Exclusive: US bankrolled anti-Morsi activists

Egyptian protesters tear down the US flag during a demonstration at the US Embassy in September 2012 [EPA]

Documents reveal US money trail to Egyptian groups that pressed for president's removal.

*

Berkeley, United States - President Barack Obama recently stated the United States was not taking sides as Egypt's crisis came to a head with the military overthrow of the democratically elected president.

But a review of dozens of US federal government documents shows Washington has quietly funded senior Egyptian opposition figures who called for toppling of the country's now-deposed president Mohamed Morsi.

Documents obtained by the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley show the US channeled funding through a State Department programme to promote democracy in the Middle East region. This programme vigorously supported activists and politicians who have fomented unrest in Egypt, after autocratic president Hosni Mubarak was ousted in a popular uprising in February 2011. 

*

The State Department's programme, dubbed by US officials as a "democracy assistance" initiative, is part of a wider Obama administration effort to try to stop the retreat of pro-Washington secularists, and to win back influence in Arab Spring countries that saw the rise of Islamists, who largely oppose US interests in the Middle East.

Activists bankrolled by the programme include an exiled Egyptian police officer who plotted the violent overthrow of the Morsi government, an anti-Islamist politician who advocated closing mosques and dragging preachers out by force, as well as a coterie of opposition politicians who pushed for the ouster of the country's first democratically elected leader, government documents show.

Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, interviews, and public records reveal Washington's "democracy assistance" may have violated Egyptian law, which prohibits foreign political funding.

It may also have broken US government regulations that ban the use of taxpayers' money to fund foreign politicians, or finance subversive activities that target democratically elected governments. 

'Bureau for Democracy'

Washington's democracy assistance programme for the Middle East is filtered through a pyramid of agencies within the State Department. Hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars is channeled through the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL), The Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), USAID, as well as the Washington-based, quasi-governmental organisation the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). 

In turn, those groups re-route money to other organisations such as the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute (NDI), and Freedom House, among others. Federal documents show these groups have sent funds to certain organisations in Egypt, mostly run by senior members of anti-Morsi political parties who double as NGO activists.

The Middle East Partnership Initiative - launched by the George W Bush administration in 2002 in a bid to influence politics in the Middle East in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks - has spent close to $900m on democracy projects across the region, a federal grants database shows.

USAID manages about $1.4bn annually in the Middle East, with nearly $390m designated for democracy promotion, according to the Washington-based Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED). 

The US government doesn't issue figures on democracy spending per country, but Stephen McInerney, POMED's executive director, estimated that Washington spent some $65m in 2011 and $25m in 2012. He said he expects a similar amount paid out this year.

:

A main conduit for channeling the State Department's democracy funds to Egypt has been the National Endowment for Democracy. Federal documents show NED, which in 2011 was authorised an annual budget of $118m by Congress, funneled at least $120,000 over several years to an exiled Egyptian police officer who has for years incited violence in his native country.

This appears to be in direct contradiction to its Congressional mandate, which clearly states NED is to engage only in "peaceful" political change overseas.

Exiled policeman

Colonel Omar Afifi Soliman - who served in Egypt's elite investigative police unit, notorious for human rights abuses - began receiving NED funds in 2008 for at least four years.

During that time he and his followers targeted Mubarak's government, and Soliman later followed the same tactics against the military rulers who briefly replaced him. Most recently Soliman set his sights on Morsi's government. 

Soliman, who has refugee status in the US, was sentenced in absentia last year for five years imprisonment by a Cairo court for his role in inciting violence in 2011 against the embassies of Israel and Saudi Arabia, two US allies.

He also used social media to encourage violent attacks against Egyptian officials, according to court documents and a review of his social media posts.

US Internal Revenue Service documents reveal that NED paid tens of thousands of dollars to Soliman through an organisation he created called Hukuk Al-Nas (People's Rights), based in Falls Church, Virginia. Federal forms show he is the only employee.

After he was awarded a 2008 human rights fellowship at NED and moved to the US, Soliman received a second $50,000 NED grant in 2009 for Hukuk Al-Nas. In 2010, he received $60,000 and another $10,000 in 2011.  

In an interview with the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley, Soliman reluctantly admitted he received US government funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, but complained it wasn't enough. "It is like $2000 or $2,500 a month," he said. "Do you think this is too much? Obama wants to give us peanuts. We will not accept that."

Join the discussion. #EgyptSpeaks

NED has removed public access to its Egyptian grant recipients in 2011 and 2012 from its website. NED officials didn't respond to repeated interview requests. 

'Pro bono advice'

NED's website says Soliman spreads only nonviolent literature, and his group was set up to provide "immediate, pro bono legal advice through a telephone hotline, instant messaging, and other social networking tools".

However, in Egyptian media interviews, social media posts and YouTube videos, Soliman encouraged the violent overthrow of Egypt's government, then led by the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party.

"Incapacitate them by smashing their knee bones first," he instructed followers on Facebook in late June, as Morsi's opponents prepared massive street rallies against the government. Egypt's US-funded and trainedmilitary later used those demonstrations to justify its coup on July 3. 

*

"Make a road bump with a broken palm tree to stop the buses going into Cairo, and drench the road around it with gas and diesel. When the bus slows down for the bump, set it all ablaze so it will burn down with all the passengers inside … God bless," Soliman's post read. 

*

In late May he instructed, "Behead those who control power, water and gas utilities."

Soliman removed several older social media posts after authorities in Egypt took notice of his subversive instructions, court documents show.

Egyptian women supporters of ousted president Morsi [EPA]

More recent Facebook instructions to his 83,000 followers range from guidelines on spraying roads with a mix of auto oil and gas - "20 liters of oil to 4 liters of gas"- to how to thwart cars giving chase. 

*

On a YouTube video, Soliman took credit for a failed attempt in December to storm the Egyptian presidential palace with handguns and Molotov cocktails to oust Morsi.

*

"We know he gets support from some groups in the US, but we do not know he is getting support from the US government. This would be news to us," said an Egyptian embassy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to the media.

Funding other Morsi opponents*

Other beneficiaries of US government funding are also opponents of the now-deposed president, some who had called for Morsi's removal by force.

The Salvation Front main opposition bloc, of which some members received US funding, has backed street protest campaigns that turned violent against the elected government, in contradiction of many of the State Department's own guidelines.

A longtime grantee of the National Endowment for Democracy and other US democracy groups is a 34-year old Egyptian woman, Esraa Abdel-Fatah, who sprang to notoriety during the country's pitched battle over the new constitution in December 2012.

She exhorted activists to lay siege to mosques and drag from pulpits all Muslim preachers and religious figures who supported the country's the proposed constitution, just before it went to a public referendum. 

The act of besieging mosques has continued ever since, and several people have died in clashes defending them.

Federal records show Abdel-Fatah's NGO, the Egyptian Democratic Academy, received support from NED, MEPI and NDI, among other State Department-funded groups "assisting democracy". Records show NED gave her organisation a one-year $75,000 grant in 2011.

Abdel-Fatah is politically active, crisscrossing Egypt to rally support for her Al-Dostor Party, which is led by former UN nuclear chief Mohamed El-Baradei, the most prominent figure in the Salvation Front. She lent full support to the military takeover, and urged the West not call it a "coup".

"June 30 will be the last day of Morsi's term," she told the press a few weeks before the coup took place. 

*

US taxpayer money has also been sent to groups set up by some of Egypt's richest people, raising questions about waste in the democracy programme.

Michael Meunier is a frequent guest on TV channels that opposed Morsi. Head of the Al-Haya Party, Meunier - a dual US-Egyptian citizen - has quietly collected US funding through his NGO, Hand In Hand for Egypt Association. 

Meunier's organisation was founded by some of the most vehement opposition figures, including Egypt's richest man and well-known Coptic Christian billionaire Naguib Sawiris, Tarek Heggy, an oil industry executive, Salah Diab, Halliburton's partner in Egypt, and Usama Ghazali Harb, a politician with roots in the Mubarak regime and a frequent US embassy contact.

Meunier has denied receiving US assistance, but government documents show USAID in 2011 granted his Cairo-based organisation $873,355. Since 2009, it has taken in $1.3 million from the US agency. 

Meunier helped rally the country's five million Christian Orthodox Coptic minority, who oppose Morsi's Islamist agenda, to take to the streets against the president on June 30.

Reform and Development Party member Mohammed Essmat al-Sadat received US financial support through his Sadat Association for Social Development, a grantee of The Middle East Partnership Initiative. 

The federal grants records and database show in 2011 Sadat collected $84,445 from MEPI "to work with youth in the post-revolutionary Egypt".

Sadat was a member of the coordination committee, the main organising body for the June 30 anti-Morsi protest. Since 2008, he has collected $265,176 in US funding. Sadat announced he will be running for office again in upcoming parliamentary elections.

After soldiers and police killed more than 50 Morsi supporters on Monday, Sadat defended the use of force and blamed the Muslim Brotherhood, saying it used women and children as shields.

Some US-backed politicians have said Washington tacitly encouraged them to incite protests.

"We were told by the Americans that if we see big street protests that sustain themselves for a week, they will reconsider all current US policies towards the Muslim Brotherhood regime," said Saaddin Ibrahim, an Egyptian-American politician opposed Morsi.

Ibrahim's Ibn Khaldoun Center in Cairo receives US funding, one of the largest recipients of democracy promotion money in fact.

His comments followed statements by other Egyptian opposition politicians claiming they had been prodded by US officials to whip up public sentiment against Morsi before Washington could publicly weigh in.

Democracy programme defence

The practice of funding politicians and anti-government activists through NGOs was vehemently defended by the State Department and by a group of Washington-based Middle East experts close to the programme.

Symbolic coffins for the more than 50 people killed Monday [EPA]

"The line between politics and activism is very blurred in this country," said David Linfield, spokesman for the US Embassy in Cairo.

Others said the United States cannot be held responsible for activities by groups it doesn't control. 

"It's a very hot and dynamic political scene," said Michelle Dunne, an expert at the Atlantic Council think-tank. Her husband, Michael Dunne, was given a five-year jail sentence in absentia by a Cairo court for his role in political funding in Egypt.

"Just because you give someone some money, you cannot take away their freedom or the position they want to take," said Dunne. 

Elliot Abrams, a former official in the administration of George W. Bush and a member of the Working Group on Egypt that includes Dunne, denied in an email message that the US has paid politicians in Egypt, or elsewhere in the Middle East.

"The US does not provide funding for parties or 'local politicians' in Egypt or anywhere else," said Abrams. "That is prohibited by law and the law is scrupulously obeyed by all US agencies, under careful Congressional oversight."

But a State Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity, said American support for foreign political activists was in line with American principles. 

"The US government provides support to civil society, democracy and human rights activists around the world, in line with our long-held values, such as respecting the fundamental human rights of free speech, peaceful assembly, and human dignity," the official wrote in an email. "US outreach in Egypt is consistent with these principles."

A Cairo court convicted 43 local and foreign NGO workers last month on charges of illegally using foreign funds to stir unrest in Egypt. The US and UN expressed concern over the move. 

Out of line

Some Middle East observers suggested the US' democracy push in Egypt may be more about buying influence than spreading human rights and good governance.

Egyptians celebrate in Tahrir Square after Morsi's removal [AFP]

"Funding of politicians is a problem," said Robert Springborg, who evaluated democracy programmes for the State Department in Egypt, and is now a professor at the National Security Department of the Naval Postgraduate School at Monterey, California.*

"If you run a programme for electoral observation, or for developing media capacity for political parties, I am not against that. But providing lots of money to politicians - I think that raises lots of questions," Springborg said.

Some Egyptians, meanwhile, said the US was out of line by sending cash through its democracy programme in the Middle East to organisations run by political operators. 

"Instead of being sincere about backing democracy and reaching out to the Egyptian people, the US has chosen an unethical path," said Esam Neizamy, an independent researcher into foreign funding in Egypt, and a member of the country's Revolutionary Trustees, a group set up to protect the 2011 revolution.

"The Americans think they can outsmart lots of people in the Middle East. They are being very hostile against the Egyptian people who have nothing but goodwill for them - so far," Neizamy said.
 

Source:

Al Jazeera

Breaking: House of Reps takes over functions of Rivers House of Assembly

Chaos as Rivers lawmakers engage in free-for-all

The House invoked a section of the Nigerian constitution.
Following the violence that occurred at the Rivers State House of Assembly on Tuesday, the House of Representatives has taken over the functions of the Rivers Assembly.

The federal lawmakers took the decision on Wednesday following debates and approval of a motion and based on section 11, sub section 4 of the 1999 Constitution.

The section states that “At any time when any House of Assembly of a state is unable to perform its functions by reason of the situation prevailing in the state, The National Assembly may make such Laws for the peace, order and good government of that state with respect to matters on which a House of Assembly may make laws as may appear to the National Assembly to be necessary or expedient until such time as the House of Assembly is able to resume its functions; and any such laws enacted by the National Assembly pursuant to this section shall have effect as if they were laws enacted by the House of Assembly of the state.”

Crisis had engulfed the Rivers House of Assembly on Tuesday when five members out of 32 attempted to impeach the Speaker, Otelemaba Amachree.

The confusion that followed led to violence among the state lawmakers with videos of the violence circulated on social media.
Wednesday’s sitting was chaired by the Deputy Speaker of the House, Emeka Ihedioha

Details later…

Politics of ‘Ghosts’ and Collateral Damage (2) By M.B.O Owolowo

The first part of this article highlighted the local dynamics of terror groups operating in Nigeria and the challenges of tackling the menace. This aspect concentrates on international dynamics, anti-subsistence theories and our potential struggle for survival. We have undoubtedly established Boko Haram aren’t ghosts, they do exist- the collateral damage is proof of that. I have been discussing with some locals in parts of these affected regions and there are not exactly happy with the government, neither are they excited about the insurgency. They are caught in-between the perceived insouciance of the supposed Commander-in-Chief coupled with the ineptitude of JTF (Joint Task Force) and the mayhem of Boko Haram.

As some Jonathanians continue to praise the government’s approach to fighting terrorism, including the ironic sending of troops to Mali- not to mention their alleged starvation, it may be interesting to note the President stated “it is Nigeria’s turn” to face the war on terror.

So from a global perspective, what is the “War on Terror”? For the purposes of attaining global peace and way before this brand of ‘terrorism’ emanated in our realm, I have been studying the concept of Jihad in Islam and the emergence of terrorism on a global scale. I already knew of figures like Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, The Mujahideen, USSR- Afghanistan War, Soviet Union disintegration and the US/CIA connection, way before 9/11.
The origins and manifestations of such ideologies are often misconstrued; a genesis subconsciously or deliberately overlooked. Of important note is a book that analyses the issues from a factual perspective.
“Invisible History: Afghanistan's Untold Story” by Elizabeth Gould and Paul Fitzgerald
The above mentioned book is a must read for those who really want an in-depth, factual and unbiased analysis of the war in Afghanistan. It dissects the true intent of the U.S, its sponsoring of Islamic fundamentalism and its subsequent growth, plus introspection into the so called ‘War on Terror’, albeit hypocritical and belated.
Robert Dreyfuss, author of “Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam” comments about the book:
"From the dawn of the Cold War onward, generations of conservative strategists have eyed Afghanistan as a launching pad first for the subversion of the Soviet Union and then to checkmate Russia in central Asia. To that end, as Gould and Fitzgerald show, since the 1950s the CIA has played games with both reactionary, feudal landlords and wild-eyed Muslim fundamentalists. In their exhaustively documented book, Gould and Fitzgerald reveal how that sort of gamesmanship played havoc with a battered nation of twenty-five million souls—helping to spawn, in the process, the virulent strain of violent Islamism that reaches far beyond the remote and landlocked territory of that war-torn country."

In my critical analysis of the history and politics of the Middle East, with the importation/exportation of extremist ideologies across the globe, I have had to research and read a lot of books written from all sides of the ideological spectra. One of such authors is Bernard Lewis who despite his critical analysis of Islamic culture, Sharia Law, Jihad and the modern day phenomenon of terrorism, in his text, “Islam: The Religion and the People.” Lewis states Jihad as a distinct "religious obligation", but suggests that "it is a pity that people engaging in terrorist activities are not more aware of their own religion: Muslim fighters are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged unless they attack first; not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners; to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities or their resumption after a truce; and to honour agreements... At no time did the classical jurists offer any approval or legitimacy to what we nowadays call terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism as it is practiced nowadays."
In Lewis' view, the "by now widespread terrorism practice of suicide bombing is a development of the 20th century" with "no antecedents in Islamic history, and no justification in terms of Islamic theology, law, or tradition." He further comments that "the fanatical warrior offering his victims the choice of the Koran or the sword is not only untrue, it is impossible" and that "generally speaking, Muslim tolerance of unbelievers was far better than anything available in Christendom, until the rise of secularism in the 17th century."

Now that we have all these issues in perspective and the paradigm of thought processes expanded, I do not subscribe to mere lamentations without the proffering of excogitative remedies; the sooner we realize our problems are politically motivated the sooner we will start to identify pragmatic solutions. It is no longer news there’s a power tussle going on between some regions in Nigeria. Contemporary Nigeria is witnessing the manifestations of malfeasance of public office holders, the myopic bigotry of former rulers and the general corruption of the polity. Many issues the entity has not addressed; the aftermath of civil war has not been dealt with, some still feel like second class citizens, poverty is rife, some regions have low literacy rates, with women living in subjugation and children in deprivation.

All that I have mentioned are the consequences of corruption and the insatiable greed of the corrupt with religion utilized as a convenient pawn, so these problems aren’t totally religious.
Religion is a convenient way to divide the populace and cause mayhem, more so, a complex ethno-religious entity like Nigeria.

Some theories have originated trying to explain the genesis of these terror attacks in Nigeria. There’s a local theory that political machinations of 2015 have begun; and those that are behind these attacks know their aims and objectives vis-a-vis power and tenure elongation.
Other internationally oriented theories have elucidated the genesis of groups like Al Qaeda and affiliation with the US, as many are now suspecting the so called ‘War on Terror’ was orchestrated and perpetuated for purposes of oil siphoning; even US citizens have started to challenge the veracity of many events following 9/11- the death of the former US ally Osama Bin Laden (the freedom fighter turned terrorist), the alleged looting of Libyan oil following the usurpation of Ghadaffi through the arming of terrorists; same armed terrorists currently involved in the Syria conflict, and available for hire.
Also, the illegal invasion of Iraq with no evidence of WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) or it’s correlation with 9/11. It is such disconcerting situations that lead the likes of Archbishop Desmond Tutu to condemn both Bush and Blair for their role in the loss of innocent lives. For Blair especially, it was this illegal invasion that tainted his tenure as Prime Minster and still haunts him presently. Ironically 10 years of the Iraqi invasion was recently marked and it was concluded nothing has been achieved but death and destruction- I am seriously hoping the Nigerian crisis doesn’t degenerate into a similar situation.

Many theorists posit the Boko Haram debacle in Nigeria is strictly political manoeuvrings in motion, with more local than international objectives. However some contend we live in a 'smash and grab' neo-colonialist era and Nigeria’s oil serves certain economic interests. Interestingly our break up has been predicted by some and a balkanization agenda after 100 years of the 1914 amalgamation is also being discussed in some quarters. One of such theories is an article titled “Nigeria: Targeted for destruction” by Gordon Duff. Basically, it’s saying think Iraq and Libya, that there’s a lovely romance between Oil, War, Invasions and Arms Trade- Nigeria not an exception.

Recently, there's been news about a supposed French Businessman and Islamic activist ready to dialogue with Boko Haram on our behalf, though laudable- but what exactly is the federal government doing in this regard. I don’t suppose if this individual’s gesture materialises, it would be a meeting with ‘ghosts’.
Whatever our intricate challenges; local, international or a combination of both- it is surmountable if we stay united. There’s no better time for us to rise above ethnic and religious bigotry, see our size and diversity as God given blessings that can be harnessed by any visionary leadership to attain global greatness.
We must desist from the usual blame game and misdirected opprobrium, we must see the bigger picture and ask the right questions, who benefit’s the most from the destruction of our lands? - It’s definitely not the Nigerian masses.

POLITICS is THE GAME & RELIGION is the TOOL: BEWARE & UNITE!!!
GOD Bless Nigeria.
www.momonologues.blogspot.com
m.b.o.owolowo@gmail.com
Twitter: @Owoism
- M.B.O
2013©

Politics of ‘Ghosts’ and Collateral Damage (1) By M.B.O Owolowo

Following the recent tragic Kano bombing, I have been in a sombre and reflective mood. I have been wondering how such atrocious incidents have become commonplace in our environment, when did our polity become so accustomed to these peculiar tragedies. If one has a heart, one cannot but feel or imagine the pain of those who have been directly affected by these dastardly acts. Inadvertently, we shouldn’t wait till we are directly affected before we are vociferous about the declining situation and possible engagement strategies.
Some have resorted to prayers, though helpful, but I believe this calamity has gone beyond that. Some other people are comforted by the fact that the bombings have been concentrated in certain parts of the North. To a few of those who reason like this, they say ‘these people’ can continue to kill ‘themselves’ and damage ‘their region’, as long as it doesn’t affect ‘our region’ and ‘our resources’ why the hell should we care? Unfortunately these are the socio-economic complexities and ethno-religious conundrum we are confronted with as a nation.

However poignant the situation I still believe in ‘One Nigeria’ and whatever affects my brother in the Niger Delta or my sister in Northern Nigeria is my utmost concern, we are all human beings and part of humanity firstly, and the preciousness of life takes precedence to any purported parochial differences.
The task of securing lives of the citizenry rests primarily with the Commander-In-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, considering these incessant attacks have literally gone unabated since inception. Apart from the reckless killing of innocent civilians by the security forces, there hasn’t really been any key arrest or significant breakthrough in nipping these groups in the bud. The strategies that have been employed have been ineffective so far, as the citizens in these volatile regions are living in constant trepidation: a modern day entrapment with Boko Haram on one hand and JTF (Joint Task Force) on the other.
Some of the President’s supporters have argued he is trying his best, but that is just rhetoric to his critics- as lives are continually being wasted under his watch as Commander-In-Chief.
The fact that he stated during his visit to Borno State his government would not dialogue with “ghosts” isn’t only unwise, but shows some level of imprudence cum frustration in dealing with the matter. A similar defensive mannerism was on display during his infamous CNN interview with Christianne Amanpour. When asked about the possibility of “The security forces driving people to the hands of Boko Haram”
The President responded with “How?” and when quizzed further about the revelations of the US State Department on “indiscriminate security measures”, “heavy handed crackdown”, “the police in the last year or so have killed more people than Boko Haram. Do you admit that there is a problem in the security dealing with it? The President’s response was “That is not correct. I have said it severally; those are insinuations by some interest groups”
Politics aside, the Commander-In-Chief has not exactly succeeded in this regard, because ‘ghosts’ do not go about killing innocent people, neither do ‘ghosts’ respond by claiming they aren’t ‘ghosts’ but have actually “been in dialogue and consultation with Borno State Government and a delegation of the Northern State Governors Forum (NSGF)”. Though I do not support Boko Haram or whatever cause they seem to be championing, I do believe all channels of communication should be explored to prevent further loss of lives. One of the criticisms of the government has been the constant security faux pas serving as an effective recruitment tool for the group's cause.
I will always support putting the protection of lives before politicking or the deadly machinations of power elongation.

What with all our constant lamentations, condemnation, condolences and misdirected accusations, we return to our supposed ‘normal’ lives, but things aren’t exactly normal. Aren’t we meant to proffer solutions to the emanating turmoil and recurring polemics in our milieu? The country is in crisis and we need solutions to avoid a drastic deterioration into protracted chaos or worst case scenario- a failed State.
Evidently there are covert ‘terrorist’ groups operating in Nigeria: all with their intended objectives. Please permit me to analyse from local and international explicatives.
Boko Haram- Ideally, the first question should be which faction? It is evident there’s more than one Boko Haram based on a series of events, including but not limited to; the arrest and killing in custody of Mohamed Yusuf (founder), arrest and escaping of suspects from various prison cells, killing of prominent Muslims in the north, including scholars like Sheikh Jafar and the assassination of Civil War hero, General Shuwa (Rtd.). There have also been killings of political targets and innocent civilians in Mosques and Churches- at some point we were praying for peaceful bomb-free Sundays, others bombings on Eid (Sallah) and Christmas, and the high profile Independence Day bombing- UN building, just to mention a few disastrous incidents.
Ansaru- It is alleged they are a splinter group. Though very little has been heard of this group or their known existence, they gained instant international recognition by executing foreign hostages kidnapped in Nigeria.
These groups are ravaging parts of Northern Nigerian, causing undue hardship to citizens and damaging infrastructure, all for what we may ask. Some time ago I read one of the initial demands of Boko Haram was securing the release of their arrested members and not an Islamic Nigeria, though later on, we constantly read in the media, they are against Western education and wanted their own ‘strict’ version of Islam.
Inextricably, I am still trying to correlate how the killing of innocent people would be attractive to non-adherents of a faith or how such methods would assist in spreading any religion in modern times. Many peace loving Muslims have argued that members of these groups don't know their history, else they would appreciate the relationship between scholarship and Islam, they are rebuked as being unenlightened by those bold enough and chided as archaic by others.
Some argue, maybe it’s not actually their plan to Islamize the country but made to appear as such, whatever the case, I am of the opinion diabolic politics is in play and religion is just a tool. The Boko Haram cataclysm has constantly been argued by some theorists as being just one cog in a well orchestrated wheel, motioned to achieve covert socio-political objectives.
Analysing from extremist perspectives, extremism has been defined to be any ideology or political act far outside the perceived or supposed political centre of a society. Violent extremism and its ramifications in any entity; be it religious, social or political should be abhorred by any logical reasoning folk. In Islam for example, there is no justification for the killing or murdering of innocent people as it cannot be justified in any religious context. It is an aberration that must be condemned by Muslims, refuted and challenged with the religious scripture (Quran) and factuality of history; not concocted fallacies and pejorative conjectures. Let me use this opportunity to commend sincere adherents of our major faiths who have been vehement in promoting these facts, as I encourage devotees of all faiths to preach tolerance, love and unity- this is one of the most effective ways to save our nation.
There are usually some propagandist’s views following such tragic incidents as the Kano bombing, and one can only plead that these groups should calm down with their ruckus. Civil war isn’t a joke and if it does comes down to a war situation, those making noise online and via available media would be the first to abscond, leaving those on ground to their fate. So let’s not deceive ourselves into believing it’s those making noise on social media that would take up arms, rather it is the already impoverished, short-changed and deprived masses that would be the victims, forming part of collateral damage.
Now more than ever, the nation needs to unite to challenge those that are hell-bent on dividing the polity across ethno-religious lines for their political and material gains. Also the President and ruling class must realise, that even if they are fortified with accorded protection, majority of the Nigerian masses aren’t as fortunate. It isn’t too late to strategically engage ‘ghosts’ before more ghosts are created in the country.

GOD Bless Nigeria.
www.momonologues.blogspot.com
m.b.o.owolowo@gmail.com
Twitter: @Owoism
- M.B.O
2013©

PDP governors bought guns for thugs —Atiku

Former Vice-President, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar
| credits: 

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar on Saturday said he cautioned some Peoples Democratic Party governors against arming the youth for the purpose of winning elections.

Atiku while speaking in an interview on the Hausa Service of the British Broadcasting Corporation monitored in Kaduna on Saturday said his advice was not heeded.

He also said he would not leave the ruling PDP despite the unfair treatment meted to him.

Atiku said he would rather remain in the party and fight the injustice being perpetrated by the leadership of the party.

He said the series of restrictions imposed on him by the party was because the party chieftains were afraid of him and his opposition to illegalities in the party.

When asked whether he would contest for the presidency in 2015, Atiku replied that 2015 was too far for him to decide.

Speaking on how he cautioned some state governors against buying arms and ammunition for the youth, Atiku said, “During our time when there was such crisis in Yobe, you saw how we tackled it. First of all, we sent undercover agents who mixed up with the insurgents and understood their modus operandi. When the report was brought to us, we then sent security agents who rounded up the enclave, arrested some of them and killed those that had to be killed.

“When we formed the PDP and candidates emerged, the governors  earmarked huge amounts of money to buy arms for youth groups so as to use them in winning the election.

“I met and told them that if they used them and after winning the election, they fail to provide them with jobs, they will rise against the people in their states. These are the youths who later turned into the Niger Delta militants you’ve been hearing about. Also, a similar thing happened in the North, I met a governor and told him that these youths you assembled and called ECOMOG will become dangerous later and that was what eventually happened. I spoke to all these governors, I alerted all of them.”

He, added that the proposed amnesty for Boko Haram was a good initiative, adding that, “Ours is just to advise the government. But there is no advice that the elders have not given the government. Look at the Lemu Committee report, the government did nothing about it.”

On why the PDP could not resolve the disagreements between him and the chairman of the party, Atiku said, “We are all working together now, it is only the governor (Murtala Nyako) that we are not working with. He feels because he is in power, he can do whatever he likes. But when you are in power and you decide not to be just, you will definitely see what you don’t like.”

Atiku said it was unfortunate that the ruling party was enmeshed in crisis, adding that, “This crisis is certainly not good and it will be nice to sit down and resolve it. Such misunderstanding shouldn’t have come about at all.

“Both sides are to be blamed. The governors have separated themselves and maintain that it is only what they want that they will do in their states, the President is saying it is not so. The way out is to come back, sit down and resolve the issues.”

Speaking on a paper he delivered in Geneva, the former vice-president noted that there was no difference between democracy in Nigeria and military rule.

He said, “After the military handed over power, the majority of those that took over power from them were ex-military men. When they took over, instead of running affairs as in a democracy, they resorted to running affairs as if it were in a military regime.  Whoever did not like what they wanted was blacklisted. That is not right.

“So, that was the shape Nigerian democracy took afterward. Sadly, the politicians who are not ex-military inherited that attitude. They thought such attitude would benefit them and continued with it. Unless we desist from that kind of attitude, do away with dishonesty and injustice in the party and in government, progress will elude us.”

I’m ready to step down for a better candidate in APC –Buhari

Maj-Gen. Mohammadu Buhari (retd.)

Former Head of State and presidential candidate for the Congress for Progressive Change in the 2011 general election, Maj-Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), has said he is ready to step down as presidential candidate of the newly formed All Progressives Congress in the 2015 presidential election, if there is a formidable and better candidate.

He said he might contest the 2015 presidential election on the platform of the yet-to-be-registered APC, depending on what happened before the time.

Buhari stated this in Minna at the maiden edition of Sam Nda-Isaiah Public Lecture Series, in honour of the publisher of the Leadership Newspapers, which took place at the Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi International Conference Centre.

Answering questions from journalists on the possibility of him stepping down in case more candidates emerge on the platform of the party, Buhari said, “Whoever thinks he has got a chance, let him come out because the more we are, the merrier it becomes.

“I will be ready to step down if there is a formidable and better candidate. It is not about me but for the survival of the party. APC is about ensuring internal democracy. Whoever emerges is the person I will support. Yes I will be ready to step down.”

Buhari had, earlier in his address at the lecture, called on leaders and those in positions of authority to ensure a viable environment for people to thrive. He also called on the media to constantly demand and put leaders in check.

He said, “The moment there is nobody in the country to make our leaders to create a viable environment, then the nation is in trouble.”

Former Governor of Kano State, Alhaji Ibrahim Shekarau, said the holding of the national conventions of both the CPC and ANPP by May 11, 2013, was ideal as he was ready to drop his presidential ambition for the survival of APC, should a better and formidable candidate emerges as the party’s standard bearer for 2015.

Shekarau, who was at the lecture, said the emergence of APC standard bearer would be democratic, despite the array of formidable presidential materials in the APC.

He said, “It is too early to talk about or to have a presidential candidate. In APC, we will have internal democracy that will guide the party. Let us have the party on the ground first, congresses will be held at various levels that will produce our candidates. At that point, anybody can contest and the party will support the best candidate that emerges.”

Shekarau said as soon as all the merging parties were through with their national conventions, formal requests would be made to Independent National Electoral Commission for APC registration, to give room for other activities that would climax in the emergence of the party’s candidates.

He added, “We are not talking of just dismantling the PDP; we want change. We are not just talking about change in democracy but change in attitude, change in approach, change in character, change in conducting the business of government. That is why our slogan is ‘change’. We are determined to change Nigeria for the better.”

Corruption: Jonathan, labour leaders trade blame...

L-R: Minister of Labour and Productivity, Chief Emeka Wogu; President, Nigeria Labour Congress, Mr. Abdulwaheed Omar; President Goodluck Jonathan; and President, Trade Union Congress, Mr. Peter Esele, during the May Day celebration in Abuja... on Wednesday.
| credits: NAN

President Goodluck Jonathan on Wednesday disagreed with the Organised Labour over the increasing cases of corruption in the country.

While the President, Nigeria Labour Congress, Mr. Abdulwaheed Omar, and the President-General of the Trade Union Congress, Mr. Peter Esele, bemoaned the prevalence of corruption and called on the Federal Government to give its anti-graft war more bite, Jonathan blamed some labour members for sleaze in the polity.

Jonathan, Omar and Esele spoke at a rally to mark the 2013 Workers’ Day in Abuja.

Jonathan attended the event entitled ‘100 years of nationhood: the challenges of national development’ in company with the Labour and Productivity Minister, Chief Emeka Wogu; and the  Minister of State, Federal Capital Territory, Chief Jumoke Akinjide, among other government functionaries.

The President said the government would appreciate the cooperation of the labour unions in ending the scourge.

He said, “Labour has been in the forefront of the demand for good governance and increased action against corruption, and these issues are being vigorously tackled on various fronts.

“Prosecutions are being pursued in matters arising from fuel subsidy fraud, embezzlement of pension funds and other serious long standing malpractices have been demystified by this administration. I assure you of accelerated and expanded action against all forms of corruption.

“Given that some of these perpetrators are senior and junior members of labour unions, greater attention to peer review action on the part of labour, will be much appreciated.”

Jonathan noted that since the advent of his administration, his actions and policies focused on the country’s sustainable progress where everyone could better achieve his or her dream.

He said his administration’s transformation agenda was about taking and implementing measures today in order to give Nigerians a brighter tomorrow.

Admitting that trade disputes were inevitable in all societies, the President said with commitment and patriotism, such issues were being quickly resolved in the country in the interest of national development.

Jonathan promised that the Federal Government would continue to associate with labour unions and play its role whenever called upon to do so.

He described Nigerian workers as not only important part of the nation’s history but pivot of the past, present and future.

Omar argued that “monumental corruption” was responsible for the problems of unemployment, insecurity and general underdevelopment in the country.

He described the state pardon Jonathan granted to former Bayelsa State Governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, convicted for corruption, as unfortunate and a major dent on the government’s anti-corruption war.

The NLC boss also frowned on the abandonment of several corruption allegations against some highly  placed government officials in courts due to lack of diligent prosecution.

He expressed fears that the more recent cases of oil subsidy fraud would also follow in the same path.

He said, “Corruption remains the most serious factor undermining the realisation of our economic potential.

“Government must not only make commitments to fighting it, government must demonstrate this commitment by its actions, by its style and by its body language.

“In this regard, we find the pardon granted to a former governor who was convicted of corruptly enriching himself as unfortunate and a major dent on the government’s commitment to fighting corruption.

“To reclaim lost ground, government needs to reassure Nigerians that it is still committed to fighting corruption by conclusively dealing with all pending cases of corruption.”

Esele said the country was losing the battle against corruption.

He said the scourge had become so endemic that it had constituted what he called the single most important factor in the nation’s failure to develop appreciably.

Noting that corruption had destroyed various aspects of the country’s life, the TUC boss said the scourge was now threatening, “to kill our government”.

He said Nigerians must consciously uproot corruption in order to have the new, beautiful country of their dream.