Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - lionger

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 38
First of all, if these guys were stupid enough to have a public 'engagement ceremony' in a country like Malawi, then they paticularly deserve to have the book thrown at them.

Secondly, this kind of public humiliation and mockery is degrading to all its participants; victims, corwd and country included.

From News Sources / Re: Umaru Musa Yar'adua.
« on: May 15, 2010, 12:37:00 AM »
The end cant be avoided Lionger. He was destined to die when he did and he would have done so at the very second he died regardless of whether he was president or not. The pity is that he died while he was still a leader of a nation. I am sorry for the fact that he was much maligned by ppl who dont know a hoot nor care a hoot about him. I cant say that I care a hoot about him myself since I dont know him and I dont think he was the best leader for nigeria and I never for once believed that he gained access to the presidency legitimately. So although I am not happy for his being maligned maliciously by ill bred and jaundiced minds, I must say that it was unavoidable. The upturn of it is that these malevolent minds are actually doing him a much needed favor, by appropriating to themselves some of his misdeeds. It is to be hoped that his mortal illness acts as absolution towards his sins. I feel so sure that if Yar adua were to be given a choice (by the cohorts surrounding him when he was alive) of either continuing as president or resigning to consign his being wholly to his Lord, he would choose the latter rather than the former. He wasnt given that choice by the overambitious power loving leeches surrounding him. He probably never knew what was happening around him anyway although  all efforts were made to hoodwink the general public into thinking that he was hale and hearty and only speech impaired.  

Well said.

I'm afraid what lionger said is what some people wrongly think. They tend to forget that death is just a way which everyone must take. No cure for it, or for the condition in which one will die. It's destined, already, that 'Yar Adua would die as he did, i.e. on the helm of Nigerian power as President.

May Allah, the Exalted, grant his soul an eternal peace, amin.

Muhsin and Husnaa (particularly Muhsin) when I said that "this end may have been comepletely avoidable" I was not talking about the inevitability of death for all human beings (obviously!) Why would you take it to mean that? What I meant (which really should have been clear for all to see) is had Yar'Adua been left to take care of himself rather than propped before us to carry the burdensome load called Nigeria, he may well still be alive today. Yes we must all die someday, but it does necessarily have to be today, while feebly clinging to powers and prestige that we have no right to, and would be far better dispensed in the hands of others.

Muhsin, countless terrible things have been destined to happen on this earth since time immemorial. Cleary this does not mean that we should take leave of our senses since everything that happens will happen no matter what? Maybe its time we asked God why we are 'predestined' to languish in the gutter while other nations are 'predestined' to surge ahead - but of course we already know the answer to that question. I daresay it might be 'wrong thinking' or even sacrilege to put this farce at the feet of the Almighty God, while ignoring the large elephant in the room which constitutes our own culpability.

Husnaa, I don't think Yar'Adua can be let off the hook that easily. A blue-blooded Fulani politician with such a rich heritage is no small fry and if willing should be able to stand up for himself, rather than become a pawn for another's questionable agenda. He must bear responsibility for it all, he made Nigeria endure during his stint in office.

From News Sources / Re: Umaru Musa Yar'adua.
« on: May 07, 2010, 02:47:38 PM »
What a great pity that it has come to this. From day one this man looked liked he was better off tending to his health than occupying the turbulent hotseat in Aso Rock. This end may have been entirely avoidable  :(.

I feel for his family. May God comfort them!

« on: March 29, 2010, 06:25:45 PM »
Ghadaffi knows next to nothing about Nigeria,
Our problem is not about being unable to live together, but it is just the rulership that has being taken over by "Aliens form outter hell' who have no feeling for the nation.
Aliens from outter hell, i call them, if they were not, who will rob his nation to build a foreign country.
Ghaddafi should keep shut and face his internal problems.
Our greatness lies in our continued existence.
i sometimes wish the Oil dries up soon, maybe when these aliens start milking our blood for export, we the masses will stand and defend our blood, (since we have failed in defending our rights.
Mutum ya sace maka hakkin ka, kuma ka ce mai Rankaidade

mallam, it is easy to divorce ourselves from our parasitic leaders, but the truth is that they are one of us. They are not aliens from hell, they are 'sons of the soil' like us; they are our relatives, our brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers. This is the truth. So clearly our problem geos deeper than the ruling class to the people and cullture that produce them.

« on: March 29, 2010, 06:09:28 PM »
Ghaddafi has always been an attention-seeking clown on the international stage.  The surprise is that some of us are so shocked at his latest statement on Nigeria that we are resorting to denial. It is not the first controversial statement he has made and it will certainly not be the last.  That someone like him could rise to be AU head and speak for Africa tells you the least you need to know about the state of leadership in Africa. Nigeria will far more likely 'tear' than 'split', and as bad as things are right now I don't think any of us wants to witness the consequences of such shallow reasoning.

By the way, HUSNAA and IBB, I think you have been unfair in your judgement of the UN's activity in Africa. While the UN's failures and weaknesses are obvious, the efforts of its socio-economic and humanitarian bodies in Africa's disaster areas ought not to be easily dismissed.  Yes, these orgs could be more effective, but we would be worse off without them. And since the end of the Cold War, half of its peace-keeping operations have been in Africa. As of 2005, about 50,000 UN troops were involved in Africa, which at the time amounted to 85 % of all active UN peacekeepers worldwide. Moreover, we should remember that the UN's peacekeeping efforts in Africa include stints in Liberia and Sierra Leone, places where the activity of Libyan-trained 'revolutionaries' resulted in civil war and chaos. The lives of Nigerian soldiers were part of the price paid to clean up the mess in those places. For this reason I cannot applaud Ghaddafi's sanctimonious and hypocritical posturing at the UN meeting last year. Libya has been part of the problem with wars in West Africa and not the solution.

Islam / Re: He Lost his job because of his stance on Islam!!!
« on: March 26, 2010, 01:13:38 PM »
Dude, what 'stance on Islam' are you talking about? Finklestein was denied tenure at his university because of his fervent activism for the Palestinian cause, which drew him into bitter feuds with pro-Israel intellectuals, particularly Alan Dershowitz. Unless you are talking of another job, I don't see what this has to do with his position on Islam.

General Board / Re: Black America Meets Northern Nigeria
« on: March 22, 2010, 04:15:28 PM »
Africans and African-americans discussing the slave trade? Hehehe dis wan sounds like trouble oh  ;D ! Eniwe, mek I wait for Muhsin to respond b4 I chook mouth for that thread. In coming to terms with the painful past of trans atlantic slave trade (TAST), I have noticed that there is the temptation among Africans and African americans, some even in the academic commmunity , to find refuge in anodynic Afrocentric romanticism which largely seeks to blame the white man for the whole thing. Some also seek to link the TAST to the embarassing socio-economic backwardness that Africa and some of the African diaspora seem unable to escape from, as part of a grand conspiracy by the white man to keep us down. Unfortunately the truth is rather more complex and bitter to swallow.

Most African societies in antiquity were slave societies ( and in agreement with HUSNAA, all human societies at different points in history practiced slavery) . Beginning in the 15th century, the sub-Saharan slave markets exploded as European merchants came to the West African coast looking to trade for chattell deemed necesssary for tilling the land in the Americas, and so the slave trade across the Atlantic began. Now, the white man did not just 'take' people, he bought them, in exchange for manufactured European goods that the Africans had never seen before, were incapable of making themselves and thus eager to obtain. In fact, Europeans did not have the capacity to either kidnap large numbers of Africans, or to force Africans to trade in slaves with them. While the European was militarily superior on his own continent, he could not transfer that superiority to Africa until the late 19th century, and by then he abhored the slave trade and was now looking to end it in Africa.  Moreover, before the discovery of quinine, the European could not venture deep into the interior of Africa without risking certain death from 'mysterious' diseases and 'bad air'. As  such, he preferred to stay on his ship by the coast and have the African merchants bring slaves to him.  Even so, the attrition rates were high. As such, Africans could not have been forced into the slave trade by the Europeans; it was  a voluntary, 'legitimate' business. If Africans had refused to trade in slaves, there was really nothing the Europeans could have done.

 How could Africans have traded their own people? Well as I said before, the slave trade has  been seen as a legitimate business wherever it existed in the world, as long as the enslaved peoples were criminals,  'enemies', 'foreigners' or in some form societal outcasts. So by the beginning of the modern era we find the Europeans trying to enslave the indigenous Americans and later Africans, and the Ottoman Arabs acquiring slaves from south-east Europe and north/east/west Africa. But in sub-saharan Africa, largely a hodgepodge of fractured peasant/semi-feudal polities, the 'enemy' and 'foreigner' was the village next door . So as far as the Africans were concerned, they weren't trading their own people!

The first people to question the institution of slavery were 18th century radical Christians in Britain, and when the West was convinced of the evil of slavery, they forced this idea down the throats of everyone else. Britain had to use force to stop the slave trade in its African colonies; and in Nigeria that took them well into the 20th century, even as late as 1950!  We still hear allegations of slave trading in the Sudan and Mauritania. If we feel a revulsion to slave trade today, then we have the West to thank for that, and tough questions to ask of ourselves. I know some people will not like the last remark, but it is the difficult truth.

Wow. Inciteful and extremely irresponsible statements from Bali. Maina is not even an 'Hausa' man :-\

General Board / Re: Nigerian Arrested for Attempting to Bomb Plane
« on: February 04, 2010, 02:34:30 PM »
While I generally agree with certain points the writer made, such as the culpability of Britain over Nigeria for the radicalization of Farouk, and the need for Nigeria to put up more of a fight for its incarcerated citizens overseas, I find the main thrusts of this article more easily exemplify the opposite end of what maxsiollun described above as 'unsophisticated news reporting' at best.

First of all, Sobowale's attempt at redefining Farouk as his potentially mentally unstable 'misguided son' who 'attempted to commit suicide' is clearly bankrupt. Frankly it makes a fool of those that propagate it, just as Nigeria's re-branding project which Sobowale seems to love has made a fool out of Dora Akunyili (who really would have been better off walking the path of Okonja Iweala rather than becoming a tool of government propaganda). Farouk is a would-be terrorist and mass murderer and we ought to be thankful that he did not succeed on Christmas Day.

 At first it is difficult to imagine why anyone would strain to such a ridiculous defense of Farouk, but perhaps Sobowale betrays his sympathies in his poorly coordinated delve into the Israeli-Palestinian crisis and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which all serve as rallying calls for al Qaeda and similar fundamentalist groups. He argues that Nigerians must not buy into the Western arguement on these issues - but conversely one might also ask why Nigerians should buy into that of Arab countries, or even worse, that of Al Qaeda. Must we be active participants in these conflicts? If Farouk can somehow be construed as a 'liberator' - whose liberator is he, Nigeria's? Why couldnt Farouk be passionate about the state of his fellow northern Nigerian muslims, most of whom languish in unescapable poverty? How about Darfur, which is relatively closer to home and where far more Muslims have died over the past decade than in Palestine or Afghanistan? The truth is that Farouk's (and Sobowale's?) causes are largely based on an extremely parochial attitude to complex issues, and they need to be exposed as such.

It goes without saying that we in Nigeria need to step up our game on the domestic and foreign fronts. Our placement on the terror watchlist may be unjustified, but is symptomatic of our worsening relationship with the U.S., exacerbated all the more by our apparent policy of 'absenteeism' championed by our absentee President. Sobowale proposes an extremely inappropriate and insensitive 'Save Farouk' media campaign but misses the fact that any such project is fruitless as long as our diplomatic arm remains blunt. Do we realize that at the time of the Farouk incident on Christmas Day, there was no sitting Nigerian ambassador to the US? Then of cousre there is President Yar'adua, who could not have chosen a worse time to be MIA. No ambassador in the U.S.,  no President at home - how then can we expect to have fruitful high-level diplomatic exchange in the face of such a crisis?  Ironically Sobowale deems the American health sector as unfit for proper psychoanalysis of Farouk and wants him released to a Nigerian hospital instead. Of course, our hospitals are so great! No wonder our President apparently feels that he can rule the country from the sick bed of a hospital in Saudi Arabia. Speaking of media campaign, I wonder if Sobowale got a chance to watch foreign minister Ojo Madueke's embarassing debut on BBC's HardTalk a couple of weeks ago. How's that for rebranding Nigeria?

Nigeria will also have to keep up its vigilance on the domestic front. While, as I have said, Nigeria need not bear the brunt of responsibility for the Farouk incident, there are other signs that are troubling. From the Maitatsine upheaval in 1980 until the Boko Haram riots of 2009, there has been a distinct foreign element in not a few of the religious riots in the North. Recently the North African branch of al Qaeda has offered military help to the Muslims in fighting Christians in the wake of the Jos riots. These signs are very worrying. If we do not like what is happening in Afghanistan, then lets be sure that it does not replicate itself in Nigeria. U.S. actions in the Muslim world may be objectionable; however, we could do with far more constructive engagement other than violent retribution over conflicts that are secondary at best. It really is that simple.

Gogannaka and Bakan-Gizo, I would like to know why you found this article outstanding. I find Sobowale's attempt at rebranding the Farouk incident quite objectionable; there is nothing to gain in  taking the ostrich approach to evade reality.

From News Sources / Re: My point of view on the sardaunan Kano!!!
« on: January 26, 2010, 06:32:13 PM »
Dan Borno, are those quotations you posted supposed to prove anything? What else would one expect from Awoniyi's lips concerning the Sardauna? As Dr. Abbas rightly states, history must serve a lesson to Nigerians. And history has implicated the Sardauna in the even more violent political upheaval in the Western region which eventually consumed the Sardauna himself along with the entire nation. I would like to think that Shekarau will leave Kano and Nigeria with a much better legacy.

Ahem, so in view of the surprising and entirely hilarious turn this thread has taken, is the forum still dead ??  ;D ;D

General Board / Re: Will yar'adua make it?
« on: January 09, 2010, 12:44:27 PM »
Lionger,how will there be trouble?

Well, as you said here...

It might be better off for Nigerians for Yar'adua to stay in power than for the heat that will come up when he is forcefully or tactically removed.

Not that the present situation is ideal, for of course it is not.

General Board / Re: HOW AMERICA SPOILED THE WORLD............
« on: December 11, 2009, 03:07:51 PM »
Dude, how is there a need for an Islamic United Nations when you already have the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)?

OIC is weak as it fails to restore the absolute independence and unity of the Muslim world; and it cannot cater for the goals we are preparing to step on recently during our time of practical activity.

How do you suppose this novel IUN will succeed where the OIC has apparently failed in ensuring the 'independence and unity of the Muslim World'? Alternatively, what are the reasons for the OIC's failures?

General Board / Re: Will yar'adua make it?
« on: December 11, 2009, 03:02:50 PM »
I hope he does; if not, trouble dey... :-\

General Board / Re: HOW AMERICA SPOILED THE WORLD............
« on: December 09, 2009, 02:40:37 PM »
Dude, how is there a need for an Islamic United Nations when you already have the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 38

Powered by EzPortal