posted
Very soon the elections would be upon us. Have you ever wondered what the end game would be like? Many people feel that the election results are already known, no not just the winners , but the actual votes each participant is going to poll. I am of the opinion that it would be one of the following scenarios.
1) Obusonjo rigs the election , He then goes out to implement the yoruba agenda, which will include installing yorubas in strategic military positions. The North would not like this and he would lose his life. At least he would get the respect of the yoruba man, and may even get to be revered like awolowo.
2) He loses the election and hands over to the Northerner (Buhari) grateful that he leaves the presidency alive. Being the coward that he has always been, especially when dealing with the Hausa/Fulani, this may be a very probable turn of event.
3) There is no clear winner at the first ballot and the 2 parties with most votes contest the runoff. Here there would be deals to be made and the party that offers more towards the Igbo interest would win.
4) He loses the election, rather than hand over power; he calls a Sovereign National conference and presides over the disintegration of the country or at least a confederation with full resource control. In this one move he would be able to satisfy his people while at the same time satisfying the Niger delta and the Igbos. The winners if he presides over the disintegration of the country would be the yorubas in the short term but in the long term the Igbos would benefit also.
We should be prepared for all the scenarios to be able to put protect our interest whatever the outcome is. The first phase of the preparation should be directed towards the election/selection of people who would represent us. They should not be people who have betrayed our trust in the past, but people who we know would not abandon our group interest for theirs. This is why it is imperative that we should support APGA as they are the only party at the moment that is able to articulate the Igbo interest.
No.3 is the most likely. I have said earlier that without Igbo vote Aremu cannot emerge a clear winner as the North will vote Buhari. However it is not clear how the South South will vote but if Ndigbo back APGA they can force a run off then they can negotiate from a position of strength. It would be stupid for any Igbo to vote Aremu and also foolish to vote Buhari just because of Okadigbo. You are right, we must support Ikemba to protect Igbo interest.
Posts: 1532 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
What is most puzzling is the failure of the Ohaneze group to see the dangers ahead. Could you believe that the group was infiltrated by IBB and his men? I have just confirmed that at last Friday's meeting to pick the consensus candidate, some of the Ohaneze chieftain wanted to ram IBB down our throat by way of Ike Nwachukwu, until they received warnings of serious consequences from the BLM people. Now, Ohaneze has adjourned the meeting without selecting a consensus candidate. What a group of traitors!!! At least they now realize that there are consequences for the type of Ghana-Must-Go politics they used play.
Posts: 127 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Leo, I have come to the conclussion that short of a complete overhaul of Ohaneze, they would continue to sell us short. Have you ever wondered what qualifies an individual to be in Ohaneze?. A lot of them are businessmen and contractors who in the present climate owe their daily bread to Government patronage. Do you expect these individuals to protect our interest?. How do you reconcile the fact that Iwuanyanwu was a member of Ohaneze while at the same time working for Obusonjo against Igbos'. Anyway, in Igboland we do not follow 'leaders' blindly. Ohaneze in 1999 asked the people to vote Falae but the voted for the Obusonjo.
Posts: 585 | From: London. | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
I couldnt help but add one more scenario which is more pessimistic though, and here it goes:
5) Obusonjo rigs the election but loses anyway To a vastly superior british Hausa-fulani rigging, and hands over to the Northerner (Buhari) He immediately informs his "Western Advisers" to be on the lookout to protect him in case anything happens. he then hands over peacefully but not before discussing with Buhari in a closed session and in Hausa how to continue a vehemently anti-Igbo stance through his policies in keeping with the instructions recieved from the British on keeping the Igbo subdued after the war.
He further denies encouraging the dissent of middle-belters and apologises for the appearance to have done so. He pleads with Buhari not to disband OPC, or arrest and execute Ganiyu Adams and Frederick fasheun immediately so as not to appear to have used and dumped them, he updates Buhari on how to infiltrate and destabilize MASSOB, and BAKASSI, EGBESU and MOSOP among others, he tells him to please leave Dupe Aelaja out of it in apology for all the firings of Hausa millitary officers during tenure, and offers that Danjuma (an Hausa-fulani inclining middlebelter) did it together with Mohammed Gusau a Fulani.
He offers that Buhari is free to fire as many Yoruba and Southern officers as possible but don't replace them with any Igbo officers except tokens or unless such is a mixed Hausa Igbo. He then reminds Buhari that they fought together to keep "Biafranigeria one" and that in order to enjoy the "DIFIDENTS OF DEMOCRAYCY" Biafranigeria must be seen to be one. To this effect any gains recognized to be made by Ojukwu and APGA during the election must be Eroded through Igbo Disunity. He further offers hints on available Igbo sellouts to be used at will to achieve this end.
Lastly, he offers his services as a "Western Adviser" consultant and bows out, grateful that he leaves the presidency alive. Being the coward that he has always been, especially when dealing with the Hausa/Fulani,
When they emmerge from their closed session meeting, Okadigbo is there to recieve them. With broad smiles, amidst loquacious and magnanimous sounding pleasantries.
posted
Brother Wacko Good analysis, my preference would be option 4, realistically I agree with Chiboy Option 3 is more realistic.
___________________ Biafra: save my bullets when I die, Oh Biafra, Allelua if I surrender and that will be forever. Posts: 272 | From: Birmingham AL | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I have a problem with option three as agreed by many that Igbos need to cut a deal in the event there is a runoff in an election I have predicted with uncertainties. We need no deal with any political group or tribal line for the interest of a nation that has never been one since day one.
What Igbos need to do is start building their own bridges and forget anything about national interest. That phenomenon does not exist.
I am appalled when in a sudden 180-degrees turn, we are talking about a Nigeria of Igbo presidency. Do we have standards, at all?
Posts: 479 | From: The Universe | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Brother Ojoto Option three is probably the most likely scenario, Obasanjo will not be able to succeed in rigging his way in all the 6 geo-political zones. What that means is that there will be a willing and dealing going on after the election. Lets keep our fingers cross is going to be a bumpy ride.
quote:Originally posted by Ojoto: What Igbos need to do is start building their own bridges and forget anything about national interest. That phenomenon does not exist.
I am appalled when in a sudden 180-degrees turn, we are talking about a Nigeria of Igbo presidency. Do we have standards, at all?
Brother Ojoto,
I dont see any 180-degrees turn in the projections being made here nor in the current efforts or utterances being made recently in other threads with reference to politics in Biafranigeria as currently unfolding. Nor do I see where the term National Interests was used, in fact anywhere the word “Interest” has been used it has been with regard to “Igbo Interest.
The way I see it, we are not living in a vacuum. Anyone who views themselves as a Radical or Activist or Revolutionary, even common Coupists still have to operate within a context which they intend to change, and so will always use that context as a reference point for better or for worse.
Consider George Washington, Q. Adams, T. Jefferson, A. Hamilton ( and all other heroes of the American revolution) Consider V.I Lenin, L. Trotsky (and all other actors of the Bolshevik revolution) M. Ghandi, Mao tse tung, Ho-Chi-Minh, Martin Luther king and many others.
These people did not just emmerge from a vacuum to declare and implement their vision on the same day and out of their given context. All of them without exception in one practical way or another took invenory of the surrounding socio-political landscape and took time to lay a foundation first, enhance their chances by altering whatever aspects of the prevailing cultures they identified as strategic, and took advantage of existing mechanisms in a way that would work in their Sort range, medium range, and long range favor, all in an understood desire to control the metamorphosis that would unveil their revolution.
I understand the deliberations on this thread to be centered around which of the possible outcomes listed above would be optimal in enhancing the opportunities necessary in our momentum building quest to successfully “bell the cat” as it were.
___________________ YA CAIN'T KEEP A GOOD MAN DOWN :) Posts: 1182 | From: TEXAS | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Talking about end game, can Biafra/Igbo win this fight for self-determination?
The world is under the thumb of the West, the same people that imposed colonialism on the entire world. During that period the method was relatively bloodless; there was no need for a drawn out military campaign to take over indigenous resources - much of the work was simply done by co-opting the complicity of the African ruling elite by simply offering a bottle of liquor and tobacco. Today, colonialism by non-violent diplomacy would not work because nations have advanced beyond easy-taking. The new method is to impose the "new world order" by violence and fear - fear of the well armed enforcer. Leaders of nations, working against overwhelming public opinion in their countries (so much for democracy), have lined up behind the big gun. This is more so in BiafraNigeria. Here, we have the timid Yoruba elite and the nothing-to-loose Hausa islamists - the two main disasters of the so-called nigeria nation - running the political affairs of NdiIgbo/Biafra. These people have already shown during the war and after that they have no problems selling out the right to their country to the outsider in return for crumbs and guarantees for a token control of BiafraNigerian political leadership. Can Biafra/Igbo compete? It should be realized that we are operating here in the domain of Olusegun Obasajo, who has shown no anguish about turning over nigeria mililtary to the foreign power, a man who has already sold out the oil fields and mineral rights of BiafraNigeria to protect his personal position and that of his tribe. My question is do the leaders of Biafra/NdiIgbo have an end game to upstage the Yoruba/Hausa on this diplomatic offensive, which really implies handing over the resources of BiafraNigeria to the West in return for support for Biafra. Obviously, this is the only way to compete with the "shophisticated" wisdom of the Yoruba intellectual elite and the diplomacy that helped to bring in the Russian migs, Egyptian pilots and British oil-for-arms military to defeat the first Biafran attempts.
[ February 25, 2003, 04:53 AM: Message edited by: Amadi O. ]
___________________ achieve Biafra and show the difference Posts: 642 | From: Los Angeles, CA | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
First of all, in my experience, I do not recollect Igbos or any "Revolutionary" movement that believes in equality or the right to self determination as pacifists, or do I recollect a struggle based on the status quo met with betraying the fundamentals outlined to reach the desired goals.
When one is engaged in a struggle like the Biafran agitation for independence which has faced many obstacles in the past due to its complex nature in conjunction with the pacifists who have problems deciding what they want and standing firmly by it, and when it is portrayed the struggle lacks substance to effect the causes it stood for, then it would be taken that the project in that regard is destroyed left with no other option than to accept defeat and join the perpetrators to seek resolve for a common goal, on their own terms. That is totally a different thing altogether.
But when you have insisted in maintaining the status quo without compromise--which is becoming the case--to achieve the desired goals, it would look folly and of total irrelevance after "crying the blues" to join your enemy who never would give you a place to make your point.
The Eritreans, when they made up their mind and realized a one united Ethiopia was not workable in their own interest, they stood by what they believed in even at the point of death. So, too, was the case of East Timor. They did not give up.
With the present situation in Biafranigeria political dispensation, it is obvious we are left with one of two choices, that is, insist on the Biafra struggle or join a one united Nigeria, meaningt we've lost it all, and unfortunately we can't go back to restart what has been killed by joining the "progressives" of one country.
The dream is dead indeed, and with the elections fast approaching as we join the bandwagon, I have no idea how the whole thing can be kept alive the way we are going.
quote:Anyone who views themselves as a Radical or Activist or Revolutionary, even common coupists still have to operate within a context which they intend to change, and so will always use that context as a reference point for better or for worse--------Ukaobasi
I'm not quite sure of what you were arriving at here. But I will pose a puzzle, which is, as Igbos head to the polls come the April election to elect a president of Igbo extraction in order to address the issues of misrule, "marginalization," equality and confederacy which supposedly would produce a nascent democracy based on upholding and respecting the rule of law, are we then in consensus with a one Nigeria or would that be a strategem to carry out a "Revolution" as you rightly inferred?
quote:Consider George Washington, Q. Adams, T. Jefferson, A. Hamilton...Consider V.I. Lenin, L. Trotsy...and M. Gandhi, Mao tse tung, Ho-Chi-Mingh, Martin Luther King and many others...----Ukaobasi
Again, I'm not sure if your analogy here is appropriate considering what the men you mentioned stood for. The Founding Fathers or The Sons of Liberty as they were later known did not ask to be part of a colonial regime, which is why they carried out successfully a revolution that changed the modern world. For instance, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton could have lobbied the imperialist for a knighthood and say "to hell" with the modern world. They believed "all men were created equal" meaning there shouldn't be any title of nobility in humankind. All in all, they (Ghandi, King, Lenin, Trotsky and the Founding Fathers) had principles and that did it.
Posts: 479 | From: The Universe | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
First of all, in my experience, I do not recollect Igbos or any "Revolutionary" movement that believes in equality or the right to self determination as pacifists, or do I recollect a struggle based on the status quo met with betraying the fundamentals outlined to reach the desired goals.
Brodam Ojoto,
Biko abughim Nze. Bro, UKAOBASI or just UKAOBASI will do.
I have never espoused pacifism, and I dont recall that having been espoused at BNW. I still am unaware of how fundamentals to reach desired goals have been betrayed by the discussions on this thread.
quote:When one is engaged in a struggle like the Biafran agitation for independence which has faced many obstacles in the past due to its complex nature in conjunction with the pacifists who have problems deciding what they want and standing firmly by it, and when it is portrayed the struggle lacks substance to effect the causes it stood for, then it would be taken that the project in that regard is destroyed left with no other option than to accept defeat and join the perpetrators to seek resolve for a common goal, on their own terms. That is totally a different thing altogether.
Should we use the term Revolution or “Biafran agitation for independence”? perhaps this is where personal perceptions come in.
Here’s our dilema as I see it:
1.) We are spatially trapped in an artificial geographic expression called “Nigeria” through no making of ours. The intent in creation of which was to subjugate at all cost and exploit into perpetuity. 2.) As our generation has come of age, we have Identified through historical reference that the stranglehold established by the colonist before our time has remained unyielding in its crushing and ever present effects even in our most basic current day to day life. 3.) We have all identified and understand who the colonist was, and clearly understand that their method of domination has so refined and metamorphosed as to remain with us in the form of mighty conglomerates who facilitate through global finance the overbearing dominance of powerblocs through whom they manipulate to guarantee and sustain their access to endless wealth. 4.) We have also identified through a very costly “JUST WAR” (such as gallantly fought by Biafra) that as a result of their Phobias, our adversaries are hellbent for their various reasons to prevent us from anything they remotely consider to be our progress.
For the Colonist our progress from their perception is our independence which they see as detrimental to their ability to continue their sophisticated charade of having granted political or economic independence to Black Africa. A charade which has enabled the unquestioned exploitation of our resources with a perpetual and unrepentant racist dominance.
For “Nigeria” (our fellow victim) our progress is our autonomy and cohesiveness which they loathe and fear in equal proportion and which they perceive that once gained by us in any form or fashion, we would blaze ahead in progress leaving them behind in a trail of dust and would not be humble enough not to rub their faces in it. As a result of the above reasons both adversaries in their combination have in common a tenacious and rabid purpose in the perpetual effort to frustrate any step taken by us to seek that Independence or for that matter even settle for autonomy.
In the above analysis therefore isn't it important to know: Are we agitating against colonists? Or their stooge power blocs? My perception is both, with the firm belief that the strategy for fighting each must be different.
Why?
THE POWER BLOC
When we fight against power blocs we tend to forget that they have formidable backing and so we underestimate them. We find ourselves and our respective representatives fighting not just against Hausa, or Yoruba, or other, but against a colonially entrenched policy of divide and rule. Against a collection of interests and their tools; the BBC, VOA, Commonwealth countries, and Northern European Conglomerate and Western powerhouses with their unlimited wealth, reach and influence. As a result we always get ambushed and thoroughly bushwhacked. Even though we pride ourselves in being more than capable of standing our ground with our local adversary, the power blocs. If we must fight them doesnt it behoove us not to do so without some basic background preparation chief of which would be to:
Consolidate unquestionable unity, come to think of it, even if we didn't have a battle on our hands and desired to wield a leverage in the politics of that failed nation our cohesiveness would still be paramount.
Build momentum internally in a surreptitious manner
Identify a framework of cohesive groups capable and dependable to rally the entire populace
Render irrelevant those tools which are used by external adversaries to neutralize and dilute internal focus such as financial wealth and external Godfatherism
Appoint from a Corps of retired executives and proven prominent citizens in combination with respected local chiefs and elders a board whose duty will be to select an array of qualified young men and women known for their integrity and their gifted ability to represent Igbo common good in the political arena
Appoint from a Corps of retired executives, retired technocrats, retired administrators, a retired machinists, etc. a board whose duty will be to select the able-bodied heads and supervisors of public and private organizations especially for a key areas such as banking media houses and other sensitive areas of interest
Appoint a council of elders made up of retired seasoned politicians to advise on issues involving the interest areas of our adversaries, their greatest fears politically, their area of weakness, sources of embarrassment, historical antecedents
Set up a think tank that would coordinate the efforts of Igbo researchers from every university in and outside of Igboland to address the problems of our collective progress and deduce the best solutions achievable with low-tech and low financial expense
Among many others.
Witness the demand for “Sovereign national conference” “Sharia” “True federalism” “Resource control” It should be noted that all advocates of these different faces of “Confederation” will recoil vehemently and invoke their efforts for “One Nigeria” as a way to distance themselves substantially from being seen by their Colonist masters to have finally awoken to their senses into the Biafran position realized by Nd’Igbo long ago.
Why recoil? Because they know that their own demise is possible if like Biafra they appear to be sending signals to the Colonists and their modern day proxies that they want to back out of the arrangement which renders them perpertual stooges and gruntworkers.
THE COLONIST
When we identify the Colonist as a main adversary then we're truly gearing ourselves for a paradigmatic battle which is why the term "Revolution" is more apt. we all know what happened in the past, we all know how the second greatest holocaust of the 20th-century was kept low key in the media and failed to shock the world beyond some humanitarian gestures toward hunger relief, so any juvenile proclamation about "Biafra agitation" will only summon boring sighs from well seasoned conservative heads of department ( you know what type of department) who would be waiting for the appropriate moment to zero in on advertised target and neutralize any momentum with scant notice from the outside world.
Our strategy in dealing with the colonist must be:
Understand the modality for their dealing with their power bloc subordinates
Understand how they prefer to respond to Nd'Igbo.
Understand their interest in the country
Understand their greatest fear of us
Understand the extent of their ruthlessness
Understand how we could bargain with them that is currently lacking
Understand any areas of friction between our local adversaries and the colonists
Identify before what audience they could be greatly embarrassed
Identify where they have been hypocritical to their own principles in dealing with us
Identify any world movements such as Greenpeace, or any Independent and world renowned attorneys who could sue the pants off some of these organizations
Identify Legislators to lobby and cajole
Identify Causes with which to bring attention such as preponderance of cancer rates in gas flaring environs or groundwater pollution in rural areas causing inordinate amounts of infant mortality
Identify sympathetic media organizations worldwide both Conservative and liberal who could support our cause
Form ourselves into formidable voting communities during election time in our various adopted countries and lend our collective weights to the candidates that sympathize, assist, and bring the greatest amount of positive popularity to our cause.
Identify who their greatest competitors are in the geopolitical zone and how to place both in competition for our attention
And much much more.
NECESSARY LESSONS
When we make ourselves open targets through a direct confrontational approach however, The following are strategies, variations of which have been successfully used in the Biafran war and some of which are capable of being used against us during peacetime:
1. Closing of the ranks by our adversaries and a “no holds barred” effort to undermine our every move. Toward this end the resources unleashed to achieve this aim seem limitless. A.) Naval blockades and bombardment by Brit vessels and equipment during war. B.) Air bombardments of civilian centers during war. C.) Total media blockade in the forms of: underreporting, misrepresentation of facts, outright fabrications, and a host of other means intended to exact maximum suppression to underplay violent and bestial pogroms, mass starvation, outright inhumanity against an innocent civilian populace during wartime. D.) During peacetime, a conscious effort to neutralize our advocates by making them sound hysterical and ridiculous. 2. Instigation of total disunity and paranoia through psychological warfare to weaken the resolve of key stalwarts in order to isolate them for focused assault 3. Ceding of entire parcels of land as well as mineral rights to achieve short term aims. 4. Political executions under trumped up charges during peacetime or the permision of outright lawlessness in specific areas as a cover for calculated assasination crimes. 5. Outright bribery of local paramount chiefs or the outright funding of unscrupulous title buyers installed to generate “grassroots support” and destabilize local areas from which stalwarts may hail. 6. Among many other strategies.
SUMMARY
My position has always been that those who colonize us or attempt to impede our progress do so because we allow them to. As a matter of strategy of approach, I have always been of the opinion that in the quest to realistically achieve our goal, there is no substitute for a-priori Igbo unity as a sequential and structural objective toward the greater long term goal. Failing this, an honest look through a visit home will reveal that the man/woman on the ground in AlaIgbo is too far gone in the quest for daily survival to be expected to indulge in this luxury of Cyber distance and removal from which we speak of “agitation”.
Those who attempt to supress us pretend to the world that there is a level playing field. Barring any tangible moves on the ground to “agitate” in Nigeria, and while still trapped in that environment reality demands that on the interim, we therefore have to pretend as if we believe that there is a level playing field in order to use their pretence against them to achieve the short term goal of regaining and consolidating our unity. The extra burden that we bear is to understand that we have a sole purpose and long term goal from which we cannot stray.
I have been on record on this board to express the belief that the Presidential elections of that failed entity is akin to the futile quest to captain a sinking ship. an analogy I converted from bro Teddy. I have been on record to express the belief that listing as that ship may be, and desirous as we are for it to sink, we must salvage from it that which pertains to us because we still have real people, relatives and family living there whose daily existence and reality, are our great concern, and whose very proximity lend them as more practical tools to channel this long term Revolution and yes I term it Revolution because of its longer term paradigmatic implications for the Black race as opposed to calling it an “agitation” (a term implying that we are stirring up what was otherwise peaceful)
The underlying premise by many on this board is that the comments we make herein in and of themselves constitute “our struggle”, a declaration against Nigeria based on our conscientious rejection of all that it stands for. Many though, have since taken up responsibilities through various channels to actualize their portion of what they believe we are all fighting for, but insofar as cohesive and directed action, my belief as I hereby express it is that Ojukwu/APGA entry into the political framework is an opportunity for Nd’Igbo to begin the internal cleansing and unifying which will enable us to consolidate forces and establish a monolithic and well leveraged voice. As such I could careless for the Presidency of Nigeria. What I care for is a voice in Nigeria that can articulate Igbo collective vision and summon the dynamic will and participation of the people to achieve it with accountability. If Ojukwu is then voted in through good effort and sheer luck, I have no cause but to believe the Blackman will be the better for it any which way including Biafrans longterm.
If we can get that ball rolling in order to face the powerblocs with leverage, and then in tandem do our own hard work out here in the Diaspora to face the colonist with tools of accountability and publicity, then we would truly stand a chance of success.
I like to believe our struggle is a much more profound and methodical endeavor, a struggle for true liberation and the type of independence political/economic that black Africa never received from the colonial masters.
I like to believe that our struggle is capable of engendering passions with a flair that makes every empathizer desirous to place their palm across the chest in patriotic tribute to the Biafran flag and anthem instead of inspiring only the unedifying chorus of disorganized diehard "agitators".
quote:But when you have insisted in maintaining the status quo without compromise--which is becoming the case--to achieve the desired goals, it would look folly and of total irrelevance after "crying the blues" to join your enemy who never would give you a place to make your point.
The Eritreans, when they made up their mind and realized a one united Ethiopia was not workable in their own interest, they stood by what they believed in even at the point of death. So, too, was the case of East Timor. They did not give up.
With the present situation in Biafranigeria political dispensation, it is obvious we are left with one of two choices, that is, insist on the Biafra struggle or join a one united Nigeria, meaningt we've lost it all, and unfortunately we can't go back to restart what has been killed by joining the "progressives" of one country.
The dream is dead indeed, and with the elections fast approaching as we join the bandwagon, I have no idea how the whole thing can be kept alive the way we are going.
Please bear in mind bro Ojoto, No enemy is being joined I still dont see how that is inferred from the contents of this thread
Furthermore it is good to derive from the Eritrean struggle and the East Timorese struggle an inspiration for tenacity of purpose. However none of these struggles which lasted decades could have done so without cohesiveness in the face of brutalization, without Planning and without an organized strategy on various layers. Eritrea and Ethiopia were never colonized in Africa and when the Italians tried, they were roundly defeated as the british had ealier been under the Mahdi’s army.
The East Timorese were independent after the departure of the Dutch until the Indonesian army attacked and colonized. Again it is important to know these and to see where the careful Brit plan affected “Nigeria” differently of which the Biafrans have been the only one to take a principled stand with their blood.
quote:I'm not quite sure of what you were arriving at here. But I will pose a puzzle, which is, as Igbos head to the polls come the April election to elect a president of Igbo extraction in order to address the issues of misrule, "marginalization," equality and confederacy which supposedly would produce a nascent democracy based on upholding and respecting the rule of law, are we then in consensus with a one Nigeria or would that be a strategem to carry out a "Revolution" as you rightly inferred?
I see no puzzle here. The premise of the question seems to be: That by not participating in the elections as it would impact the Eastern states and by not rallying around a candidate we can trust, that our relatives on the ground would be protected from the types of 419ers now ruling AlaIgbo whom the Hausa/Yoruba foisted to disunite, Balkanise and frustrate us? That by participating to take matters into our own hands as a sequential interim step that we have thereby abandoned what we hold dear?
I dont see the puzzle.
quote:Again, I'm not sure if your analogy here is appropriate considering what the men you mentioned stood for. The Founding Fathers or The Sons of Liberty as they were later known did not ask to be part of a colonial regime, which is why they carried out successfully a revolution that changed the modern world. For instance, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton could have lobbied the imperialist for a knighthood and say "to hell" with the modern world. They believed "all men were created equal" meaning there shouldn't be any title of nobility in humankind. All in all, they (Ghandi, King, Lenin, Trotsky and the Founding Fathers) had principles and that did it.
As above, bro Ojoto, your premise seems to be that anything is being given up. How would I begin to communicate to you then? By shouting ashebay hay!!! ashebay hay!!! ? I gave the analogy that these great American founding fathers did not just get up and pronounce themselves targets. They organized themselves, unfolded their plans, mapped out their strategies and went into action all at their appointed time. Until the moment they identified themselves all that was known by the Torries were little pockets of seeming lawllessness like the Boston tea party. Until such time as they acted no one really knew them as anything but colonials
Again we must consider here that Britain was accross the Atlantic and most of the founding Fathers were born and bred local men and boys who knew the local terrain better than the Torries. Biafra has already fought a war. Must the strategy remain the same?
You seem to be saying here that merely making projections on this thread amounts to lobbying Obasanjo for Knighthood (figuratively speaking) You have even accused of abandoning principles in a “180 degree turnaround” all from the discussions above?
Isnt that a serious stretch?.
___________________ YA CAIN'T KEEP A GOOD MAN DOWN :) Posts: 1182 | From: TEXAS | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Wacko: Great analysis! Good that most Igbos on board are seeing the vanity in the extremism some want to impose on us.
From the REALITY on the ground in Alaigbo the word on most peoples lips after Ekwueme was rigged out is what you just said in your third option.
Quote: -------------------------------------------------- They organized themselves, unfolded their plans, mapped out their strategies and went into action all at their appointed time.--Ukaobasi. --------------------------------------------------
Ukaobasi: Good that the so-called hardliners both here and at home have been sidelined. Even Ojukwu cannot be so stupid to advice Igbos to take up arms in the Nigeria of today which as you rightly observed is not only being ruled by the Yorubas, Hausa, Fulanis, etc., rather, is also ruled from WITHOUT by the Western powers as well. So anyone who really want to exctract the Igbos from present Nigeria should be ready to use LETHAL FORCE against not only the powers that be in Nigeria but also against their more powerful backers in the West
The question begging for answers is how many of the "hardliners" some of whom have already sold their bith-right by taking up the passport of the very countries they should be fighting against are that prepared or brave enough to square it up with say the American government?
Obviously, it is hard to make some people see reason even when the signs are as clear as the African sun. Blowing HOTAIR (as some do here) is not a sign of bravery, atleast not in the politically and economically complex world of the 21st century.
Posts: 997 | From: Germany | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
" Many though, have since taken up responsibilities through various channels to actualize their portion of what they believe we are all fighting for, but insofar as cohesive and directed action, my belief as I hereby express it is that Ojukwu/APGA entry into the political framework is an opportunity for Nd’Igbo to begin the internal cleansing and unifying which will enable us to consolidate forces and establish a monolithic and well leveraged voice. As such I could careless for the Presidency of Nigeria. What I care for is a voice in Nigeria that can articulate Igbo collective vision and summon the dynamic will and participation of the people to achieve it with accountability. If Ojukwu is then voted in through good effort and sheer luck, I have no cause but to believe the Blackman will be the better for it any which way including Biafrans longterm."
Ukaobasi No one could have better clarified the game plan and highlighted the current direction of many pro Biafrans on this forum as well you have done. You are one guy with a vision and it remains an understatement when I say you views are invaluable to the cause. I don’t see you as a pacifist, but rather a rational thinker who knows when to respond to the enemies changing tactics. The worst thing that can befall a nation is to lack men with vision, which is why today I put my reputation on the line for Ikemba’s role in pointing out a direction for Ndigbo in Particular and the rest of Biafra Nigeria. Do I still believe in Biafra ? I do and continue to believe it remains the best option for everybody including the rest of BiafraNigeria.
I guess I must ask what really is a revolution ? What comes to mind is some form of physical resistance to status quo. True most revoilution have been bloody as we saw in France, USSR, Cuba, Iran etc. We should also ask why would the Islamist’s in Algeria seek the ballot when Allah has sanctioned a Jihad, or the IRA play’s politics through Sien Fein while occasionally letting off their bombs in London subways? Why does Arafat play politics under the Fatah party and plants bombs under Al axa matyrs brigade? If you ask me that is what is meant when they say “by every means possible” ? Revolution at some point may entail politics and activist should not shy away from it.
I have previously called for the involvement of pro Biafrans in "LOCAL" Igbo politics. As it is today if Biafra fell into our laps it will be hijacked by 419ers and Abuja by night merchants. It is of utmost importance that Ndigbo are organized and lead by decent people even as we continue to seek freedom from the clutches of BiafraNigeria. These two things to me are not mutually exclusive events. Now those who talk about Igbo presidency or the likes of Alex Ekwueme, Nwobodo, Nwachukwu , Okadigbo and all the other self seeking charlatans are yet to grasp the true situation in BiafraNigeria. There is little or no Igbo interest in follwoing these people who conviniently fail to identify with Ndigbo in dire times.
Listen to Ojukwu, he talks about coming to heal not lead, there is no stupid deceit of claiming to fix the problems facing BiafraNigeria without fundamental changes to its being. That the BiafraNigeria ship is definitely without captain is no more news to us, once in a while some opportunist’s pretend to be at the helm while looting the booty in it’s hold. Igbo presidency for the sake of "it's our turn" is a worthless venture and not what I understand Ikemba to be gunning for.Those NdIgbo who hang their hopes on "our turn" are the very opportunist who cannot see the big picture, we need to dislodge them if we are to gather the herd in Igbo land.When we ask for Biafra we must do so with one voice, a situation where people like Mbadinuju will run off to Abuja to report his brothers to Aremu because Ndigbo wish to bury their dead in Uli will no more arise.
I am not ashamed to be associated with those supporting Ikemba in his plan to unite Ndigbo,I however do realize we may need to return to the trenches in the not too distant future. The difference though is this time we will probably have most of our people behind us, because a political system that would enable us select our leaders from within not anointed by haters in Abuja would be in place. I don’t expect to read about any elected official in Umuahia or Abakiliki who encourages Aremu to finish off MASSOB in Igboland while OPC and Almajiri’s wreck havoc elsewhere anymore.Such Abuja inspired leadership must end if we are to organize effectively.
It is going to be a long drawn out battle but I encourage all to participate in every sphere of it.
[ February 27, 2003, 06:20 PM: Message edited by: chiboy ]
Posts: 1532 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
I apologize if the word "Nze" used to address your eloquent remarks offended you. It was not meant to flatter, nor was it meant as a title for whatever reason. I used that as a respect and honor to a man of your magnitude. Once again, no offense intended.
quote:I have never expoused pacifism, and I don't recall that having been expoused at BNW.
To clear myself from that misconception, I did not say you "expoused pacifism," but I beg to differ when you say "Pacifism" has not been expoused at BNW. However, I will attempt based on this particular thread without pointing out the contradictions regarding the principles to a cause which BNW has been about all along. This particular thread and the title "2003 Polls, End Game" which Oga Wacko's opinion outlined in iten 3 notes:
quote:There is no clear winner at the first ballot and the 2 parties with most votes contest the runoff. Here there would be deals to be made and the party that offers more towards the Igbo interest would win.
Earlier I had said there should't be any deal on the ground that Igbos do not need to dabble into no political gimmick should a case of "runoff" become the issue. Moreover, based on the current trend of the kind of nasty politics in the present day Nigeria of which we shouldn't have been part of, the legacy of sustaining an intact and viable Igbo nation, in other words a sovereign state of Biafra ought to have been our legacy regardless of "2003 Poll, End Game," uncountable numbers of Igbo presidential candidates, political compromise with the hawkish Hausa-Fulani Islamic North and the treacherous hands of the West. No people that I know of in our own situation in recent memory have subjected themselves in a card game the way we seem to be pursuing our agenda within the Nigerian context.
But in your own observation on our choice of words regarding "Revolution" and Biafra agitation for independence" with personal perceptions you made a list of our "dilemas as you see it" citing the "colonists" and our "adversaries." Do we really have adversaries other than that we just cannot put our acts together? In fact, the blame game has been our problem ever since we found ourselves in a situation where we cannot get along arriving at a common ground to resolve what I see as a stumbling block to our "progress" rather than blame the colonists and adversaries for our demise. And I do have a problem when you continue to cite the colonists and adversaries to have been on our way, frustrating our efforts and undermining our progress.
With that, I would take it all means from your point of view that whenever the Igbos are singled out and slaughtered in the bloodlust Sharia we should blame the colonists and our adversauries. And it all means when Igbos who petty trade and run all kinds of makeshift shops in Nigeria but yet do not control the economy, we should blame the colonists and our adversaries despite our enormous committments.
It all means when Igbos are killing themselves in the most brutal of circumstances as we've seen the last few weeks over the uncertain 2003 elections, we should blame Ousegun Obasanjo, the colonists and our adversaries. Now with the widespread civil unrest and political assassinations in Igboland today, do we blame the colonists for the problem or is it just that we've been caught in a chess game where elimination describes the name of the game? How do we explain what we've been doing to ourselves?
Furthermore you said:
quote:As a result of the above reasons both adversaries in their combination have in common a tenacious and rabid purpose in the perpetual effort to frustrate any step taken by us to seek that independence or for that matter even settle for autonomy.
Who said it was going to be easy anyway? And what step has been made beside the lousy gestures by Ralph Uwazuruike's MASSOB. Of course, it lacked seriousness because the movement ignored the counsel of expperts to dialogue with the international community presenting a case of tranny, genocide, unlawful detention, ethnic cleansing, bigotry and hatred which would have legitimacy for self reliance.
When United Nations voted overwhelmingly to establish an International Criminal Court to try dictators and national leaders who may have committed crimes against humanity in 1998, the idea was to enforce its rule of law ensuring history does not repeat itself in the mostblood-soaked century in humankind. The decision in Rome created a new tribunal, to be located peremanently in the Hague, Netherlands and would be empowered to investigate, charge, and convict any person in the world who may have committed crimes against mankind. That decision endorsed by a global body, came as a result of the disturbing conflicts in the Balkans, and also specifically directed to hunt perpetrators of evil.
In contrast, MASSOB, the only movement with guts and her subsidiaries seemed to have noagenda toward influencing international bodies for its case to be heard demanding a green light for Biafra nationhood. It is in thius order, if handled well by organized representatives that its worthy causes would receive attention and justified to enable plebiscite hold according to the principles of self-reliance. But bear in mind thatas in all agitations for the right to self determination, there always would be a conflict of interest, disagreements and "mad-dogging," the starring at one another with the tough guy kind of look, which is normal as long as the subject matter is not negated due to faction. But Uwazuruike and MASSOB, as others would follow later on, was planning a state of empire in which every decision of a sovereign state of his must have his endorsement.
quote:They organized themselves, unfolded their plans, mapped out their strategies and went into action all at their appointed time.
That I would agree but I beg to disagree on the notion of apponting retired council of elders "to advise on issues involving the interest areas of our adversaries, their greatest fears politically, and their area of weakness."
I INSIST WE HAVE NO ADVERSARIES THAT THE PROBLEM LIES WITHIN US. Who are the Elders? Supposedly, the vulnereable and gullible visionaries who have been tight-lipped for decades? Let's deal with our problems first and talk less about the colonists and our adversaries.
Nwa Aro:
You seem to be holding grudges lately? What is the problem and who is imposing extremism on you and your colleagues?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
