ISRAELITES IN AFRICA: All Hail Biafra

The above heading is also the title of a song originally composed by Charles O. Okereke. The lyrics of this song which quickly turned into a classic in a few short years were originally conceived in 1970. Okereke 14 at the time was just a child – a Biafran child, that is. As Biafra’s defeat was announced over the radio waves, the words of the song tumbled into his young mind. Ironically, the prophetic declarations started with insistent urgency in Okereke’s head on the very day that Biafra’s recapitulation was announced; January 12, 1970.

Nearly fifty years after, Okereke still remembers the place and moment when the words started rushing through his mind in quick succession. He was lying down with his face on the ground, taking cover from the persistent shelling and bombardment of Biafra interiors by Nigerian government forces. Then the voice of the Biafran General Philip Effiong came on the radio telling Biafrans to cease fire and suspend the battle of resistance which began in May, 1967. Biafra was now defeated on the battlefield. But in the people Biafra lives on, undefeated.

[the_ad id=”4744″]

Biafra War was an unjust genocidal war executed by the government and people of Nigeria against Igbo people in particular who later became known as Biafrans along with some other non-Igbo southeasterners. In total, 3.5 million Biafrans were killed by Nigerian state and its other citizens. Of this figure 3.1 million were Igbo. The number of the murdered Igbo represents a quarter of Igbo population at the time. Ever since, there has been a consensus by all experts that the Biafran War was genocidal because the original intention of the Nigerian government and its people was to wipe out the entire Igbo population from the Earth.

The Igbo resisted the attempt and successfully averted that sinister plan. But that the Igbo successfully prevented the total annihilation of their population does not change the fact that a genocidal plan was made and an actual attempt was carried out to execute that plan in reality. That in the end only a partial percentage of the people’s population was exterminated does not vitiate the genocidal fact of the Biafran War. The standard definition of genocide acknowledges that an act qualifies as genocide if elements of planning and an actual attempt to execute the plan are present in the circumstances that lead to the death of a large number of one or more of the 4 recognized genocide groups. Such groups can be ethnical, national, religious or racial. Going by this, there is genocide if there is a deliberate intention and act to systematically wipe out either in whole or in part a targeted group.

Nigerian state planned and physically carried out an actual act aimed at exterminating the Igbo nation in its entirety from the Earth. However in the end, Nigeria succeeded in exterminating a quarter of Igbo population. Nevertheless, there was genocide in Biafra.

In Biafra Igbo people were nearly exterminated. That was the dark, ugly part of the Igbo Genocide. But Igbo story did not end there. In the midst of death and decay; a new life form that cannot easily be killed sprouted; love and creativity blossomed abundantly among Igbo survivors. Misery, suffering, starvation and the searing heat of hatred and war produced in the young and old of Igbo Genocide survivors the genius fecund which often is brought out from the inner recesses of an endangered people through such extreme hardship. The multitude of prodigious artistic creations (literary and visual) that followed the Biafran War was undoubtedly the silver lining in the horizon of this Igbo’s darkest hour.

Charles O. Okereke’s All Hail Biafra and several others came out of this crucible of death and darkness blazing forth with shining hope and futuristic certitude. Especially, when one listens to the marching or martial version of the song, the mood and lyrics contradict the anticipation. As the song begins to play, the invincible and unyielding spirit of the Igbo, the Biafrans comes out clear. The song is triumphal, full of hope and belief. This distinctive feature of All Hail Biafra: Cry of a Biafran Childis in direct contrast to the mood and circumstance in which the song was born. As a song written on the day that Biafran defeat was announced it would have fittingly reflected the mournful mood which the defeat brought on the people who gave the Biafran fight the best that they got.

[the_ad id=”4690″]

In reality, All Hail Biafra should have been a dirge lamenting a people’s lost paradise, defeated dream and dashed hope of a people who had struggled so hard to secure a future where their generations would live in unfettered liberty and life in its fullness. No, instead it is a song of triumph, even celebratory: “We have vanquished our enemies . . . We have emerged triumphant, from all our enemies/Through the crucible unscathed, we passed victorious/Our trumpets pealing . . .”

All Hail Biafra

All hail Biafra

Land of the rising sun, we love and cherish

We have vanquished our enemies, all hail Biafra

God Bless Biafra, in Him we trust

Shout it sing it, all hail Biafra

God bless Biafra

We have emerged triumphant, from all our foes

Through the crucible unscathed, we passed victorious

Our trumpets pealing, the glorious song

Play it, sing it, all hail Biafra

Oh hail Biafra

We shall always remember, all that perished,

In the struggle for our freedom, all hail our heroes

Our prayers shall bemoan, both day and night

Say them always, all hail Biafra

(This reproduction is with the express permission of the original author Charles O. Okereke who is also the copyright owner of the song.)

Harcourt Whyte still occupies the very prestigious and enviable position of being the greatest modern Igbo music composer of all genres. Most of his compositions are in Igbo and they are in major part church hymnals. Harcourt was an Igbo Methodist spiritual who like Charles Wesley, the cofounder of the Methodist faith, wrote most of the hymns of that Church in English. Harcourt’s liturgical compositions are deeply philosophical and admonitory. On Igbo cosmological music firmament, whether sacred or mundane, Harcourt Whyte’s star still shines the brightest. His physical body was afflicted with the scourge of leprosy but his mind soared and excelled in the purest of spheres. He worked from the famous Leprosy Colony in Uzuakoli. But by the beginning of the genocidal Biafran War, Whyte had already established his yet unchallenged place in history.

It is true that before the war there were scattered bright twinkling stars on Igbo creative firmament. But the war would release a burst of multiple inventive and ingenious stars blazing with dazzling colors eclipsing the hate and blood the enemy unleashed across the canvass of the Igbo world. So, the periods during and after the war were particularly good for the creative Igbo cultural milieu. They are periods that especially enriched the Igbo cultural, social and scientific life like no other periods. Charles Okereke and many others like him are the products of these eras.

Geniuses often run in pairs or multiples and they have a way of finding each other. Soon after the war Harcourt Whyte and Nnamdi Olebara would find each other. Olebara as well as being a music composer is clearly the greatest Igbo poet, both of the Biafran War era or of any other time. (Some of his poems have been translated into English for the benefit of non-Igbo speakers by Chinweizu.) After the war, Whyte with Olebara popularized a unique and attention-demanding musical genre. This duo’s musicology would soon become accepted and has since been adopted and expanded by many others, notably by musicians like Patty Obasi. (Obasi would later do some collaborative works with Olebara along this line.) This particular musical devise is both entertaining and didactic. It tends to criticize social vices and pass commentary on burning social and political issues. Sometimes the criticisms and commentaries work. When the production is successful the songs help to influence and revolutionalize people’s attitude and social behavior. In this area Patty Obasi remains unequalled. His Nwa Mami Iwota phenomenal production remains evergreen and continues to reverberate down through time.

This music genre is noted by the way some lines of poetry are interjected at the end of a song’s stanza. The poignant poetry lines serve to further expound and underscore some points in the just performed stanza. The effect is something like highlighting notable lines or passages in a book which one is reading. This musical method works as bold scores, projecting and emphasizing in bright colors in the listener’s mind some pertinent areas of the song.

Golden yellow make up one of the dominant colors on the front jacket of All Hail Biafra CD. The hazy gold, the dark earth and silhouetted vegetation in the background give the CD its somber dusky hue and mood. An evening? Yes. But it is an evening with its yellow-white sun still dominating the horizon, pouring into the distant foreground its molten liquid of mellow light and warmth. A white bird (a dove?) is in flight across the face of the luminous setting sun. The front jacket also has the torso pictures of Charles Okereke the Biafran child as well as Charles Okereke, the Nigerian man. The child except for the chalky facial shades; is rendered in black silhouette. The man’s picture is in colors. He is dressed in printed and embroidered wide turtle neck kaftan with a matching short-round hat.

On the reverse side of the CD is a yellow background enclosed in squared gold edges. Map of Africa fills up the middle with the list of the CD songs superimposed across the map. There are eleven songs, including Charles Okereke’s award winning composition: God Bless Africa. This flip side contains the musician’s name and information on how to obtain copies of the CD. It says that the CD is available both in Nigeria and the United States. It is actually available anywhere else through Amazon or the reader can google the title to get more information on how to order.

The popularity of All Hail Biafra is enduring and is such that many people mistake it to be the Biafran National Anthem. Some people can swear that All Hail Biafra is the Biafran Anthem but it is not. The Biafran National Anthem; Land of the Rising Sunwas originally written by Nnamdi Azikiwe and set into music in the pattern of Sibelius’s Finlandia. Okereke wrote and produced his All Hail Biafra entirely on a different unique tune. The music and its rendition are well-produced.

A few people have sometimes speculated on the possibility of a new independent Biafra adopting the song as its new national anthem. This writer sees that happening as a remote necessity. When a new Biafra or Igbo state becomes free from the Nigerian bondage, the old anthem may still remain valid. Or if there should arise a need for a new anthem for the new republic, the government and people may have to compose a new and different national song. The new national song will be composed to reflect the up-to-date history of the people, the prevailing realities as well as anticipate the individual and collective hope of the then free people.

In the end however, it will not matter what the new free Igbo country will decide to do about its national anthem. All Hail Biafra will still remain an important Biafran national patriotic song. Okereke’s All Hail Biafra has carved out an enviable place for itself in the pantheon of notable Biafran artistic creations. All Hail Biafra is a great music. An important feature that distinguishes great music from the mediocre is that great music has clear philosophical theme or themes. The listening audience should be able to either relate with the themes in their individual or collective experience. Or at least the audience should be able conceive in their mind a comprehensive picture of the idea the artist is trying to convey as the storyline musically unfolds. Additionally, it is expected that whatever theme a good song is pursuing should be well-developed and stretched beyond the single-phrase or single-stanza excited children’s sing song. Sadly, up till now the Igbo music horizon has been dominated by such folksy lackluster cacophonous noise where the music makers monotonously repeat over and over an emotive one-line wonder.

As a result, over so many years the Igbo music scene has remained famished. Except for the few greats whom we have already mentioned, modern Igbo music arena has been barren of real good music and dedicated musicians. Even more troubling is the fact that some of the few well-made music are not easily accepted into the mainstream. So, in the absence of the Igbo projecting and promoting its bests, modern Igbo music scene remains saturated with the second rate and the absurd. The ear of Igbo listening audience is assaulted with the thematically barren or poorly developed themed songs. Take for example the so-called highlife music genre. Highlife as championed by such musicians like Osita Osadebe are disappointing and less satisfying because what would otherwise have been, with a little more work, excellent music, is turned into mere improvised excitement and almost no music.

November 29, 2016

Nigeria’s Radical Islamic President is Suppressing Biafran Zionists and Pro-Secessionists

At the end of the Biafran War many experts came to the conclusion that genocide had been committed against the Igbo by the Nigerian government. In an effort to suppress the scandal, the Nigerian government with some help from Great Britain worked frantically to cover up the news about the atrocities. For almost fifty years that effort paid off. The crime of Biafran Genocide was carefully hidden away from the public.

However, today 2016 the agitation for the restoration of the defunct Biafran state is in the news again. This is coming nearly half a century after the country’s demise in 1970. After suffering a pogrom in which more than 100,000 of their people were killed by Nigerian civilians and various security forces of the Nigerian government, Igbo people with other southeasterners who also were affected in the killings declared an independent Biafran state in mid-1967. Immediately following the secession the Nigerian state levied a genocidal war of aggression that lasted two and half years against Biafra. With the help of Great Britain, USSR (Russia) and Islamic Arab states; all those countries supplied arms to Nigeria and the war resulted in the genocide of Igbo people.

The war was prosecuted with the declared intention of wiping out the Igbo from the face of the Earth. By the time the war was over a quarter of Igbo population, that is 3 million of them were further exterminated. About 2 million of the casualties died from starvation resulting from the Nigerian government official policy of “hunger as a legitimate weapon of war.” Almost fifty years after that horrific genocide which tends to have been largely forgotten by much of the world community, a new generation of Igbo people who are majorly Animists and Christians are reviving the call to free themselves and territory from the largely Islamic state of Nigeria.

A close look at most of the people who are championing the new struggle to separate Biafra from Nigeria reveals that they either did not witness the Biafran War or they were mere children during the war. For this reason some people have asked the question; why are people in this age bracket bent on defiantly reviving such a horrific episode and experience in their history half a century on. Some people have argued that it has something to do with the fact that the Nigerian government banned the teaching of history in Nigerian schools soon after the Biafran War. People were prohibited from mentioning the name, “Biafra” for many decades afterwards. The government wanted to hide the genocide permanently from public consciousness. As a result, subsequent generations which did not witness the war are unable to appreciate fully the devastating impacts of the war on their parents’ generation. But since the years following the war even the generations of Igbo people who did not witness it are being punished and marginalized by the Nigerian state. And this is part of what is fueling the independence protests.

Remembering how horrible the war was, people like the current Muslim President of Nigeria Muhammadu Buhari who incidentally fought on the Nigerian side to defeat Biafra have asked the new agitators for a revived independent state of Biafra to forget it. Of course he did not find it necessary to express any remorse about the Igbo Genocide which he helped to orchestrate. He instead believes that the people will just forget just because he asked them to forget the heinous crime that was committed against them. Insensitively, the president went on to argue that the agitators are doing this because they did not experience or witness the war. This has made many observers to interpret Buhari’s highhanded response by killing the peaceful nonviolent agitators as his way of trying to teach the “inexperienced” agitators a lesson. In the past one and half years Buhari has rolled out, on many occasions, the full strength of his country’s military force to violently suppress the peaceful nonviolent Biafran independence movement.

The human rights organization; Amnesty International reports that since the advent of Buhari administration in 2015 till now – the tail end of 2016, Nigerian government has killed more than 300 Biafrans and wounded many more while they held peaceful protests for Biafra’s independence. Amnesty International says that many of those pro-Biafra protesters were shot and killed in their sleep and others while they gathered in churches to pray. Many of the protesters were shot and killed from behind while they tried to escape.

The fact is that the peaceful protests for the separation of Igbo territory (Biafra) from Nigeria has been going on since the year 2000. The group known as Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) had spearheaded these protests. Various Nigerian administrations before the advent of the present one in 2015 had used mostly the incarceration of the leaders of the movement in trying to deal with and suppress it. MASSOB’s former leader Ralph Uwazurike suffered many jail times in Nigerian prisons. Sometimes the MASSOB leader was detained for many years at a time. Apart from many of the agitators who are being killed extra-judicially by government forces there are some notable individuals who are being held in various Nigerian prisons just because they are agitating for Biafra’s independence. Some were snatched off the streets into prisons for merely wearing vests with Biafran insignia or just being in possession of Biafran flags. There are such people like Benjamin Onwuka the leader of Biafra Zionist Movement (BZM,) Chidiebere Onwudiwe whose home was invaded by Nigerian security agents in the middle of the night. He was taken away from his house at 2 AM and has not been heard from again since the last one year. Then there is Nnamudi Kanu who runs an online radio called Radio Biafra London (RBL.) These individuals except for Onwudiwe whose fate is yet to be known, can be described as almost lucky because Buhari’s government has not yet executed them and their cases have been celebrated because of the relatively wide media publicity they have attracted.

But there are many unsung pro-Biafra agitator-victims who are not as lucky. They are currently suffering various kinds of persecutions in many detention centers around the world. Some of these less known victims are being prosecuted in different courts of law in many places around the world simply because they demonstrated publicly for the independence of Biafra. These people are being deprived of their freedom or are being subjected to other forms of hardships and inhumane treatments because of their involvement in Biafran freedom activism.

Over the years many critics have complained that the Nigerian government has used some unorthodox diplomatic manipulations to influence how some foreign government agencies carry out their duties in its effort to suppress Biafra’s independence and hide the Biafran Genocide. Since the time of Biafra War till now, Nigeria has deployed its diplomatic tentacles across the world to make sure that those who agitate for Biafra anywhere are suppressed. We will cite two little known examples of those who are going through persecutions in so-called civilized societies like European countries of Norway and England.

Lotachukwu Okorie used to serve as MASSOB’s District Officer in southeast Nigeria before he emigrated to Norway, fleeing from persecution by Nigerian government authorities. On getting to Norway, a civilized society, he believed that his problems were over and his human rights would be protected. Unfortunately, he discovered that they had only just begun. In what looked like a remotely influenced operation the Norwegian government detained Okorie and charged him with illegal immigration crime. He was then detained for one year and six months without any conclusive decision on his case. According to Norwegian laws he overstayed in jail the period he was legally supposed to. Just before he was arrested, Okorie was so frustrated by the various dehumanizing treatments he was receiving from Norwegian security agents that he was driven to attempt suicide with a kitchen knife.

Another case which is fast becoming a source of embarrassment to the British government is that of Yahgozie Immanu-el victim of political persecution by British authorities that apparently are trying hard to please Nigerian government which it is believed are tele-guiding and influencing the current ordeals of Yahgozie. It appears that the British government is willing to compromise their country’s very reputable centuries-old national respect for the fundamental human and civil rights of all people simply to please the Nigerian government. Yahgozie is an independent journalist as well as a pro-Biafra activist who is based in London. He got arrested by the British police while he covered the recent official visit to Britain by the Nigerian President Buhari. He was subsequently taken to court on frivolous and trumped up charges that he was trying to attack President Buhari’s motorcade. Some eyewitnesses of the incident are still unable to understand how the actions of someone who only had a microphone and was trying to cover the unfolding events could have been interpreted as an intention to attack President Buhari. Yahgozie’s case comes up again in the City of London Magistrates Court later in this month of November. Many people think that the case is actually turning into an embarrassment to the human rights image of the British government.

[huge_it_share]

November 17, 2016November 17, 2016

South Sudan’s Independence and the Irony of Defeat in Victory

For more than 25 years the people of South Sudan fought their powerful common enemy to a standstill. The enslaving Arab Islamist forces of north Sudan were matched fire for fire until the northerners acknowledged that the southerners who are Animists and Christians have rights to live free and on their own cultural and religious terms. The southerners fought valiantly as men, they fought as one people; they fought long and won their freedom from the oppressors on July 9, 2011.

Vicariously, those of us who are fighting to free Biafra from the vicious grip of the Islamic state of Nigeria participated in the South Sudanese victory like it was our own. Yes, in more ways than not, the Sudanese victory tends to foretell how the eventual Igbo freedom from Nigeria will look like. Why the Biafrans saw in the South Sudanese victory their own is because in Nigeria Igbo people are also faced with the same Arab-Islamist forces of Hausa, Fulani and Yoruba oligarchies which are bent on the total extermination of the Igbo. So, since the South Sudanese withstood similar enslaving forces and defeated them, the victory has remained an evergreen source of inspiration for the Igbo in Nigeria.

While they fought in the trenches, on the hills and in all the many battlefields; the South Sudanese leaders had some squabbles and disagreements. But they always found ways to settle their differences and disputes and sustained the fight against the enslavers. At the end of the battle they won a country but now this is 2016, they need to win a nation.

Unfortunately, by 2013 the people lost their hard won country to personal interests and power flexing of their leaders. The leaders’ individual interests and show of power plunged the entire country into a civil war which has raged on to their shame and the disappointment of their admirers. These leaders need to put aside for one moment their pursuit for personal prestige and show some example of caring and benevolent leadership styles. Urgently, they must find solutions now; find ways to end childish things and begin the onerous and matured business of governing and managing a country and the welfares of its people.

Earlier on, at the southern tip of the continent, South Africans who had also fought long and arduous against those who oppressed them through Apartheid system, celebrated their freedom in 1994. Some of the leaders of the fight were imprisoned for more than 25 years. But their fight for equality had lasted for about a century. In the end the South Africans also won freedom and the right to be equal participants in the affairs of their country. But perhaps that is where the similarities of the two fights end. Today, and unfortunately so, the leaders of South Sudan are turning their laudable and prideful victory into a tragedy and nightmare. The attitude of the South Sudanese leaders toward leadership and power is largely to be blamed.

In South Africa there were Nelson Mandela and others like him who to a greater extent understood the nature and concept of victory and power – altruistic, magnanimous, camaraderie; transient and flitting. While in South Sudan there are Salva Kiir, Riek Machar and others who believe that victory is personal, individualistic and an end in itself. And that power should be held onto permanently and used vindictively to witch-hunt opposition while the opposition egoistically asserts that it is not weak, after all. That it also has influence. But the truth is that good leaders, whether in opposition or not cannot be vindictive and sour or constantly trying to prove some points.

The big guys of South Sudan are shamelessly flexing unattractive and unimpressive muscles, trying to prove personal superiority while their lowly citizens to whom the victory and power truly belong continue to suffer in pain and devastating impoverishment. In the mind of these leaders, they have come to erroneously think that because they were opportune to be present at the moment of the people’s victory therefore they have become some divine beings who are now infallible and indispensable. This attitude shamefully violates the memory and honor of those heroes who also fought and died before July 9, 2011. Sometimes one wonders if these leaders have ever considered that old saying of leaving the stage while the ovation is still loud.

Down through time, history has not lacked noble and honorable achievers and victors who left exemplary records which those that care can imitate. In the following story we learn that sometimes, because of the feelings of others that good leaders learn to let go of personal pleasures and comfort, even when they can afford them. In other words, true leaders cannot always take it just because they can. The biblical David was a military commander of ancient Israeli army who is still recognized as a successful leader of his people because he understood how to handle victory and power without being sucked into the twilight zone of those two impostors. It is reported that at one point during the heat of a battle, when an enemy force occupied Bethlehem his hometown, David thirsted for water from a well in Bethlehem. When he made his wish known, three of his officers volunteered and risked everything by cutting through the ranks of the enemy to fetch the water from the well. On their return, David would not drink the water but poured it out as libation, saying that there was no way he could drink it because the water equated with the blood of these men who risked their lives in order to satisfy his personal fancies.

As the leader, nothing prevented David from drinking the water but he resisted greed and insensitivity and instead poured the water away. We can play the story forward and contrast it with the attitude of the present South Sudan generals who it seems would rather impoverish and drink the blood of their fellow country men, women and children merely to hold on to power and prove how right and indispensable they have become.

The Monster is in us

My poet friend Jonathan Wilson said that as a little boy he looked for the monster under his bed. But now as an adult he suddenly discovered that the monster was himself. These South Sudanese generals fought so gallantly to win their many battles only to be defeated by mere selfish pursuit of personal glory and the unwillingness to let go and concede personal fancies in the interest of peace in the country for which they have already sacrificed so much. The present arch rivals President Salva Kiir and his former Vice-President Riek Machar fought side by side in the military until the enemy was defeated and the people of South Sudan became free and independent. Now, they are finding it impossible to defeat the enemy in their individual selves. Good leaders aim to leave behind legacies which acceptably, are more difficult to do than winning battles. In trying to win wars the aim is to defeat the enemy, while in building legacies true leaders must defeat their selves. At first it was believed that the problem of the South Sudanese people was the hegemony and evil devises of the Islamic Arabs in the north. Sadly, due to the selfish interests of their leaders, the people seem to be doing a rethink.

To many observers, that victory over the bigoted fanatical forces of Islamic Arab feudalism will not be complete until the leaders are able to defeat their personal demon. But they still have the time and opportunity to save themselves, the country and the people in it. These leaders must come to the realization that power as everything else is only a means and not an end in itself. All powers and attained positions are transient and temporal and should be treated as such.

Nevertheless, we are not pretending to believe that sentiments and emotions may be all there are in making these men to do the right thing. Sometimes there may be need for something extra. So, while we are appealing to the conscience of these men, to reconsider and solve this problem in the same way they had solved other disagreements they had when they fought for their liberation, we are not ruling out the need for genuine external assistance in helping solve this problem. The international community should find a way to use sanctions and other forms of economic and political pressures to force these men to do the right thing.

Part of what I consider to be the right approach in solving the problem is to avoid an obtuse and blanket kind of condemnations and approvals. Let the guilty be blamed and those who out of a sincere and honest heart have done the right thing should be praised and encouraged. It will be more beneficial, especially in the interest of posterity for those who do intervene in this matter to be specific when dealing with all aspects of the issue. There is the need for a comprehensive and holistic approach in trying to solve South Sudan. As an example, in my opinion, I think that the time has come for the review of the country’s political and social structure. The prevailing National Constitution was drawn under the circumstances of strife and war with an external force. As a matter of necessity, since the country as an independent state is now under a civilian regime, it may be a good idea to produce another constitution which takes cognizance of present realities.

[huge_it_share]

November 6, 2016November 6, 2016

How the Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari Cashed in on the Political Capital of Global Jihad

Some of Nigeria’s analysts see Muhammadu Buhari’s emergence as the “accepted” “saintly tough-guy” Nigerian corruption killer in a different light from the general make-believe one. These analysts attribute Buhari’s final success after many failed attempts to become Nigeria’s democratically-elected president to some external influences. They claim that some powerful international figures have often meddled in Nigeria’s internal affairs to affect the outcome of events in the country. And Buhari’s recent victory at the polls was not an exception.

One remarkable example that these critics cite is the especially patronizing speech by the American President Barack Obama just before the 2015 Nigerian presidential election which brought Buhari to power. In his speech Obama urged Nigerians to maintain a united country no matter the outcome of the election. Many saw the speech in which the president used an old Biafran-Nigerian wartime “genocidal slogan:” “To keep Nigeria one is a task that must be done” as an outward expression of clandestine political machinations which in the end installed a preferred candidate in Nigeria’s supreme leadership saddle.

In the opinion of many observers, Buhari is an Islamic extremist who believes that he; “will continue to show openly and inside me [him] the total commitment to the sharia movement that is sweeping all over Nigeria,” and “God willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementation of the sharia in the country.” Those are Buhari’s own words. For having the foisted posture of the “saintly tough-ruler” as well as an Islamic fundamentalist, Buhari fitted well the ideal consensus candidate of Nigeria’s Islamic north. He was chosen because he was believed to be a capable and willing candidate who would boldly implement the so-called north’s long term ambitious Islamic agenda for Nigeria – extending the global Islamic caliphate project to cover the entire country, including Christians’ and other religions’ areas. Nigeria for many reasons has long been considered important in this local and global Islamic caliphate agenda. It is said that the ultimate goal of this agenda for countries in Africa’s south of the Sahara is to eventually overrun and conquer them for Islam like those in the northern half of the continent. The advocates and financial sponsors of this agenda see the conquer and subjugation of the entire Nigerian geography as being strategic because by virtue of its position and clout the country will serve as a launch pad whose reaches cover the entire target-region.

The Nigerian jihad as part of the greater global Islamic agenda

In Nigeria today there are two manifest champions of this “global caliphate” agenda. They are members of the deadly Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram who have very strong connections with the most powerful people in Nigerian political, military and business establishments. The second group is also an equally well-connected Islamic terrorist group modeled after the fearsome Sudanese Janjaweed. Its members are mostly Fulani, members of the ethnic group (the group sometimes referred to as Nigeria’s “born-to-rule” over others) from which the current Nigerian president comes. They are generally known as the Fulani Cattle Herders (FCH.) Like Boko Haram, Fulani Cattle Herders are also generously financed by the northern elite and ruling oligarch class.

In the last few decades Saudi Arabia and some other Islamic countries like Iran, Turkey and Nigeria have dreamed of and fanatically pursued the archaic fantasy of an eventual Islam-subjugated world. These countries have expended in the process, a chunk of their petrodollar and other national incomes in pursuing the agenda. Some observers think that they have been successful in more ways than most people will care to admit. It is believed that among other achievements, that perhaps their greatest is being able to successfully infiltrate the Western news media establishment. Through this subversive penetration of the mainstream news and information dissemination process of Western societies, the jihadists have over the years, exerted pervasive subtle but unmistakable influence on the editorial opinions of media outlets in the West. Some analysts think that the prevalent editorial stance of most mainstream Western media where each tries to outdo the other on who would best be described as the most “politically correct,” “tolerant” and “civilized liberal,” can hardly be explained otherwise.

The infiltration seems to be so thorough and complete that today no matter how realistic and objective a critic is, there will always be a way to accuse him or her of being “politically incorrect,” suffering from “islamophobia” and expressing a “dangerous far right extremist views.” Today anyone can easily bet their most valued possessions to predict that the editorial opinions of Western media will always sing in unison the well-rehearsed chorus that “not all Muslims are terrorists” therefore the critic who deviates from the accepted “liberal” and fear-induced “civilized tolerance” is condemned and labeled; “unsophisticated,” “bigoted,” “crude” and “uninformed racist.” The new Western standard is simple; even after the attacker had called the authorities on the phone to announce their reason for the attack, Western authorities in the name of “not being at war with Islam,” should spend an endless period of time investigating to ascertain the motive behind the attack.

The ultimate goals of all terroristic or Islamic jihad campaigns are to receive attention, elicit fear and intimidate or cow the target-victims (the infidels.) Those goals have substantially been achieved in many places around the world, Nigeria inclusive. The ongoing global jihad has not only successfully used fear and intimidation to cow much of the international community, it has also compelled everybody to “tolerate and endure happily” the prevailing globe-wide displays of barbaric Islamic violent extremism. So, the fear campaigns have successfully cleared the way for the emergence into powerful offices, such extremist bigots like Buhari in dysfunctional societies like the Nigerian country. As a result, people in the mold of Nigeria’s present leader, rather than being censored are patronized by such world leaders like United Nations’ Ban Ki-moon with such unrealistic words like: “You are highly respected by world leaders, including myself. Your persona has given your country a positive image.” Yet the so-called Nigeria’s “positive image” is nothing more than the continued descent to the lowest levels of religious intolerance and flagrant abuses of the human rights of peaceful citizens. The brutal killings of hundreds of non-violent Biafran separatist protesters by government security forces are too recent to be swept under the carpet by the patrons of these extremist elements.

While campaigning for and on assumption of office, Buhari did not need to present any complex political agenda. Having proved himself as an Islamic fundamentalist, he could cash in on the well-established global jihad’s political capital of the “global caliphate.” Nevertheless, Buhari who became the posterchild of Nigeria’s “saint-and-tough-guy” messiah, winning became a do-or-die obsession. At 70 plus years, he became desperate as he felt that time was running out on him. In his own words; “baboons and dogs would be soaked in blood” should he fail again to win the election to become Nigeria’s next president in 2015.

Buhari and his handlers managed to convince the uninformed public that he was the “poor” candidate who never stole money since his more than forty years in public office (but there are abundant public records to the contrary) who is suited to kill the monster of Nigerian corruption. Yet this wretched candidate was able to easily afford the $10 million consultancy fee of the American political strategist David Axelrod of the Obama phenomenon. So, an indigent Buhari who would kill the Nigerian corruption saw nothing wrong in paying a “modest” $10 million to a foreign political consulting firm for a local election in a country where the people live on less than $2 a day.

July 24, 2016

Brexit, Sadiq Khan, and Lessons from the Igbo on Radical Islam

Dogs at play

The Igbo believe that there is a standard rule of play which dogs observe when two of them are at play: When one dog falls on its back the other dog knows without any other prompting that the next time is his turn to fall too. In this way, the play does not turn into a fight and will last longer. The lesson here is that when I fall for you and you in turn fall for me, the world goes around and becomes a more peaceful place where we all work, play and prosper in the spirit of give and take.

A Muslim becomes the Mayor of London

On May 9, 2016 the new Mayor of London Sadiq Khan was heralded into office with a fanfare and much jubilation. By any stretch of the imagination the election of Khan, a Muslim whose parents were recent Pakistani immigrants to Britain was historic. For the next 4 years Khan will preside over the affairs of one of the greatest cities of Christendom and Western civilization – London England. London, a Christian English city is only 60 miles from the famous cathedral in Canterbury where the revered Archbishop of Canterbury who is the global head of the Church of England lives. So, as well as being an important Western civilization’s cultural center, to many members of the Anglican Communion, Wesleyan Methodists and many other Christians, London can also serve as a holy city comparable with any other religions’ “holy” cities anywhere else.

For some people, especially the liberal politicians, the result of the London mayoral election was just the way it’s supposed to be. Such liberal thinkers argue that this is 2016 after all, and the world has come a long way in its journey towards tolerance and the integration of world’s diverse cultures and peoples. That notwithstanding, and given the prevailing realities of Islamic terrorism and violent jihad being unleashed by radical Muslims throughout the world, there are a large number of conservatives, including some moderates, who were shocked at Khan’s election as the new Mayor of London. Nevertheless, many have compared his election in London in some ways, to the 2008 election of Barack Obama into the White House as the President of the United States of America.

But, as some people have observed; in Obama’s case, he had to make an extra effort to assert and defend his Christian faith. While in Khan’s case, the people of London went a step further than the Americans; Sadiq Khan did not have to disguise his Islamic faith in his bid to become the Mayor of one of the most important Christian and Western cities in the world. In this regard therefore, Khan’s election became both a personal as well as a collective victory. The collective which won alongside Khan are all those who have campaigned to see a world where the populations of societies everywhere are more plural and diversified than closeted and mono-cultural. In this regard, the Western culture and education as represented by the city of London leads the way and has become the epitome of tolerance and liberty of the 21^st century. London is now a city on the hill to which any other elsewhere that is eager to exhibit tolerance and integration will aspire to copy

The dangers of Muslims resisting assimilation

However, and unfortunately so, judging from current events and experiences in Europe and other Western societies, it shows that it is not enough to create multi-cultural societies through open liberal immigration policies. What is even more important is that recent immigrants should be encouraged to integrate with the native populations to which they emigrate. It is of primary importance that new immigrants should accept the ways and practices of their host communities. Sadly and very troubling too, most Muslim immigrants to Western societies have continued to resist assimilation into their host Western societies. This resistance therefore has continued to breed unnecessary social tensions and cultural clashes. Apparently and very absurd also, the Muslim immigrants are fighting to destroy the very cultural foundations and social practices that sustained the host societies and made them attractive to the newcomers to want to emigrate to them.

Since the last few decades collective human civilization and progress have come under severe attack and threatened with real danger by unholy heat from radical Islam. And very disturbingly, this heat is fueled by these Muslims’ deep-rooted hatred and intolerance of other people’s views and cultures. Going by the Biafran experience, the danger of such antisocial behaviors as being displayed by these radical Muslims can be terrible and far reaching. When these excesses go unchecked for too long, they end up producing very serious crimes like complete social breakdown, genocide and other forms of crimes against humanity and civilization.

Radical Islam was responsible for the Biafran Genocide

As some readers may recall, it was the same intolerance and hate that led the Muslim dominated government of Nigeria, between 1966 and 1970, to commit the genocide of the Igbo in which more than 3.1 million Igbo perished. This heinous crime of genocide against the Igbo has so far gone largely unnoticed and unpunished, and as a result fifty years after, the world is witnessing an increased widespread impunity where the same group of people is committing the same atrocities against other populations. This world belongs equally to all the people here and no single group should lay claim to an exclusive right to control it and dictate for all others how they should live their lives.

The people of the world should come together to save the world

In 2016, fifty years after Biafra or Igbo Genocide, Muslim extremists have continued to pose real danger to not only Igbo people in Nigeria, Western civilization and its peoples, but also to all humanity, its civilizations, peoples and every progress that the collective humanity has ever made. And rather than continue to live in denial, human beings everywhere should now assume the responsibility by coming together to stop this bent by radical Muslims to destroy the world civilization as we know it. The international community must come together to fight this Islamic monster to a halt. The international community, led by the United Nations must declare a global state of emergency against intolerance, hate, violent Islam, sharia and jihad. Honest, sincere and practical steps must be taken collectively by the international community now to stop this madness or everything the world had ever held dear and all progress made by human beings will be doomed. The continued survival of the human race and their civilization is the collective responsibility of all people everywhere and the people must come together to save themselves.

Extending London-example to Islamic societies

Apart from the immigrants accepting, and in some cases willingly adopting the ways and cultures of their host communities, to accelerate the rate of integration of world’s cultures and populations, other cities and societies around the world need to follow in the path which the city of London has gone. In this regard it is necessary to particularly call out the traditional Muslim cities and societies. Tolerating and integrating with other cultures and peoples cannot be a unidirectional river that flows only from the West and other free societies toward the Muslims. Going back to the dogs’ rule of play with which we started this discussion; all Islamic countries and other societies which hitherto had been bent on remaining exclusive and intolerant of other cultures and worldviews must look up to London’s example and update their societies to the 21^st century London-standards.

In this same spirit of tolerance, it will be proper to see in no distant time, probably within the next decade, a Christian or Jewish man or woman become the mayor, emir or its equivalent of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia. Within the next ten years there should be a Christian or Jewish man or woman born by recent Christian or Jewish immigrant parents elected to become the mayor or emir of Tehran. Also, as the West has shown through the election of a Muslim into the mayoral office in London, such Islamic terrorist groups like al Qaeda, Islamic State, Boko Haram among others which are bent on destroying everybody, all cultures and views that are different from theirs must reconsider their unholy barbarous campaigns and start working toward tolerating and accepting other people and cultures. They must accept and practically demonstrate that 21^st century world and civilization have moved far away from the 7^th century intolerant Arab barbarism on which Islamic sharia and jihad are based.