PETER OBI'S PANDORA PAPERS SCANDAL: WHY IT MATTERS.

ICHEOKU says the issue is not whether he is a "wealthy" man or "a very big trader" or the "sole importer of Heinz salad cream" or brings Ovaltine in container loads into Nigeria or is the chairman and/or board member of so many banks, nobody is questioning or begrudging him of his riches. The issue is that he turned out to be just one of them, another hypocrite who preached one thing while doing the other. He harped against corruption but ended up engaging in corrupt practices, hiding assets in offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes on them. He also owned foreign bank accounts against the code of conduct for public office holders as a former governor of Anambra State. 

He portrays himself as squeaky clean, an image which he cultivated through many economic theory themed speeches and which he markets himself to Nigerians with, as the only authority on the solution to Nigeria's multifaceted problems. He painted an image of an incorruptible personality, the quintessential embodiment of a saintly politician, the moral authority of exemplary leadership and someone possessed of the clout of an ideal Nigerian leader, something which have eluded the country until Peter Obi emerged on the scene. It is this image which he created for himself and sold to Ndi Anambra and which he is also trying assiduously to sell to Nigerians that has now been sullied and besmirched by what the Pandora Papers revealed. 

So, if Nigerians cannot trust him to be honest with his assets declarations and compliance with set rules of code of conduct of public office holders, what else can they not trust of. He is approaching the issue with responses and reactions which are off tangent by proclaiming his innocence and declaring how rich he is. Therefore, no matter the length he goes to protest his innocence and/or declare that he acted based on advise of professionals, including international lawyers who had assured him that he did nothing wrong by incorporating companies in tax havens and in his children's and wife's names, it will not cut it. He acted to avoid being directly identified as owner of the companies and to avoid paying taxes on them. It impeaches his character for trustworthiness and this is the only issue that should concern him which he should work to restore. 

The mere fact that he was ready, willing and able to participate in such a money/assets hiding scheme goes to show his character for dishonesty and if he did it, what else he is willing, able and ready to do just for the sake of money. It is his conduct that is on trial alongside his character for deceit. Recall that many of those rich and wealthy individuals implicated in the Pandora Papers are leaders of some countries whose citizens are suffering from all manners of crass deprivations, including the King of Jordan and his $100 million hidden assets. These are heartless people who do not care nor necessarily love their people that they would rather stash millions overseas than invest in their countries and with jobs creations, help their people earn their living. People are dying in their countries from hunger and starvation while they have millions hidden in money laundering havens. 

Anyway, Peter Obi is one fella who ICHEOKU does not particularly care for especially following the Ezu River 23 floating dead bodies of IPOB and MASSOB members who were massacred when he was the governor of Anambra State. The extra judicial murders of these young Igbo men were not investigated and as their governor, he failed to throw his weight to ensure that their killers, the State, took responsibility for their murder and the culprits were prosecuted and punished and compensations paid to their families. He simply acquiesced to it and the murders were swept under the rug of Ezu River and it was acceptable to this Peter Obi. That callousness cost him a lot of goodwill which he hitherto had both in Anambra State and Nigeria. To say that he speaks funnily, in a small, witchy, shrill voice, unfit for any fully grown adult to possess, especially a man, adds to his general weirdness. 

There is something about him that significantly questions his sincerity and trustworthiness; or should ICHEOKU say something eerie feeling about his general demeanor and personality. He could be an accomplished businessman, scholar, administrator and what have you, but there is something unsettling about him that any clear eyed, unbiased and disinterest person can easily see of him even standing hundreds of feet away. So what the Pandora Papers claimed is not the surprise here, the surprise is that there were not many more of such accusations in the papers as appertained to him. 

As an advocate of good, transparency and open governance which he claims, like Caesar's wife, he should have been above board in every facet and flank. He should not  have given anyone including many of his detractors any reason to throw mud at him and say, you see he is just one of us, big on saying things but small in doing them. Like the Pharisees, he does not practice what he preaches. The veneer of corruptibility is sufficient to sully his reputation and for a man who has pontificated and preached values of a holier than thou person since leaving office as Anambra State governor a few years ago, it matters that he was implicated in the Pandora Papers scandal. He is damaged no matter from which angle or perspective it is viewed as the Peter Obi of yore is no longer the Peter Obi of now.

Peter Obi should understand why many Nigerians, especially his fans are angry at him, worried and concerned about the assertions in the Pandora Papers, which he has since admitted, claiming that he did nothing wrong by what he did. It is because of the trust which they hitherto reposed in him but which has now somewhat be shaken or diminished or completely wilted away as a result of the disclosure. They are unhappy with him that their idol and symbol of honesty and good stewardship is no more; and now questioning if he has been just a great pretender all these years. An Igbo adage has it that 'a good face does not deserve to be scratched'; and being above really means being completely above board, regardless. 

That pedestal of incorruptibility and honesty which Peter Obi had placed himself on have been compromised, it has caved in as a result of the Pandora Papers disclosure and so much so that his once colossal political height have become diminished and he no longer stands as tall as he once stood in the eyes of Nigerians. He should therefore channel any damage control to finding ways to repair it and reinvent himself as the man with candor and character who shuns everything and anything corrupt. He can start this by first shutting down those secret foreign operations, then apologize to Nigerians for the mistake, with a promise to be better going forward while simultaneously denying knowledge of ever being aware that such practice is wrong. He needs humility and not defiance, nor using the opportunity to proclaim how "wealthy" a businessman he is, as his riches is not the issue but his sharp practices of secreting assets overseas. 

Once he can appreciate the distinction, he might recover some of his political capital and standing before Nigerians, otherwise, he has gone off the political cliff and with it whatever chances he formerly had at ever berthing himself in Aso Rock. With Atiku Abubakar's avowed notoriety for being acutely corrupt and now Peter Obi's questionable overseas business sharp practices, imagine what would have been the faith of Nigeria had the duo won their ticket's election in 2019. It is possibly the reason the almighty God intervened and prevented their anchor from dropping in Aso Rock. Just imagine how many jobs his $15 million stashed in overseas' bank accounts would have created in Nigeria and helped put food in so many hungry stomachs. It is that Peter Obi is infallible or that he did something which no other Nigerian has done before, but that Peter Obi should have lived the expectations from Peter Obi and not be just one of them. It is sad. 

THE MORE YOU ARE TRUSTED, THE LESS YOU PAY - DAVID HORSAGER

Trust, not money, is the currency of business and life. In a climate of trust, people are more creative, motivated, productive, and willing to sacrifice for the team. What happens when a business gains the trust edge? Every aspect of business becomes more profitable. Customers will pay more, tell others, and come back. With suppliers whom you trust, one call is enough. Delivery time and costs decrease because there is less double-checking, paperwork, and follow-up.

Skepticism and suspicion create the opposite of trust and destroy motivation, teamwork, and results. Skepticism brings everything into question, slows processes, and promotes suspicion. America’s public climate has been pervaded by suspicion. For just a glimpse of how this has happened, consider insurance scandals, misconduct by the governors of New York and Illinois, the mortgage and banking meltdown, financial fraud, Ponzi schemes, the Big Three automakers’ failings, executive greed that has bilked investors and employees, food contaminations, and athletes hiding drug use. It is no wonder suspicion is soaring. There is a cost.

In fact, research from a study of 453 buyer-supplier relationships of automakers dealing in three countries (Japan, South Korea, and the United States), gave empirical evidence of the economic value of trust. The research found that the automakers’ transaction costs were five times higher with the least trusted supplier than with the most trusted supplier. Further, with the least trusted suppliers, face-to-face interaction time doubled. Low trust revealed a need to spend more time and resources for communication, negotiation, and compliance. High trust led to greater information sharing and a willingness to sacrifice for the partner.

Your credit score is really a trust score. If a bank trusts you on the basis of your past financial responsibility, then you will get a higher score and pay less for a loan. In fact, I just asked my mortgage broker what the cost of a loan is today using different credit (trust) scores. She said if you have a score of 720, which is not terribly high, you can get a thirty-year mortgage at 4.75 percent. However, if your credit score is 640, which is not terribly low, the best loan you can get would be at 7.25 percent. That means the less-trusted buyer will pay over $115,000 more on the same $200,000 mortgage. If you were to buy a $500,000 house and had the lower credit score you would pay nearly $300,000 more over the course of the loan–and that does not account for the higher payments for insurance because of the lower credit score. The more you are trusted, the less you pay!

Most podcasts or blogs never lead to any more than a little extra pocket cash. One podcaster has beaten the odds with a most unusual approach. Canadian Stefan Molyneux is the innovative host of Free-domain Radio, the largest philosophy podcast on the Internet with over 4 million Internet views per year. Molyneux has released over 1,200 podcasts and at least seven books completely free of charge. How does such a model produce any profit?

Freedomain Radio thrives on the honor system. Molyneux, in a massive version of the office snack box, asks listeners to voluntarily donate what value they find in the podcasts. He suggests 50 cents per podcast. Molyneux believes Freedomain Radio’s honor system has been a positive factor for his business model, which he didn’t entirely predict. The fact that his income could dry up at any minute means that he feels a constant pull to keep producing relevant and interesting podcasts. If he doesn’t produce quality, people don’t pay. In my discussion with him he told me, “I get instant feedback. I know right away if it was good or not based on how many donations come in for that material.”

Molyneux says he keeps the donation model so listeners have a sense of ownership of the podcasts. Listeners engage and feel that they are a real part of the conversation, since they contribute to its financial success. His sites include no advertising, and people don’t even get to write off their donations, because he is not a charity. Molyneux proves that where there is trust, money will follow. “Trust is everything,” Molyneux told me. “If I didn’t have trust there would be no downloads, no show, and no business.” According to him, the most important factor in trust is humility. Being humble has made him one of the most trusted philosophers of our time, because he is open to differing opinions and willing to bow to the good points and logic of others.

Another important aspect of trust is being congruent. Molyneux mentioned this: “Your business model needs to be aligned with your content and your approach.” Since his philosophy is that “people are basically good” and that “voluntary virtue is the best ideology,” his donation model is consistent with his philosophy and business. Stefan Molyneux has defined trust as the best conceivable principle to have in the modern marketplace, and it has resulted in success for his business.

Bill Otis, former chief of the Appellate Division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, offered this analysis: “Our ability to bail our way out of this recession is extremely limited, because, even if they worked and could be paid for, bailouts and government spending generally fail to address the fundamental problem at the heart of our difficulties. The fundamental problem is not liquidity or even solvency. It is trust–or more correctly, the lack of trust–that has spawned the breakdown in the credit markets. The lack of trust cannot be remedied with money. It can only be remedied with that which creates trust.”

Though our trust has been shaken in America during this economic crisis, we still enjoy a level of trust that is not found in all parts of the world. A business professor and friend of mine, Leo Gabriel, was asked by a native of a small, war-torn, developing country, “Why does capitalism work in America and not here?” Gabriel said, “Because, generally, we can assume trust in our economic system.” In America we can go online, order a product, and assume it will be shipped. The retailer can generally assume that he will be paid. 

Without trust there cannot be economic activity. You must be able to trust that your cash, check, or credit will have value and will be good. A retailer must know that the product or service will be delivered from the supplier as expected. With greater trust comes greater economic activity and a better form of capitalism. One benefit of sincerely building trust is the priceless feeling that comes when one does what he knows in his heart is the right thing to do. Other intangibles of genuine trust include decreased stress, increased peace, fulfillment, solid friendships, and a lasting legacy.

CNN'S 24/7 SIDE SCREEN CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC DISPLAY: WHERE DID IT GO?

ICHEOKU says the reasoning then was that "reporters must continue to expose the tragedy of the pandemic and the government's response to it", begging the question does that need to "expose the tragedy and government's response" no longer exist today? Are people no longer dying from the coronavirus pandemic disease or has the government finally had a grasp on the pandemic that it makes no sense continuing with the split screen effort? 

Rather, was it merely a politically driven sensationalization geared to hurt President Donald John Trump's chances at reelection by portraying him as a clueless mumbling fool who has no idea on how to control the pandemic, and that he is the reason the coronavirus pandemic was killing Americans. Why did CNN make the decision to halt their spilt screen feed about the coronavirus pandemic following President Joe Biden assumption of the mantle of office. 

Could it be that American people dying from the coronavirus pandemic under President Joe Biden is somehow tolerable and permissible, but their dying from the coronavirus pandemic under former President Donald John Trump was unacceptable. A supposed news network that is supposed to just report the news and let the people make up their minds as they see fit, but which has since become acutely partisan, having a clear a dog in the fight, that it merely propagandizes Americans as well as their global audience with only what they want them to hear, rather than what is actually happening. If their purpose was to expose the pandemic and government's response, why stop now?

Many more people are still dying from the virus and statistically, more people have died from the dreaded disease since President Joe Biden took office than died when President Donald John Trump was in office. Yet CNN made the political decision not to continue with their split screen coverage of the coronavirus pandemic in order to protect President Joe Biden and not damage his presidency. Suddenly, everything is now honky dory with President Joe Biden in the White House and there is no more need to continue creating anxiety in the polity and panicking the people. As a result, CNN is no longer going into a tizzy with reminding American people every second, every hour, every day that Americans are dying in great numbers from the coronavirus pandemic, why? 

Their motive was not a genuine attempt to inform the people on the virulence and lethality of the virus and what the government was doing about it. It was part of their grand campaign of calumny against then President Donald John Trump to make it impossible for him to win a reelection. So, what other thing else do we see on CNN is merely biased opinion and not news; and is it about time the network removed the "NEWS" in its name and just become what it covers, biased editorials and opinions. CNN played an active role influencing last November 3rd, 2020 presidential election and with President Trump gone, one had expected that the coronavirus pandemic will also be gone alongside with him. But it is still here with us and killing more people, including the fully vaccinated; upturning the whole CNN narrative that it was a TrumpVIRUS. It is sad. 

FURY V WILDER TRILOGY: A BATTLE ROYALE, TWO GIANTS BUTTED HEADS.

ICHEOKU says Tyson Fury v Deontay Wilder III lived up to its billings and millions of boxing fans all over the world were completely satisfied, admitted those of Gypsy King Tyson Fury were satisfied more than their counterparts. But overall, it was a beautiful fight that will be treasured for a long time. Congratulations to the Gypsy King for his TKO defeat of Deontay Wilder in the 11th round of their 12 round bout. Deontay showed his mettle too, as he proved he was not just a push over. It was a good fight.

DEONTAY WILDER ON HIS KNEES: BOWS DOWN BEFORE GYPSY KING TYSON FURY.

ICHEOKU says Tyson Fury has nothing more to prove to Deontay Wilder in their battle of who is the superior heavyweight boxer. Not once, not twice, but for the third time which the opportunity availed the American heavyweight boxer Deontay Wilder to prove that he is a better heavyweight boxer but he couldn't deliver. It shows that he has nothing on the British boxing great Tyson Fury. 

He drew in their first meet, lost in their second meet and have now once again lost in their third and most probably final meet, thus crowning the Gypsy King the indisputable better heavyweight boxer. Tyson outboxed Deontay and put him down three times and with a TKO, forced Deontay Wilder on his knees as he bowed down to his boxing superior, the Gypsy King. 

The third meet was epic and did not disappoint at all as the two boxing giants battled it out convincingly with five knockdowns, two for Deontay and three for Tyson, before a crowd of more than fifteen thousands boxing fans and millions more who watched it on pay per view around the world. It was a thriller in Las Vegas which went all the way to the 11th round when Tyson Fury dropped Deontay Wilder for the third and final time before referee Russel Mora jumped in to save Deontay from further punishment, declaring a TKO victory for Tyson Fury. 

The fight is rated their best fight ever out of their three meets. It was the champion's 31st win and the 22nd knockout of his boxing career. Tyson Fury was a bigger and taller fighter and his punches heavier, which he used to punish Deontay Wilder and reminded him who is his boxing daddy; finally submitting him in the 11th round through a technical knockout. With this win, Gypsy King Tyson Fury is now the best heavyweight boxer in the world, the king of boxing heavyweights and also the king of the entire boxing sport.  ICHEOKU says congratulations to the KING. 

PRESIDENT TRUMP IN IOWA WITH EYES TRAINED ON 2024 AND BEFORE THEN, 2022.

ICHEOKU says the former president was in his usual element and before a joyous tumultuous crowd of supporters who drooled and longed that he was still in the White House and leading America from the front. But unfortunately, the conspiracy of November 3rd, 2020 made their day dreaming remain what it is, a mere wishful thinking. He is definitely running again but as he rightly observed, will the "entrenched interests and sinister forces" which scuttled his 2020 reelection bid permit his successful comeback in 2024. If he can bulldoze through their wall, he stands a very great chance of returning back to the White House. But we shall see. #MAGA2024.

BIAFRANS LIVES MATTER IS THE NEW BLM: CHIWETALU AGU SHOWS GREAT COURAGE.

ICHEOKU says kudos to Nollywood star Chief Chiwetalu Agu for using his acting platform to add his voice to the agitation for an independent State of Biafra. He displayed an exemplary courage worthy of emulating by everyone, using whatever platform they have to put the word across that Biafra is indeed what the majority of the people of Southeast Nigeria truly want. 

Such a display of uncommon courage will help IPOB's leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu with the Biafra struggle. It will show that the agitation is deeply rooted and that majority of the people are in full support of it; an independent homeland where they can freely live, aspire, prosper and safe from the frequent slaughtering by Fulani terrorist herdsmen simply because of their faith in God Almighty and their desire for freedom from a suffocating Fulani Islamists hegemony. Well done High Chief. 

FYI: What Nigeria's President Muhammadu Buhari's government "proscribed" was IPOB but not Biafra. It also did not ban the wearing of any clothing that looks like or have any connotation of Biafra. The rising sun symbol or red, black and green colors are not exclusive Biafra as to suggest that anybody wearing a design based on them is promoting IPOB. They are not IPOB nor Biafra insignia or attire or regalia. While IPOB is Biafra, Biafra is not IPOB. Biafra is bigger and larger than IPOB as IPOB is but one huge branch of the Biafra tree. The High Chief should approach a court for these clarifications to be pronounced on.  

TRUMP'S HAITIAN IMMIGRANTS & AIDS: THE UNENDING "BLACKS ARE BAD" NARRATIVE.

ICHEOKU says President Joe Biden's immigration officials set mounted horses against them at Del Rio and deported thousands of them back to Port-Au-Prince as soon as they were pocked up, despite the dire situation in Haiti. It did not matter to the administration that amongst those helpless Haitian immigrants were thousands of women and children. It did not matter to the administration that Haitian president was assassinated a few months ago on July 7th, 2021 and that the country is rudderless and adrift on the sea of hopelessness and despondency. It did not matter to the administration that thugs and gangsters are running amok in Haiti, making life unbearable and that security situation is deplorably bad. 

Then add the devastating earthquakes of 2010 and 2021 which turned Haiti upside down on its head and reeling in abject depravation and degrading poverty. But none of these were sufficient to persuade the President Joe Biden's administration to show mercy on these unfortunate Haitians who successfully made it to America through the Del Rio entry point to grant all of them at least a temporary stay in America. Instead, the administration deported thousands of them back to the same Haiti which they fled several years ago, where they are now more despondent than they ever were when they left as their country that has changed drastically for the worse. 

Now, as if those Haitians immigrants have not had enough punching on the nose already, here comes former President Donald John Trump disparaging them further, stating that majority of them probably have Aids. In his own words while on a telephone interview with FoxNews Sean Hannity, the former president said, of Del Rio's Haitian immigrants: "Haiti has a tremendous AIDS problem. AIDS is a step beyond, AIDS is a real bad problem. So hundreds of thousands of people are coming into our country. And if you look at the stats, and if you look at the numbers, take a look at what's happening in Haiti. A tremendous problem with AIDS." An insinuation that those Haitian immigrants are infected and carrying AIDS.

What a balderdash for the former president singling out Haitian immigrants in this particularly disparaging manner as if Haitians are the only immigrants that ever came to America with some infections or even probably carrying the HIV/AIDS disease. Why the attack on Haitians with such insinuation, afterall Rock Hudson was the first face of AIDS in the world and he is an American, but nobody ever disparaged America or tried to publicly shame America for the scourge that eventually killed the Hollywood rich and famous Hudson. America also had HIV/AIDS epidemic in the 1980s but no country in the world ever isolated American citizens or shamed Americans for producing Rock Hudson in this manner, calling them out as AIDS carriers. So, why Haitians?

But a former president who is either oblivious of the damage or who does not care about his image and how he is perceived among black community in America as an acute racist, continues to give his detractors more ammunition for their continuous firing off of their racist accusations and attacks against the former president. Why is he still digging more inside a hole of racism when he is already in, instead of guarding his utterances more carefully and being more circumspect about what he says that could be (mis)interpreted as further evidence of what they already accuse him of. President Trump should make effort at building bridges with blacks everywhere, including Haiti, in order to help him burnish his image and make it more amiable to black people.

It does not even matter assuming what the former president said is true, such a public figure should be more careful not to utter such divisive and derogatory statements capable of stigmatizing a particular people. We are not allowed to call Islamist terrorists Muslim islamists terrorists because it would stain Muslims all over the world; so why is it then ok to stain all Haitians and by extension, every black people, by painting Haitian immigrants as AIDS carriers. The United States of America at 2.40% even have more people living with HIV/AIDS according to the World Index on HIV/AIDS than Haiti with 2.10%, so why the singling out as if Haitians are the incubators of the disease.

It only goes to show the former president's aversion to all things black; and further propagate the typical stereotyping that paints everything Africa and black as bad and negative. With regard to Haitian immigrants, the former president does not have any proof of the "stats" he quoted and  could not possibly validate his claim, yet he said it, regardless. Whether it was Trump being Trump or to be provocative on the issue of immigration and make a point that President Joe Biden has failed with his immigration policy, what he said only festers the fear of Haitian immigrants by Americans. It is also indisputable that there are more homosexual gay men in America than Haiti and if the typical stereotyping that the dreadful disease is a gay disease, why then is Haiti being singled out in this manner. 

Hopefully, the former president will realize the gravity of what he said soon enough to disclaim or deny it; and apologize for it, except that he does not usually apologize, before it costs him more black supporters and many Haitians live in Florida and throughout the East Coast. Haitian immigrants should not be demeaned in this manner and portrayed as "poster-child" for AIDS. They are immigrants looking for a better life in America just like other immigrants from other parts of the world who throng into America in search of their American dream, not knowing that many of such adventurers before them found nightmares instead; and decided to sleep on rather than wake up to a dream that did not come true. Our homeless and prison population attest to this fact that not all American dreamers lived their dreams but that should never stop anyone from trying their luck whenever the opportunity avails itself. So, no, the former president is wrong as Haitian immigrants are not AIDS infested.

FRANCES HAUGEN: A HEROINE OR A DISGRUNTLED FORMER EMPLOYEE?

ICHEOKU says if her program was not canceled and her team disbanded, would she have come out to make her allegations? For the nearly two years she worked at Facebook and for the same period of time when everything she is now complaining about were going on at Facebook, what did she do and why now? It is very unfortunate that many people keep a blind eye to things which does not directly impact or effect them directly and as long as it remains that way; but will immediately come barreling down once their interest becomes effected. Now, she is being celebrated as a "heroine" who is courageously taking on the big tech, unafraid to go up against such a titan Mark Zuckerberg and his company Facebook.

Although ICHEOKU is not holding any brief for anyone nor maintaining the position that Facebook is not doing something that will give its profitability an undue advantage and edge over the complained safety of the young and the society at large users of the platform. The issue here is whether the whistle blower is a vindictive woman who is merely reacting angrily because her position was eliminated and she no longer have the power and authority which she once had at Facebook. What is her true motive for coming out this hard at Facebook or is there any company in the world which primary motive is not to increase profitability at every other thing's expense. 

She calls herself "an advocate for public oversight of social media" but did not tell us when her advocacy started, whether at the beginning of her career in the tech industry or at the waning days of it prelude to her resignation from Facebook. In fact she actually said as much herself that she "only lost faith in Facebook's commitment to protecting users after Facebook disbanded the civic integrity team" which she was heading, following the conclusion of the 2020 presidential election. This is despite Facebook stating that the disbandment was for efficiency as it merely redistributed the duties and members of the civic team into other areas. So, if the team wasn't disbanded, would Ms Frances Haugen had come out or still be working for Facebook?

Ms Haugen also claimed that the thing she saw at Facebook "over and over again" was that there were conflicts of interest between what was good for the pubic and what was good for Facebook and that Facebook "over and over again" chose to optimize for its own interests, like making more money. So, she saw all the inimical activities going on at Facebook, it's cutthroat competitive edge to be on the top and to make as much money as they could possibly make, yet it took her this late to voice out her concerns and make her observations known to the public. Why not when she first noticed them and what took her this long?

She knew all these as way back as 2018 when she started working at Facebook that their algorithms were changed to prioritize posts with higher user engagement; and that engagements which turns out lies and anger rank off the chart. She said that Facebook knew that if they change the algorithm to make Facebook safer that people will spend less time on Facebook, that people will click less on advertisements on Facebook and that such limited interest to engage will in turn make Facebook less money. What did she do to remedy the situation immediately upon noticing it. Nothing, as she worked and profited and benefitted from Facebook without a care in the world that people are being "destroyed" by Facebook until now. 

There was nothing in her testimony or in any of the Facebook documents which she stole from the company that showed that she worked tirelessly hammering on these alleged misdeeds to force a change in the company's direction. Instead, she unlawfully and illegally copied thousands of pages of Facebook's internal documents, company's work products and internal memos, which are exclusive property of the company, yet she has not been arrested for it. 

Why is she not in jail instead of parading herself at CBS 60 Minutes or in the Congress or is what she did any different from what Wikileaks Chelsea Manning or National Security Agency contract staff Edward Snowden did, for which one of them has already done some time before being pardoned midway and the other is still a fugitive hiding in Russia.

Then she asked people not to hate Facebook because of what she revealed as that will mean that she had failed in her mission and you ask yourself what then was her ultimate goal for so doing if not to isolate Facebook and create a divide between the company and its 2.3 billion users. She wants lawmakers to take action against Facebook, regulate Facebook, in order to hit back at her former employer for the manner they treated her which forced her to resign. In other words, she was just trying to use lawmakers as her unpaid hitmen. She wants the regulation of big tech, period; the same big tech which she benefitted from handsomely, passing through their revolving doors which saw her going through many including Pinterest, Google and Yelp. 

ICHEOKU says is emphatic that social media is what it is or has become because of the far leftist liberals who control it and who are micromanaging public opinion, censoring and caging  opinions which does not meet their benchmark of liberalism and which digresses from their so called "community" set standards. So, any regulation of the social media should be directed and targeted at equalizing the playing field for every opinion, regardless of how divergent and different they might be. 

Any such regulations should strive at this and not to force Facebook to do more censoring as that will smother free speech and diminish its essence. It is true that Facebook cannot control all the contents on its platform, but Facebook can at least try not to selectively pick and choose which content to control, especially when it is conservative viewpoints. 

This dichotomy in censorship of viewpoints is the real danger of social media and not that Facebook is not doing enough to keep the platform safe. Just to add, if investors were misled, it was a purposeful acquiescence caused by failure of due diligence and greed and not as a result of anything which Facebook is doing because what Facebook is doing is to keep such investors happy with huge returns on their investments. 

Also, Mark Zuckerberg and other high level male executives of Facebook are exceptionally even lucky that no allegations of sexual abuse or of a sexual harassment nature was included, otherwise we would be talking about entirely something else. Feminist females are waging an undeclared war and they do not care the length they go to deliver knockout punches at targeted males. Mark Zuckerberg just dodged a potential #MeToo pbullet.

CORONAVIRUS DEATHS: HAS THE EFFORT TO FIND A CURE STALLED OR FAILED?

ICHEOKU says Pfizer CEO recently said that they have the capacity to supply enough vaccines for booster shots as well as whatever the amount of doses of vaccines that will be needed for the unvaccinated to get vaccinated. But he did not say anything about a continuing effort by his company to develop a real vaccine that will finally take care of business instead of the adjunct vaccines that constitute the current "doses" and "booster shots." Why can't Pfizer just develop a 'one-dose-fix-it' vaccine and be done with it. But no, they have figured out how to continue making billions from producing "multiple-shots" vaccines, hence there is no more incentive at finding a cure for the disease with a vaccine that actually works. How about retooling. 

First was that we have to rush to find a vaccine, then it became that we needed a dose of the vaccine, then a second dose of the vaccine and now they are contemplating a third dose of the vaccine. At the rate they are going, we will eventually some day be required to get a fourth dose, a fifth dose, a sixth dose and so on until it becomes a monthly vaccination. It is possible too that  a time will come when coronavirus vaccination will start competing with Apples' iPhone on which product will get the most versions and models. Since Steve Jobs died, Apple has lost its once epochal innovative edge and instead of entirely new different products, have somewhat  stagnated at just, periodically, upgrading the same old products, reformatted in various versions. How about a product that can make a blind to see or can magnetically zap our pains away? Now iPhone version 13 is about to roll out and you wonder whether we will someday see iPhone 100. Is coronavirus vaccine headed in the same direction too?

What does the series of coronavirus vaccinations upon vaccination say about the efficacy of the vaccine when similar vaccines of yore such as vaccinations for polio, measles or smallpox were all a one-shot deal. Is commercial profit the reason the coronavirus vaccination is turning into a periodic exercise which has left many people wondering what is the use of getting it anyway when it does not protect people from getting the disease and in some cases, still dying from it too. Why continue the needling and poking of their skin if they will not become immune from the disease as a result. Vaccination by its essence is to inoculate against and prevent a disease from infecting and taking root in a person or animal. But when vaccinated people end up still becoming infected, hospitalized and in some case still dying from the virus, what then is the use of getting vaccinated. 

Researchers and medical scientists need to go back to their laboratories, honker down and stay there until they find a true vaccine which will be a real panacea for the coronavirus disease, the real McCoy. The rushed out vaccines are not sufficiently working, at least, not as effectively as was anticipated and hoped for. Instead of the patchwork vaccines which now require more doses and every so often, and which is gradually getting our bodies used to it that it no longer provides the immunity expected, and making people susceptible to infection and vulnerable to the disease, effort needs to be doubled on finding a vaccine that will be an effective antidote to the coronavirus disease. The tale that the lingering infections, hospitalizations and deaths is the pandemic of the unvaccinated is not true because even fully vaccinated people are dying as well.

Enough of the focus on how many vials that could be sold and at such a humungous profit to a desperate world, scarred stiff of the coronavirus. It is time to refocus attention on finding a silver-bullet vaccine that will knock out the coronavirus for good. The government and regulators should sit on pharmaceuticals companies and make them develop a vaccine that will be truly effective against the virus without any further delay. They can do it. If they could develop the vaccines now being injected into people's arms, they can also redouble their effort and develop vaccines which will in fact be really effective against the virus. On a layman's level, this can be achieved, at least, by increasing whatever derivatives and properties in the composition of the current vaccines. The present lack of cure and total immunity is in a way hampering full vaccination as many unvaccinated people are asking what is the point anyway getting a vaccine that won't do the job. 

At this rate of booster shots, what is the guarantee that we will not eventually become permanently dependent on coronavirus vaccination for the rest of our lives. With more doses being recommended and required, we may end up getting as many doses as even a dozen at some point down the line. It might also even become a daily or weekly or monthly or yearly rendezvous with the needle. The frequent vaccinations might even alter and damage our bodies so much that we become like diabetics, requiring self-injected daily shots of the vaccine to keep us from completely unravelling. But are Americans prepared to inject themselves very so often because of the coronavirus disease. So, instead of all these repeat doses, effort should be made at finding a one dose shot that will be the mother of all vaccines that will end the coronavirus.

ICHEOKU says with the emergence of new variants and the continuing diminishment in efficacy of current vaccines, there is a need to reassess and reconfigure our thinking about the disease, to enable us redirect our energy towards finding a permanent cure. A much improved vaccine that would smother the virus for good and put everyone at rest is the answer. Too many people have already died from the disease and many more people are still dying from the disease, including those who were already fully vaccinated, who did everything they were told to do in order to stay alive but who ended up dying anyway. It has been explained away as "break through" cases, but why was the virus able to break through the shield of the vaccine? It is time this scourge finally ended and every effort should be made to see it ended. It is doable, it can be done and we can do it as Americans; but first, the pharmaceutical companies must be persuaded to do it. Say no to more coronavirus deaths. 

TRANSGENDERISM CANNOT CO-EXIST WITH FEMINISM - MATT WALSH.

As conservatives and Christians have run away terrified by the prospect of having meaningless words like transphobic tossed at them, it might ultimately be, in a strange twist of fate, the feminists who take down the "transgender" narrative. If they ever figure out that "transgenderism" is a direct assault on their entire worldview, maybe it will prompt a full fledged civil war in the progressive ranks.

After all, according to mainstream feminist wisdom, there is no such thing as a "female brain" or a "female soul" or "feeling like a female." By the words of every liberal who has ever said anything on the subject of women's rights in the past four decades, how you dress, look, think, and feel have nothing to do with your womanhood. Usually it would be offensive and sexist to accuse a woman of acting like, thinking like, or feeling like a woman.

Yet now, suddenly, emotions and looks define a woman so severely that a man can actually become one if he claims to experience feelings that he assumes are feminine? The whole thing contradicts itself.

Feminism and transgenderism say two opposing things about what it means to be a woman. In fact, feminists have come up with the term "neurosexism" to condemn the misogynistic and "pseudo-scientific" idea that male and females brains are different. But Bruce Jenner claims he has "the brain of a female" so how does this work? Do you mean to tell me that the only people who can have female brains are males?

Meanwhile, feminists regularly insist that the absence of a uterus and a vagina excludes men from having an opinion about things like abortion. So a man can't have ideas about women's issues because he lacks the correct anatomy, but he can actually be a woman despite lacking the correct anatomy? How does that make any kind of sense? Transgenderism and feminism cannot coexist. Progressives can't have both. They'll just have to choose.

For my part, I agree that a man can never lay claim to womanhood. I also agree that there is such a thing as a female brain and a female soul and by extension female emotions and female personalities and female characteristics; but the trouble is that female brains and souls are always contained securely in female bodies. A man will never be born with a sloth's heart or a rhino's liver or a birch tree's root system, just as he will never be born with a woman's brain.

I'm told that white people appropriate black culture when they listen to Nikki Minaj or wear flat brimmed hats. I'm not sure that such offenses constitute cultural theft as much as they indicate possible brain damage, but that's not the point. If we're worried about groups appropriating from other groups, I think we need to investigate the practice of calling a man a woman because he grinds down his forehead, wears eyeliner, and pins back his genitals. If you look closely, you might find reason to consider this an appropriation of womanhood, or worse, a degradation of it.

There is more to being a woman than "feminized" facial features and frilly underwear. Bruce Jenner in drag is not beautiful. Women are beautiful because they are women. Womanhood is itself beautiful. Women bring something distinct and special to the world. They fill a void and play a role that no man can.

A woman is a woman not merely because of whatever cosmetic feature a man might vaguely emulate. A woman is a woman because of her biology, which a man does not share and never will. A woman is a woman because of her capacity to create life and harbor it in her body until birth, which a man cannot do. A woman is a woman because of her soul, her mind, her perspective, her experiences, and her unique way of thinking, of loving, and of being -- all things a man can only mimic.

A woman is a woman. She has earned that title. She pays for that title. She suffers with that title and gives life with that title and lives from conception until death and beyond with that title. She is that title. She should not be told that it's such a flimsy thing that a man with enough money can buy his way into it. It's demeaning and reductive, and as a father and a husband and a son and a brother, I take exception to it. I can only imagine how women might feel if they were only allowed to be open about it.

And notice I said I "can only imagine," because that's all I can do. I cannot experience a woman's thoughts or feelings due to the fact that I am not one. You don't get to have a "new" self or another self or a different self or a Self 2.0. Your self is your self. It's your being. It's your essential personhood; your particular and unrepeated character. Your self is your body, mind, and soul. It is physically, metaphysically, spiritually, philosophically, scientifically, rationally and logically impossible for a self to change into a new self. A self can only be what it is. 

It's all so evil and so bizarre and so unthinkably ridiculous that no dystopian sci-fi writer could have predicted that the collapse of western society would look like this. Right now Orwell and Huxley are looking on in deep regret. "Man! An apocalyptic future where people are so pampered, conceited, and bored that they pretend they can snap their fingers and reconstruct their soul from scratch -- why didn't I think of that?" 

After many years and at least a dozen viral Dove marketing campaigns, it seems that, for the sake of the gay agenda, we've utterly abandoned the whole "women shouldn't be photoshopped or plastered with makeup and silicone in order to reinforce a subjective standard of femininity" thing. Perhaps the one single thing liberals were actually right about has now been tossed into the garbage because it doesn't serve the gay/"transgender" narrative.

If progressives can wield the power to demolish and remake even the definition of "man" and "woman" in their ideological image, then they have achieved a total  and irreversible cultural victory. They have reached into the universe and reshaped reality itself. They have become gods, or at least that's the kind of power we give them. You can blab on and on about economics and foreign policy, but if we live in a country where confusion, perversion, and self-worship reign supreme, what's the point? America will already be dead.

FYI: culled from his article "Calling Bruce Jenner a woman is an insult to women" punished in The Blaze on June 2, 2015.

STEPHANIE GRISHAM IS JUST ANOTHER OMAROSA, ANGRY AND VENOMOUS.

ICHEOKU says William Congreve in his book 'The Mourning Bride' said that 'hell has no fury like a woman scorned.' Stephanie Grisham is definitely acting like one such woman, but who scorned her? Who did a number on her that incensed her so much that she decided to take it out on the Trumps? Why the level of anger and bitterness and why at a family who welcomed her into their bosom and provided her with so many countless opportunities? Is this the best way she knows to pay them back for their goodness or it is yet another proof that no good deed goes unpunished. Why Stephanie, why?

Could it be instead, that she is desperately seeking relevance and financial gains that she decided to exploit her once privileged closeness to the Trump's family and presidency by making her own claims against the Trumps in her soon to be published book "I'll Take Your Questions Now: What I Saw in the Trump White House." What a woman? Why did she do such a story now and going around media houses trying to market it, while choosing at the same time to ignore and disregard her breach of the trust which was bequeathed on her by the Trumps, the reason they allowed her within their circle in the first place. 

At the rate these former staffers are going, writing their supposedly "tell all" hit pieces, it will become very difficult filling positions in a presidency, as presidents will be very wary of hiring people, aware that they might some day tell stories about them, including un-collaborated tales of what they supposedly witnessed and observed while serving in the White House. It is also possible that some of these "tell-all" stories are outrightly made up accounts or were heavily embellished just to add extra punch, in order to entice public's curiosity and make what they have written worthy of reading to generate and boost sales. 

If she was this unsatisfied with her stay in the President Trump's White House, why did she stay for that long, more than five years and not resigned in protest much earlier? Why did she pretend that everything was alright sucking up to the Trumps only to now turn a rat, telling tales from her imagination, majority of which she made up as she wrote. A woman who was so trusted by Trump that she went from being a campaign aide to then presidential candidate Trump to becoming the First Lady's press secretary and later White House press secretary, but who have chosen to become a Brutus. Why?

In fact it does not even matter whether or not her story is true and her veracity for truthfully speaking is unimpeachable, the fact of the matter is that she breached her trust to the president by regurgitating her supposed recollections of what happened during the time she pretended to serve the president and the First Lady loyally. The breach alone is sufficient to defeat whatever her book contains because if she is capable of such a stab in the back, she is also capable of just any other thing, including lying and making up stories and therefore cannot be trusted to warrant reading her tales. 

How close was she to Trump's mouth or Putin's ear to have heard what the president whispered into Putin's ears? Is she a psychic that she was able to decipher from Trump's body language  that the president was merely pretending courage before Putin, but was deathly afraid of the Russia strong man? We should be more concerned about her character and question the motive behind her own latest addition to the long list of books of besmirch of the president. Why should America continue to allow such despicable people to profit from breaching such a position of trust and confidence which they once held. 

Was Stephanie Grisham born that way or did some financial difficulties trigger her other dark side. Why is she so bitter as to decide to become so poisonous, lying and making up fantastical nonsensical about a family which took her in, gave her a chance at life, a voice and recognition. Why would anyone be this perfidious and treacherous, thus making it difficult if not impossible to ever trust people again. What is her beef with the Trump's family that she is attacking everyone and has become an epitome that money is the root of all evil. Who made her an offer she could not refuse in the attempt to further tarnish Trump's legacy and family name? Who induced and motivated her to say and write her pitiful work of fiction, imaginations and fantasies, including  things which probably came to her from voices in her head.  

Why would anyone be this angry? She appears so troubled and so vengeful that she probably made up the story or at least embellished them heavily just to get her pound of flesh. She has by gushing out shown that she cannot be trusted to keep peoples private matters private, so why would anyone else trust her account of what she allegedly said she witnessed and heard in the Trump's White House? We should not waste our money on such a trashy book by a woman who has now proved herself to be so trashy and desperately seeking to profit from tarnishing President Donald John Trump, his wife Melania, his daughter Ivanka, his son in-law Jared Kushner and the overall Trump's presidency. 

Even if all her alleged sundry list is true, is America's most pressing need now another tale about the Trumps or haven't we had enough to last us a lifetime already? Does the country still have appetite for it and are people still craving for some more Trump's bashing. Of all the challenges facing the country including an intractable coronavirus disease, an economy that is still fluttering, increased gun violence, uneasiness and heightened anxiety about the future, her solution is to burden us further and feed us with more tales about the Trump. The woman is a nut job and should be completely ignored as not worthy of our time and money as she has proved herself to be even worse than Omarosa Manigault Newman. Such creepy people are dangerous and should never be encouraged nor supported in anyway that would aid their perpetuating of their devious acts. 

By her action, Stephanie Grisham makes a strong case for a law prohibiting writing of "tell-all" books so soon after one had held any position of trust and confidence, for at least five years post disengagement. Stephanie Grisham is a testament that the allure of money could transform people demonic moles, listening into conversations and watching every movement of their bosses, only to later profit from writing books about them. Such conduct is killing "trust and confidence" in America and since Non Disclosure Agreement seems to no longer work as effectively as expected, there is a need to pass another law to prohibit such unduly taking advantage of  a once held position of privileged close relationship. 

Stephanie Grisham has morphed into a great pretender, a green snake in a green grass, who lurked around the Trumps only just for this moment. She should never have been allowed within such perimeters of confidence and trustworthiness. She definitely did it for money and not that she has anything of value to inform the people. She is a female Judas Iscariot who betrayed people who hitherto took her into such a great confidence and allowed her to be near them. From what she did, it is hard to believe that there is anyone left in America who could be trusted to keep peoples confidences and secrets as the private matter which they are; or is it possibly the reason they say in Washington DC, if you want a friend or confidant, get a dog. 

719,933 COVID-19 DEATHS IN AMERICA: WHY IS THE VIRUS MORE VIRULENT IN AMERICA?

ICHEOKU says coronavirus death toll in America has crossed 700,000 and speedily inching close to one million. Thousands more are still dying from the scourge in America today when nearly the rest of the world have moved on from the virus and back to living their normal, pre coronavirus, life. It is equally noteworthy that none of these other countries suffered as many loss of lives as America suffered and still suffering; and despite vaccinations, many people are still dying from the coronavirus in America. So, what went wrong with America's handling of the coronavirus and why is America still being pummeled by it? Why is the death toll in America far more worse than it is in the rest of the countries, including the reputedly, country of origin and purveyor of the coronavirus, China.  

Why, despite the fabled medical and technological sciences advancement of America were so many American people still lost and are still being lost to the coronavirus disease.  What exactly went wrong in America's healthcare system that brought about such a gory outcome. Why did more American people die from the coronavirus than any other people on the face of earth including in less developed countries. Is it possible that Americans were infected with a different strand of the coronavirus than the type which the rest of the world were infected with? Is it possible too that the infection rate and mortality had to do with our body type and the food we eat or our lifestyle? What caused the very high mortality and why did more Americans die and still dying because of the virus.

Could it be that our medical and hospital management is afterall not the best or as efficient as they are hyped to be; or simply that medical staff got overwhelmed by the number of the dying that they became numb to death and in the process to get it over with, no longer cared much about who lived or died. Did business considerations come into play in the thinking of how to manage the pandemic that infected people did not receive optimal care, leading to their deaths. Did such profit over care consideration impact the quality of care that were being administered that it led to such a high number of fatalities. Why did what worked in other countries not work in America, in regards to prevention and care that kept their death rates very low?

It is a very difficult thing to process, the fact that more people died from the coronavirus pandemic in America and are still dying from it than in any other country, especially for a country that prides itself as supposedly the premier country on earth. Not even third world countries fared this bad and no other advanced country suffered a fate close to what America found itself with and still going through with. America is the third most populous country in the world yet it suffered more coronavirus deaths than the first and second most populous countries, China and India, put together. So, why the wide disparity or is there something peculiar in our DNA that made us to be more susceptible to the disease than the rest of the world. 

It is not enough to mention that over seven hundred Americans have died so far or just to mourn and pray for them; there is a need to investigate the medical anomaly which manifests in this huge numbers and unravel the mystery behind it. It is inexplicable that this many Americans succumbed to the virus and so many people in America as well as the rest of the world similarly share in this concern, wondering why the almighty America could not arrest the scourge and prevent its people from being deleted by it in so large numbers. The country of can do where nothing is impossible eventually found itself on bended knees, being clobbered by the coronavirus when the rest of the world did not suffer nearly the same level of fatalities. 

Something does not feel right about the high death toll and needs a digging deep into, to find out why. Not even the change of presidents effected anything with 319,933 deaths since President Joe Biden took office. To the dead and dying, may the good Lord give them rest. To those afflicted and suffering, we decree speedy recovery on them. To the unvaccinated, please get your shots and help in your little way to help keep the scourge under control. As we continue to explore what possibly went wrong that cost this many lives, 719,933 Americans dead; and how to keep everybody safe and alive, pharmaceutical companies should double their effort at finding a permanent panacea for the virus, either a vaccine or a drug that actually works, which will finally put an end to the scourge. It is sad.

ONLY WOMEN GET PREGNANT AND GIVE BIRTH, PERIOD.

ICHEOKU says the assault on womanhood is continuing with the rancid woke left idiocy that "anybody" or "people" can get pregnant. This thinking is very demeaning and degrading to the labor of love which women give freely in making babies, the reason the world is still populated with human beings. Without that special and unique ability, humanity as we know it would have since petered to an end. Therefore it is incumbent on us, especially males, to always recognize this inviolable imperative and learn to treat women better, more respectfully and more fairly, aware that they are the "Gods" of creation which we can actually see and feel, and whose finished work that take them nine months to perfect we can in fact behold as babies. 

For anyone to say or suggest that "anybody" can get pregnant is indeed insulting to general sensibilities as it is belittling of this great and awesome wonderful labor of love which only women give. It is particularly offensive when those who do not know exactly what women go through in bringing new lives into this world, a journey which have cost millions of them their lives, but which have not deterred them from continuously embarking on, mouth off such silliness. Carrying a baby for nine long months, the discomfort, the sickness, the sleeplessness, the kicks, the nausea, the anxiety, the bloated body and general malaise, topped off by agonizing labor pain and the near death experience of delivery, should under no circumstances, be diminished or toyed with because it is not a joke nor a laughing matter. 

Anyone involved in lessening the gravity of child bearing by dismissing it as an all comer's game needs to have their head examined. The men and some very strange feminists females propagating this notion that pregnancy is not a big deal, such that "anybody" can get pregnant, sound like brain-dead imbeciles who are unashamed of distorting a fact of great consequence. Real women, especially those who have been through the experience, should not allow these men and the distorted women, who have never experienced child bearing and delivery, to understand what the pangs of childbirth really feels like, to continue to demean pregnancy or even the broader womanhood. Both are near sacred as they involve the bringing of human beings into this world. A glorifying thing of immense joy.

This unique ability of women calls for their celebration, show of optimal respect and being sanctified as the only human beings capable of multiplying by pulling off such feat. It is outrageous to disparage pregnancy as an "anybody" affair or derisively dismiss it as as "people" can get pregnant. No, people do not get pregnant, only women do; and although women are people, but they are of a special breed. The beauty of pregnancy and its special place is such that not even all women are capable of getting pregnant and/or carrying babies to full term. Pregnancy is a special blessing from God as only those women who are optimally blessed with the capacity and ability, can in fact, actually get pregnant and/or carry babies to term. 

It is therefore about time women rose up and demand an end to the put down of such onerous responsibility which they undertake selflessly, without question. Women should be appreciated and acknowledged more for all the sacrifices involved in birthing babies and possibly too, should  be even paid to have babies. But whatever happens, the idiotic and imbecilic narrative and thinking that "anybody" can get pregnant must not be allowed to take root. The attempt to denigrate or diminish or dismiss the hell which women go through to bring children into this world should be condemned by every right thinking person because it is one heck of a big deal to make the journey, especially as repeatedly as millions of women do. Enough of the disparagement; lets celebrate pregnancy and also celebrate women who make it happen. 

NATIONAL WOMEN SOCCER LEAGUE SEX SCANDAL: NOT SURPRISED BUT AVOIDABLE.

ICHEOKU says following the US Gymnastics scandal which sent Dr Larry Nasser to prison, one would have expected the separation of the wolves from the sheeps in order to guard against any such future scandal. But apparently, such preventive, proactive measure was not put in place, hence the latest scandal engulfing the National Women Soccer League. 

The solution is simple, since there is no crystal ball for knowing who is a potential sexual abuser, all women sports, including women soccer, should be left entirely for women alone. All women's sports should be solely women's affair, left for women coaches, women administrators and women managers, and that way, put an end to the regularly occurring unwanted sexual harassments of sportswomen by their male handlers. This is not to suggest that lesbian and transgendered females do not sexually harass women or are incapable of sexually harassing women, but it is not as much as full bloodied males who are always drunk on testosterone and like bulls in musk, frequently seeking drainage.

Although it is going to be difficult to accomplish such a gender only exclusivity in women's sports, because there are not enough women manpower (woman-power) to fill all the necessary positions, but it is worth making the effort. More women should be recruited into sports academies to train for these positions in order to have this problem permanently fixed. Some men, if not most of them, can hardly look the other way when constantly surrounded by a beehive of young healthy bodies. A matter made even worse when they have some form of authority over the women and are easily tempted to venture unto the forbidden terrain or in some cases, even demand a quid pro quo sexual favors for being selected to play or participate in the teams regularly. 

It is an authority thing, meant to control the women and have them subjugated to satisfying their libidinous desires. The sports world is just like any other work place, admitted every work places have not been cleared of all men; but the sports world is somewhat different because there are very few limited spaces available for participants, thus making the competition very rife. It is this scarcity and the desire to fill them that these abusers are exploiting to gain undue advantage over these women, using "play to play" as a weapon of choice. It is not right nor justifiably excusable under any circumstances and all measures should be explored that would permanently put an end to it. There are also many victims who are currently dying in silence due to the shame of coming out, not being believed or fear of possible retaliatory loss of place and position in the team. 

For any one creep caught, there are many others who have not been caught as well as those who are just about to get started. The problem is prevalent and enduring within the league, which made Purple-hair fella, Megan Rapione to lash out, saying "Burn it all down, let all of their heads roll" while reacting to the news of fired Washington Spirit's head coach Richie Burke and North Carolina Courage's head coach Paul Riley. Also that the League's Commissioner Lisa Baird quickly threw in her resignation equally shows that she knew about it but failed to do something about it, which has now added more combustible materials to the eruptions in the League. A serious, across the board investigation and real solutions are needed right now to, as Megan rightly put it, protect the right person/s. 

The National Women Soccer League can achieve this by becoming more proactive in dealing with this problem, instead of mitigating resultant damages. It also does not matter that some people are attacking womanhood in our world today and trying to invent an utopian genderless society where males and females are blended into just persons or people. It also does not matter or should not matter that some women claim that they feel and believe that they are men and vice versa. But when an issue as horrible as the present rises, everyone should band together to admit the biological fact of the indisputable distinction between the sexes. We should therefore put aside all the woke political correctness divisions and together, find a permanent solution to a pervasive problem by letting women do their thing, coach and manage their women leagues. #EndTheScandal.

BRITNEY SPEARS: A HUGE MISTAKE JETTISONING HER FATHER.

ICHEOKU says her enablers, glorified vultures, who are only interested in the carrion and not in what is her best interest engineered the outcome. Now the singer has been completely severed from her father's supervision and with that, once again become vulnerable. Where were these hangers-on when she nearly lost it all, including her center of equilibrium resulting in that horrific shaving of her hair. They were no place to be found when she was on the precipice about to end it and needed all the help she could get. Her family took it upon themselves to rescue her and labored tirelessly until they salvaged their daughter from self destruct. After 13 years of maintaining her on the narrow straight and right path, these destroyers of the fame and famous, have come back to "liberate" their Britney so that she can once again become their cash cow and they will milk her until her udders all come off. 

It does not matter what anyone says about her father or the manner of discipline he imposed on his daughter, the fact remains that he did whatever he did to save Britney and Britney was saved. If there is ever one case where the end justified the means, the rehabilitation of Britney Spears is one such case. It showed that no one can ever love a child more than their parents and for a girl, the always abiding love between dad and daddy's girl, endured in Britney's case. She was loved by her daddy who went far and beyond to show that by doing whatever it took to rehabilitate her almost lost daughter. No stranger can show that amount of care and love and not the new conservator appointed by the judge to replace Mr Jamie Spears. 

Mr Spears loves his daughter and protected her from the jackals prowling around for a chunk to bite off her. Unfortunately, instead of showing appreciation to her daddy, Britney went with the flow of her praise singers and pushed the man who saved her aside and dove headlong back into the restless scavengers growling for her fortune. Their well orchestrated plan to isolate Britney from her family so that they can continue the frenzy-feeding off her have succeeded as the court has ordered Mr Spears' suspension as her conservator. These jackals will do whatever it takes to keep her gushing up her fortune, including supplying her with drugs of her choice and other cravings to impact her clarity of decision making. They will put her back on the speed lane of the highway to hell and the crash this time, will be very unforgiving. 

Before you even start, ICHEOKU will like to stop you right away by saying, please spare ICHEOKU the apologies that it is her money, she is an adult and should be free to live her life as she sees fit. Where is Michael Jackson today or was it not his money, was he not an adult and was he not free and lived his life as he saw fit? How about Whitney Houston, the popular crack is whack theorist? It was her money, she was an adult and she lived her life freely as she saw fit.  The list of such unfortunate incidents is long, of adults who were not saved by intervention but were left to live their lives as they saw fit because it was their money and they were adults, so nobody told them how to live their lives. 

ICHEOKU is emphatic that Britney Spears would since become history but for the intervention of her family which stood by her and pulled her out of the jaws of certain death. She was at door and knocking frantically to be let in but was lucky her family rushed in, grabbed her and took her back home before Madam Death could get off the couch to open the door for her. So all those pretenders rallying for Britney Spears to "get her life back" should refresh themselves and reflect on the events that led to Britney Spear being denied and not having her life in the first place. Something led to it, it is called intervention and it is the reason Britney Spears is still alive till this day. 

If Brittany had not shown the propensity to spiral down into scary situation in the past, may be nobody would have intervened in her life. But for someone who literally grew up before our eyes, and who we watched strutting the runway of self ruination before her parents intervened and saved her from an assured self destruct, she rightly earned to be placed under conservatorship. Whether the conservatorship is still necessary depends on whether Britney Spears has metamorphosed into somebody other than the one placed under conservatorship. Hopefully the judge reviewed all the evidence before arriving at her conclusion that Mr Spears be suspended as her conservator; and by appointing a new conservator shows that the judge is equally doubtful that Britney has reinvented herself. 

Is it possible that she could have changed? Is it possible that she is now a fully grown woman who has put her acts together and now knows what is best for her? Is it possible that the Britany Spear 2.0 is and will be different from the Britany Spear 1.0 who shaved off her hair on national television? Everything is possible, but to completely sever all ties with her father, the man who salvaged her, is not the best foot to put forward. She should have began her quest for complete freedom quest by co-managing her affairs as equal partner with her father and then evolve accordingly, until such a future time that she becomes more comfortable and fully ready to assume the control of the driving wheels without any need for further supervision.

She complained about not being allowed to have children and marrying; but she already have two children with and was once married to Kevin Federline. Everyone knows how that married worked out and ended with so much being paid to the gold digging baby daddy. So why tempt fate again with another fella who is likely another Federline, just patiently waiting to also strike at her pot of gold at the right time. She could easily proceed in the Oprah Winfrey lane and style any future relationship like Oprah has with Mr Steadman; and try and enjoy the rest of her life with only a companion, without fear of community property trouble or another alimony or spousal support in the future. Prenup won't even be that helpful as some good lawyers sometimes find a way of circumventing it to take more than is stipulated.

Anyway, the court has given the green light and how she decides to navigate the boat forward is now strictly her decision. ICHEOKU wishes her well and pray that everything works out well for her; and that people will not take too much advantage of her and ride her like a pony until she falls apart. No one deserves to go through life constantly under supervision, but her situation warranted it. She now owes it to the people who supported her through the ordeal to prove to them that she has turned the corner, that she is now a new leaf, a competent person who is ready and able to manage her affairs without a need for her father's supervision. She should not confirm the fears in some quarters that nothing has changed and should live up to the expectation of the judge who ruled that she no longer needs her father's guidance as she will soon be freed of all supervision and take her life fully back. Goodluck Britney.