Some call it the law of karma. I prefer the older formulation: what you do unto others shall, in time, be done unto you. Nigerias recent political history offers few more instructive illustrations of this truth than the parallel fates of Sambo Dasuki and Abubakar Malami.

Those expressing sympathy for former Attorney‑General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, over his current ordeal with the EFCC and the DSS may have conveniently forgotten what befell former National Security Adviser (NSA), retired Colonel Sambo Dasukiarrested barely a day after handing over office. His story remains one of the most troubling indictments of executive overreach in Nigerias democratic era: a case study in how personal vendetta, political score‑settling, and institutional disregard for judicial authority can be disguised as the pursuit of justice.

The roots of the Dasuki saga run deep into Nigerias military past. Dasuki played a significant role in financing and facilitating the 1983 coup that brought General Muhammadu Buhari to power according to retired Colonel Mustapha Jokolo, Buharis former ADC. He was also involved in the 1985 countercoup that removed Buhari and installed General Ibrahim Babangida, though he was not among those who physically arrested Buhari. Colonel Abdulmumini Aminu, who led that operation, confirmed that he and three others actually carried out the arrest without Dasuki. These historical details matter because the bitterness they produced never fully disappeared.

Dasuki was arrested in late 2015 and charged with money laundering over the alleged diversion of arms‑procurement funds during the Jonathan administration. What his accusers refused to acknowledge, however, was that during his tenure as NSA dozens of towns were successfully reclaimed from terrorists. It was also a period when banditry had not yet taken root in the Northwest or North‑Centralan insecurity trend that escalated only later under the Buhari administration.

While the allegations against Dasuki appeared serious on paper, what followed was far worse: a systematic assault on the rule of law.

Multiple courts granted him bail. He met every condition. Yet each time, he was immediately re‑arrested without any new charges. This cycle continued until he became the only public official in Nigerian history to remain in detention despite bail orders from four different courts, including the ECOWAS Court.

In a particularly troubling twist, Malami falsely claimed in a VOA interview that Dasuki had killed 100,000 people and justified his continued detentiondespite multiple bail orderson national‑security grounds. This misinformation and media‑trial posture led to his summons before the LPDC in 2019, where he eventually recanted.

President Buhari later made the administrations stance explicit during a televised media chat, declaring that Dasuki would not be released regardless of court orders and describing him as a security risk. It was a rare moment when executive contempt for judicial authority was openly acknowledged.

Beyond the physical detention, the Buhari era normalised media trialswhere citizens were convicted in the court of public opinion long before any judge had ruled. The EFCC and the DSS were the most notorious instruments of this strategy.

The case of Colonel Nicholas Ashinze illustrates this vividly. Ashinze, a military intelligence officer who played a key role with technical partners in operations that reclaimed territories from Boko Haram, found himself facing charges even as the EFCC issued a statement so inaccurate that it provoked a rare judicial rebuke.

Justice Gabriel Kolawole condemned the EFCCs conduct, describing its statement against Ashinze as scandalous and prejudicial to fair trial. He ordered the agency to apologise publicly to the officer and suspended the trial. The EFCC complied, attributing the falsehoods to an internal mix‑up.

Similarly, the arms probe panel under ONSA, chaired by one Air Vice Marshal Jon Odeh, was disbanded after members were themselves indicted for receiving bribes from individuals they were investigating. These episodes underscored the institutional impunity that characterised the period.

Perhaps the most heartbreaking dimension of Dasukis ordeal was the treatment of his father, the late Alhaji Ibrahim Dasukiformer Sultan of Sokoto and one of Nigerias most revered traditional and Islamic leaders. Despite repeated appeals, he was denied permission to visit his son in detention. He died without seeing him.

This act was widely condemned as unnecessary crueltyan example of how political rivalry had crossed into something far more callous.

By contrast, when the current administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu detained former Kaduna Governor Nasir el-Rufai over corruption charges, he was immediately released following his mothers death. I welcomed the gesture, while wishing that the mercy had come earlier and that no public official should spend more than a month in custody merely awaiting trial. The standard of decency we apply must be consistent, regardless of who occupies the dock.

Dasuki was eventually released on Christmas Eve 2019, after Buharis re‑election. His freedomcoming after more than four years in detentionfelt less like justice and more like a political calculation that had finally run its course.

Contrast this with the treatment of Abubakar Malami, who served as Attorney‑General and Minister of Justice from 2015 to 2023. In 2025, Malami was arrested by the EFCC on allegations ranging from corruption and acquisition of exotic properties to terrorism‑related offences and illegal possession of firearms.

The irony is unmistakable. Malami was the chief law officer who authorised and supervised the prosecution of Dasuki. He wielded the machinery of state prosecution against perceived opponents for eight years. Now he sits where they once saton the receiving end of the same system he helped to shape.

Yet there is a crucial difference. Within two months, Malami was granted bail by both the EFCC and the DSS. There were no sensational media trials. No re‑arrests after meeting bail conditions. No presidential declarations that he would remain detained regardless of court orders. Whatever one thinks of the current administrations handling of the matter, the contrast with the Dasuki precedent is stark.

The Buhari administrations disregard for due process extended beyond political opponents. On June 9, 2016, the Nigerian Army summarily retired 38 senior officersnine major generals, eleven brigadier generals, seven colonels, and eleven lieutenant colonels. They learned of their retirement through the media. Despite vague allegations of professional corruption, none was formally accused, charged, or tried under military law.

These were decorated officers. Colonel Mohammed Suleiman had foiled a Boko Haram attack on Aso Rock. Colonel Danladi Hassan had led troops in reclaiming territories, while Lt. Colonel Mohammed Abdulfatai commanded a special counterinsurgency operation in Konduga that resulted in the elimination of more than 200 terrorists in December 2014. Yet they were dismissed without the dignity of a fair hearing.

The National Industrial Court ruled six times that the retirements were unlawful and ordered reinstatement with full benefits. The Senate and House of Representatives reached the same conclusion. The Army ignored them all. One officer, Ojebo Ochankpa, died in 2017 still awaiting justice.

Nearly a decade later, most remain unreinstatedvindicated by every court, yet denied the justice those courts prescribed.

This is the legacy of the administration that Malami served and defended. By any honest measure, it was one of the most lawless periods in Nigerias democratic history.

While we must insist that Malami receive the fair trial that Dasuki was denied, we must also demand accountability for those who orchestrated the abuses of the pastnot through fresh lawlessness, but through the very institutions they once undermined.

What you do unto others shall be done unto you. The real question is whether, this time, we will do it better.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the author of “An Encounter with the Spymaster” Email: yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post The Trials of Dasuki and Malami A Study in Nemesis: What You Do Unto Others appeared first on YAShuaib.

Public debate in Nigeria is increasingly shaped not just by facts but also by emotion, identity, and organised outrage. My recent short Facebook post reacting to The New York Times (NYT) report on an Onitsha-based trader and activist triggered an avalanche of hostile responses many from individuals identifying as Igbo and largely sympathetic to IPOB and the quest for Biafra.

What shocked me was not disagreement; that is part of democratic discourse. It was the coordinated pattern of abuse, libellous language, and unrelated propaganda, even after I deleted some of the very offensive posts of online cabals. A closer look revealed what I often call social media warriors from digital pressure groups mobilised from coordinated platforms, less interested in dialogue than in silencing alternative views.

Surprisingly, my harmless Facebook post that sparked the anger was a simple paragraph, which reads: They attacked us for calling out the reckless claim of Christian genocide that painted all Muslims as guilty. Now they insist that The New York Times report on the Onitsha trader who urged an American strike on the Sokoto Caliphate is an editorial attack on Igbos. Haba! So they finally get the point.

The inciting and provocative reactions to the post underscore a deeper national tension about narrative ownership.

When U.S. President Donald Trump raised the inflammatory claim of Christian persecution and genocide in Nigeria, many Nigerians Muslims and Christians alike rejected that sweeping characterisation. The Nigerian government rejected it. Distinguished Christian voices such as Bishop Matthew Kukah warned against framing Nigerias complex insecurity through a purely religious lens.

Yet some local actors from particular sections of the country, based on their ethno-religious agitations, amplified Trumps claim, using it to cast suspicion and aspersion on Nigerian Muslims collectively, as if millions were complicit in terrorism. That dangerous generalisation, strangely, was also applauded in some quarters.

During that debate, I wrote Genocide Claim: President Trump, Ribadus Team and the Saudi Prince, arguing that Trumps claim was politically motivated, selective, and detached from Nigerias security realities. His foreign policy record including his warm relations with Saudi Arabia suggests strategic and financial calculations rather than religious solidarity. Nigerias insecurity, while grave, stems from criminality, weak governance, and socio-economic pressures, not a state-driven religious extermination.

That article, too, drew coordinated attacks. The goal appeared clear: intimidate dissent. Unfortunately for the attackers, I can’t be intimidated but laugh at their folly.

Now the debate has shifted following the New York Times report (NYT), which referenced Emeka Umeagbalasi, head of the Onitsha-based NGO Intersociety, whose claims about Christian killings reportedly influenced U.S. political conversations.

Curiously, rather than engaging with the substance of the report through a reasoned rejoinder, much of the anger on social media was directed at Taiwo Aina, the New York Times photographer credited under one of the images. She became the target of sustained online attacks because of her Yoruba name from many users who identified as Igbo.

What made their reaction even more troubling was that other journalists involved in the report Saikoh Jammeh, Dionne Searcey, Ismail Auwal, and David Chidi Eleke whose names were clearly listed, faced no comparable backlash. The selective outrage, especially against a female photojournalist whose role is largely technical and visual, says more about the emotional climate of the debate than about the report itself.

Before the NYT report, the BBC Global Disinformation Unit had investigated Intersocietys figures and found them unverified and inflated. Despite the lack of verifiable data, such claims fed into U.S. conservative political narratives and Trumps rhetoric. Independent conflict trackers such as ACLED consistently show that violence in Nigeria affects multiple communities, not Christians alone.

The BBC report noted that Intersocietys narratives are shaped by southeastern political grievances and often align with IPOB-linked activism. PRNigerias earlier independent analysis similarly observed Intersocietys shift from governance advocacy to persecution-focused messaging. That BBC investigation authored by Olaronke Alo, Chiamaka Enendu, and Ijeoma Ndukwe also attracted fierce backlash.

The pattern is troubling. When international actors portray Nigeria through a narrow religious-genocide frame, local extremists feel validated. But when global media question the credibility of those claims, it is suddenly labelled ethnic profiling.

You cannot condemn collective labelling only when it affects you.

Even more disturbing is the symbolism emerging online: viral videos of groups dressed in white garments, flanked by U.S. and Israeli flags, calling on Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to rescue them from Nigeria. Such appeals reflect deep frustration but also dangerous faith in foreign intervention. History shows external powers act primarily in their own interests.

Nigerias unity debate is valid, and reforms like restructuring and federalism deserve serious discussion. But misinformation, hate narratives, and appeals to foreign powers will not bring justice they only deepen mistrust.

We must ask: Who benefits from calling Nigeria a religious genocide zone? Who gains when neighbours become enemies? Who profits when foreign powers exploit our crisis?

Our insecurity is real, but it demands facts, responsible leadership, and national cohesion not propaganda and sickening fake news by enemies of our unity.

Yushau A. Shuaib
Author of ‘An Encounter with the Spymaster’
yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Between Trumps Genocide Claim and New York Times Onitsha Trader Narrative by YAShuaib appeared first on YAShuaib.

Let me start by acknowledging that storytellers increasingly seek to replace historians in shaping narratives. While anyone can become a storyteller, not everyone can be a historian. Storytelling involves crafting real or fictional narratives designed to entertain, educate, or inspire, often without strict adherence to factual accuracy. History, by contrast, is a meticulous record of past events, rooted in evidence and striving for objectivity and understanding. While storytelling prioritises creativity and emotional resonance, history demands scholarly rigor and factual analysis. Stories may incorporate history, but not all stories are historical.

History remains historyeven in todays climate, where Western and Eastern media often compromise journalistic ethics, favoring partisanship over accuracy and truth. This is evident in their coverage of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, where some outlets prioritise one-sided narratives, forsaking fairness and balance. Once respected for their integrity, many international media platforms now align themselves with the interests of patrons and sponsors, abandoning independence and impartiality.

This brings me to a recent article by award-winning columnist Lasisi Olagunju of the Nigerian Tribune titled “Fulani, Hausa, and Yoruba Truths.” In his piece, Olagunju explores Nigerian history, ethnicity, and identity complexities. While he challenges northern scholars narratives about the origins of the term Yoruba, his focus heavily skews toward Yoruba history, leaving the other two ethnic groups mentioned in his titleFulani and Hausalargely unexamined.

The article appears to be a reaction to an announcement by Minister of Education Tunji Alausa about reintroducing history as a subject in Nigerian primary and secondary schools. In his characteristic fashion, Olagunju highlights the contradictions in the accounts of three “historians” on Yoruba history, including comments by Kemi Badenoch, a Yoruba woman and a leader of the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom.

Badenoch controversially stated, “Being Yoruba is my true identity, and I refuse to be lumped with northern people of Nigeria, who were our ethnic enemies, all in the name of being called a Nigerian.”

This statement provoked a satirical response from Nigerian-American professor Farooq Kperogi, who argued that the Yoruba ethnic group owes its nameand much of its history and languageto northern Nigeria. Kperogi cites Songhai scholar Ahmad Baba, who, in his 1613 essay “Al-kashf wa-l-bayān li-aṣnāfmajlūb al-Sūdān,” first referenced the Yoruba as “Yariba.”

Olagunjus article counters Kperogis claims, particularly the argument that the name “Yoruba” originated from Northern Nigeria’s Baatonu (Bariba) people. He draws on Yoruba historians to offer alternative explanations for the term’s origin, but his rebuttal lacks consistent reliance on verifiable sources.

For instance, he cited the response of Moyo Okediji, a Nigerian-American art history professor at the University of Texas at Austin, who publicly commended Badenoch for distancing herself from northern Nigeria due to concerns about terrorism in the region.

However, rather than citing credible sources, Okediji offered his own interpretation of the origin of the name “Yoruba,” claiming that his (own) grandmother had told him it is a shortened form of “A yọ orù bá wọn dáná ọmọ tuntun.” He suggested it is a panegyric phrase referring to both Ọ̀ṣun and Ọya, particularly Ọ̀ṣun. Unfortunately, he did not provide the year of his grandmother’s birth to lend credibility to his assertion. While colourful, the professors interpretation is unsubstantiated and anecdotal, lacking the academic rigor necessary for historical discourse.

Olagunju also speculates on the term “Yoruba,” suggesting it “may have existed long before the Bariba and the Yoruba had cause to meet.” Yet, like Okediji’s claims, this assertion lacks substantial evidence or authority. Some references cited by Olagunju include Richard Smith’s “The Alaafin in Exile: A Study of the Igboho Period in Oyo History,” published in The Journal of African History, March 1965, and Professor J.A. Atanda’s “The Historian and The Problem of Origins of Peoples in Nigerian Society,” published in December 1980. According to Olagunju, Atanda writes that “Sultan Bello’s account of the origin of the Yoruba people drew inspiration from an old Arabic text, ‘Azhar al-Ruba fi Akhbar Bilad Yoruba,’ written by Dan Masani, a noted Katsina scholar who lived in the seventeenth century and died in 1667.” These references highlight the involvement of non-Yoruba scholars, predominantly from the north or Arabian backgrounds. Therefore, the argument by the writer could not effectively challenge the central premise of Kperogis argument or provide conclusive evidence for his claims.

Olagunju also mentions Samuel Johnson in his work, “The History of the Yorubas,” as “one of the most famous figures in Yoruba history.” Still, he did not provide the publication date, which may be deliberate. Samuel Johnson (1846-1901), an Anglican minister and historian, wrote a seminal history of the Yoruba people. Although the publisher lost his manuscript, it was reconstructed from his notes by his brother after his death. First published in 1921, this foundational work remains a standard reference for Yoruba history despite some inaccuracies acknowledged by scholars.

Olagunju appears primarily concerned with countering Kperogi’s claim about the influence of the Bariba in Yoruba land. He cites Professor Banji Akintoye, who claimed in “A History of the Yoruba People” (published in 2010) that “most of the greatest warriors in Yoruba history were produced by the Oyo Empire.” Olagunju mentions one such warrior, Iba Magaji, who served Obalokun and Ajagbo as Basorun and played a key role in early campaigns that conquered parts of Nupe and Bariba countries. This raises the question: is “Magaji” a Yoruba or Hausa name? Yet, this rhetorical flourish does little to resolve the broader debate.

Does history hold significance when tribal and ethnic sentiments distort narratives, overshadowing fact and truth? How can we cite the personal impressions and perceptions of politicians and historians who demonstrate apparent bias towards specific ethnic groups? Educated individuals must refer to reputable resources that substantiate their claims.

Reliance on reliable and unbiased sources is paramount if history is to be taught in Nigerian schools. Documented evidence and peer-reviewed publications should serve as essential reference materials.

While Olagunju’s article sheds light on Nigerian history and identity complexities, I disagree with him on teaching compromised narratives to appease ethnic loyalties. This trend is becoming increasingly prevalent among contemporary historians in politics, academia, and the media, especially among Nigerians. I believe history should remain true to its essence not a collection of convenient stories but a dedicated pursuit of truth.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the author of Strictly Personal: Writings for the Media www.YAShuaib.com, yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post On the Etymology of ‘Yoruba’ by Northerners appeared first on YAShuaib.

Recently when I joined up with Jaafar Jaafar and Abdulaziz Abdulaziz as Northern writers in the campaign for the appointment of an Igbo military officer to the position of the Nigerian Chief of Army Staff, it was a deliberate and sincere effort towards the socio-political stability of the country, which appears deeply riven, at this point, on the issue of the affirmation of its diversity. It was also an attempt to draw attention to the need to insulate a critical institution like the Nigerian Armed Forces from pernicious disaffection by all the different stakeholders of the Nigerian nation.

As a beneficiary of the hospitality, good-naturedness and warmth of others in Nigeria, and particularly the Igbo in Asaba, Delta State, which I consider another home away from home during my NYSC, I have always used every forum to appreciate the Nigerian diversity, while pointing out the difference between the regular fellow citizen – whose fate and circumstances are similar to those of mine – and those who have very limited tolerance for difference, and are inclined towards violent discriminatory – if not separatist – acts.

Discrimination and a narrow point-of-view have always been a great source of concern for me, as it encapsulates some of the things that are fundamentally wrong with Nigeria. While I belong in the company of those who have been routinely called names and casted aspersions on by others, because we insist on national unity rather than separatist campaigns or agenda, it was of great shock to me to read a recent piece “Open Letter To The Most Senior Biafran In Buhari’s Government” by two Igbo intellectuals, Rudolf Okonkwo and Chido Onumah. In the first place, they addressed their missive to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Geoffrey Jideofor Onyeama, who was described as “the most Senior Biafran in Buhari’s Government”! I don’t even know what that means, especially as there are other ministers in the present government who are senior to the gentleman referred to both in age and experience in politics and government. One then wonders the purpose of this reference.

The opening paragraph of the widely syndicated letter quickly confirms its intent, as the writers make no pretence at concealing the intensity of the animosity they hold against the President of Nigeria. Not only did they condemn President Muhammadu Buhari in very strong terms, but they also deploy the most derogatory of language, with such examples as: “his (Buhari’s) cognitive impairment has greatly deteriorated, even though that is no justification for his murderous and genocidal rhetoric.” Imagine such a choice of words in describing the leader of a country!

While addressing the Foreign Affairs Minister, they wrote thus: “From his (Buhari’s) utterances, the gap between things his innermost mind conjures and what his mouth utters has been completely erased. We also chose to write you (Onyema) because you are the most senior Biafran in Buhari’s government. We know that in your world, Biafra is the worst tag that anyone could put on you. Unfortunately, the people you work with, in and around Aso Rock, see you as a Biafran. You can keep running away from it, but in the deepest corners of their eyes, Biafra is like a shell on you. And like a snail, you cannot cast it off.”

I only hope the two writers know the implications of the above statement to other Nigerians, whether within or outside the government, who don’t share in their Biafran agitation and quest. The import of the very offensive remarks quoted above could easily create suspicions in the relationship between the Igbos and non-Igbos in the Buhari Administration, and by extension among other Nigerians.

In another paragraph in their “Open Letter,” the writers seek to put the Minister in a tight corner, as if he is in cahoots with them, when they say that, “Over the last six years, we are aware of your (Onyema) hard work on the international stage to rescue this government’s reputation. As this government squandered both at home and abroad the enormous goodwill it received in 2015, you have worked hard to reassure the international community that the wheel of the Nigerian vessel had not come off and would not come off. Based on recent events, you do not need a soothsayer or us to tell you that the wheels came off a long time ago. What the international community was telling you in private weeks ago, they have made a tiny bit of it public following the debacle that is Buhari’s reaction to Twitter’s sanction of his genocidal tweet against the people of the South-East.”

From the above, are they claiming that they were privy to the proceedings of the meeting?

Also, while they expressed their utter disdain for the President, they yet never disclosed that the same Buhari had nominated Igbo politicians as his running mates in previous elections, which however failed because the majority of South-Easterners refused to vote for the tickets he was on.

Meanwhile, when Buhari finally choose a Yoruba man as running mate, they not only became possibly the best-known opposition candidates in Nigerian history, but they went on to win elections into the presidency on two continuous occasions.

Whereas they mention the already outlawed and proscribed group, the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) once in the entire lengthy article, they yet attempted to whitewash its leader by claiming that “Nnamdi Kanu is a product of Buhari’s incompetence” and that “Buhari’s paranoiac frenzy about anything Biafra turned what was Nnamdi Kanu’s agitation for justice and fairness into what it is today.” Surprisingly, they added that, “The president made Nnamdi Kanu a hero by locking him up and disobeying court orders to free him.”

Yet, it is quite easy to forget that there was hardly anything exclusive about the fate suffered by Nnamdi Kanu, as he had similar journeymen in Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd.) and Sheikh Ibrahim El-Zakzaky who have been punished greatly by the same act of disobedience to court orders. These are Northerners who have suffered gravely in the hands of the government, but who have not instigated rampages that habitually kill the Police and other security personnel, while destroying public property in their region, just because of the injustice meted out to them by the state.

While IPOB is mentioned only once in the article, and this was in their defence, the writers nevertheless mentioned Boko Haram several times for obvious reasons, even though terrorists and acts of terrorism need to be engaged within the same frame and treated in the same manner. They even created an interesting leeway in their description of IPOB militants as ‘Biafran activists,’ as put in the sentence that, “whatever excesses Biafran activists exhibit pale in comparison to the activities of well-armed, long-established northern-based groups, most of whom are from the president’s ethnic stock.”

May I ask: what is the composition of this ethnic stock of the president? Is it Fulani, Kanuri, Arewa, Muslim, etc., because he is all of these?

Still, Rudolf Okonkwo and Chido Onumah fail to refer to the killing of dozens of security personnel, including officers of the Police and the Armed Forces, in the East and the destruction of security formations and facilities, including Police stations and Prisons, but they would rather blame the security agencies. According to the “Open Letter”, the two writers mentioned that President Buhari would send Onyema “to crisscross the world and lie for him…. lying that there were no killings of innocent young men and women in the South-East by security agencies.” What about the security personnel killed in the various outbursts of local insurrection, could it be that they are considered as less human than the others who got murdered and hence deserved no mention or for anyone to seek justice on their behalf?

What about the killing of Northerners, especially Muslims, alongside the looting, as well as destruction of their goods in the South-East by gangs of the so-called Unknown Gunmen?

The Biafran writers refused to refer to reckless incitements of the IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu against the federal troops, even as he repeatedly describes Nigerians and the country as ‘animals and a Zoo.’ Neither did they mention that the IPOB that they have refigured as some sort of freedom movement has actually been proscribed by law for its various criminal, treacherous and treasonable offences.

The writers did not deem it appropriate to point out that their revered hero, Nnamdi Kanu is a fugitive who jumped bail and had his sympathisers, including lawyers and activists, lie so brazenly by sensationally claiming that he had then been abducted by security agencies, while he had really been ferried abroad by these same supporters.

As I had mentioned in one of my articles titled, “Between the Nigerian Igbos and Biafran Agitators,” (https://yashuaib.com/2017/06/nigerian-igbos-biafran-agitators/) written in June 2017, I said “the Ndigbo are spread across every nook and cranny of Nigeria. The Igbo speaks local dialects and respects the cultures of his host communities. He believes every part of Nigeria is a home away from home and adopts the same as his place of residence. Experience has shown that if you go to any community and you do not find an Igbo person there, your had better leave that town immediately. Any city without an Igbo person is not business-like. On the other hand, a Biafran agitator is not exposed to other parts of Nigeria besides Igboland, and even if he might have grown up in the diaspora, he only learnt the distorted history of Nigeria through myopic and eccentric points-of-views. The agitator hates other Nigerians and possibly believes in violent confrontations towards the actualisation of his dream of the Republic of Biafra.”

While I still stand on the fact that there are differences between peace-loving Igbos and IPOB militants and their sympathisers, as one who is permanently sold on Nigerian diversity and the strengths and possibilities it represents, I wish to urge that as Nigerians, we should all be very careful about the sort of divisive politics that we promote. And how we seek to cherry-pick events to lend a morbidly dark interpretation to our national experience at this, no doubt, challenging point in time, while working towards an end that might not be totally salutary.

Yushau A. Shuaib
Is the author of “An Encounter with the Spymaster”
www.YAShuaib.com

The post A Rejoinder to Igbo Intellectuals on the Biafran Minister in Buhari’s Government appeared first on YAShuaib.

What can one do when the terrorists (Boko Haram/ISWAP) who claim to be Muslims living among Muslims are killing Muslims without any mercy?

I just watched a video of Kanuri converts to other religion when the leadership and majority of Boko Haram are from the same ethnic group

What can one do when the terrorists (Boko Haram/ISWAP) who claim to be Muslims living among Muslims are killing Muslims without any mercy? At least 80% of abducted travellers between Maiduguri and Damaturu on the New year days are MUSLIMS.

Only those deeply-knowledgeable on Islam and strong-hearted would never doubt their faith when lunatics create wrong impressions on the noble teaching of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).

A Muslim is not only a believer by birth but by studying the holy scriptures, understanding, observing and practicing the tenets and principles of Islam. That is why I am proud to be a Muslim as I campaign against terrorists committing monstrous atrocities in the name of Islam in North-East and elsewhere.

And the NAKED TRUTH IS THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITIES KNOW THEM. Not all of us can be fooled.

Yushau A. Shuaib

www.YAShuaib.com

The post Kanuri Converts and Boko Haram Terrorism-YAShuaib appeared first on YAShuaib.

Miss World agbani Darego

Recently a professor in the London School of Economics, Satoshi Kanazawa who relishes his role as an agent provocateur, provokes a public outrage with a research finding he tags “Objective Attractiveness” that was published and eventually removed by Psychology Today magazine from its website. Kanazawa who is referred to as evolutionary biologist and psychologist entitled his article “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive than Other Women?”

Kanazawa, has always been criticised by fellow scholars over his provocative studies which could be tagged as his mere personal opinions than credible findings. While the student union in London have called for his dismissal from the university some respected bloggers who have studied some of his works have publicly come out to criticise his faulty findings.

Khadijah M. Britton, for instance points out recently that: “Kanazawa is a repeat offender, with years of roundly criticized and heartily debunked pseudoscience-based shock-jockery under his belt. Despite this, he is still posting on the blog of a reputable mainstream publication, still teaching at a respected university and still serving on the editorial board of one of his discipline’s peer-reviewed research journals. Though, possibly not for long: this particular post’s racist hypothesis offended many, unleashing serious righteous outrage across the internet: social media users raced to blog, tweet and even petition demanding that Psychology Today remove Kanazawa as a contributor to their Web site and magazine.”

While many could be easily fooled by academic theories churn-out from the campuses, we should be wary of accepting every research finding as infallible. It has been discovered that some researchers are not only fake but are subjective in all their methods: in determining the population, in selecting the participants for studies and in the analyses of the findings. They give figures not necessarily reliable or accurate statistics on the findings.

Since Kanazawa and his likes do not believe in the idioms that “Beauty is in the eyes of beholders” his research’s conclusions are nonsensical, unscientific, godless and outright stupid.

How could one measure and rate the attractivenness of a woman? Should the attraction be on the face, body structure, gesticulation, complexion or the attitudes? How could one determine the entire physical embodiments of a woman?

In my writing in 2002 when a Nigerian lady, Agbani Darego won the Miss World title (Miss World 2002), I did state that: The African (black) femininity, without exaggeration, enables one to mirror oneself from unblemished and fleshy cheeks. They (black women) are healthy and full of life; exhibiting enticing physiques. An African (black) woman is dark, thick and robust, devoid of a skinny, bony and tiny body frame. Artificial makeup and expensive attires are not what make the natural beauty of a black woman.”

Though I am not a scientist like Professor Kanazawa, I can rightly say like majority of people who use their senses to pass judgement that black is naturally beauty and attractive.

canadian pharmacy Vigora

The post Kanazawa’s Satanic Study on Unattractiveness of Black Woman appeared first on YAShuaib.

Nasiru El-rufai the former Minister of Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja and Nuhu Ribadu the ex- Chairman of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) were top public officials and major campaigners, though secretly, for the recommendation and nomination of Umaru Musa YarÁdua as the sole candidate of People Democratic Party (PDP) to eventually become the President of Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2007.

At a period when Nigerians were concerned about a possibility of Third-Term agenda for President Olusegun Obasanjo, and the fear of foisting corrupt person becoming the next President from a litany of aspirants in People Democratic Party (PDP) campaigning for the shot, the emergence of Umaru Musa YarÁdua to the scene was rude shock to many observers because he was neither popular in the national consciousness nor visible in various social and political scene.

Recommending YarÁdua to the then President Olusegun Obasanjo who had made up his mind to either get himself endorsed for third-term or influence the election of one of his governor-allies in the South-South, was not an easy task but Elrufai and Ribadu succeeded in just doing that.

Their supports were said to be motivated by YarÁdua’s recorded achievements in socio-economic growth and massive physical infrastructures developments in Katsina State as a Governor for eight years. He was said not to believe in cheap publicity and self-glorification as he provided a lot of road networks, estates, schools and hospital with promotional funfair like launching and commissioning of projects. Nigerians were also told YarÁdua was the only incorruptible governor in the last democratic dispensation.

While the trio come from different states in the North; Kaduna, Adamawa and Katsina State, they all attended, at different periods, Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, an institution that has churned out most of the Northern educated elites in the country and situated in Kaduna State, notoriously known as the den of Mafia, whether ex-military officers or retired top public functionaries.

Love them or hate them, Elrufai and Ribadu had created niches for themselves as the major actors in the last administration for adding colour to that regime with their passion for spontaneous actions and timely results in their respective agency’s mandates. It is necessary to point out it was to the credit of El-rufai that restoration of master-plan and beautification of Abuja became a model of fast-growing modern city. Not only did he demolish ghettos and shanties of poor dwellers, he also banished mad people, beggars and Okada riders from the city-centre. Those were some of actions that further endeared him to Obasanjo who assigned him into various panels including that on Privatisation of Public Institutions, Civil Service Reform, Monetisation Policy and Economic Teams. While Atiku Abubakar was busy in a battle of wit with his estranged master, Mallam Elrufai became defacto Vice President.

On the other hand, the aggressive and massive campaigns against corrupt practices at by Nuhu Ribadu as the Boss of EFCC, similar to that of War Against Indiscipline (WAI) of Buhari/Idiagbon regime, received global recognitions, especially after parading some untouchable public figures as criminals. Some of the memorable incidents were the shaming of Inspector General Tafa Balogun of Nigerian Police and Governor Diepriye Alamieyeseigha of Bayelsa State for excessive lootings of public funds. He ensured that apart from jailing them, substantial amount of stolen funds were recovered as well as confiscating their assets worth billions of Naira.

The reputation of El-rufai and Ribadu as indefatigable leaders was overshadowed by their obvious garrulousness in their frantic efforts to defend and carry out Obasanjo directives against some perceived opposition especially the then Vice President Atiku Abubakar. Interestingly for that reasons and for accomplishing assigned tasks promptly and decisively, Obasanjo entrusted with other responsibilities. They were in the inner-caucus-kitchen cabinet as the seen and unseen advisers to the President. Their opinions became laws: Ribadu’s list of corrupt Nigerians was a bible that automatically barred the politicians from contesting in 2007 Election likewise Elrufai-monetisation policy on sales of government houses became binding after the announcement.

Their intervention in endorsing YarÁdua for the top position in the land was seen as justifiable in the face of the do-or-die policy of the ruling party since only PDP could win an election with an Iwu-INEC as the electoral umpire. Surprisingly YarÁdua seemed unenthusiastic to the proposition. He neither aspired nor lobbied for the ticket before he was dragged into the campaign orgy. He had disclosed his interest to return to the academia as a lecturer in Ahmadu Bello University after his second tenure as Governor of Kasina State. As if to send further signal of lack of interest for the ticket, he hardly spoke at most of the political rallies with his seeming lacklustre disposition. In fact he did not hide his ill-health during the campaign as he flew out of the country for medical treatment. To the bewilderment of Nigerians, during one of the Presidential campaign rallies, YarÁdua spoke to supporters through phone from hospital bed in Germany to say that he was ALIVE.

There are many early warning signals from the outset on the electoral process but yet many individuals persuaded him to accept the nomination in the belief that failure to do so might force the regime at the centre and PDP machinery to provide ominous alternatives. There were insinuations that those persuading him for the Presidency had hidden agenda to use YarÁdua for their selfish motives. Surprisingly, immediately after his swearing-in, he dismantled some structures of previous administration and revised some decisions like the reversals of petroleum prices and proposed new taxation and he was widely hailed by Nigerian as an independent person.

He proved that he was not a puppet even as there were rumours that El-rufai and Ribadu had either lobbied or were billed to take new appointments as Minister of Energy and Inspector General of Police respectively under YarÁdua’s administration. They could have made positive impacts in the portfolios if appointed considering their passion in righting the wrong. It is still baffling how they become estranged from their sole candidate. Probably they undermine other underground caucus close to YarÁdua

While many leaders get to higher positions by fortune of being in a right place, at the right time with the right people, God also rewards people with leaders they deserved for their actions and inactions when things happen.

While Elrufai is said to have joined others clamouring for a change of leadership at the top, asking or forcing YarÁdua to resign may sound easy, but the implication is better imagine when he still has extreme loyalists for various motives with the full support so far of the branch of the executive, legislature and by extension judiciary.

Sure we are in a disturbing period with a confrontational stance of Niger-Delta militants publicly clamouring for instalment of Goodluck Jonathan, an Ijaw person they disliked and campaigned against during the last election. We have heard the voice Northern jingoists on “power must remain in the North for the remaining period.” The merchants of death are also praying for demise of Nigerian leader, God forbid. All these point to high conspiracy being coined to achieve hidden agenda to further confuse the polity. Interestingly, the military, which have been discipline and professional lately, would not fold their arms without protecting the territorial integrity of the Nigerian nation.

It is quite impressive the disposition of Vice President Goodluck Jonathan who has remained ever loyal to his boss, by distancing himself from the antics of undesirable element, proving that he is not ambitious and greedy politician who in similar position would have done otherwise. He is as faithful as he was while deputising for Governor Alamieyeseigha before he was coerced to jettison his loyalty by threats from EFCC and elements in PDP influenced by power-that-be.

With less than two years to the next election, let pray for our President’s good health and God’s guidance to do the right things in the remaining period. In 2011, as electorate, Nigerians should exercise their electoral franchise diligently without coercion and emotion. We are where we are today because some people somewhere, with power to influence changes, decided on our behalf. We therefore get what we deserved.

This article by Yushau A. Shuaib was originally published in New Nigerian December 7, Daily Champion December 8, Leadership December 8, Daily Independent December 13, Peoples Daily December 18, Daily Trust December 21, Triumph , News Star December 21 and Thisday January 5, 2010

The post Still on El-rufai and Ribadu on President Umaru YarÁdua appeared first on YAShuaib.

NEMA Nigeria

In Nigeria, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) recently sent an early warning alert on likelihood of drought in some states in the Northern Nigeria. The Director General of the agency retired Air Vice Marshall Mohammed Audu-Bida said that the drought warning alert became necessary as to enable the governments of the states to be affected to make adequate planning including sensitization of farmers, contingency stockpiling and networking with focal institutions for effective mitigation of likely negative consequences of the climate condition.

The NEMA boss said the agency has sent official letters to the states that may be affected, mostly in the North-East and North-Western Nigeria. The agency is reputed to have some state-of-the-art facilities that include Geographic Information System (GIS) Laboratory and Cospa-Sarsat, a satellite aided tracking technology for responding to distress signals from aviation, maritime and land users.

The warning is quite instructive because it was discovered that the same agency in the past had issued official letters to states and relevant institutions warning them on various issues that require urgent attentions. For instance before the last rainy season it alerted the states on possibility of massive flooding if actions were not taking to clear blocked drainage system and through campaigns against building along waterways and the indiscriminate dumping of refuse and dirt on the gutters among other measures. Few months later many states experienced heavy flooding with thousands of victims rendered homeless and properties worth millions of Naira lost.

The same scenario was replicated when after assessing some developments in neighbouring countries and even within some local communities it raised alert and warned against the spread of epidemics like cholera, meningitis and Lassa fever. Unfortunately the cautionary advises were not heeded from expected quarters while some institutions either picked holes on the warning as false alarm or gave mumbo-jumbo kind of technical jargons as excuses for lacklustre response. As usual a fire brigade approach is applied as the last resort to contain the incidence when it eventually occurs.

While the agency may indeed be proactive in its mandates to inform and educate Nigerians on disaster risk reduction (DRR) and providing early warning signals to agencies of government, the recent alert by the agency on the likelihood of drought grabbed the national headlines with more attention given by the foreign media. Surprisingly, sceptics still doubt the veracity of the forecast.

It may be necessary to state that there are different types of drought associated with the African continent. They are meteorological drought relating to rainfall amounts, hydrological drought which is determined by water levels in reservoirs and agricultural drought relating to the availability of water for crops.

With vast amount of knowledge as well as reliable and authenticated reports easily accessible on the internet, one may not necessarily need to be meteorologists to different between the types of drought and their implications on any given society. One may not necessarily be a trained Fireman to predict the consequence of misuse of firework and inflammable in a domestic environment.

According to researchers, meteorological drought is defined by comparing the rainfall in a particular place and at a particular time with the average rainfall for that particular place. This drought results in a depletion of soil moisture with negative impact on harvest. They also point out that hydrological drought is viewed from the drop in water levels in dams, rivers and other form of reservoirs due largely to low rainfall. It is said that changes in water levels affect ecosystems, hydroelectrical power production and recreational, industrial and urban water use.

On the other hand agricultural drought is said to occur “when there is not enough water available for a particular crop to grow at a particular time. This drought doesn’t depend only in the amount of rainfall, but also on the correct use of that water.” An example is given of “a period of low rainfall where water is used carelessly for irrigation and other purposes. Under these circumstances, the effect of the drought becomes more pronounced than it was before. ”

The warning by NEMA is a welcome development and an eye-opener for relevant institutions and bodies to wake up to their responsibility and be proactive rather than waiting for disasters to occur before taking actions. Without the use of technology, a common sense dictates some scenarios what may result to disaster if prompt actions are not taking.

One of the recent campaign by the agency that require maximum attention of all Nigerians especially the government is on the threat from the notorious Lake Nyos in Cameroon which on August 21, 1986, suddenly emitted large cloud of carbon dioxide (CO2) which suffocated and killed 1,700 people and 3,500 livestock in nearby villages. The lake poses a threat due to its weakening natural wall as geological tremor could cause the dike to give way, allowing water to rush into downstream villages all the way into Nigeria from Cameroon line of volcanic activity. Interestingly only Nigerians in Diaspora in an online forum, and lately the Senate have shown great concern on the need for the government to pay more attention on the fear raised by NEMA on the need for proactive measure to protect states around the axis.

The advantage of early warning alert is to ensure that all relevant agencies and institutions are adequate prepared and make contingency provision to prevent, manage and mitigate calamities which mostly occur without prior notice. The benefit of such warning is cost effective because it is cheaper to make provision than excessive extra budgetary expenditures that are incurred after crises.

It becomes necessary to call on response agencies in Nigeria to be actively engaged in collaborative efforts and in sharing necessary information that would be useful in saving lives and properties from natural and human-induced disaster. Such partnership would go a long way in addressing some environmental and societal problems than egocentricity and individualistic postures of some institutions that may add to national woe.

This article by Yushau A. Shuaib was originally published in New Nigerian October 28, Economic Confidential November, Nigerian tribune November 1, Daily Sun November 2, Champion November 3, Thisday November 4, Vanguard November 4, 2009

The post Still on Early Warning Alert System in Nigeria appeared first on YAShuaib.

NEMA Nigeria

According to him over70,000 may die in Benue State of Nigeria if the Volcanic Lake Nyos in Cameroon erupts. He also pointed out that over 30000 livestock are also at risk in Benue State alone. The Lake as he rightly disclosed is adjacent to Nigeria and its eruption may affect Benue, Kogi, Enugu, Adamawa and Taraba States. By implication about 40m Nigerians may be at risk.

The writer also made some valid references when he disclosed that the Obasanjo administration raised a technical committee in 2006 which submitted a report on the situation. According to the writer: “In January 2009, it was disclosed that a sum of N26 billion has been committed to the construction of a buffer dam at the Nigerian side of the Lake. The buffer dam is supposed to reduce the impact of the eruption.”

Adeola raised some pertinent questions after pointing out the mandates of National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) on an emergency situation when he asked: “What has NEMA done about this current threat to 40m Nigerians? Has NEMA monitored the situation and the reports made by the technical committee set up by Obasanjo? Was NEMA part of the committee? How is NEMA monitoring the state of preparedness of all organizations and agencies which may contribute to this particular disaster management? If the disaster occurs now, what rescue operations are in place? Does NEMA have any comment on the state of the buffer dam that is nothing but a serious national embarrassment to Nigeria? Has any useful information been posted on NEMA’S website relating to this predicted disaster? How do the concerned people get access to such information? I did a quick browse of NEMA’s website and I’d probably missed the information. ”

Being a staff of the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), this rejoinder, as a member of NVS is a spontaneous reaction to the piece of Adeola, which is not necessarily the official position of the agency. From a personal experience, visitation and information available to me, I can say that appropriate actions are being taken by the Federal Government to address the situation.

The website of NEMA www.nema.gov.ng which provides causes and preventive measures against major disasters, also has a Press Release page where one could have read several news items on some issues including the one published by the agency some months ago to allay the fear of Nigerians and international community over the situation in Lake Nyos.

The story with a title”NEMA Allays Fear Over Poisonous Gas from Lake Nyos” states that: “Though there are possible threats due to past consequences, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) has allayed the public fear over the danger of Lake Nyos in Cameroon which in August 21, 1986, suddenly emitted a large cloud of carbon dioxide (CO2) which suffocated and killed 1,700 people and 3,500 livestock in nearby villages in Cameroon.”

The Director General of the NEMA, AVM Mohammed Audu-Bida (rtd) confirmed that Lake Nyos is a crater lake in the Northwest Province of Cameroon, which is a deep lake high on the flank of an inactive volcano along the Cameroon line of volcanic activity. The lake poses a threat due to its weakening natural wall. He also admitted that some experts have warned that a geological tremor could cause the dike to give way, allowing water to rush into downstream villages all the way into Nigeria. But he nevertheless said to address the problem, the Federal Government has approved the construction of a dam in Kassimbilla in Taraba State to contain any excessive flooding and gaseous content from slipping into the country from Lake Nyos in Republic of Cameroon.

The NEMA Boss said the dam being constructed by the government would be utilised for electricity generation and agricultural purposes while serving as a reservoir in the case of any eventuality from Lake Nyos. He added that the agency has been communicating with states that may likely be affected in the likelihood of breakage from the Cameroonian side. He said the agency is also assessing the situation in order to develop early warning mechanisms with regards to the breach of the Lake.

I must add that if readers go to the features or other relevants pages of the website, just like other press releases issued and published by the media, they would realise that the NEMA of today is more concern with adequate public awareness campaign against emergencies rather than waiting for disaster to happen just to deploy relief materials to victims.

In fact in the new thinking of NEMA on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), emphasis is laid on adequate preparedness of response agencies in an event of any disaster for timely and responsive interventions. About a week ago a team from NEMA with other relevant agencies visited the communities that may be affected and monitored the level of progress on the project to ensure that our people and livestock are assured of adequate protection.

I find it necessary to also draw the attention of members of this forum (NVS) to the piece I posted to this group some months ago which may also be useful to understand measures being taken by NEMA in its mandates to address emergencies in Nigeria. The link are indicated at the bottom of this rejoinder.

While appreciating the effort of Adeola in bringing to the fore this debate and the comments made by other members, I can assure you that NEMA, its staff and other response agencies are up to the task… We are proactive in our approach as we believe too that God will protect us. Please help me say AMEEN aloud as I believe there would be NO SHAKING… in our environment.

NOTE: this is a personal position and not necessarily the official position of NEMA.

This article by Yushau A. Shuaib originally appeared in July 2009 on the website of www.nigeriavillagesquare.com

The post RE: Before 70 000 Nigerians Perish Overnight..! appeared first on YAShuaib.

Hamza Al-Mustafha

The piece captioned as above of November 7th 2007, written by Yushau A. Shuaib and published in the daily Sun tabloid, is instructive. We are all victims of and witnesses to the atrocities of the past in Nigeria. But since we have evolved a democratic structure that pretends to fairplay and equity, it is necessary to overlook the past and turn a new leaf. It is not, by the protracted incarceration of Al-Mustapha and others, in conditions seen as subhuman by their personal confessions and by disinterested testimony, can we initiate appropriate deterrent measures or fully redress all pieces of injustice of the past. The fallout of military predation in our polity is phenomenal. It would appear overtly vindictive to insist on continued trial of Al-Mustapha and others while ignoring the fact that the accused were, in their various alleged commissions, on orders from their superiors, even if expressly guilty of over zealotry. The said offences were committed in the hey days of military dictatorship and many other such heinous crimes as alleged against them, have been cordoned in the present dispensation. The seeming selective nature of the trials whereby the initiators of these disastrous crimes are safely ensconced in their presidential palaces while the circumstantial surrogates, who would ignore their superior’s orders on pain of dismissal from service or elimination, are being hounded from prison to prison in very dehumanizing circumstances, is inequitable. The ex- CSO’s outburst of being denied access to his family for many years is both pathetic and chilling.

Whatever became of Sgt. Barnabas Mshelia alias Rogers, of whom unconfirmed reports were that he was pardoned and conscripted into Chief Obasanjo’s terror squad? Are the purported killers of Chief MKO Abiola and Gen. Abacha also being tried? When, during the Oputa hearing many retd generals were indicted on gross abuse of human rights, and these generals disdained off summonses by the panel, were there any punitive measures canvassed against them as correctives?

The mood today is reconciliatory and futuristic. Nothing can be gained from protracted excitation of the past. This writer does not, by this submission or appeal attempt to attenuate the enormity of the pain visited on the good people of Nigeria by repressive juntas. He is only canvassing for redress of the past by means other than protracted legal tussle, a tempering of justice with mercy with respect to Al-Mustapha and others, whose ordeal in detention shall have mortified them into consciousness of the transitory nature of power; and an evolution of a democratic order that would make these crimes of the past difficult to perpetrate. We may recourse to an independent human rights violation panel, whose recommendations would not be treated with disdain or levity as in the past.

Granted that the president, Alhaji Umaru Yar’ Adua, was himself a prime victim of the past gangsterism, as seen in the murder in detention of his brother, Retd Gen. Shehu Musa Yar’ Adua. Granted too that his present position of president Federal Republic of Nigeria cannot be said to compensate for that irreparable loss, he should probably look sqarely at the protracted trial of Al-Mustapha and others and find a reprieve. Vengeance is God’s and whatever was allowed by fate to occur should be seen in the light of inevitability. A definite policy concerning past grievances, would not only resolve the Al-Mustapha, Bamaiyi and others’ matter but also resolve the age-old Niger Delta question and make the continued incarceration of activists like Chief Ralph Uwazuruike, for which the international community had heavily criticized Nigeria, unappealing. There is the saying of our people: if you beat an erring child with one hand, you draw him back with the other.

Chief Clarius Ugwuoha wrote in from the Ezeali Palace in Egbema.

The post What of Al-Mustapha, Bamaiyi and Others? A Reply to Yushau A. Shuaib? appeared first on YAShuaib.