posted
Yawn..... Another slowthinker. This time around it's an extremely moronically retarded nigerian slowthinking fool. Not to worry, I'll spell it out for you so that even half-witted nigerian apes like yourself will understand.
code:
THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
The United Nations General Assembly does not create sovereign nations.
The United Nations General Assembly is the sole worldwide body with the power to grant permission or deny permission for new nations to be created.
The United Nations General Assembly has a unique protocol for nation-creation.
The United Nations General Assembly has a different unique protocol for intervening in ongoing conflicts.
posted
Again when it comes to practical matters you refuse to see reason. I posed a couple of simple questions to you and all you can do is post the U.N website. Why don't you outline how the U.N created those nations I mentioned?. How many U.N resolutions are actually acted upon by constituent nations except when it suits their interests?. What I'm trying to point out is your deliberate overestimation of an impotent organisation that has no real clout except bend to the wishes of power brokers. Obviously, you are just another delusional retard seeking attention. It's only a matter of time before Nigeria collapses and there is nothing you can do about it. sorry.
Posts: 136 | From: Massachusssets | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
The topic here is not for me to outline anything or to answer your questions. I'm merely restating what I've written in my first post to you (after which you couldn't resist the tempatation of opening the pandora box of insults).
For you slowthinker, let me remind you again:
The United Nations General Assembly DOES NOT create nations. Now, which of these nine words do you find difficult to understand?
Again:
The United Nations General Assembly has a unique protocol for nation-creation. The United Nations General Assembly has a different unique protocol for intervening in ongoing conflicts.
What exactly is hard for you to understand here? Must you really, with full force, publicly display your complete ignorance of UN procedures?
My first reply to your post was centered around the UNGA protocol for nation-creation, and not the protocol for intervening in ongoing conflicts. These are two completely different aspects, with completely different procedures, which involve completely different UN committees. What's so difficult to understand here?
You are not to be blamed. Your lack of understanding the UN protocols which stems from your poor nigerian education really makes you to look embarrassingly ignorant.
quote:...impotent organisation that has no real clout...-ogbuni
It was powerful enough to crush the secessions in both Congo and Nigeria with maximum results! It was powerful enough to remove stupid and primitive dictators from office. And it will continue to do so!
Each time the term “Peaceful Separation” is mentioned, we become inundated with cries on the impossibility of the possible. I am reminded that there was a time that the mere mention of a moving horseless cart, or a flying house, were also considered PIPE DREAMS, we now drive cars and travel by air – the possibility of the impossible! The secret is being able to think out of the box, or the difference between a master strategist and pretenders. No matter the number of degrees or years of experience in any chosen field, the most important ingredient in becoming a ‘master’ in any chosen field is talent, which of course comes from Chi Ukwu, the Mighty Yah. But talent undeveloped is worthless, the humbleness to LISTEN and LEARN from all, no matter who they are, and the ability to continuously modify and remake our assumptions as we test our hypothesis while seeking answers, understanding that we do not have all the answers, and yet the refusal to accept, “it is impossible” as an answer, most times walking against the grain, in a nutshell, decides who and what we become – a master or a pretender.
Let us for a minute consider the possibility of the impossible. If ‘Peaceful Separation’ is possible in the British Birthed Abomination Nigeria, how may NATIONS will ask out of that abomination and insult to Mother Africa. How would this affect the Nations that have been milking the Abomination Nigeria – the bottom line of the Multi National Corporations.
We then start to understand why the NIC jumped the gun to remind us that:
1. The most important would be the outright collapse of Nigeria… 2. Since we are yet not convinced they throw in, “The most important would be a junior officer coup that could destabilize the country to the extent that open warfare breaks out in many places in a sustained manner”, since no other option is obtainable in Africa. 3. Now to cement the above point, they finish us up with, “If Nigeria were to become a failed state, it could drag down a large part of the West African Region.” 4. Reminding us of, “Even state failure in small countries such as Liberia has the effect of destabilizing entire neighborhoods. If millions were to flee a collapsed Nigeria, the surrounding countries, up to and including Ghana, would be destabilized.” 5. Finally we are told that since Africans are helpless from their history of the Blackman, they stress the point that we still have to crawl back to the masters for help anyway, no matter what happens, “Further, a failed Nigeria probably could not be re-constituted for many years – if ever – and not without probably international assistance,”.
What did the NIC see that they had not seen in the last 30 plus years since the end of the Biafra-Nigeria war? What is new in the Nigerian equation? Were most of these countries who were milking the nations in Nigeria not the same countries that were ready to and offered the lives of more the THREE MILLION Africans on the altar of Nigerian unity? Have these countries not stood on the sideline while genocide continued unabated on the survivors of the Nigerian holocaust? Just what did these countries do about the plight of the oil producing communities and how did they better their lot, since they had already washed their blood soaked hands of the Igbo genocide and holocaust, and buried their guilt deep in their subconscious, forgetting that Chi Ukwu the Mighty Yah, who sees all and knows all, has a way forcing all knees to bow!
The die is cast, either these nations who have milked Africa come to terms with the rule of law, understanding that all gain when justice reigns, or when these Nations are free as they surely will, it will be difficult to gain their trust.
IT is time for an African based solution, hope NIC will understand that all will gain if there is a PEACEFUL SEPARATION, and this is the only solution to the Nigerian problem.
Posts: 166 | From: chicago | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Alchemist, I really find it funny when you call someone a slow thinker when it is apparent that you lack the capacity to think in the first place. So it was the U.N that fought against Biafra,.. right?. So the alliance of Britain, Soviet Union and the Arab league is what constitutes the united nations in your view?. Now, why is it that the vietnam war which was raging concurrently at that time had the soviets behind the vietnamese while the United States operated under a "U.N" mandate?. Eventually, the U.S lost the war and the U.N went ahead and recognized vietnam. Why did the U.N abandon it's protocols after the side with it's mandate lost?. Never mind the Arab and muslim leanings of Utant, a Pakistani who was the secretary general at that time. His bias was very evident all the way from 1967 Arab-Isreali war to the 1973 Yumkipur war. You are nothing but an ignorant buffoon pretending to have anything upstairs.
quote:So it was the U.N that fought against Biafra,.. right?. So the alliance of Britain, Soviet Union and the Arab league is what constitutes the united nations in your view?...-ogbuni
These are the screaks of a nigerian primitive monkey, who, apart from being a slow-thinker, is also a fellow with a weak character. Why not just accept that you were in error, instead of twisting my words?
Your nonsensical quote above is not what I had written, and certainly does not represent my views. These are your stupid conclusions which you have drawn maliciously. This is a vain and primitive attempt of a poorly educated smelling nigerian person who is ignorant of UN protocols, unsuccessfully trying to twist my words.
Not to worry, I'll spell it out again for you slow-thinker:
The UN crushed the secessions in Congo and Nigeria by not recognizing the rebel "governments", and, as in the case of Katanga, by sending UN troops into Congo to restore the unity of Congo.
posted
Alchemist, Your primitive attributes are always manifest with each post you make. Remember, the crux of this thread is the imminent collapse of your beloved stinking dead horse called Nigeria and not "how the U.N works". I'm not twisting words you pathetic imbecile, I'm simply helping your depraved moronic arse understand your notion of "U.N" at that time. In addition, before any security council resolution becomes "binding", each of the permanent members would have to consent barring any abstentions. Why was France, a permanent member on the opposite side of the isle in regard to the Biafra issue?. All that was needed for Biafra to survive was enough armaments and not the UN. Every dunce knows that the U.N is more or less a fair weather orgnisation that comes in like a vulture after the concerned parties have sorted out their differences in whatever way they saw fit. Any measure of clout it acquires is soley contingent upon the wishes of a major world power. If anything, it was the community of neo-colonialist despots known as OAU that spearheaded the fight against Biafra and not the UN. For your information, the U.N policy towards Biafra was similar to Eritrea when the two conflicts broke out in 1967. The question as to why the world chose to ignore the British sponsored genocide being visited on the Biafran people has more to do with their greed for oil and nothing else. Why did the U.N recognize Eritrea after being tagged "rebels" for over 30yrs?. The same goes for south Sudan. It seems that the U.N. always become more prominent whenever the areas involved have abundant natural resources. I wonder why.
Yes, you are and you did. When you draw conclusions which have nothing to do with what I've written, and you go ahead and place words into my mouth, then that's twisting my words. Hear your ugly self:
code:
originally posted by ogbuni: So it was the U.N that fought against Biafra, right? So the alliance of Britain, Soviet Union and the Arab league is what constitutes the united nations in your view?
Only those who have nothing left to say resort to such a stupid tactic.
Again, with your latest posting, you reveal your ignorance on how the UN works. You cannot know how this gigantic organization works by sitting at home, watching CN-bloody-N and relying on a stupid university degree obtained in the mid 1970's.
I don't xxxing care what the topic of this thread is. You are the one who keeps on displaying (to the amusement of the readers) your typical nigerian separatist low mentality, by downgrading and belittling the United Nations. Thus was the grave error of Tshombe, Ojukwu and their gang of separatist deceivers: "Bypass the United Nations and acquire enough weapons to win the war."
The direct result of such dumb thinking is isolation. When you openly go against the UN and their diplomats, you are asking for trouble. It is then and there that you will witness the real power of the UN. Since the creation of the UN, no sovereign nation was created by bypassing the UN. Check your history.
For you to mention the Vietnam war in one of your previous posts, saying that the US had a UN mandate, and the Vietnames were backed by the Soviets, and thus UN rules and regulations were not kept, reveals your complete lack of knowledge of UN protocols. Even in this war, the UN protocol was minutely kept.
Let me spell it out again for this lowly nigerian slow-thinker: The United Nations General Assembly DOES NOT create nations. The United Nations General Assembly has a unique protocol for nation-creation. The United Nations General Assembly has a different unique protocol for intervening in ongoing conflicts.
Normally, a word is enough for a wise man, but since you are the opposite of that (someone suggested saying that you are a nigerian monkey with a typewriter), it is understandable that you keep on falling into the pit of ignorance.
Thanks for entertaining us readers with your nigerian ignorance.
posted
Why not make a constructive argument you dumb idiot!. I guess that's expecting too much since we're dealing with a neanderthal sub specie. That explains the origin of the crass primitivity you've been exhibiting on this site. I still wonder why they let you out that mental institution for deranged animals to come here and bleat like a goat in heat. UN this UN that while deliberately ignoring the crux of the issue. I think you should thank your stars that I had a little time to educate your dumb incoherent ass on the subject matter. Why don't you concentrate on my last post and address the points raised therein?. Instead, you could only scrounge around through my previous posts because your clueless head is empty and bereft of anything meaningful. This kind of abject stupidity on your part is also a good indication that you never even bother to read let alone think before posting your usual imbecilic garbage. In any case, your beloved Nigeria is kaput and the 15year CIA projection is actually too long because it is bound to meet it's inevitable waterloo given the way things are going in that hell hole.
posted
The nigerian monkey screaking around with his unjewaschenes stinking mouth.
The beer-parlour-political-analyst, clueless UN-specialist-via-watching-CNN is on the vomit again.
What's wrong, nigerian dude? Afraid to keep sticking to that ugly green xxx-up nigerian passport of yours? Yes, it shall be yours even in the year 2020 and above!
Think about it: when the illegal massob organization began to rear its ugly head, nigerian ibo separatists all over the globe began to prophecy about the imminent emergence of a sovereign biafran nation. Many of these day-dreaming fools even set dates, such as "within the next five years." The nigerian ibo diaspora spoke of nothing else than these impotent predictions. Today, years later in 2005, where are you? I'll tell you:
YOU'RE STILL IN DIRTY NIGERIA!
Live with it, you half-witted nigerian fool! The more you fight against your nigerian reality, the more you inflict irreparable damage unto your filthy nigerian snail brain.
posted
Alchemist the CLUELESS NIGERIAN BABOON, why are you so demented as to fight an inevitable eventuality?. Only a parasitic blood sucker like you will keep on burying his ugly head in the sand when confronted with the truth about your beloved colonial carcass. It is only a matter of time before your sadistic pathetic ass is eliminated by the reality you refuse to acknowlegde.
Posts: 136 | From: Massachusssets | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Ogbuni we might have a different opinion on how the UN operates, but try and get this information right:
I am not part of your nigeria, neither do I support the evil concept of Nigeria.
I am merely a realist rather than an idealist, who looks at the present backward situation of various nigerian separatist movements, and then draw my conclusions that the nigerian separatists are very far from being ready to create, not to talk of ruling a sovereign nation.
Therefore, instead of wasting your time, your energy and your money on some stupid and extremely immature separatist plan, why not just accept reality? Life is a bitch, but when you pay her well, she'll do you good, dude!
posted
Talk about selective amnesia. Why then are you fighting the concept of Biafra with such intense hatred?. You see, those who begin to wet their pants whenever Biafra is mentioned have always been that group of people benefiting from the current criminal retrogressive set-up. When little luggard set up his colonial cage in 1914, none of the constituent peoples were consulted. This simply implies that the foundation of your beloved Nigeria was not carved in stone but rather a mere economic convenience of the British government thus, self-determination remains an inalienable right of any component group. Needless to say that the "country" ceased to exist the instant a particular ethnic group was earmarked for extermination. That was what gave birth to Biafra and not your Ojukwu induced hallucinations. You must be a bigger moron than I thought if you think any plans involving the fate of millions of people could be gleaned from publiic forums. Yes life is a bitch and humanbeings are duty bound to make it better by working dauntlessly to change any extreme adverse condition.
Posts: 136 | From: Massachusssets | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:So it was the U.N that fought (crushed) against Biafra, right? So the alliance of Britain, Soviet Union and the Arab league is what constitutes the united nations in your view? - Ogbunigwe
The questions posed here could easily be implied based on the stance Alchemist took with his comments thus; ” It (being UN) was powerful enough to crush the secessions in both Congo and Nigeria with maximum results!”
quote:UN is an impotent organisation that has no real clout. – Ogbunigwe
It was powerful enough to crush the secessions in both Congo and Nigeria with maximum results! – Alchemist
I’ll below repost the position of a nigerian neighbor that would give credence to Ogbunigwe’s side of this uncivil debate. To paraphrase, it was not the trailblazing position of the puny UN that secured the temporary victory to the rest of nigeria against Biafra, but the nonchalant attitude of the powers that be at the time as stated in the piece below. One would have given a little weight to alchemist’s strategy for Biafra to have incorporated the UN in its march to freedom if not for the stumbling block of the islamist head of UN at the time from the terror haven, Pakistan. The lackluster attitude of the UN as buttressed in the latest war in Iraq is enough to convince even the most ardent skeptic that this organization panders to the wishes of moneybags and as a result cannot be taken seriously.
quote:Nigeria Beyond Tomorrow By Anthony A . Akinola anthonyakinola@yahoo.co.uk
The reason why Nigeria is one nation today was not because of the might of Federal forces during the 1967-70 civil war. Of course God’s will prevails in everything, but one informed reason is because none of the then super-powers America and the Soviet-Union, saw the need to break up the federation. If one of them had shown active interest in the collapse of the Nigerian state, the scale and outcome of the conflict might have been different. In fact, in the 1960’s America saw Nigeria as the problem of Britain and could not be too bothered.
The potentials for disintegration of the Nigerian state, based on ethnological realities and historical antecedents, are there for all to see, hence the prediction in America’s intelligence report could have been gambled by any intelligent observer. Ethnic or religious disagreements could trigger and flare up to unmanageable proportions. In fact, mass anger over unemployment and growing poverty could be exploited to achieve an intended result. The availability of a small minority with secessionist ambitions is a factor. That, indeed, is the sour truth. Rather than visit the report with angry outburst, an intelligent government will study the grounds upon which the author(s) arrived at their conclusions. Honest issues highlighted could then be addressed in the most realistic fashion. Coming at a time when a national conference is taking place, the opportunity for informed discussions would not be missed.
Lessons can be learned from the experiences of others. Maybe the former Soviet Union would have survived as a nation if it had been a democratic, federal union whose peoples, ab mitio, co-existed on agreed terms, rather than by the force of Leninist-Stalinisr ideology. Nigeria's diversity, if property channeled, should be the source of her strength.
The America nation itself had transformed from an unstable confederation of 13 independent colonies into the federal colossus that it is today. The Americans did fight a civil war in the 19th century, as we did in Nigeria a century later. However, America’s founding fathers did put a constitution in place, which has proved capable of withstanding the heaviest political storms. The political institutions that emerged from the Connecticut Convention of 1787, federalism and the bicamera legislature in particular, were compromises and resolutions to issues that were once bitterly contested. That is what we should do for Nigeria – a constitution that addresses the political realities of the Nigerian nation. Let ours be a nation that does not fear to thread on a new ground, and let our patriotism be that of a people determined to shame even the minutest of pessimistic predictions. But our system must be just and fair for that to happen.
The road to the future is about the present generation of Nigerians making personal or group sacrifices in the interest of our collective existence. Federalism is a political idea that derives its energy from the principle of give and take! The danger signal beckons where and when that principle cannot be respected.
The American observer is no fool. There is a constitution conference going on in Nigeria, and one of the issues in discussion has to do with term of office for president. What note do you expect an observer to make when the main ground upon which a key political leader objects to a single term presidency is because a southerner is serving a second term in office, and a northerner should not be prevented from doing same? “These people are not serious” would be the conclusion of a sceptical observer but our Nigerian House will not fall.
Alchemist, speaking for myself, I process your views better when it’s without the thuggish languages that reduces the value of some good points you make. There’s no question some Igbo you disrespect here appreciate certain views you bring to the table but your anger towards anything Biafra/Igbo makes those points that are reasonable ineffective. On every other post you readily tell us; “I am not part of your nigeria, neither do I support the evil concept of Nigeria.” If you’re indeed not “part” of nigeria, although we know otherwise, what’s your beef with Biafra/Igbo? I can’t be the only soul that sees this obvious contradiction/conflict, in conclusion therefore; you ARE part of the backward nigerian system you deny. The inference here is, to have and display the amount of interest you show means you're PART and PARCEL of nigeria, we understand.
___________________ BIAFRA: The land of my ancestors now, yesterday and always. So it will be! Posts: 2483 | From: Ala Igbo | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, Mebiafran, this is the impression shallow folks get while merely scratching the surface. Hasn't someone advised you in the past to quit scratching the surface?
Again, apart from the topic at hand, it is very biased and wrath-evoking (to say the very least), when you now lash your rebuke at me, and allow ogbuni to go scot-free, whereas a simple fast look at Page 1 of this thread, will show you how I, with all civility and good manners, posted my posts, only to receive a reply full of insults by Ogbuni. He is the one who started to open the Pandora Box of insults. If you refuse to realize this simple matter of fact, that he, Ogbuni, started the rough language UNPROVOKED, then in future do not address me again, directly or indirectly.
Wasn't it Fumi Onodipe who reminded everyone of the rules of discussion, as found in BNW 101: Lessons in Intellectual Dialogue? Two of them state:
quote:5) If you launch a personal attack on a member of these forums because of what s/he wrote about a public figure, whom you admire, you should be prepared to receive attacks against yourself and anyone else that your opponent chooses to attack. 6) If you initiate insults, embedded or otherwise, you have no right to determine when the insulting exchanges should stop. written by Fumi Onodipe
I take it as a personal attack from you, Mebiafran, for rebuking me, the one who received unprovoked insults from ogbuni, and you allowed ogbuni to go scot-free. Your solidarity among separatists is making you to behave in a very uncivilized manner, to say the least. To tell you the truth, your separatistic biased behavour sucks. It only serves to make me utilize more aggressive verbal Fliegerabwehrkanonen.
quote:...to have and display the amount of interest you show means you're PART and PARCEL of nigeria...-Mebiafran
To a mind limited by poisonous separatistic indoctrination and weakness, the surface level is all that matters. Digging deeper into a matter is too strenuous for limited folks, and thus weakness takes the upper hand. It therefore does not surprise me that you've concluded thusly. Your conclusion is the outward evidence of an inward weak spirit and an unintelligent mind.
quote:...what’s your beef with Biafra/Igbo?
What's my beef? The same beef I have with stupid nigeria, dude, the very same! Both nigeria and biafra are undead products of the same former european colonial rulers.
Both are corrupt.
Both are evil.
Both are primitive.
Both disrespect the value of human life.
Both are deeply into demon-worship.
Both have brought about the suffering of millions.
Both of them have shamelessly committed crimes against humanity.
posted
Having exchanges with alchemist is like forcing an uninterested female to accept someone she has nothing in common with and finds unattractive. If alchemist never experienced Biafra and was never part of her, it makes zero sense then to come to the frail conclusion he ended with. Obviously, alchemist too over scratched the surface by pretending to have missed the more important points in my post that recognized the area he raised pertinent issues. I'll while ignoring the trademark insults on anyone that proffers a divergent view from him repost what he, alchemist missed in that post he nibbled at.
quote:Alchemist, speaking for myself, I process your views better when it’s without the thuggish languages that reduces the value of some good points you make. There’s no question some Igbo you disrespect here appreciate certain views you bring to the table but your anger towards anything Biafra/Igbo makes those points that are reasonable ineffective. - MeBiafran.
Why you have chosen to remain staunch in displaying the type of unprecedented animosity towards the Igbo is better left for you to interpret. Your angry outbursts at every post speak volumes about the handle behind them. Not my problem, guy. It was your denial of the summation of your UN position towards Biafra by Ogbunigwe that precipitated my post which has nothing to do with exonerating or ignoring any insults. I don't think I insulted you in mine yet here you are again and again and again and continue to be with the half-witted insults you dished that was not expected. Anyone who read mine would definitely agree with me that your reaction was uncalled for. Do you really expect the forumites to see you in reverence when your actions wreak of absolute lack of grandeur? Your continued thuggish act is the bane of the negative vibes you draw, it’s self inflicted, young man.
REMINDER; “I’ll below repost the position of a nigerian neighbor that would give credence to Ogbunigwe’s side of this uncivil debate.” – MeBiafran.
I was careful not to attribute this comment to anyone in particular yet your guilt lured you to react unnecessarily as if it was mainly addressed to you. A favor please, show where I insulted you this time.
___________________ BIAFRA: The land of my ancestors now, yesterday and always. So it will be! Posts: 2483 | From: Ala Igbo | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
Sorry sir, what "case" are you talking about, all his wrong attributes towards the Igbo/Biafra? Do I still retain the right to participate on this board on especially matters that affect my ethnicity without having to hear strangers tell me what constitutes leaving someone alone? Where, exactly, did I insult this confused chap in the post I reproduced above is all I'm asking, sir. And going by the dangerous standard you want to impose, ARE YOU LEAVING ME ALONE? (lol).
___________________ BIAFRA: The land of my ancestors now, yesterday and always. So it will be! Posts: 2483 | From: Ala Igbo | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
I don't argue or write much but your popularity and what you stand for has put your prestige on the line when you try to read every meaning into what Alchemists says. One thing you have to bear in mind is Alchemist has not made any significant post in whatever that he's been trying to prove but just an annoying irritant. You don't want to deal with that, do you?
Moreover, he loves getting under your skin, for it keeps attracting your attention which I suppose, makes your thinking irrational the more you engage him in a mud fight. Think about it.
Posts: 83 | From: Kirksville, Missouri, USA | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Where, exactly, did I insult ..... in the post I reproduced above is all I'm asking, sir...-mebiafran
Do I detect yet another nigerian slow-thinker here, or is someone unsuccessfully trying to hide? All the same, I'll take time to spell it out for you line-by-line:
You maliciously took sides with this nigerian monkey ogbuni without considering that ogbuni started insulting me UNPROVOCED in his first post which he addressed to me (you can find this post on Page 1 of this thread)
Now, you slither and slide like the serpent from Eden's Garden and concentrate on this stupid little word which you've written in italics ("uncivil").
Since you're able to type rebukes for me, why not do the same for orangutan-ogbuni, the one who started this "uncivil" debate in the first place? Fake loyalty between separatist brothers is hindering you from doing so, isn't that so?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
