NBC BRIAN WILLIAM LIED, SHOULD RESIGN OR BE FIRED!

Icheoku says stepping aside will not cut it. What was good for CBS Dan Rather should also be good for NBC Brian William. In Dan Rather's case, it could even be argued in his favor that he mistakenly told a lie based on a third party's account that George Bush never served in Texas Air National Guard; but unlike Brian William, who intentionally and purposely told a lie just for his personal egotistic aggrandizement. At least Dan Rather never claimed he was in Texas when George Bush failed to serve, but Brian William was rehashing a first person account, somewhat a percipient-witness's account, of his "valor" in a war front. Therefore he told a blatant lie aimed at misrepresenting of facts and misled so many people into believing he is one strong son of a gun who flew into heat of battle but made it out alive and well, albeit a little shaken up. 

Icheoku says Brian William "taking himself off the air for several days" is not enough deterrent or punishment; he should rather take himself off the air forever and permanently or the network should do that for him by firing him. Icheoku says Brian Williams has lost all credibility whatever and the network leaving him still on air would be a tacit approval by them that it is okay to lie. He should not be allowed to to taint news from the network going forward as anything he reels out henceforth would carry some degree of incredulity. The best thing is to let him go permanently and let the NBC begin to heal its image of having an anchorman who told a a blatant lie. Icheoku calls on Brian William to do the needful and RESIGN his office now as the anchorman of NBC nightly news and failing which NBC must let him go, FIRE HIM. 

The Washington Post fired its reporter Sari Horwitz for plagiarism; the AP fired its reporter Bob Lewis for lying about Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe; The Los Angeles Times fired its reporter Jason Filch for false reporting, CBS fired Dan Rather for a mistaken report, so why not NBC portion out the same treatment to Brian Williams? So if all these media outlets could uphold the honor of their reports and disciplined their offending correspondents, what is NBC waiting to tow the line and see the back of Brian Williams from their network? Icheoku says such self gloating and self promotion, without merit or any basis, by Brian William, should be seriously frowned at and never tolerated of an anchorman or any other person for that matter, especially one with an apparent authority or influence over the people. What Brian William claimed was an over exaggerated sense of self and of a bravely which he did not earn, nor merited and therefore should not be rewarded by leaving him to continue on that his seat. He should be punished or rather disciplined with a termination of appointment or deployed out of public sight on NBC network television. 

Icheoku says Brian Williams knowingly and intentionally did what he did - he lied and misled the American people  as well as the rest of the watching world into believing his concocted story of heroism and repeatedly too. He did not tell the lie once,  but on several other occasions including on David Letterman show. Brian Williams had enough time to pull back and recant the lies he told, but no; instead he was revering in his newly found fame of bravery. He choose to rather continuously mislead the American people as he surfed the wave of his sudden unearned fame and bravery as a reporter who went into the eye of the storm and made it back safe. 

Icheoku says Brian William is a liar, he is a cheat and he should therefore be dismissed pronto and without any further ado or delay. For repeatedly telling a story that he was shot down in a helicopter in Iraq when he was not, tend to minimize the seriousness of what those real combatants who suffer such fate, go through. It is despicable, it is condescending of him and it should not be condoned. Icheoku maintains that this is not a case of a "fog of memory" as he was not alone in the supposed helicopter and had several occasions to recant his tale but chose not to and did not, until veterans complained about his unfounded claims. Icheoku is emphatic that his was not a mistake but a purposeful misstatement of fact which he witnessed and thus a blatant lie. Brian Williams having lost all credibility and trust of the news watching public, SHOULD BE LET GO and never allowed to show his lying face on NBC or any other new network again.

SANUSI LAMIDO SANUSI, CORONATED EMIR AND NOW SARIKI SANUSI II OF KANO.

Icheoku says it is now official that Sanusi Lamido Sanusi is the new Emir of Kano. He was formally coronated and handed the staff of office and is now officially known as Sariki Sanusi II. The Emir and Sariki Kano, Sanusi II, was presented with gifts of a sword, knife, bow and arrow by the emirate council, thus empowering him as the defender of their cause including the spread of Islam which the new Sariki vowed would constitute part of his agenda. In his words, Sariki II said, 'his ascension to the throne has strengthened his resolve to fulfill his obligations to Allah, to Islam and to the people of Kano.' Icheoku says interpretation  -  war, war and more war against all infidels and people who are not of Kano ancestry? 

Query:- why were all the gifts presented to the new Emir and Sariki of Kano all instruments of destruction and killing; without any instrument or insignia of peace being therein contained too? So what does it portend to a cohesive Nigeria and the one united Nigeria which this people readily bandy around and which they would like everyone to believe, but which in real sense actuality, is a complete hogwash ruse, merely used when convenient and discarded at the next instant. Icheoku asks why not present the new Sariki II with the Koran, music instrument or some paintings and carvings, instead of sword, bows and arrows, spear, knife etc? 

Anyway, one day Nigerians will rise up to truly resolve all the impasse in the country, in order to truly have a more coagulate society where every one is equal and treated fairly, whether or not he or she comes from any of the emirates or their ruling houses. Meanwhile, congratulations to the new Sariki II of Kano and may your reign help bring some reasonableness to your people's attitude of born to rule which is causing all the unneeded tension in the land. But please know that the people from this neck of the wood have resolved that if they cannot rule you people, you people shall not and must not be allowed to rule them, never again and not in the life of Nigeria as it is presently limping. Icheoku says best of luck and may your ancestors guide and protect your reign.

ELECTION 2015:- FEBRUARY 14TH JETTISONED, IT IS NOW MARCH 28TH.

Icheoku does not know nor see the wisdom in deferring the Election 2015 till March 28, a whole six weeks from its originally scheduled date of February 14th. Aside of INEC probably completing the distribution of PVCs, there is no guarantee that the Boko Haram madness would be fully contained within the set six weeks time frame. 

But Jega and Nigerian security officials know best and all Icheoku can do is defer to their judgment and tow the line. However, Icheoku would pivot our principal focus away from the election as rescheduled until probably two weeks to it, to enable us gravitate to other topical world issues. Icheoku is also afraid that if the election is extended once, it might be extended yet again based on one excuse or the other, but the speculation should also yield for now.  So until then, our blogging will now revert to its original tenet - broad coverage of world developing stories; and it is now temporary bye for Nigeria Election 2015. Ciao!

GEJ ALL THE WAY!!!!!

BUHARI IS A MURDERER, SO SAYS THE ECONOMIST?

The Economist called Muhammadu Buhari a murderer, yet endorsed him for Nigeria's president? Query: would the British people allow a murderer and a man with "blood of British people on his hands" inside their 10 Downing Street as their Prime Minister? If not, why is their magazine, The Economist, wishing such evil upon Nigeria's own Aso Rock. 

On February 14, tell The British colonial instrument, The Economist, that their shameful contrivance is known; and that Nigerians are too decent a people to allow a man who has killed Nigerians before inside their Aso Rock. On February 14, Vote for peace and freedom, VOTE GEJ.

THE ECONOMIST DOES A HATCHET JOB ON JONATHAN, ENDORSES BUHARI?

Icheoku says the gang-up against Nigeria's current march forward is continuing as The British Economist has now officially unveiled its mask by endorsing a brutal dictator and a murderer, a man who The Economist agreed 'has blood on his hands', for Nigeria's president? Query: how can any Nigerian people's loving magazine prefer a man who has murdered Nigerians to a man who is trying his best under the circumstances to improve the lot of the people, admitted his pace might not have been as fast enough as expected, as their president? Icheoku says any Nigerian who does not find some sinister motive in this supposed endorsement of Muhammadu Buhari by The colonial British The Economist magazine, must not have his or her thinking-hat on. What manner of a person or magazine would rather have a murderer ruling the Nigerian people but a nearing bankrupt tabloid with declining readership which is trying to assert and insert itself in a purely internal affairs of Nigeria. 

In their very hateful and extremely biased article - "The least awful", titled "A former dictator is a better choice than a failed president", the magazine wrote "Sometimes there are no good options. Nigeria goes to the polls on February 14th to elect the next president, who will face problems so large - from rampant corruption to a jihadist insurgency - that they could break the country apart, with dire consequences for Nigerians and the world. And yet, as Africa's biggest economy stages its most important election since the restoration of civilian rule in 1999, and perhaps since the civil war four decades ago, Nigerians must pick between the incumbent, Goodluck Jonathan, who has proved an utter failure, and the opposition leader, Muhammadu Buhari, a former military dictator with BLOOD ON HIS HANDS. The candidates stand as symbols of a broken political system that makes all Nigeria's problems even more intractable." 

Icheoku queries, who made The Economist a judge over Nigerians or gave them the right or impetus to decide for Nigerians who to choose as their president? How dare The Economist become this intrusive in who becomes Nigeria's president or even fathom a say, trying to influence the outcome of a purely internal affairs of a sovereign state? Icheoku alerts Nigerians not to fall to this baiting by a stupid racist white people's magazine, out to get Nigerians into reversing all the gains of this past few years, when good governance has catapulted Nigeria into the front of Africa's best economy as well as one of the world's fastest growing economy. As for the white people, who Icheoku knows very well, black people don't matter; and whatever they could do to stall any of their growth anywhere including in Nigeria, they would gladly do and so is The Economist latest dabbling in Nigeria's forthcoming election. Icheoku avers that The Economist is simply propagating the white peoples' well known agenda to stunt Africans and in this case, Nigeria; and they must not be allowed to have their way, not this time. Icheoku says to hell with The Economist and their unsolicited meddling in an entirely domestic affairs of Nigeria. Icheoku says The Economist should know that Nigerians and only Nigerians are and will be the sole deciders of who governs them on February 14, 2015.

Continuing the magazine wrote " Mr Jonathan....stumbled into the presidency.......Mr Jonathan has shown little willingness to tackle endemic corruption. When the central bank governor reported that $20 billion had been stolen, his reward was to be sacked." Icheoku retorts, what has The Economist got to gain by reminding the world particularly Nigerians, that President Jonathan "stumbled" into the presidency when every person already knew the fact of how his presidency began? Yet The Economist was clever by half in not pointing out that President Jonathan had since after the initial "stumbling" into the presidency, WON as of his own right, the presidency of Nigeria in an election. The Economist went way back to 2010 Jonathan's succession to late President Yar'Adua's presidency; but intentionally left out the fact that President Jonathan ran and won the presidency in 2011 and against the same Muhammadu Buhari he is currently locked in a near dead-heat for the same office this 2015. So query, whose hatchet job is The Economist doing with their useless endorsement of a brutal dictator, whom they reluctantly admitted, have the blood of innocent Nigerians on his hand? Yet The Economist would rather a bloody despot sit over Nigerians' affairs despite his  vagrant abuse of their human rights, than for a president, who is doing his best under the circumstance, to continue to safely navigate the ship of the Nigeria state. 

Continuing, The Economist wrote, "Worse, on Mr Jonathan's watch much of the north of the country has been in flames. 18,000 people have died in political violence. Another 1.5 million have fled their homes. The insurgency is far from Mr Jonathan's southern political heartland and afflicts people more likely to vote for the opposition. He has shown little enthusiasm for tackling it, and even less competence. Quick to offer condolences to France after attack on Charlie Hebdo, Mr Jonathan waited almost two weeks before speaking about a Boko Haram attack that killed hundreds, perhaps thousands of his compatriots." Icheoku in response says who gave The Economist the 18,000 number of Nigerians killed by Boko Haram, they are bandying about? Where did they collate the figures from or did they sit in the comfort confines of their London air-conditioned offices and magically conjured the figure of 18,000 Nigerian perished, when none of their correspondents can pinpoint Chibok on the map, betting on their life? The Economist did not address the problem of its Western countries refusing to sell arms to Nigeria to fight the Boko Haram scourge, yet it was frontal in telling the world that 18,000 Nigerians have perished as a result of Boko Haram, with 1.5 million others displaced. Icheoku asks, would this number of Nigerians have suffered this fate if Western governments had rushed aid and help to Nigerian government and military to checkmate this mayhem. 

Icheoku says as with every tabloid out to gotcha you, The Economist just did a nasty hatchet job on Nigeria's President Jonathan, trying to whip up sentiments and inflame passion and ignite ethnic tension in a society that is already roiling over. What does The Economist want to achieve by stating that "The insurgency is far from Mr Jonathan's southern political heartland and afflicts people more likely to vote for the opposition?" Who told The Economist that those Boko Haram enclave would readily prefer Muhammadu Buhari to Jonathan. Who told The Economist that the president shows little enthusiasm in taking his country back from these insurgents from hell called Boko Haram? Further, what is wrong with President Jonathan consoling the French people following the fate they suffered in the hands of some Islamist terrorist; in similar manner as Northeastern Nigerians have suffered under the Boko Haram insurgency? Instead of The Economist questioning the French for not consoling Nigerians for their own loses, they are busy attacking a President who merely extended a hand of fellowship for the French people in their time of mourning; admitted President Jonathan did not personally visit France like so many other heads of state and governments, numbering forty-four, during the march of solidarity with France. Possibly The Economist desires to plunge Nigeria into anarchy with their exaggerated figures of Nigerians killed as well as those displaced as a result of the Boko Haram insurgence. Icheoku is emphatic that the number of victims and affected Nigerians as quoted by The Economist is very much over-exaggerated figures; and not what is on the ground as The economist would otherwise like the world to believe.

Further, The Economist wrote, "The singled bright spot of his rule has been Nigeria's economy, one of the world's fastest-growing. Yet that is largely despite the government rather than because of it; and falling oil prices will temper the boom." Icheoku queries, if it was indeed solely because of the people of Nigeria rather than an effectively tailored Nigeria government policies, why did the same Nigerian economy not achieve the same growth under previous governments in Nigeria, since the people of Nigeria always remained a constant in the equation? Icheoku says if it was merely because of the people and not the government, were the people sleeping through past governments and suddenly woke up to miraculously change things for the better under the present government? The fact of the matter remains that from the gloating of The Economist that "falling oil price will temper the boom," it is clearly obvious why the magazine wrote the nonsensical and not that they truly and honestly meant well for Nigerians by advising them on who to elect as their president. Icheoku says therefore Nigerians must rise up in unison and tell all these Western imperialists vultures and their The Economist megaphone, to shove it. To hell with these colonialists who have refused to help their former African colonies achieve greatness and are continually sabotaging every effort being made by black Africans to free themselves from shackles of under-development.

The Economist wrote, "Nigerians typically die eight years younger than their poorer neighbors in nearby Ghana," but they failed to add that under the Jonathan's government, there was an improved life expectancy, regardless of whether or not Nigerians died eight years younger than their neighbors. Query: did Nigerians suddenly started dying eight years younger because President Jonathan magically brought about the outcome? The fact of the matter is that The Economist, reading in between the lines of their acerbic commentary on the Jonathan's government, is clearly demonstrating an asinine hatred for President Jonathan, a man they merely addressed as "MR", not even acknowledging his office as president of Nigeria or his doctorate degree by addressing him as a Doctor or PhD. 

But it seems The Economist was only interested in propagandizing their hatred for President Jonathan, pointing out only his perceived failures, while tactically remaining mute as to the root causes of the supposed failures. A more objective magazine, which has no dog in the fight, would have objectively pointed out the challenges faced by the Jonathan government which is being sabotaged both internally and externally, especially by the western conspiracy not to have him succeed. Icheoku calls on Nigerians to now truly see the February 14 election for what it is - a full liberation from all these powers of darkness and truly declare their independence from these elements. The election is equally a test of their intelligence in choosing wisely a better and more people's orientated president to lead them. Otherwise how could anyone including The Economist, seriously prefer an elementary school certificate holder to a PhD holder for Nigeria's president; especially one who has the blood of Nigerians on his hand? Nigerians should ask The Economist, if it were in the United Kingdom, would they elect a murderer as their prime minister or would such a murderer instead have since be locked up and away in prison, where he belongs instead of campaigning for him to move into Nigeria's Aso Rock?  Icheoku asks The Economist, would they let a Muhammadu Buhari into their 10 Downing Street and if not why are they canvassing for his lease of Aso Rock? 

Why would The Economist wish for Nigerians what they would not accept nor take - to have a murderer preside over the British affairs? Imagine a Muhammadu Buhari who The Economist admitted was a military coupist, whose rule was "nasty and brutish" and whose "buharism"-styled governance was destructive, yet they want such an animal to be Nigeria's president? A Muhammadu Buhari who  quoting The Economist, "banned political meetings and free speech, detained thousands, used secret tribunals and executed people for crimes that were not capital offenses", yet The Economist wants such a perverter and traducer of the Nigerian people to become Nigeria's president? Icheoku berates The Economist that they are merely putting words into Nigerians' mouth when they inferred that 'many Nigerians think such a scumbag should be given another chance' as their leader. The truth is that the evidence on the grounds, short of the APC propaganda, is at variance with this conclusion and does not collaborate their assertion.  

Icheoku says imagine The Economist wishing Nigerians "a sandals-wearing ascetic" for president when Nigeria is not an ultra religious conservative wretched society? Nigeria is also not the poorest of the poor countries in Africa or even when measured against other countries of the world to have such poor-rat non-motivational character as their president. The Economist would rather have for Nigeria, a president who is severely too austere, very mean and who abstains from anything that makes life worth living? Icheoku berates this as another subterranean evidence of an extreme attempt by the white man controlled The Economist to see Nigeria cut to size and pushed back into the doldrums of economic inactivity and its attendant poverty. Look at The Economist, green with envy and complaining that Nigerian ministers could afford expensive wrist watches? Icheoku asks if not Nigerian ministers, who? If Saudi Arabia, an equally oil producing country could afford such exhibitionism and The Economist does not see anything bad with their ministers, why Nigeria's? Icheoku would like The Economist to know that majority of Nigerian ministers come from money and have expensive taste atypical Nigerians, before coming to serve in their various capacities as ministers. So salary or not, they could afford good stuff including "expensive wristwatches worth many times their annual salary", as they do not depend on their meagre salary to afford a comfortable lifestyle. 

Icheoku says The Economist was quick to point out that Muhammadu Buhari "repeatedly stood for election and accepted the outcome when he lost", but cleverly avoided or did not include the mayhem his defeats wrought on the country, resulting in numerous loss of lives and properties in the hands of Buhari-encouraged irate supporters? What a magazine that supposedly has no dog in the fight but which failed woefully in masking its bias, writing a very skewed commentary on Nigeria's forthcoming election. The Economist was equally telling Nigerians that only "a Northerner and Muslim" could have legitimacy to govern Nigeria, when Nigeria is not a Muslim country but a secular multi-ethnic and multi-religious country, not exclusively Northerners? Icheoku says Nigerians, now you know who actually is fueling the born-to-rule mentality of the Hausa/Fulanis - the people who skewed the contraption called Nigeria to favor the Hausa/Fulani in the first place, despite what Lord Lugard pointed out in his hand-over notes  in 1918 is their obvious shortcoming. 

The Economist is also telling Nigerians that only a military man can rule Nigeria and that Nigerian army is demoralized; yet the United Kingdom is not ruled by a military man and neither did The Economist include that the reason for the initial demoralization of the Nigerian army is the initial lack of weapons to fight Boko Haram, which The Economist's Western brother countries conspired to deny Nigerian army in their battle against the insurgents. Icheoku says The Economist did not even acknowledge the fact that some substantial progress is being made under the circumstance, especially the gains recorded as well as the push and confinement of Boko Haram out of several states to now merely a corner of the Northeastern Bornu State. 

Lastly and very luckily too, The Economist as well as their Westerner antagonists of Nigeria and their President Jonathan, will not vote in this Nigerians  election. Only Nigerians would and therefore it is for Nigerians to decide who to choose as their president and not a thousand of biased The Economist or any of their Western haters. Icheoku says Muhammadu Buhari is not the change Nigerians desire nor deserve and therefore Nigerians would not have him as their president. Muhammadu Buhari cannot save Nigeria but would plummet all the gains of the past years if given the mandate; but luckily Nigerians know better than The Economist is giving them credit for by trying to influence their election and would once again tell Muhammadu Buhari, no, thanks but no, to his offer to rule them. Icheoku maintains that President Jonathan has repeatedly shown his will and capacity to galvanize the country as one indivisible entity and would not stand by and watch the country go up in flames like the Balkan states, which The Economist's people supervised its devolution. But unlike the Balkans, Nigerians would not let these Western vultures preside over the fragmentation of Nigeria and on February 14, would deny them their ill-wish to see Nigeria gone with the wind. On February 14, tell The Economist that their game is up an blown open, VOTE GEJ.

VOTE FOR JONATHAN GOODLUCK, A MAN OF PEACE NIGERIA NEEDS !

BUHARI AND ISIS, WHAT THEY SHARE IN COMMON?

Icheoku says those terrorists of Iraq and Syria known as ISIS have this time definitely outdone themselves in farming out  terror to their captives. They have certainly crossed every known boundaries of humaneness as they went beyond all thresholds of exerting cruelty by roasting a human-being alive? Icheoku opined that even Al Queida and Nigeria's Boko Haram would agree that burning a man alive indeed crossed the lines of what humanbeings could do to one another, whether as to send a message of intimidation and fear or to prove that they are unfeeling animals capable of inflicting the worst type of painful cruelty on their captives. Icheoku queries what manner of vicious animals are these fellas who would take joy in burning a person alive and watch him roasted alive while revering in it? 

Icheoku says not even wild animals in Seregenti Wildlife park are capable of such bone-chilling exhibition of barbarism as this ISIS; those animals usually suffocate their preys before starting their feeding frenzy. But these rabid hyenas of Iraq and Syria Caliphate, they have shocked the conscience of the world into an unbelievable macabre display of brutality. At least they should have given the victim some valium to blunt the pains if bent on watching him burnt alive; but they did not. Instead in the name of whatever brand of Islamic sect they are practising and for which they created their Caliphate of hell, they doused the Jordanian pilot in inflammables while locked and chained inside a cage like an animal, then set him afire and watched him suffer an agonizing painful burning death. Icheoku says the entire humanity should rally round to get these scoundrels routed once and for all, as this magnitude of cruelty is an unacceptable behavior from any human-beings    so called. Icheku prays for the repose of the soul of the burnt to death Jordanian pilot Mu'ath al-Kaseasbeh.

When one thinks that their public humiliating beheading is the apogee of their cruelty, they decided to go one step further to top it off by burning to death a life human-being. Icheoku doubts if any other form of meting out punishment by death would ever surpass this, both in degree of torture and excruciating pain of a slow agonizing death. But  compared to Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria, who murdered three innocent Nigerians using a retroactive decree to achieve his premeditated target objective of putting fear of Buhari in the heart and minds of Nigerians, ISIS still won. Icheoku says however, Muhammadu Buhari and ISIS share a common goal of instilling FEAR OF THEM in the people and they both succeeded. On February 14, 2015, please Nigerians tell Buhari you have not forgotten the palpable fog of FEAR that he caused to envelope Nigeria during this regime of infamy; and that no sane Nigerian would cherish an encore. So on February 14, VOTE GEJ.

FELA TO NIGERIANS, DO AWAY WITH BUHARI.

"Driver get accident, but na conductor Buhari charge for tribunal." - Fela Anikulapo Kuti 

Icheoku says this was vintage Fela analyzing the warped decision of Muhammadu Buhari, following his military coup of 1983, who put the president of the country, President Shehu Shagari, in a posh government mansion but put the vice president, Vice President Alex Ekwueme in Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison under very harsh inhumane conditions. 

Icheoku says Nigerians, corruption is not just only when you take or give bribes, but also includes treating people differently because of their tribe and religion; or as in this case, intentionally causing a vice president harm by unfairly adjudging him guilty and holding him responsible for the actions of the president. Icheoku says Nigerians, please listen to the philosopher-musician and remember this disparate treatment and inequity of Muhammadu Buhari. On February 14, VOTE GEJ.

ELECTION 2015, SAY NO POSTPONEMENT !

Icheoku says no matter the excuse or subterfuge, the scheduled election of February 14, 2015 MUST and SHOULD go on, regardless. There is never a time a polity fully vote in any election, so if the Boko Haram infested region is incapable of voting, their votes should be divided percentage wise between the parties using the pattern of voting in their closest neighbors for allocation. If INEC is not ready with the PVCs, they should improvise with other identifying cards for purposes of accrediting the voters. But Icheoku rejects any attempt to postpone the election as such would taint any result thereafter, no matter who eventually wins. So INEC should conduct the election as scheduled; moreso they had all the time in the world to get prepared and be ready for the election. Icheoku says HOLD THE ELECTION as scheduled on February 14, 2015, NO EXCUSES is acceptable to Nigerians as well as the International community.

BUHARI DID THIS TO ME, PLEASE DONT VOTE FOR HIM.

Icheoku says to the many who ask what did the Biafran people expect from the government of then Nigeria in response to Biafran's aspiration to end the genocide being carried out against them which led them to secede from Nigeria, Icheoku says Biafran people expected the government of Nigeria to fight the war humanely but not with atrocious vendetta. It was supposedly a civil war, a conflict between supposed brothers and sisters; but when the Nigerian side converted it to a war of attrition and re-probative punishment, that was when they crossed the line. Icheoku says if the Nigerian side was indeed sincerely only trying to stop Biafrans from bolting away, they would have specifically targeted or directed their attack precisely against only the top echelon of the Biafra effort while sparring their defenseless citizenry and get it over with very quickly too. 

But no, they methodically and systematically exerted punishment; specifically and deliberately made the war to linger for too long in order to enable them 'mission accomplish' their genocidal objective. A more humane government, which was earnestly trying to pull her seceding citizens back into the common geography, would have quickly decapitated the headship of Biafra and then cajoled the Biafran people into happily and joyfully rejoining Nigeria again as fully reintegrated equal citizens without any prohibitive punishment, so many of which still lingers on till today. But to convert these people into haters in perpetuity of those connected with that war, by the way and manner they prosecuted that war and later failed in rehabilitation effort, smacks of a government which was not sincere in its initially stated objective of fighting the war. 

When they intentionally carpet bombed markets, schools, hospitals and hordes of Biafran refugees running for their dear lives and away from conflict theaters, killing hundreds of thousands of them in the process,  they crossed the line of decency. Icheoku says the Nigerian side passed judgment of vendetta on the entire Biafran people, regardless of age, sex and infirmities; and equally became the enforcing agents of their version of retributive justice on a whole Biafran humanity. They also denied food and medicine to starving women and children of Biafra including their pregnant women. Icheoku says the Nigeria side left the borders of humanity when they bombed hospitals and similarly slaughtered their captured and surrendered Biafran prisoners of war in their thousands of hundreds; and thus began their infamous genocide which till date, has pitted surviving Biafrans against the known architects of that war of infamy. 

Icheoku says when the Nigeria side massacred thousands of unsuspecting Asaba Igbo people at the end of the war, men and boys who were lured out of their various hiding places under the guise welcoming Muritala Mohammed, Muhammadu Buhari and other Nigerian army officers who were visiting Asaba, that was when they crossed the border line of being a civilized army. Then finally after the war, the same Nigerian supposedly victorious side, stole all the wealth of Biafrans, handing out only twenty pounds to each account holder regardless of how much millions of pounds they had stashed in their bank accounts prior to the war; that's when they transformed themselves into soldiers of fortune who pillaged Biafrans. Icheoku says when the same side declared no victor and no vanquished, but went ahead to and till today, treats the people of Biafra as war conquered and treating their natural resources as their own war spoil, that is when they tasked Nigeria's unity. 

When the Nigeria side declared the 3Rs of rehabilitation, reconciliation and reconstruction but went ahead and abandoned it, leaving the Biafran side completely devastated and deprived, a fate which they are still suffering till today, that was when they questioned the rational and reason de`tre of Nigeria's continuous existence as one entity. Icheoku says if indeed the Nigerian side sincerely did not want Biafrans to go out of love for them and not love for the natural resources of Biafran, which  they have selfishly appropriated to themselves only, why did they not embark on a Marshal-like Plan for Biafran at war end to help rebuild the devastation they intentionally wrought in Biafra-land? 

Now the same band of invading scoundrels are geared at forcibly preventing a former Biafran from his entitled second term presidency simply because he is a minority who shouldn't rule them in the first place? Icheoku says here again, the same people have yet crossed the line and are seriously questioning the co-existence of the disparate peoples that make up Nigeria. Two things: if they don't want us to rule them, they should not rule us; secondly, no Biafran in good conscience would vote for one of the architects of this genocidal war, especially one who has not found it in his heart of hearts to apologize for his role in that war; not necessary for fighting the war which as a soldier was his duty and job to so fight, but for the ruthless manner in which they waged it. Why carpet bomb schools, massacring innocent children who were not part of the war but merely trying to acquire Western Education which was and still is not regarded as dangerous in their own neck of the wood in Nigeria? Why massacre women who were just trying to hold the forte in the absence of their husbands and breadwinners who were engaged in the war effort? Why bomb baby Jesus laying innocently in the later when tons of bombs were dropped in churches, leveling them an sometimes with worshippers praying for the war to end? Why bomb market places as well as refugees running for their dear lives? 

Anyway, this is the beef Biafrans had with the then Nigerian side, especially the men who directed that evil machination against their supposed BIafran brothers and sisters who they wanted to bring back to Nigeria, may be as dead bodies only? So now you get it those who continuously question what does the Biafran people expect the Nigerian government to do faced with a seceding Biafra? This also forms the current near vitriol opposition to the presidential candidate of the APC, Muhammadu Buhari, a participant in that ungodly atrocity. This is why Icheoku and other sensitive Biafrans are so incensed at the insensitivity of the  APC in recklessly chosing Muhammadu Buhari as their presidential candidate; and now trying without ceasing and deceitfully too, to further rubbish our general psyche by forcing him on Nigeria as president? 

So readers, please understand that the struggle is not necessarily against the Hausa/Fulani or the APC as a party for that matter. No, some of us does not even care much about Jonathan, but strongly resent and reject the thoughtless choice of this man who has caused so much sorrow and tears amongst a people. Our effort is directed against the APC's insensitive thumping of their nose on these various sensitivities with their choice of Muhammadu Buhari. Icheoku once penned an article titled "APC, why not Rotimi Amaechi for presidential candidate" and meant it. Also many of us anti-Buhari activists would have, by extension, equally accepted Governor Kwankwaso or Abubakar Atiku as bona fide APC choice candidate for the presidential contest BUT definitely and certainly not Muhammadu Buhari. As with in every democracy, people should have choices of candidates to choose from but not the present dreg from the bottom of the sewer called Muhammadu Buhari. 

Icheoku asks the APC to seriously, leaving propaganda aside, share with Nigerians their clear road map of getting such a very loathed and highly divisive mongrel like Muhammadu Buhari into Aso Rock short of rendering the land waste trying?  What chance in hell of getting elected, does someone with such gargantuan baggage as Muhammadu Buhari stand come February 14, 2015 by a plurality of Nigerian votes? Almost every Biafran lost someone to either kwashiorkor or bullets or bombs or avoidable deaths. Some people did not know what happened to their beloved parents and grandparents including uncle and aunts as well as other relatives who were too old or too sick to run along  during the war and have no identifiable grave sites to once in a while say prayers for the repose of their souls; admitted so of them were devoured by hungry dogs and other beasts that took over desolate habitations. 

So people, it is not about an opposition candidate stand for election against an incumbent; no, it is about who that opposition candidate is. Icheoku says Muhammaud Buhari is a sadistic sicko, psycho and pathological maniac who drives joy in seeing others suffer from his torture. He did it before and there is no guarantee he would not do it again; after all at his very advanced age, he cannot learn anything new or better than what he is used to. This is the same man who previously destroyed a budding democracy in Nigeria and you wonder which manner of persons, walking straight on their two legs and privileged of having functioning brains in their heads, would ever contemplate accepting this very BUHARI as their elected president? Irrespective that some users of men have already anointed him as their presidential candidate for the sole reason of using him as a ladder to get to the low hanging fruits of Nigeria; but must Nigerians buy into this decrepitude person? 

But you know what, Icheoku is now already madly sad, merely thinking about this impending assault on Nigeria's general psyche, particularly the Biafran victims of Muhammadu Buhari involved genocide, to contemplate the funereal fog his "election" will throw on the polity.  So Nigerians, take a  look at Icheoku in the picture above, a victim of Muhammadu Buhari's homicidal war of acute starvation and please help Icheoku send a clear message to him, that the International Criminal Court at The Hague would be a preferred place to send him as an accused war criminal, but definitely not to Aso Rock as president of a free and democratic Nigeria. So on February 14, VOTE GEJ and in any other event or disposition, stay home; but please do not in otherwise get involved or partake in this evil genocide or encourage this maniacal despot secure a seal of approval of his awful past activities with your vote.

BUHARI IS NOT THE CHANGE NIGERIANS DESIRE NOR DESERVE !!!

Icheoku says please Nigerians look at Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and ask yourselves do you want a sleeping grandpa managing the affairs of your country and WHY? On February 14, VOTE GEJ, a younger man with a more steady hand on the tiller as the preferred watchman.

LAMIDO, STAYING PUT IN PDP

"The allegation of my possible defection to APC is bunkum." - Sule Lamido, Jigawa State Governor.

BUHARI FOLLOWERSHIP IS IGNORANCE RUNNING RIOT - ONU

Icheoku read an article by one Peter Onu, one time Acting Secretary of then Organization of African Unity, OAU now AU, between 1983 and 1985. It is a very riveting and captivating article indeed. Below are some portions of the article as lifted:-

1. "Peter Onu of Nigeria was Acting Secretary-General of the OAU between 1983 and 1985.  At the 1985 Summit in Addis Ababa, statesmen like Julius Nyerere, President of Tanzania, lobbied for his election as substantive Secretary-General. However, there was a major stumbling block to Peter Onu’s candidature: his Head of State, Muhammadu Buhari, was campaigning against him."

2. "Despite Buhari's claimed: “This generation of Nigerians and indeed future generations have no other country than Nigeria;” when the crunch time came, his allegiance to Nigeria disappeared. In the election of the OAU Secretary-General in 1985, Buhari voted against Nigeria and for Niger instead. He secured the election of Ide Oumarou, a Fulani man from Niger; as opposed to an Igbo man from Nigeria. By so doing, Buhari became the first and only Head of State in the history of modern international relations to vote against his country in favour of his tribe."

3. "Years later, General Buhari marched all the way from Daura to Ibadan to demand of Oyo State Governor, Lam Adeshina: “Why are your people killing my people?” Again, he was not referring to Nigerians as his people. Instead, he was an advocate for the rights of murderous Fulani herdsmen who killed Yoruba farmers that objected to their cattle grazing on their land and damaging their crops. This same Buhari who voted against Nigeria in 1985, and said in 2003: “Muslims should only vote those who will promote Islam,” is now shopping for votes nationwide."

4. "If APC had wanted to be taken seriously, it would have come up with a better presidential material than Buhari. There is something anomalous about a party whose mantra is change, recycling a 73 year old man as its candidate for the president of modern Nigeria." 

5. "Buhari has little or no understanding of public policy. That is why APC will always come up with some excuse or the other not to have him participate in a debate with Jonathan. Buhari fought corruption by imposing ridiculous 300-year sentences on offenders. He fought exam malpractices by imposing 24-year prison sentences on school children. He dealt with indiscipline by flogging people to queue at bus-stops. He dealt with food shortages by sending soldiers to break into private warehouses and shops. He fought trade imbalances by taking Nigeria back to the stone age of trade by barter (counter-trade). He sought to extradite a Nigerian from Britain by drugging and crating him."

6. "There is so much about Buhari ending the Boko Haram insurgency as he did the Maitatsine insurgency in the 1980s. But the General needs to be advised that Boko Haram is not Maitatsine. Maitatsine was in two towns: Boko Haram is in three states with spillover effects into others. Maitatsine fought with bows and arrows: Boko Haram fights with sophisticated weapons. Maitatsine was a local insurgency, Boko Haram is an international phenomenon." 

7. "Buhari does not know what corruption means and how to fight it. He became Nigeria’s Head of State through the corruption of a coup d’état and he then tried to fight corruption with corruption. Imposing retroactive decrees and killing Nigerians under them is corruption. Putting an Igbo vice-president in Kirikiri, while placing the Fulani president under palatial house arrest, is corruption."

8. "Detaining people like Michael Ajasin in jail, even after they were discharged and acquitted by kangaroo courts, is corruption. Jailing journalists for telling the truth is corruption. Putting pressure on a judge in order to jail Fela Anikulapo-Kuti is corruption. Shepherding 53 suitcases of contraband unchecked through Customs during a currency change exercise is corruption. Swearing an affidavit that his school-leaving certificate is with the military when it is not, is corruption."

Icheoku says Nigerians, please do not buy into the snake oil that is Muhammadu Buhari being repackaged by entrenched special interest who are desperately fighting to retain power and remain relevance in the affairs of Nigeria. On February 14, tell Peter Onu, Nigerians share in his disappointment and frustrations, VOTE GEJ.

THE PDP PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN SO FAR - MUAZU.

“As our robust and issues-based campaign enters its final week, the Peoples Democratic Party is very much on course for a deserved victory at the forthcoming polls. We have put our best foot forward and in reviewing the campaign tour so far, I have no reason to doubt that victory will be the reward of our hard work, in sha Allah (by God’s grace).

When the campaign started, it was clear that the opposition had gone far in distorting the achievements of our great party. When they shout change, they don’t tell Nigerians what they want to change.

Do they want to change the sound educational policy of the PDP, which has been hailed all around the country as the route to transformation of the country’s democratic institutions?

In the North, the popularity of our Almajiri schools system has finally solved the educational backwardness in the three zones of the giant North. We shall follow this up with a revolution of the normadic education system started positively by the Babangida regime in the 1980s and we would have wiped out ignorance.

On the security crisis in the country, Muazu said “positive results are emerging from the combined forces of our neighbours, who have realised that Boko Haram is not just a threat to Nigeria, but also a major regional threat and the need for a combined effort to wipe out this Al Qaeda inspired menace should be dealt a fatal blow by a combined regional force.

What will APC change in tackling the insurgency as they have claimed every day of the campaign? Absolutely nothing! All that they will change is that they will apply their propaganda expertise and confuse Nigerians even more.

The PDP juggernaut is up, running and is unstoppable. Political campaigning is not about mounting the soapbox and shouting APC Change! APC Change! Change without proper analysis and costing is simply time wasting.

I expect that the APC should have handed down what their budget would look like this year if they won, and show Nigerians where they will get the money to finance their mountain of promises, but nothing of the sort has yet happened as the campaign closes.

This is the least that Nigerians deserve, not a conglomeration of failed political parties with nothing to offer than to promise heaven and earth. If the PDP was merely lily-livered, it should have collapsed with all the poaching of our best brains and the defection of our members.

Yes, we were knocked down, but we are not out. We have in fact stood up to their challenge and now pummeling them to submission.

My take on the campaign so far is that we have a great chance in the North-west and North-east, and North-central is our usual hunting ground where we normally excel.

The huge votes of Kano will be shared equally because our leadership there has done a great job, thanks to the fighting spirit of Education Minister Shekarau, coupled with the unsure steps of the governor which has prevented him from getting involved in pushing their presidential candidate.

The South-west was already rooting for the PDP after the deceit of their party was exposed with Afenifere, UPN and the OPC rooting for us while the South-east and South-south were already a no-go areas for the opposition despite their pretences in Imo, Rivers and Edo States.

I want to specially thank our star performers in the grassroots campaign train all over the country. I can shout it to the high heavens that we are the champions.” - National Chairman of the PDP, Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu."

Icheoku says this statement of progress is very uplifting indeed to all Jonathanites 2015 and prays that the good Lord will crown the GEJ 2015 campaign effort with successful  second term. Icheoku says God's speed GEJ2015. On February 14, 2015, VOTE GEJ.

ROMNEY TELEGRAPHS BUHARI, MOVE OVER?

Icheoku says United States of America's recurring political decimal, perpetual presidential candidate Mitt Romney, has spoken to his Nigerian counterpart Muhammadu Buhari. Responding to his rumored prospective run again for the US presidency, Mitt Romney debunked the rumor, stating that he is not going to run for office again because, according to him, "IT IS TIME FOR NEW FACES.' Icheoku says if only Muhammadu Buhari would listen and heed the advise that Nigerians are indeed tired and bored with a face that has been on the block for over thirty two odd years. 

Icheoku laments that when Nigeria is not a banana republic nor suffering from dwarfism that refused the emergence of  new leaders, this going back to recycle a 1983 Buhari for 2015 Nigerian presidency, will not say well about the country, especially to a world that still remembers that United States President Ronald Reagan and United Kingdom's Margret Thatcher were his contemporaries then; that Soviet Union was still in existence and that Nelson Mandela was still a prisoner in Robben Island when Buhari first ruled Nigeria. What kind of message would a 1983 Buhari mounting the leadership chair now in 2015 Nigeria send to a world that is almost getting tired of Nigeria's all motion and no movement nor meaningful traction with their progress. So with your votes Nigerians, please tell Muhammadu Buhari that you heard Mitt Romney very loud and clear and that you will help him move over. Icheoku says to Buhari please listen to Mitt Romney and move over! On February 14, 2015, VOTE GEJ.   

JE SUIS TOMPOLO ET DOKUBO.

Icheoku says every Nigerian who has a conscience is a Government Tompolo and Asari Dokubo in the defense of all oppressed minorities of Nigeria. Therefore, together we all must rise up and resist the current effort to intimidate and silence a people, who are merely protesting against their continued repression and oppression by the Hausa/Fulani internal colonialists of Nigeria. Icheoku says every Nigeria of goodwill should say no to Hausa/Fulani born to rule mentality; they should say no to TY Danjuma's lopsided apportionment of blame and unbecoming attack on the two Niger Delta freedom fighters; while keeping quiet when Northerners throw their own fiery rhetoric bombs. Icheoku says such impartiality has and should have no place in today's Nigeria. 

Icheoku maintains that the North is clamoring for unity of Nigeria because of their exploitation of the contraption as is presently skewed in their favor and not because of any love they have for anybody who is not one of them; so to hell with such debased unity that does not guarantee equality and equity to all. Icheoku says the North must be told the bitter truth that were the oil in their region, they would not tolerate any other Nigerian from benefiting therefrom but would have since gone their way with their oil. If in doubt look at how they destroy non Northern peoples' properties each time they riot while sparing their own people? 

Icheoku emphasizes that the only acceptable united Nigeria will be one where there is no place for an 'Animal Farm' sort of scaled social standing/status; and where the distribution of political power and resources are evenly spread across the board through every disparate nationalities no matter how few or large they may be. But in any event, if these people will not allow us to rule them, they should NEVER be allowed to rule us, NEVER AGAIN. They have killed enough of us already trying to keep us silent, but this time around, we shall say to them ENOUGH and if they want war let them have WAR. Ken Saro Wiwa was murdered by these perverts to keep him quiet and stop his agitation for a fairer society; ditto so many other victims of their vicious colonizing mentality that believes in absolute power including muzzling their perceived enemies into complete submission and subjugation to achieve this. Unfortunately, they have pushed their luck too far and have now awaken the consciousness of the oppressed; who having nothing to owe anymore, have decided to stand their ground and fight back. So to the TY Danjumas of Nigeria, Icheoku says do not question the resolve of a man pushed to the wall. On February 14, 2015 VOTE GEJ.