ojukwu's body language was showing clearly that he, deep down in his mind, was already making concrete preparations to declare Biafra despite insisting on Aburi Accord implementation on the surface. In fact his proposal of regional army at Aburi was not only strange to the whole world as no other country had ever even thought of that, but was also an indirect way of seeking power in advance to declare Biafra should Gowon implement the accord. If not for a secession strategy why would anyone propose a regionalized army? Where has such ever happened? Then what is the meaning of army?
In principle, apart from Ojukwu, the the other three military regional governors did not really represent their regions' civilian populace's interest because they were forced on them by Ironsi. They were not voted into their positions by those civilians. Before they left for Aburi they did not consult the civilian masses in any way, therefore their blind endorsement of Ojukwu's numerous Confederal proposals was not representative of the true wish of the civilian populace of their respective regions. Only Ojukwu could be said to have been properly accepted by his own region's people to represent them because he was chosen for them by a fellow Easterner - Ironsi and was practically consulting the Eastern Regional Assembly for most of the steps he took. If the known leading politicians endorsed and loved by their people in each of each of the regions had been allowed to represent their regions at Aburi, do you think Ojukwu's confederal proposals would have scaled through for Gowon to sign? Recall that in arrival of Ojukwu and Gowon from Aburi, it was these leading politicians from other regions that rejected the Aburi Accord with their peoples support because they were not carried along to Aburi coupled with the fact that the outcome of that accord was far from the wishes of the civilians they represented. Those civilians from the 3 other regions were the majority and not the 4 regional military governors who represented a military establishment that had illegally imposed themselves on them.
Gowon had no choice but to renege on the agreement because on return he got to know that what he mistakenly signed was the interest of a very small minority and not the majority. There is nothing morally wrong about that. It would have even been morally wrong for him to stick to the accord after the overwhelming majority told him on his arrival that it was contrary to their expectation and therefore did not want it implemented.
Ojukwu's stubbornness was ultimately aimed at declaring a separate republic by all means, and a military government at the centre would not allow it since the constitution did not provide for that. In fact the constitution had it that the unity of Nigeria was non-negotiable courtesy of Zik. There was no secession clause in it, and it was endorsed like that by all at the time of formulation, including Igbos
. Even prior to that time the same Ironsi and the same Ojukwu never allowed Isaac Boro's declaration of secession see the light of the day on account of the non negotiability of Nigeria's unity. So Gowon too had to defend the unity of the country by any means possible just as Ironsi and Ojukwu too did to Isaac Boro earlier on. Therefore the majority who wanted federalism did not mind whatever strategy (whether reverting to unitary system) Gowon used to prevent Ojukwu's secession or confederacy which would have endanger their lives. If secession would not endanger peoples lives, then why did Ojukwu and Ironsi not allow Isaac Boro go?
It doesn't matter if we spend 50 years trying to get federalism back.
Who introduced an evil remains the guiltiest irrespective of the extent to which others later copied it. Adam ate only fruit thus committing far lesser sin that most people who came after him. But he is still called the father of sin because he set the precedent in the first instsnce.

Your insinuation that the North and West broke Aburi Accord because they wanted to dominate is a distortion of facts. Recall that the North initially did not want to be part of Nigeria but even described Nigeria as the mistake of 1914 prior to independence. In fact Ahmadu Bello repeatedly asked for the de-amalgamation of Nigeria and same with Tafawa Balewa. It was Zik who kept on courting them into co-forming a country with the South. The same Zik gave them power over the South by taking the NCNC into an alliance with the NPC to throw up Balewa as the first ruler instead of the all-South alliance that would have made a Southerner, specifically Zik himself, the first prime minister to help curtail the born to rule agenda. So whose fault?

Why dont you answer the questions I asked? If you cant answer then say so. You said that Gowon reneged on the agreement he signed in Aburi because the majority did not want confederation but a return to how things were before Ironsi. Who were these majority? Did different ethnic groups come out in protest or something? If you say that politicians and leaders went to Gowon to impress on him the need to return things to pre-Ironsi times then tell us who these leaders and politicians were. Since you say that they were the majority, there must have been many of them. What are their names cut across the 4 Regions of the time? This is your whole arguement about why Gowon was justified in going back on the gentlemans agreement he signed, causing Ojukwu to seceed and the civil war that followed. So tell me this majority that wanted Aburi repudiated and the names of these leaders that wanted it.

Also, this majority that insisted on pre-Ironsi times, what were their reaction when Gowon then decided to do much worse than Ironsi or Ojukwu and introduced unitary rule by dividing the regions into 12 states. If they felt so bad at the confedral agreement reached at Aburi, just how did they feel when Gowon dismantled the 4 Regions for 12 states? Also, if Gowon dismantled the 4 Regions to neutralise Ojukwu, why did he not return the country to pre-Ironsi times in 1970 when he won the war and there was no more Ojukwu?


Answer questions instead to trumpeting the same Yoruba propaganda we have heard for years

schrondinger:
. Is that your own version of the story, where ojukwu came out and said things doesn't work like that.

Not my version, the Aburi agreement Gowon signed can be found on the internet. Ojukwu even insisted that the Aburi meeting be voice recorded.

Look at Ojukwu toasting glasses with Gowon and late General Ankrah, former president Ghana, in Aburi after signing the Aburi agreement. Who would have known the the mischevious Gowon would return to Nigeria to go against the agreement thereby causing an unnecessary war.

Biafran national guard? What is that? Yoruba propaganda

RedboneSmith:
Ifeajuna I know. Who is Ifeanjuwa?

Forget the Yoruba cone gead who started this thead. Thats how you know them. He doesnt even know the difference between Ifeajuna and Ifeajunwa.

Biafra National Guard? Thats how they came up with TRIPOB and REIPOB

Deadlytruth:
Your argument that the continued existence of the regions under Ironsi automatically meant federalism was still in place is very faulty when looked at against the fundamentals of what unitary system and federalism entail. In principle what makes a society federal is not the mere existence of regions subnational divisions but the extent to which those divisions are autonomous and free of the influence of the centre. That Britain has districts and regions like Sheffield, etc does not automatically translate to Britain being a federalism. Actually Britain is a unitary state because even though regions are present in it, the centre has overwhelming control over them. That was similar to what Ironsi did. He left the regions in existence but was actually weakening them and stripping them of their autonomy in favour of the centre, thereby subtly converting Nigeria to a unitary state. The regions that existed under Ironsi were very very weak and almost dead. His centralization of the civil service was an attack on the most fundamental definitive feature of regional autonomy. Regions which have lost control over their civil service sections had lost everything else as the civil service is the pivot and life blood of any administrative entity. The civil service generates the revenue, implements the governments programmes and policies, and practically runs the government. In fact the civil service is the only tool by which any government operates and does its business of governance. So unifying the civil service was tantamount to taking away government from the regions completely. It was like removing the engine of the regional governments and taking those engines to the centre. Then what was left in the regions even though they were still existing merely on paper?
Your claim that Gowon's division of the country into 12 states came before Ojukwu's declaration of Biafra is nonsense. After majority of Nigerians rejected the Aburi Accord, it was practically impossible for Gowon to continue with his already commenced process of returning Nigeia to the pre-Ironsi status quo because Ojukwu had already mounted the campaign of 'On Aburi Accord ALONE we stand' thereby making it clear that he would not under any condition or for any reason accept anything other than confederacy which ironically the majority wanted. His mind was made up so Gowon did not need to waste his time to try to convince him again that majority wanted just a full return to federalism and not confederacy.
If Ojukwu had agreed with the majority that we went back exactly to pre-Ironsi federalism, Gowon would not have split into states the regions which he was already rescuing from Ironsi's damage.
Your argument on seniority in the army is irrelevant because there was chaos at that moment and that the choas was not an about internal affairs of the army but was even more about the affairs if the civilian populace. So army hierarchy considerations had to be jettisoned in the interest of seeking the best solution that resonated with the wish of the civilian majority. Soldiers don't exist for themselves but for civilians.

You keep changing positions each time. Now it is no longer the declaration of Biafra that caused Gowon to reverse on true federalism, it was because Ojukwu insisted on the confederation agreed at Aburi. Laughable. Who told you that the majority wanted a return to pre-Ironsi times? Who where this majority? The North? All 4 Regional Military Governors and Gowon signed a binding agreement in Aburi on behalf of their people. why would Gowon unilalterally renege on what he signed with others? How can a person sign an agreement, have a change of heart and not call all those he signed the agreement with to renegotiate? Your argument is really funny. So Ojukwu was stubborn and adamant on confederation, Gowon wanted a return to pre-Ironsi times, but because Ojukwu was stubborn, Gowon now decided to ignore Ojukwu and the same majority who want true federalism and decided to introduce full blown unitary rule by dividing the regions, and making things much worse than either Ironsi or Ojukwu advocated for? Who are you kidding? So where was this so called majority that wanted true federalism when Gowon was doing this? Where were they when Gowon won the war and there was no more stubborn Ojukwu? Why did the same unitary system continue? So Ironsi started a bad precedence and all of you happily ran with it, even fought a war to keep running with it and kept running with the same precedence in an even worse form for 50 years. Who are you people kidding?

Guy face the truth. Long before the first coup, the North has always wanted economic and political domination of Nigeria. The first coup and counter coup was the perfect excuse to put that agenda in place. Knowing that the Western Region had no fight in them, the only opposition they faced and still face is from the former Eastern Region and part of the former Mid west Region which some people now collectively call SE/SS. So they implemented 'divide and rule' Thats why Aburi agreement was bad fir them, it stopped their plans for domination in its tracks cause Ojukwu thats what they were up to.

Do you know that the Northern officers who conducted the counter coup initially wanted to seceed the North out of Nigeria? But they realised that the North would not be viable without the South and changed tune to what their political fathers wanted which was control of Nigeria. The war was inevitable because the Igbo man was not prepared to accept Northern domination as readily as the Yoruba man was. Our history has taught us all that Nigeria does not work as a nation and we are all better apart than together.

Okoroawusa is irrelevant

Very small price to pay for freedom.

Had Gowon not broken the Aburi agreement he signed with Ojukwu in Ghana, Ojukwu would not have needed to declare Biafra and there would have been no war.

AloyalNigerian:
we can unite. As long as we don't make the same mistakes our grand fathers and fathers made. There is a saying that, "you don't do something the same way and expect different result ". we can find a way to walk this through. I believe we can.

How will we unite? Does the Hausa/Igbo/Yoruba man even like each other? Before you can unite with someone, you have to accept each other. How is that possible? Do you know when Igbos started fighting to be on their own? Since the days of Lord Lugard. How can you be uniting with someone who is telling you that he wants to be on his own? If you keep telling the same person that we should unite, then it is you who is looking for trouble. You can only preach unity to people who have it in their heart to be together. If there are others who dont want it, you stop your preaching and let those people who dont want to go their way.

Deadlytruth:
Decree 34 actually abolished the regions. In fact by that decree Ironsi changed Nigeria's official name from 'Federal Republic of Nigeria' to just 'Republic of Nigeria' meaning that the federating units had ceased to exist. In the broadcast in which he announced that decree he even argued that intense regionalism had failed the country and just had to be replaced with a very strong centrist structure.
Recall that Gowon, in an attempt to placate the North, made his own decree 56 which reversed Ironsi's unification decree. If Ironsi's decree 34 did not abolish the regions and centralize the government, then why did Gowon find it necessary to make his own decree 56?
Your claims on Aburi Accord are quite distorted. The truth is that after Gowon reversed Ironsi's decree and returned Nigeria to the four structure status quo ante amidst other on-going attempts to reverse all other undesirable changes Ironsi made, the continued retaliatory massacre of Igbos by Hausas in the North which had gone full swing prior to that time forced Ojukwu's eyes open to the the futility of the 'One-Nigeria' pursuit which Zik had inspired in him and in all Igbo's all along. The assassination of Ironsi also further demoralized Ojukwu so much that the combined despondency from these two ugly scenarios actuated him into seeking a structure even looser than the status quo ante which Gowon had just started returning Nigeria to by his decree 56 among others. This culminated in the scheduling of the Aburi meeting as demanded by Ojukwu and to which Gowon consented on the assumption that Ojukwu like everyone else wanted a return to the full pre-Ironsi structure. At the meeting however Ojukwu's proposals went beyond the previous federal arrangement to pure confederacy. Out of ignorance of the difference between federalism and Confederacy Gowon agreed to Ojukwu's confederal proposals. But on return to Nigeria, the majority back home were shocked to see that Gowon had ignorantly accepted confederacy as against their expectation of a return squarely to the purely federal structure which Ironsi derailed. This made them advise Gowon to renege. So Gowon's reneging on the Aburi Accord was not his own personal decision but that of the majority of the other Nigerian tribes who expected to see their much cherished federalism restored but were shocked to see Confederacy being offered in the name of Aburi Accord. Of course they had to reject it flat.
Consequently, Ojukwu felt frustrated and declared Biafra. Gowon then had to, as a strategy to frustrate Ojukwu, begin to undo the reversals he had already made to Ironsi's changes. This included a re-centralization of the structure to weaken Ojukwu. Had Ojukwu's proposals at Aburi just stopped at federalism and not icontaminated with elements of confederacy, the accord would not have been rejected on arrival in Nigeria. Had Ojukwu not declared Biafra, Gowon would not have started reversing himself on returning Nigeria to the true federalism we had before the advent of Ironsi.
I agree with you that the prevailing circumstances in the first republic were tending towards anarchy. But we all know that the circumstances were as a result of Tafawa Balewa's abuse of power at the centre. If the centre's abuse of its little powers could caused so much anarchy, then commonsense and logic dictated that whoever came to the rescue with sincere intentions, either through a coup or whichever way else, should have further removed more powers from the centre to forestall the kind of abuse which Balewa perpetrated. But Ironsi came in and ironically began to strengthen the centre in the name of arresting the drift into anarchy. Was it not the powers at the centre that caused the anarchical circumstance in the first instance? This is my issue with Ironsi.
Gowon was too ignorant to have known that a constitution could be freely tampered with by a military officer had Ironsi not set the precedent.

You are running away from the real issues and countering your own arguement. Ironsi did not abolish the 4 Regions. The 4 Regions were still existing the day Ironsi died, so how could he have abolished it? What Ironsi did was to centralise Government, the 4 Regions stayed intact.

Gowon went to Aburi to talk peace with Ojukwu and the 3 other military Governors. They debated for two days and signed an agreement. If Gowon went back home and decided that the Aburi agreement he signed infront of the president of Ghana was not right, he should sought a second meeting to amend it. Lets not forget that this was military rule and in the military, a junior officer does not dictate to his senior. Of the four military Governors of the time, Lt Colonel Ojukwu, Colonel Adebayo, Lt Colonel Ejoor and Lt Colonel Katsina. Adebayo, Ejoor and Ojukwu were all senior to Gowon. Only Katsina was junior to Gowon.

For Gowon to have held a meeting with his seniors, signed the agreement with them and gone back home to sing another tune is in it self a very bad thing.

You said that Gowon reneged on the Aburi agreement because of the wishes of the majority who wanted the pre-Ironsi situation? Then why didnt he do that? Instead, Gowon went ahead to dismember the 4 regions into 12 states. Why did he do this? Ironsi did not cut up the Regions, he onky changed the mechanics of how it was run. Aburi did not cut up the Regions, it only changed the mechanics of how it was run. Only Gowon came and not only changed the mechanics of how the 4 Regions were run but also cut them up into 12 pieces.

For your information, Gowon announced the division of the 4 Regions into 12 states on the 27th of May 1967, as a result, Ojukwu declared Biafra 3 days later on the 30th. So this talk of yours that declaring Biafra caused Gowon to reverse on true federalism is nonsense.

Had Gowon not cut up the 4 Regions, those 4 Regions would still have reverted to pre-Ironsi situation whenever civilian rule returned.

AloyalNigerian:
Nigeria is a country of so many tribes but there are three major tribes, viz.; Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba. These tribes are distributed into the six geopolitical zones. The Yorubas occupy the south-west zone, the south-east and south-south zones is home to mainly the Igbos while the North-central, north-east and north-west zones are dominated by the Hausas (and Fulanis as well).

No doubt, we co-habit peacefully in some areas while in some places there are crises. Take for example, the ongoing crisis in southern Kaduna perpetrated by the Fulani herdsmen. The just settled crisis too in Ekiti was ignited by this same set of people. Why do we have problems living together? Why is there militancy in the east? Why are there killings every now and then?

Sometimes, these crises are not inter-tribal but intra-tribal (Ife and Modakeke). One need to think what the causes of these crises are? One of which is Supremacy: Some crisis were ignited as a result of both parties trying to show their supremacy over each other. This is a wrong mentality, why should we fight to show supremacy? when you can develop yourselves and no one will need to tell the other that you're supreme. No doubt, actions speak louder and more effectively than words.

Dissatisfaction is also one of the reasons for some of these crises.The president and some top politicians have reiterated the fact that Nigeria's unity is not negotiable. Our main source of income is situated in the east. But they are dissatisfied with how the government is treating them because they are the minority but feeds the majority. They want preferential treatment which I think isn't too much, but what is absurd to me is the way this mesage is being passed to the government. Will carrying arms solve this? Carrying arms has disqualified this agitation from being called a movement, hence it's being called militancy.

I am not trying to place blame on anybody but I think the politicians should stop planting the seed of discord in their bid to garner the support of their kinsmen. I think we should vote based on the capabilities of the candidates and not their tribes. We need one another, the east can not succeed without the north and west, vice versa.

Let's embrace peace and treat one another with love. Until we do this, we can't really progress.

When will you guys stop this nonsense? "Let us unite", "let us come together and make Nigeria great", "we all need each other"

Guy, your grandfather heard these stories, your father heard the same story and now, it is your turn to hear it. Some years down the road, your kids will be hearing the same thing. If Nigeria has not united after 103 years as a country and 66 years as a nation then you are wasting your time praying for unity. Theres no magic about to happen. Im an Igbo man, over 3 million of my kinsmen were killed in the name of 'one Nigeria'. Anything that can wastes 3 million lives is not what anyone should be uniting with.

H

Igbos and Yorubas to be friends? Not possible.

Deadlytruth:
We are not talking about who planned the coup or who crushed it or who coloured it as a tribal coup.
We are talking of how federalism was dismantled and by who.
That has nothing to do with the coup which was an event of its own.
That Ironsi stopped the coup and then took over power for himself removes the credit from him. The objective of the five majors' coup was for military to take over. So if Ironsi, after stopping the coup, took over as a military man himself then of what use was his stopping the coup? His action yielded the same result as that of the boys whose coup he stopped.
So what was the difference? Truncation of democracy was going to be the result of both.
Moreover, of what benefit was his stopping of the coup after all the targeted people had been killed including innocent civilians and innocent army officer.
The fact that killing of Igbo's continued under Ironsi's regime and that even he himself was later killed means that his taking over power did not really stop the chaos.
Like I already said, it would have been correct to say he stopped the coup if and only if he had sworn in Dipcharima, replaced the slain premiers with their deputies and left the stage as a honourable professional army officer.
Military take over was military take over whether by Ironsi or by the five majors. If I must choose I would have even preferred that Ironsi never stopped the coup because the five majors' government would not have dismantled federalism since Nzeogwu in one of his interviews with journalists before he died described Aguyi Ironsi's unification decree as silly.
However, stories of the details of the coup do not alter the fact that Ironsi and Ojukwu put us in this mess. This is the simple truth Igbo's should accept and stop creating the impression that Northerners are the cause of our woes. It is only when we all mutually admit where our own brothers were wrong that we can succeed in restoring our true federalism. Blaming others and trying to rationalize the ugly quotas our kinsmen contributed to this mess will not engender the trust and cooperation we seek. If each and every Southern tribe is ready to admit where their own kinsmen were wrong in their actions in those trying times. I tell you that we will get Nigeria restructured within 6 months whether the North likes it or not.

You should get some facts straight.

The first coup happend because of the general unrest in the land such as the 1963 census, the badly flawed elections of 1964 and the violence that it caused in the Western Region and other places in 1965. So its not like all was well when Nzeogwu and others struck in January 1966.

Nzeogwus coup was not an Igbo coup, even one of the main coup plotters, Major Ademoyega, said so in his book. Besides, Major Ademoyega, Captain Adeleke and Lt Oyewole were all major participants of the coup who were not Igbos. Even Northern foot soldiers were by far the largest participants of the coup.

Nzeogwus coup was initially popular with Nigerians. There was no way civilians could have carried on in that situation. With much of the military in support of the coup and Nzeogwu a national hero, there was no way civilians could have continued and Ironsi could not have handed over to civilians within 6 months.

Decree 34 promulgated by Ironsi was done with the full acceptance of the supreme military council and not something Ironsi alone made. Also, decree 34 did not abolish the regions. All it did was centralise Government which is how all military Governments run. The Regions still had a high degree of autonomy while Ironsi was there. Had Gowon and his Northern cohorts not abolished reagions and created states, Nigeria would have returned to the way things were run whenever civilians returned.

If Ironsi can be blamed for making a mistake with decree 34, what happend in Aburi was daylight robbery. When a loose federation had already been negotiated, Gowon went back on the agreement and created states which forced Ojukwu to seceed the Eastern Region out of Nigeria. Funnily enough, you will see people criticise Ironsi for decree 34 but hardly see the same people ever criticise Gowon for braking the Aburi agreement, creating states, taking away resource control and creating a worse unitary form of Government than Ironsi ever did.

If the report is true, it all goes to show what everyone already knows. That the Nigerian Army are barbarians.

ProudArewa:
Out of the first 30 officers commissioned in the NA only six were northerners but those useless Igbo officers staged a coup and killed four out of the six officers leaving behind Gowon and Akahan......

Wrong. Nothing happend to Usman Katsina. Also, non of the people in this picture were involved in the coup.

Ogundipe was a disgrace. He towed the line of cowardice which so many of his highly placed fellow Yorubas such as Colonel Adebayo, Awolowo and Obasunjo would also tow.

"Dont do anything to make our masters the North slaughter us"

ceejay4real:
God bless you my brother! But the big questions I want to ask every true and patriotic Nigerian are; must Nigeria divide into so many various countries? Why can't we simply divide into two as we were prior to the January 1st, 1914 Amalgamation by Lord Lugard? Why is it so sooo difficult for the Southern tribes to demand for a Southern Nigeria Republic? I think it would make more sense to the General Assembly of the United Nations if such a demand is presented to it. All this Biafra, Niger Delta, Oduduwa Republics to me is bullshit. Let's just split Nigeria into two with Lagos as our capital in the South! PERIOD!

It cant work. Igbos and Yorubas cant stand each other

TonyeBarcanista:
my brother, this issue is simple and clear.

Some of you want Biafra, but our people want restructuring. Why try to lump us into Biafra without our express will? is that cool? THINK BRO.

The will of the people should be supreme and not sentiment of another group!

As for the north resisting restructuring, how long can they resist? Has our people really pushed it? Think.bro...

You are not answering my question. My question is, in the event that Nigeria never restructures, what is the alternative? Do you accept the status quo?

People have been talking about restructuring since Aburi in 1967, guess what? It has come to nothing. The restructuring you are talking cannot be achieved without constitutional change. To change the constitution, you need a a 2 thirds majority vote in the national assembly. With the North controling nearly 63% of the national assembly vote as opposed to just 37% for the south, how will restructuring ever happen? Or you believe the North will one allow anyone to control their resources, particulary Oil & Gas. This is not about Biafra, this is about the reality on the ground.

TonyeBarcanista:
The message here is demand for restructuring, that is a renegotiated country.

Governor Wike was speaking within the context of Biafra, and the fact is that the people of Ijaw nation and the entire Niger Delta are not seeking for a splinter country nor do they have any business with iPod confusionist group.


Nigeria must be restructured to make any progress

And the question the likes of you never like to answer is, what if Nigeria never restructures? What then is the alternative? You throw your hands in surrender and shout 'one Nigeria'?.

How anyone thinks the North will ever agree to restructuring is beyond me. Restructuring is no longer possible in Nigeria, the North will not entertain the idea. So anyone who wants restructuring had better start considering alternatives.

Also, there is no union in the world that is beyond negotiation

MalcoImX:
O r rather, they should bring YOUR corruption back.
Obo, Buhari is even taking it step by step with corruption. If it's to be tackled headlong, the cry will be more than this.

Guy dont fool your self. There is still massive corruption happening as we speak. Governors, Senators, Local Govt Chairmen, Ministers and so on are still stealing the natiom blind. All Buhari is doing is just a comic show. While it is true that corruption should be destroyed, it dies not mean that Buhari has destroy the Nigerian economy, make everyones life harder, and we turn around and congratulate him for fighting corruption. So Buhari cannot fight corruption and grow the Nigerian economy? If he cant do both then he shouldnt be there.

I like the part where the CBS newscasters said

The British carved out the richest area in Africa, lumped 250 tribes together and arbitrarily called them Nigerians

The raw truth. I will never understand how one ethnic group can insist that they must be in one country with another simply because Lord Lugard said we all "Nigerians"

MalcoImX:
There's no stolen or easy money that most lazy ones are used to.

Maybe true but what is the point of it all if you and I dying of hunger under Buhari?

MalcoImX:
Kai, see lying. A sleeping Buhari is better than ten walking GEJ.

Really? Then why are Nigerians suffering more under Buhari than they did under GEJ?

ShoProperties:
.Most Igbos don't like Buhari because Goodluck Jonathan’s message to them was well digested but wasn’t enough to re-elect him. If Jonathan is any hero it will be a beer and also After looking at things from a wider perspective, I believe one of the factors is that Igbos erroneously latches on to the lie that Goodluck Jonathan is an Igbo man, with his adoption of Igbo names: Ebele and Azikiwe. He played Igbos so hard that many may not realise this in their lifetime… Another factor, which I'm still trying to believe is not true, is the Bafarawa factor… Recall that Bafarawa admitted collecting 4.6 billion Naira for 'spiritual' purposes, which I suspect was used to bewitched Igbos to love Jonathan no matter what… Sadly for them, it started working after the elections, when it was not really needed anymore…

This has got nothing to do with GEJ. The coming of Buhari has shown everyone that Igbos were right to have backed GEJ. Everything has crumbled since Buhari came. GEJ was not perfect, he never claimed to be. But one thing is sure, GEJ was a much better president than Buhari can ever be