Article of Faith: What Is The Name Of Jesus? By Femi Aribisala

Femi Aribisala

The name “Jesus” was never heard of until 1,500 years after Jesus walked the earth.

Several years ago, I was listening to a sermon by Ethel Aderemi, when the Lord suddenly asked yet another of his enigmatic questions.  “Femi,” he said, “what is the name of Jesus?”  I was dumbfounded.  I asked myself: “Is Jesus not the name of Jesus?”  What then could be the meaning of the Lord’s question?

Real name

I soon discovered that the name of a person is usually not his name.  The real name of a person is the very essence of that person.  It is his character, personality and profile.  I know a lady called Peace; but she is neither peaceful nor peace-loving.  Her real name must be “Trouble-maker.”

But in the bible, no one ever acted contrary to his or her name.  If your name is “Thief,” then you are a thief.  Abigail says of her husband: “As his name is, so is he: Nabal is his name, and folly is with him.” (1 Samuel 25:25).  Jacob’s name means “one who supplants.”  All his life, he acted according to that name until God changed it to Israel.  He deceived Esau out of his birthright.  He deceived his father and obtained his brother’s blessing.

So what is the name of the Lord?  The name of the Lord is the very nature, character and personality of God.  God revealed to Moses that his name is compassionate, gracious and slow to anger. (Exodus 34:5-7).  Likewise, the name of Jesus is the very personality of Jesus.  It represents all that Jesus is.  The name of Jesus is Saviour of souls.  His name is Joshua; it is Saviour from sins.  His name is wonderful, counsellor; mighty God. (Isaiah 9:6).  It is love; merciful; goodness and holy.

Unanswered prayers

Jesus says to believers: “I will do whatever you ask in my name.” (John 14:13).  Why then do we pray and get no answers?  It must surely be because we don’t really pray in Jesus’ name.  We simply attach his name to the end of our prayers and presume thereby that we have prayed in his name.  But to really pray in Jesus’ name, we must have the character of Jesus.  We must have his faith and his compassion.

That means we cannot tell lies and then pray in the name of Jesus.  Neither can we be quarrelsome and pray in the name of Jesus.  We cannot walk in the counsel of the ungodly, or stand in the way of sinners and pray in the name of Jesus.  To pray in Jesus’ name, we must walk in his name.  To pray in his name, we must stand in the righteousness of God.  The psalmist says: “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.” (Psalms 66:18).

Jesus said to his disciples: “Until now you have not asked for anything in my name.  Ask and you will receive.” (John 16:24).  This indicates that hitherto the disciples prayed according to their own wishes and desires.  Thenceforth, they were to pray only according to the desires of Jesus.  Nevertheless, many of us still go to the bank of heaven with forged cheques.  We attach the name of Jesus to requests he would never make.  We fail to appreciate that praying in Jesus’ name is not “my will be done” but “God’s will be done.” (Matthew 6:10).

Formulaic prayers

Moreover, praying in Jesus’ name is not a formula.  We don’t need to say “in Jesus’ name” with every prayer.  If it is in his name, then it is in his name.  If it is not, it is not.  The fact that you put my name on a cheque does not mean you can get anything out of my bank account.  The cashier can tell the signature is not mine.  And if he contacts me, I will not confirm the cheque.

There are many counterfeiters of the name of Jesus.  You will know us by our fruits.  We are people who swear and lay down curses “in the name of Jesus.”  We go to prayer-meetings and kill our enemies “in the name of Jesus.”  We practice witchcraft “in the name of Jesus” and use his name to hold men in bondage.

We need to recognise that Jesus only knows those who know his name.  Nobody gets introduced to Jesus in heaven.  We must make sure he knows us by name now, by walking in his name.  When we deceive and tell lies “in Jesus’ name,” it shows we don’t know him.  Jesus says: “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’  Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you.’” (Matthew 7:22-23).

Lost in translation

Some years later, I discovered Jesus could not have been the actual name of Jesus.  Jesus is not a Hebrew name.  The real Hebrew name of Jesus is ‘Yahushua,’ which means “God saves.”  Accordingly, the angel must have said to Joseph: “You shall call his name ‘Yahushua,’ for he will save his people from their sins.” (Matthew 1:21).

‘Yahweh’ is the Hebrew name for God.  ‘Yah-ho’ is usually appended to the beginning or ending of Hebrew names, just like the Yoruba ‘Oba’ or the Ibo ‘Chukwu.’  ‘Shua’ means deliverance.  Both are combined to form ‘Yahushua’ (pronounced ‘Yah-hoo-shoo-ah’), which is then shortened for everyday use to ‘Yahshua; and then even shorter still to “Y’shua.”  In the process of conversion to English, “Y’shua” became ‘Yeshua’ and then ‘Joshua.’

In order to render Yahshua in Greek, it was transliterated by exporting the Hebrew sound, instead of translating it into the Greek equivalent of its meaning: ‘God-saves.’  This had certain implications.  Ancient Greek did not have the ‘y’ and the ‘sh’ sounds found in Yahshua.  In order to make the ‘y’ sound in Greek, the letters ‘iota’ and ‘eta’ have to be combined together to form ‘ee-ay.’  And in order to make the ‘sh’ sound, you had to make do with the softer ‘s’ sound of the letter “sigma.”  Therefore, Yahshua could only be transliterated into Greek as ‘Ee-ay-soo-ah’ instead of ‘Yah-shoo-ah.’

However, masculine Greek names that end with vowel sounds were usually given the letter ‘s’ as a suffix.  Thus, ‘Judah’ became ‘Judas’ and ‘Cephah’ became ‘Cephas.’  This suggests ‘Ee-ay-soo-ah’ should become ‘Ee-ay-soo-ah-s.’  But there was yet another dilemma.  It is unconventional in Greek for there to be two vowel sounds before an ‘s.’  So the last vowel sound was dropped, leaving us with ‘Ee-ay-soos’ (Iesous) as the Greek pronunciation for Yahshua.  When Latin became the predominant language of Christianity, Greek versions of the New Testament were translated into Latin.  In this so-called Latin Vulgate, ‘Ee-ay-soos’ was further transliterated, making it ‘Iesus.’

The letter ‘j’ did not exist in the Old English language.  But around the early 12th century, ‘j’ began showing up in certain English dialects, often replacing letters “i” and “y.”  Therefore, names like ‘Iames’ became ‘James;’ ‘Yohan’ became ‘John;’ and ‘Iesus’ became ‘Jesus.”  The publication of the popular King James Bible in 1611 effectively “ratified” Jesus as the English name of our Saviour.  In effect, the name “Jesus” was never heard of until 1,500 years after Jesus walked the earth.

Femi Aribisala is the fellowship coordinator of Healing Wings. Healing Wings is a pentecostal Christian fellowship which meets on Tuesdays and Thursdays. He blogs at Femi Aribisala . E-mail: faribisala@yahoo.com

PremiumTimes

Before we ‘port’ to APC: Is Tinubu and Buhari really ready? – Adekoya Boladale

Before Monday last week Nigeria mobile subscribers have been in captive of telecom operators. It is a slavery to be hooked to a non-performing, fraudulent and carefree company with no alternative to switch side without losing contact with friends and family. So you can imagine the joy and sigh of relief on the faces of these helpless subscribers when the Nigerian Communication Commission (NCC) rolled out the Mobile Number Portability exercise; a system that gives subscribers the opportunity to switch between telecom operators without losing the widely known-with mobile number.
If these telecom operators have kept subscribers in captive then Nigerians are in nothing short of hell. The country is presently been led by a political party that has failed in all ramification. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have been running the administrative and structural affairs of this country for fourteen years and the only significant thing they have achieved so far is the revamping of the telecom industry which is even rumored to have been kick started by the Late Gen. Sani Abacha’s regime, other than this the nation has been thrown into perpetual corruption, maladministration, dictatorship, insecurity, deceit, aggressive hunger, betrayal and numerous loans. To say the least, PDP murdered that infant baby called Nigeria right from birth.
Like the telecom industry Nigerians deserve the right to ‘Port’ to a better, people oriented, creative, sincere and visionary political party. It is high time the country gain freedom from the captive of the mighty. However, the big question is to which political party? It is certain that come 2015 the Peoples Democratic Party will be widely denounced by change seeking Nigerians who can’t wait to enjoy good governance and development but which political party posses the qualities that Nigerians long for?
A fortnight ago the former Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) concretized the move to merge with other opposition parties to form All Progressive Congress (APC), a move which was widely supported by all members present at the national convention. During this period the party made available the manifesto of the new political party which they (merged political parties) believe would solve the manias in the country.
Obviously the most reasonable alternative party presently is the All Progressive Congress (APC), I understand some Nigerians feel the need to have a political party free from politrickers and opportunists, a party solemnly formed and funded by ordinary Nigerians who have no hidden or personal agenda whatsoever, however the present political structure of the country coupled with the political orientation and level of public awareness of vast majority of Nigeria electorates will make this impossible at this point in time. However, the All Progressive Congress really needs to put its house in order. Its decision in the next few months will determine if truly it has what it takes to deliver Nigerians from these shackles of slavery.
The attempt to renegotiate the oil deals is a laudable plan but this brings to mind the question of to whose ends would the renegotiation favour? Ordinary Nigerians and oil producing communities or the new breed of sycophants and rogues that my end up dominating the villa? The plan to also investigate the oil revenues and past political office holders is well thought of but is the party truly ready to face the challenges of combing corruption which requires that no sacred cow be left untouched? Would the party be ready to prosecute ex-governors, senators and honourables who have contributed immensely to the sour situation of the country even when these people are founding members of the party? Is the party ready to put the likes of Tinubu, Okorocha, Amosun, among others on the stand if need be?
Nigerians have been promised white elephant for so long that we easily realize when such lies are been told. Am not disputing the ability of APC to perform, that would be like condemning the masquerade before it get the chance to dance but I strongly believe Nigerians are tired of sweet and cheap talks channeled only to winning voters sentiments and emotional. If truly APC is ready to be the vehicle of change for Nigeria then we require a party that will opens its arms to welcome ideas and inputs from the people especially the youths, and not one that claims to be constructing a merger committee without the presence of the ‘future generation’. The party also has to take into cognizance the importance of the female gender as a resourceful and core element in nations building rather than the usual role of augmenting political formation and political gender equality gospel.
Above all, the most germane tasks of the party is ensuring an open and democratic presentation of a truthful, brilliant, courageous, dogmatic and God fearing individual to bear the party’s flag in 2015 and not just some handpicked scholars who lacks absolute knowledge about leadership. Nigerians can no longer take the nonchalant attitude of an acclaimed president to multiple civil genocides. The pills of hunger and unemployment shoved down our throat can no longer be accepted. What we require is a listener and a performer rather than an ‘I-don’t-give-a-damn’ leader.
On a last note, Mr. Tinubu and General Buhari should be aware that this time around it is no longer a Bourdillion or Daura affair which the world gives little attention to how it goes down. The situation at hand is long pass a beer parlour selection and negotiation mode, Nigerians are watching with keen interest if truly the APC is what it preaches.
Adekoya Boladale is a political scientist and wrote via adekoyaboladale@gmail.com
Twitter: @adekoyabee
OsunDefender

Jonathan’s Hypocrisy: Punishing MASSOB while rewarding MEND, OPC, Boko Haram, By Adeolu Ademoyo

Adeolu Ademoyo

Just as the guns and bombs of Boko Haram, the main northern wing of our ethnic militia, continue to boom, and as if they actually sat down at a meeting to plan the final dismantling of the Nigerian state, Boko Haram’s counterparts in the creek –MEND and others replied with the wartime information (despite its amnesty deal oiled by oily security contracts with the Nigerian state under President Jonathan) that they will commence hostilities from the end of May, 2013.

Operating from the western flank of the ethnic militia ground movement, the OPC, whose tongues are currently tied and muffled   by a potential juicy security contract, informed on their own oily application to the Nigerian government through one of its spokespersons Dr. Frederick Fasehun. Shortly after Mr. Fasehun’s public disclosure, another spokesperson for OPC, Mr. Ganiyu Adams, whose current mellowed voice has been oiled of recent by the potential greasy oil pipeline security contract to their OPC militia- suddenly came out booming to advocate-not as usual about how his “Yoruba kinsmen” are being “marginalized’- but   for a share of the oily security contract with Mr. Fasehun.

Meanwhile, MASSOB, the chief player of the eastern wing of Nigeria’s ethnic militia ground movement has laid low-no oily deal yet. The eastern war songs had mellowed somehow for some time with a dubious treason charge hanging over the head of its leaders. This is the strange, dubious and paradoxical relationship, which the Nigerian state maintains with the ethnic militia movement.

Confident of oily amnesty deals from President Jonathan’s government who lacks that much needed sense of intense urgency in governance in the 21^st century, Nigerian ethnic militias have always justified their “legitimacy” on sundry reasons. The most recurring justification are their claims of   marginalization, persecution and oppression of members of their ethnic groups. While OPC would argue that it emerged during the era of military dictatorship especially IBB/Abacha as a response to the “persecution” of the “Yorubas”, the MASSOB would rest its legitimacy on same premise-the “persecution” of the “Igbos”.

Furthermore, while MEND and the creek militias point to the  “persecution” of “peoples of South South” and the criminal neglect (this is true) of the oil producing South South by successive governments, Boko Haram and its affiliates in the Northern part rest their legitimacy on “Islamizing” Nigeria.

Defenders of these militias continue to spin and spew new arguments to justify the existence of these militias.  However, the relevant question is: Can and Will Nigeria survive with these militias? My answer is No.  Nigeria will implode if these ethnic and religious militias are allowed to continue. It thus follows that any individual, collective and selective defense of any of these militias or formal or informal legitimacy –both government or private – given to these militias is a direct, expressed and explicit threat to the corporate existence of Nigeria.

On different occasions, depending on which wing of the Nigerian ruling elite has been selected to be in government, Nigerian state often worsens the problem by being selective in its dealings with these militias.

For example it is funny or perhaps not funny that a dubious treason charge hangs over the head of Mr. Ralph Uwazurike and other leaders of MASSOB while President Jonathan’s government is considering the oily application of Oodua Peoples Congress for oil pipeline security contract. It is not funny-and therefore dubious because there is no difference between OPC and MASSOB. Yet MASSOB is facing treason while OPC is being considered for an oily contract.

Furthermore, we have had clarion calls for amnesty for Boko Haram; I have not heard same for MASSOB from those who call for amnesty for Boko Haram. This paradox becomes more odd and immoral as President Jonathan commences its amnesty program for Boko Haram while a treason charge hangs over Mr. Uwazurike of MASSOB.

These immoral paradoxes show the manipulation of the Nigerian people by the different wings of the Nigerian ruling elites. Rather than ask MEND to mend their terrorist ways, President Jonathan has awarded juicy contracts to ethnic militias in the South South and is considering doing same for OPC. Given this moral duplicity, I believe that President Jonathan must drop the treason charge over the head of Mr. Uwazurike and other MASSOB leaders, and award the contract to guard Eastern oil pipelines to MASSOB.

It must also award contract for Northern oil pipelines to Boko Haram as part of its amnesty. If we Nigerians do not see why these ethnic militias must cease to exist, then they all must be treated with equity by the Nigerian state.  However, in the 21^st century, the existence of ethnic militias such as OPC, MEND, MASSOB, and Boko Haram in African countries is a major set back, and an absurdity.

For example, the statement of the presidential aide and chairman of President Jonathan’s amnesty program, Mr. Kingsley Kuku,  to MEND and other creek ethnic militia and terrorists that insecurity will return to the Niger Delta if President Jonathan is not returned to government in 2015 justifies the view that all the ethnic militias are illegitimate and that they are tools in the hands of the ruling elites.

Furthermore, the allegation that Boko Haram collected 500 million naira (strangely Boko Haram has not used their usual YouTube to deny this) to free the French hostages further confirmed the view that Nigerian ethnic militias are foot soldiers and messengers of hate and death, which our ruling elites use to negotiate and garner power for themselves. Therefore, the allocation of oily oil pipelines security contracts to them by President Jonathan is a down payment for terrorism-in-waiting. If this act continues, President Jonathan would have used Nigerian money to   pay for the dismantling of the Nigerian state.

This is not acceptable.  Some people had consistently worked for the sustenance of the corporate existence and integrity of our country. This is why the Nigerian state under President Jonathan must first stop the persecution and prosecution of MASSOB, stop the oily contracts to these militias, stop contracting our security to erstwhile and current terrorist militia groups (OPC and MEND/creek terrorist groups), directly take responsibility of our nation’s security and go ahead to  openly use the force of law to dismantle and delegitimize all the ethnic and religious militias (OPC/MEND and others in the creeks/MASSOB/Boko Haram) today.

 They have to go.  They do not have a place in a 21^st century Nigeria.  The characters in these ethnic militias must not be allowed to lead our youths and children astray. We should not allow these ethnic militias and the Presidential support given them by President Jonathan to return us to the Stone Age.

PremiumTimes

Obasanjo: Proposed Pipeline Protection Commission is Avenue for 'Chop-chop'

Olusegun Obasanjo

• Disagrees with Agabi on integration agency

By Adebiyi Adedapo

The former President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, has said the proposed Pipeline Protection Commission by the federal government to combat pipeline vandalism is unnecessary, saying it was an avenue “for chop-chop.”

Obasanjo said this yesterday in Abuja, during a thanksgiving service in commemoration of 50th birthday anniversary of former Minister of Education, Mrs. Obiageli Ezekwesili.
The former president also disagreed with the  former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN),  on the need to setup an agency for national integration.

Obasanjo said the Nigerian constitution was based on principles that guarantees integration.
Agabi had earlier commended the Obasanjo administration for performing creditably well, except that the administration did not create an agency for national integration so as to foster the unity of various groups in the country.   

In a swift reaction, Obasanjo said: "Kana Agabi is exemplary, as a Christian, he is exemplary in integrity, he is exemplary, but this morning he goofed, How can you say that, there is need for a commission for national integration? The constitution of Nigeria is for integration, what more do you need, you have a constitution that is based on integrating of this country, you have things like the federal character, what is that meant to do? To integrate.
"If we now failed to implement it, then you can even say we have breached the constitution of Nigeria. So, we don't need an agency for national integration, read your constitution very well, and you are a lawyer."

Obasanjo wondered why the government would conceive the idea of setting up a special commission to combat pipeline vandalism despite the availability of the Nigerian Police and other security agencies.

"This morning, I was coming from Abeokuta and I was listening to the radio, I heard that they are going to setup an agency for pipeline protection, what are the police there for? What are all the securities agencies that we have there for? Another 'chop-chop'," he said.
Obasanjo, who described Ezekwesili as a patriot and honest citizen of Nigeria, said Nigerians should hold him responsible for any failure recorded during his administration.

"Let me say what Oby stands for and the exemplary service she has rendered, under my own administration and indeed to the global world, I thank God for making you available to serve Nigeria and to serve God. For those who worked with me to achieve whatever we may think we achieved and I have always said it, whatever you want to blame in my government, blame me, because I was in charge, don't blame any of those who assisted me, if there is any credit to dispense we will share that.

Oby,  for those who want to probe you, if they are honest, they would discover that the government of Nigeria should specially give you money for what you have done for this country," he said. 

He, however, said Nigeria was a nation loved by God, adding that God had done everything for the nation.
"Stop tempting God with prayers. I just hope that we will get it right. We have no choice, we have to get it right, let us decide individually that I will do what I have to do to bring about change in Nigeria, and if you do, you will be called names, some people are hired to do that. But say what you believe is right and stand by it," he added. 

Describing the celebrant, Obasanjo  said Ezekwesili and Iyabo Obasanjo, were exactly the same in character.
"One thing about Oby is that she looks like me,  unfortunately for her, she behaves a little like me, and even some people said she walks like me, but she has a younger sister, Iyabo, they are in character exactly the same, they will abuse me when they feel they should abuse me, but I don't answer them, except to say that even when you are 50 years old, you are still my daughter, and even when you are 60 years old, you will still be," he said.

Also, a former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, who spoke at the reception, said Ezekwesili was a patriot who loves her country and want her country to be free of corruption.

El-Rufai described the celebrant as Nigeria's Margaret Thatcher.
"Oby is one of the most honest and genuine persons I know, she says it as it is, and in this country, saying the truth is controversial, so I am not surprised she is said to be controversial. What said was to draw attention to the waste of resources in the administration and it is true, I honestly see Oby as our Margaret Thatcher, I see Oby as one Nigerian that should be the President of this country at some point, then I will actively support her," he said.

ThisDay

Wanted: A Leader For Just A Time As This By Bayo Oluwasanmi

When it comes to responding to political crises, there are three “temperatures” of a leader: hot (responsive), cold (rebellious), and lukewarm (indifferent).

People love the hot leader, reach out to the cold, but reject the lukewarm. The calm that puts us to sleep may be more deadly than the storm that keeps us wide awake.
The world is looking for scientists. The church is looking for theologians. And Nigeria is looking for men and women of vision. Nigeria’s leadership position is vacant.
Africa in general and Nigeria in particular, have been ruled by blind men who do not see ahead with clarity.  They only think of the moment and hardly anticipate possible consequences of their choices.
For too long and too wrong, Nigerians have suffered needlessly and endlessly from rulers that have been inebriated with corruption. Thus, Nigeria has become a classical example of withered hopes for the multitude of its poor.
The events of late in Nigeria should keep those of us who genuinely love our country awake at night when others are snoring hard.
The stories coming out of Nigeria everyday make us wonder who is really in charge of the country – President Jonathan or the Boko Haram terrorists.
In addition to the slaughter of thousands of innocent Nigerians by the Boko Haram, the riotous living followed by destitution experienced by our people further alienates them from the human race.
Corruption – the dreaded word – is Nigeria’s number one enemy and killer. The leadership is deeply embroiled in it and unwilling to extricate itself from the evil. Corruption and cluelessness have become the Siamese twins of the Jonathan administration.
Nigeria is a country where truth is more terrifying than fiction. The other day, Mr. Jonathan confessed to a “small corruption” in the land. Mr. President, small corruption?
With all these frightening problems, the president wears a happy face with his disarming signature smile and custom made fedora hat. He looks unruffled, unworried, and unscathed. I don’t know how Mr. Jonathan can go to bed peacefully at night.
It's not enough to govern a country by wearing fedora hat and smiles. Government is a serious business. Nigeria is witnessing unprecedented rampage and carnage and it appears the worst is yet to come.
President Jonathan has remained aloof and literally asleep at the wheel. The hues and cries of distraught Nigerians are all but fallen on deaf ears.
The tale of intrigue and bloodshed overruns the land. The recent clashes between troops and the Boko Haram Islamist militants in Baga, Borno State, with 187 dead and hundreds with life threatening injuries left the Jonathan administration with no excuse or explanation.
President Jonathan has proved time after time that he’s a leader out of control. Here is how:
(i)    He misunderstood the times.
(ii)    He lost joy over little problems.
(iii)    He needed friends to build his self-image.
(iv)    His greed and ambition make him unhappy.
(v)    He listens to the wrong people.
(vi)    He thinks too highly of himself.
(vii)    He sets himself up for failure.
(viii)    He’s reaping what he sowed.
At a time like this in Nigeria, we need a leader who will make the needs of Nigerians his personal burden. The individual who will embrace the burden and feel morally compelled to act on it.
We need a leader who practices the Law of Sacrifice: a leader must be willing to give up to go up. The vision becomes his or her possession. And most importantly, the person will call others to join the cause, often at great personal risk.
Examples of such leaders abound in history at different times and age. Esther saved the Jewish people from being exterminated. Joseph kept his people alive during the famine in Egypt.
Moses led the Israelites out of slavery. Samson and David delivered the Hebrews from the Philistines, and Gideon delivered the people from the land of Midianites.
President Nelson Mandela and Bishop Desmond Tutu saved South Africans from Apartheid. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks delivered African Americans from Jim Crow. Mahatma Gandhi delivered the Indians from unjust rule of the Brits. The list goes on and on.
These leaders were able to achieve their goals only when their cause becomes more important than their lives. Those who saved their lives would lose it, and vice versa.
We need a leader who must put the cause of Nigerians above his instinct for self-preservation – and not only live, but enable many others to live as well.
When to lead is as important as what to do and where to go. Nigeria needs a leader who must overcome whatever keeps him from moving forward.
We need a leader who will see his fate like that of the rest of Nigerians. If we don’t take risks, we can never expect to rise to the occasion. The leader will fare no better than the rest of Nigeria if he didn’t take risk and act.
A leader could lose more than an opportunity if he refused to take action. Of course, doing the right thing at the right time can seem risky. In the long run, a leader incurs a greater risk by not taking action. For failing to take action, a leader could miss out on his mission in life.
A leader will never accomplish his mission by remaining idle. What paralyzes a leader from acting? Fear? Image? Whatever keeps a leader from pursuing an opportunity, he’ll succeed only by making one timely decision after another.
Nigeria needs a leader that will keep his finger on the pulse of Nigerians’ basic needs. Such a leader will always find opportune time to lead. And now is the time!
We need a leader that will understand what Nigerians need, but also what they need from him. A leader that will get in touch with our people’s needs.
A leader who will continually ask: what is the mood of my people? What do they desire to accomplish? What do they need from me, their leader?
We need a leader who will surround himself with key people that will tell him the truth that he hates to hear. A leader that will ask key influencers what they’re feeling before taking important decisions.
A leader that will ask himself: Do the key influencers see the same opportunity that I see? Are they discerning the same timing? A leader that will get feedback from his key people before taking action.
Nigeria needs a leader with the courage to risk, to reach, and to put himself on the line to seize an opportunity. Taking an advantage of an opportunity requires courage.
The call for men of vision by the 18th century American novelist and poet, Josiah Gilbert Holland, whose pseudonym was Timothy Titcomb reverberates truly and loudly today.
Titcomb probably had Nigeria in mind when he wrote his poem “God, give us Men!”
Listen to him:
“God give us Men!
A time like this demand strong minds, great hearts, true faith, and ready hands;
Men whom the lust of office does not kill;
Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy;
Men who possess opinions and a will; Men who have honor;
Men who can stand before a demagogue and damn his treacherous flatteries without winking!
Tall men, sun-crowned, who live above the fog;
In public duty and private thinking,
For while the rabble, with their thumb-worn creeds,
Their large professions and their little deeds,
Mingle in selfish strife, lo! Freedom weeps,
Wrong rules the land and waiting justice sleeps.”
The president’s first name – Goodluck – might have served him well. In real life, luck is a combination of preparedness and opportunity. He has the latter in excess, but the former is refreshingly absent.
***We cannot drive a car forward by looking at the rear view mirror. We cannot use shoes as hammers, newspapers for umbrellas, and finger nail to tight a screw!
byolu@aol.com

 Saharareporters.com

Mediocrity, Ignorance, Money and Manipulation Equals Corruption, Violence, Dictatorship and Hopelessness: An Open Memo to Nigerian Opposition Politicians

The APC merger negotiations have progressed very well with encouraging outcomes. It is to the credit of the leadership of the merging parties that so far issues of potential candidates, post-merger party leadership, etc. have not disrupted the merger negotiations. In fact, they have not so far emerged as serious contentious issues; although no doubt in not too distant future they are issues that the merger must address. On account of the progress the merger negotiations has achieved, many Nigerians look forward to the conclusion of the merger and the eventual emergence of APC as a political party uniting major opposition politicians in the country and to that extend therefore a major electoral contender in the country with the bright prospect of defeating the PDP. The hope of the defeat of PDP is founded on combinations of poor living conditions and the fact that the PDP has imposed itself on Nigerians since 1999. One of the factors that made that possible was the fragmentation of opposition politicians at all levels.

Notwithstanding the progress that the APC merger process has recorded, Nigerians are daily worried that somewhere along the lines, opposition politicians may blunder and plunder and as a result crash the merger process and dash the hopes of Nigerians. One of the ways, opposition politicians will blunder and plunder is by orienting the new party - APC - the PDP way and to that extend all candidates and invariably public officials the party will produce assume exactly the image of PDP, if not a more ugly image. This will basically mean organising the party structures around individual candidates who will ensure that only party members that are loyal to them emerge as leaders of the party. These so-called leaders of the party would then secure the candidature of their sponsors based on which funding can be guaranteed. Upon successfully winning their elections, public officials will then take their 'rightful' positions as leaders of the party and dictate to the party structures. That way Local Government Chairmen will be party leaders at Local Government levels. Governors will be party leaders at state levels. At national level, it will be the President.

This will translate into subordinating party structures to the dictates of the executive arm of government. Party decisions will be mainly about crude demonstration of loyalty. Party funding will be mainly through individual political entrepreneurs who would regard party funding as investment that should yield dividend upon electoral victory. Legislative arm of government at all levels will continue as surrogate of the executive and in many respect centres for huge personal enrichment of members. In the circumstance, internal democracy in the party will be a far cry. Democratic development would remain a dream. Should that happen, then our opposition politicians would have succeeded in mobilising and organising themselves to defeat PDP but continue to operate a PDP government with so-called APC members. Is this a possibility or a reflection of the dominant pessimism and cynical mindset of Nigerians? Besides, assuming, our opposition politicians are able to do everything right, will they be able to survive the PDP booby traps, which may include winning current legal battles with INEC and some political merchants claiming to be trying to register so-called African Peoples Congress with the APC acronym?

These are issues that call to questions the organisational, leadership and intellectual superiority of Nigerian opposition politicians as reflected by the parties currently negotiating the merger - ACN, ANPP, CPC and Okorocha-led APGA. In terms of organisation, so far, about four months after the commencement of active merger negotiations at national level, there is hardly any formal communication to states, local government and ward structures. There may be some flow of information through representatives attending national meetings with some contacts with leaders at these levels. To be fair to CPC and ANPP, there are reported cases of mobilisational meetings with members across the country. However, the major orientation was basically to get the support of members and prevent any blackleg. With respect to the ACN, there were meetings of the National Working Committee, National Executive Council and National Caucus, first to give approval to the commencement of merger negotiation including the composition of the merger committee and subsequently to execute all statutory responsibilities leading to the merger convention of April 18. At the end of all these meetings, there were no clear instructions, delineation or delegation of responsibilities to party structures at states, local governments and wards levels.

Arising from the absence of any communication from the national level to states, local governments and wards regarding activities to facilitate local negotiations towards harmonising the structures of all the merging parties into a single one producing the APC and against the background of the dominant PDP culture of organising parties around candidates, states, local governments and ward leaders are mostly unclear about what to do. In most cases, there is a preponderance of peripheral informal discussions around which party will eventually produce what position in the new party. Part of the expectation is that it will just be a case of appointment. There is no expectation that it will be a product of elections. And since the issue of results of 2011 elections may be the yardstick for measuring popularities of the parties in the merger, as well as the question of resources needed to stimulate local consultations so as to guarantee even the acceptance of any formula for the emergence of the leaders of APC, the emerging reality is that potential candidates at state, local governments and ward levels are imposing themselves as APC-gatekeepers. Unfortunately, in most cases, party leaders at these levels have submitted themselves to these potential candidates.

In the circumstance, it may just be a matter of time for our APC to just emerge as a shadow PDP. In which case, from formation, APC may be dominated by mediocre leaders who will not be interested in running the party based on rules, conventions and knowledge. The only most important qualification will be money which will confer the authority to manipulate. Since money is a most important qualification, responsibility in government will just be the needed opportunity to convert public treasury into personal holding. Once that happens, the culture of corruption, violence and dictatorship will be the natural outcome. Given such a situation therefore Nigerians may as well be ready to regret voting out PDP. Depending on the extent of compromise of basic democratic values, we may also find ourselves missing PDP government just like today we are in some ways missing the regime of Gen. Sani Abacha and Chief Olusegun Obasanjo on accounts of poor performances of successive governments.

It is important that these issues are openly discussed with the objective of focusing the APC merger process to do the right thing. Nigerians deserve an opposition party committed to basic democratic values around which the conducts of candidates and public officials can be regulated. Nigerians are fed up with parties that are controlled by candidates and public officials. We, as citizens, are really exasperated by the existence of political parties that only promote corruption and the plunder of public resources. Nigeria is in desperate need of a party that will promote service and the development all parts of the country irrespective of religion, ethnicity or any form of differences. It is clear that APC present a potential of being a strong opposition party but it is coming with a big risk of being comprised, weakened and eventually emerging as another election platform controlled by candidates for elections who will be driven by all the negative vices of ethnicity, religion, etc. in order to win elections by any means possible. This will represent a huge national political disaster.

Can this disaster be prevented? What is it that we can do to prevent this disaster? To the extent that the merger negotiations are still ongoing, APC presents an opportunity. What is needed is for Nigerians to aggressively engage the leaders of the party and persuade them to do the right thing. Often, it is not the big issues that will produce the right results. It is the combinations of the smaller issues that assist in producing the right results. Given the need to facilitate the emergence of united structures at states, local governments and ward levels, it is incumbent on our leaders negotiating the merger to come up with a complete new, all-inclusive and democratic approach for the evolution of the newly elected APC leaders out of what we have today. No doubt, there have been so many concerns around this but hardly new thinking. All discussions are tailored towards producing an interim leadership based on some formula. Once that happens, the party risk losing the needed democratic credentials. In fact, at all levels, the arrival of the party will be greeted with sharp division and internal fights and at the end completely neutralise any electoral potential.

One of the recommendations to take care of this major problem and place the party on a democratic pedestal is to seek to start building the party from lower structures. This will mean rather than appoint interim executives based on some sharing formula for the new party, can all members of current executives of the merging parties constitute themselves into the caucus of the party at all levels. In which case, basic guides about delegating responsibilities for Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer, etc. can be democratically resolved within the context of such a structure. This will then guarantee that all members of the current leadership of the merging parties are integrated as part of the leadership of the new party. With such a structure, internal disagreement can be better managed and since already the draft harmonised constitution of APC has envisioned the existence of caucuses at all levels, they can then form the starting point of the organisation of the new party.

This will then require that clearly defined responsibilities are given to the caucuses. A good recommendation will be taking steps to unite all party members, starting with stakeholders who are elected representatives and those who served as candidates for past elections. In the context of these responsibilities States and Local Government structures of all our parties can be mandated to organise meetings and begin to prepare everyone for the merger. These caucuses could also begin to explore issues of strategies for membership mobilisation, including fundraising to implement merger activities.

This will no doubt go a long way in boosting the democratic potential of APC. Somehow it is not being addressed because there is a strong belief in our leaders negotiating the merger that the most important aspect in the merger is their ability to reach agreement at national level. If the experience of CPC is anything to go by, agreement or consensus among national leaders is not a guarantee for the emergence of strong democratic leaders at local levels. The truth is that strong democratic leaders at local levels can only be guarantee if there are very good framework that enthrone orderly conducts leading to the emergence of leadership. The absence of this is cancerous and will eventually lead to the collapse of the party, starting with dramatic electoral defeats. These were signals that CPC experiences in 2011 elections highlighted. Ordinarily therefore, it should be expected that our leaders need not to be reminded about this fact. Well, if just to be absolutely certain, this should awaken our leaders on the need to be steadfast.

Part of the reasons why attention is not being paid to states, local governments and ward levels is because there is too much concentration around who will emerge as presidential candidate of the party. This is an area where credit must be given to Gen. Buhari, Asiwaju Tinubu, Alh. Shekarau and all national leaders of the merging parties for moderating supporters such that the issue of presidential candidate of the party is yet to become a priority. However, it is important that we also recognise that although it is not directly on the negotiating table, it is very much around such that almost every person on the negotiating table is constantly relating with virtually every issue based on the presidential prism. In fact, there are many members of the merger committee relating with virtually every issue based on positioning strategy in order to gain recognition or advantage in one way or the other. As a result, it was therefore very convenient to ignore our local structures.

Sincerely, our leaders must work based on a strategy to produce a party leadership that is stronger and more powerful than any government or elected official the party will produce based on the capacity to command moral authority. One of the obvious limitations of the current merger negotiations so far is that moral authority is not a consideration at all. On account of which issues of public perception and support have been almost jettisoned. To some extent, it is also a reflection of over confidence. There is hardly anyway these issues can be discussed without reference to the conduct of our leaders. In some ways, although both Gen. Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu have moderated supporters not to flag up issue of presidential ticket, there is a way in which it is a matter that in future be determined with reference to the two of them. As a result, the current party leadership permutation hardly factors them or their role in the leadership.

So long as the role of Gen. Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu in party leadership is being ignored, the possibility of undermining the democratic base of APC is very high. This is because there is no way these two individuals will be in the party as ordinary members. Any interest they expressed will naturally elicit strong currency and therefore it is very necessary to factor this reality based on clear delegation of responsibility. In some ways, the existence of structures with good measure of responsibilities in the harmonised constitution of APC provides the basis for shared authority by all our leaders. A good reference point is the existence of the position of National Chairman and Chairman Board of Trustee (BOT). Either Gen. Buhari or Asiwaju Tinubu can be the National Chairman (not interim) or BOT Chairman and vice versa. And since we have ANPP as the third party in the merger, they can produce the National Secretary. Between Alh. Shekarau and Chief Onu, anyone of them can be saddled with the responsibility of being the National Secretary.

The reality is that no one among these leaders can dictate to the other and it is almost certain no one person can take decision without the consent of the other. Each of these leaders has capacity to veto any decision. Therefore consultation among leadership will be paramount. In addition, no government produced by the party at any level can dictate to anyone of these leaders. In other words, the party leaders will wield far more influence than any elected representatives, on account of which every government produced by the party can be subordinated to party control. As a result, all that ordinary members can look forward to will be to secure the support of any of these leaders and the party. In so many ways, this will guarantee contest within the party, which is what democracy is all about. The danger is if clear internal rules are not provided for the contest.

How then will the issue of presidential candidate then be resolved? This should have a life of its own. It will not be an easy task. The starting point will be for our leaders to start debating the quality of people to qualify as potential presidential candidates. This should also be cascaded down to gubernatorial and legislative candidates. Situations where individuals seek to position themselves based on some loyalty permutations is unhealthy, undemocratic and portend serious dangers. If APC is to come through as a sincere democratic project, all decisions including ones producing leadership must be founded on good parameters informed by consensus across party leaders.

It is important that we are able to humble our leaders so that they don't mismanage the merger negotiations and create a situation where APC is founded on mediocrity, ignorance, money politics and manipulation, which has so far constituted a strong bottleneck to our national democratic development. Mediocrity, ignorance, money politics and manipulation will only continue to entrench corruption, violence, dictatorship and hopelessness. Should our leaders represented by Gen. Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu fail to ensure that the merger negotiations produce a strong, united democratic party at all levels, history will hold them accountable for whatever will be the result of governance and leadership failures of today.

Salihu Moh. Lukman
smlukman@gmail.com

 Saharareporters.com

Benghazi Attack: FBI Releases Photos Of 3 Men In Connection With Attack On U.S. Consulate In Libya

The FBI released images of three men it wants to question in relation to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012. U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, and three other Americans were killed in the assault.
On its website, the FBI explains:

We are seeking information about three individuals who were on the grounds of the U.S. Special Mission when it was attacked. These individuals may be able to provide information to help in the investigation.

If you have any information regarding the men in the photos, text or email BenghaziTips@ic.fbi.gov or submit information confidentially at https://forms.fbi.gov/benghazi-en.
HuffingtonPost