Sunday, 15 September 2013

E-X-P-O-S-E-D: Jonathan offers $12 billion to governors to sustain loyalty – Activist alleges

And Victory: How The Birmingham Church Bombing Revealed America's Ugly Truths

On Sunday, Sept. 15, 1963, in Birmingham, Ala., at 10:22 a.m., a bomb exploded at the 16th Street Baptist Church. The blast, erupting from the church's east side, sprayed mortar and bricks, caving in the building's walls.

Of the nearly 200 congregants inside, attending Sunday school classes and preparing for the 11 a.m. service, about 22 were injured. But perhaps most notably, four little girls -- three 14-year-olds and one 11-year-old -- were killed, putting the bombing among the most well-known and heartbreaking tragedies in the fight for civil rights in America's Deep South.

In a bittersweet irony, the Birmingham church bombing catapulted the civil rights movement to a new stage, and ultimately helped influence the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But the immediate effect of the deaths, in the face of vaunted American ideas like justice and liberty, was to reveal a country that had refused to take an honest look in the mirror.

For centuries, society had relegated African descendants to second-class citizenship, and as a result, created a complicated perception of black physicality. The subjects of fear and fascination since their first interaction with Europeans, blacks, over time were dehumanized and subjected to unjust treatment as a result.

"Black bodies are complex signs that represent something both appealing and repulsive for the society in which we dwell," Anthony B. Pinn explains in his essay, "DuBois' Souls: Thoughts on "Veiled" Bodies and the Study of Black Religion."

The images that circulated right after the Birmingham church bombing not only put the hypocrisy of American liberty into the spotlight, it also humanized African-Americans. But while the pictures of the destruction that killed the four girls helped fight the long-held perception at that time that black bodies are less-valuable, it is a battle that still carries on today.

Chains Of The Past

One main reason it was possible for Ku Klux Klansmen Robert Chambliss and his accomplices to carry out the bombing was the sociological tension created by centuries of American slavery, said Sherwin Bryant, associate professor of African American Studies and History and director of the Center for African American History at Northwestern University.

"Western modernity has largely been at war with black subjects," Bryant told The Huffington Post. "It has mostly been at war with, and seeking to subjugate and dominate, people of African descent."

The institution of slavery ultimately developed a need for white colonists to establish dominance over black bodies, which largely still exists today, he said. Race and racism are byproducts of that slavery.

"Slavery had everything to do with, first and foremost, a kind of social and political status that one had, or more precisely was denied in the colony," he said. "What happens in Atlantic slavery is slavery becomes tethered, almost exclusively, to Africans and the very idea of blackness and particular kinds of labor, the very kinds of labor that no one would want to do. So as those things become practices tethered to blackness and African descendants, or black bodies, there you begin to see the way in which slavery was a part of making race."

But the abolishment of slavery and the end of the Reconstruction Era created a kind of anxiety among whites about the position of power, he said. That resulted in a desire to control the activities of African-American citizens through acts of terror.

"What you have cropping up, after the federal government sort of abandons black Southerners, you basically have white vigilante violence that begins to emerge to subjugate blacks," Bryant said. "There’s a certain attempt to subjugate and keep black folks in place, and one of the main ways that was attained was through black terror."

Empathy v. Embarrassment

Examples of this terrorism ranged from calling a grown black man "boy," or refusing to call a married black woman "Mrs.," to violent rapes and lynchings -- or the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church. But how does society justify such inhumane treatment? The answer lies in whether the victim is seen as a human being.

"Racism is the most powerful force that can completely erase the humanity of human beings,"Dorothy Roberts, a law and sociology professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, told The Huffington Post. "It’s a perverse sickening combination of very deeply embedded assumptions and experiences, but also the stake that people have in their privileges."

These psychological effects of racism made it possible for large groups of whites, women and children included, to gather to watch lynchings -- a horrific scene captured in photos throughout history and recounted in James Baldwin's fictional stories in "Going to Meet the Man."

"The only way they could do that is if they didn’t see that person as a human being," Roberts said. "Torture is the end result of racism. That one human being can torture and justify it because they don’t see that victim as a human being, and racism makes it possible to do that."

But the lack of empathy among those crowds is a far cry from the feelings that photos from the church bombing evoked in Americans nationwide. Those dark images and what they represented were in stark contrast to the droves of whites who stood with black activists fighting for equality.

As images of brutality against peaceful protesters and unjust killings circulated both nationally and internationally, pressure mounted for the U.S. to respond. However, Bryant said he's unsure whether empathy played a larger role than embarrassment during the civil rights movement.

"One of the things that really helped the civil rights movement to break through, was the fact that the United States was fighting a war against fascism around the globe and yet at the same time treating its black citizens as less than human," he said.

"So being embarrassed and called out on the world stage, that sort of inconsistency, questions of human rights violations being raised on the world stage, that is what began to help turn the tide for civil rights. I don’t think that it was 'empathy,' but a particular kind of shaming, or showcasing the absurdity of liberty, the absurdity of the American democracy and the ways in which the black experience actually gives lie to that kind of rhetoric and discourse."

"That has been our reality, empathy has not been our reality."

"We All Did It"

In the aftermath of the bombing, the city of Birmingham and then-Alabama Gov. George Wallace feigned attempts to track down the perpetrators. But to many proponents of the civil rights movement, the suspects were only a small part of a much bigger problem.

The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. told Wallace the young girls' deaths were partly the governor's fault.

"The blood of four little children … is on your hands," he said. "Your irresponsible and misguided actions have created in Birmingham and Alabama the atmosphere that has induced continued violence and now murder.”

The day after the bombing, the Milwaukee Sentinel published a story effectively scolding the nation, saying that "the Birmingham church bombing should serve to goad the conscience. The deaths ... in a sense are on the hands of each of us.”

Also the day after the bombing, a white Alabama lawyer, Charles Morgan Jr., delivered a speech against prejudice and injustice at a lunch meeting of the Birmingham's Young Business Men's Club, and was forced to leave the city as a result.

Four little girls were killed in Birmingham yesterday. A mad, remorseful worried community asks, "Who did it? Who threw that bomb? Was it a Negro or a white?" The answer should be, "We all did it." Every last one of us is condemned for that crime and the bombing before it and a decade ago. We all did it.

In 1963, Addie Mae Collins, Denise McNair, Carole Robertson and Cynthia Wesley became soldiers in a war they didn't fully understand, and died for a cause beyond the reach of their young minds.

But the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church, and the deaths of four innocent little girls forced Americans to confront the ideology that black lives were not as valuable as white lives -- something the nation still grapples with today.

"You might argue that we won the war, but we lost the peace in some ways. Many of the civil rights gains have been gutted and marginalized, and it really is difficult to get a handle on where we are," Bryant said. "There’s a way in which white privilege continues under a veneer of black liberty."

HuffingtonPost

Ogiame Title: How Olu Of Warri’s Dethronement Was Averted

шаблоны RocketTheme
Форум вебмастеров

Fresh facts have emerged to explain why the Olu of Warri, Ogiame Atuwatse II, accepted to revert to the Ogiame title which he had renounced last week because it means "King of the river". Palace

sources disclosed over the Weekend that it was the Delta State governor, Dr Emmanuel Uduaghan, who mounted pressure on the eminent monarch to rescind his decision in the interest of peace in his kingdom.

The Itsekiri Warri Kingdom was in turmoil over the decision of the traditional ruler to stop performing the traditional rites of his stool because they are fetish, paganism, idolatry and contrary to his Christian faith.

Youths in the kingdom protested the action and shut the palace gate and asked the monarch to resign the office of "Ogiame". For four days, the palace and the premises of the Olu of Warri were under the guard of armed policemen deployed to the area to stop the protesters and maintain law and order on the directive of the governor.

Uduaghan, who hails from Abigborodo community in Itsekiri kingdom, had returned from Abuja to Warri to appeal to the youths to allow the traditional council to amicably settle the matter.

Before the monarch accepted to honour the Itsekiri traditional culture, a last "white paper" which was to be endorsed by two-thirds of the traditional council of chiefs demanding the dethronement of the monarch came to the knowledge of the governor, who immediately called on the prominent title holders to suspend the action and promised to hold the final peace talks with the Olu of Warri before any drastic measure could be taken.

According to the palace source who sought anonymity, the governor called on Ogiame Atuwatse II and informed him that if he refused to rescind his position on the title of "Ogiame" within two hours of his talks with him, "the traditional council of chiefs would dethrone him through congress".

After the governor's phone conversation with the monarch, it was learnt that the monarch agreed to rescind his decision and High Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor was mandated to brief the press on the development.
Thereafter, Lori-Ogbebor led leaders of 112 Itsekiri communities to announce that the traditional ruler had recanted and the crisis had been resolved.

She said the monarch had a wrong perception of the meaning of Ogiame.

Since inception, the Olu dynasty has been linked with Christianity. From the son of Olu Esigie I, the first Olu to embrace Christianity was baptized in the Roman Catholic Church during the missionary era. Christianity was established in Ode-Itsekiri by the Catholics in 1570 AD. He sent his first son to Portugal to study Theology.

iPaidABribe

Jonathan goes for broke

Home » Columnists » Jonathan goes for broke

by: Idowu Akinlotan in Columnists, Idowu Akinlotan, Sunday 23 hours ago

Last Wednesday, President Goodluck Jonathan suddenly and unexpectedly axed nine of his ministers, all of whom, it appeared, were appointed through those now ranged against him in political battle. It is instructive that when the president was finally persuaded to substantially reshuffle his cabinet, he did so in defence of private political objectives and in ways that baffled presidency watchers. We do not know whether Dr Jonathan appreciates the irony that dogs his presidency; but to many of us it is clear that whenever he projects power it is mainly to advance ignoble causes. Indeed, I add that anytime the president yields to his often overpowering inclination to do wrong, it is in spite of the loftiness of the cause before him and to the detriment of his imposing and outsized office. It was with characteristic surliness, for instance, that he deployed the military to crush the January 2012 nationwide fuel revolt when all he needed to do was placate the electorate and gain political capital as he grudgingly reduced the price of a litre of fuel from N145 to N97. In last week’s cabinet reshuffle, Dr Jonathan adds imprecision to surliness.

Perhaps tired of being punched and wrong-footed by his enemies, Dr Jonathan finally felt compelled to respond in a way that has left his aides struggling to rationalise what is obviously a baffling political move. Except newspaper reports quote presidency sources wrongly, it is known that the president and his aides are still negotiating with the Group of Seven governors and others sponsoring or inspiring them into intra-party revolt. But by moving against the G-7 nominees in his cabinet, it is not clear which the president values more: to root out those he suspects are disloyal to him; or to reconcile with the G-7 and restore peace and order in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). His priorities, however, seem already self-evident. It is obvious he intends to continue indulging his counterproductive pugnacity, a contentiousness that has been given fillip by the gerontocrats surrounding, captivating and seducing him to war. The president has enormous powers, they say, and it is both presidential and fitting to use them in such a manner that no one will be left with the mistaken belief that Dr Jonathan does not understand the nuances of power.

Dr Jonathan does not interpret the grievances of the G-7 governors as proceeding from their exasperation with the leadership style of the PDP chairman, Bamanga Tukur. Nor does he think those grievances, even if they were substantial or potent enough, were genuine. Indeed, with the presence of the intrepid Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State in the ranks of the so-called rebels, the president is sufficiently persuaded to believe that rebellion, rather than grievances, was the bane of the party. The president also gives the impression, without saying so, that the rebellion is driven by a combination of irreverence (some call it rudeness), opposition machinations and deliberate contempt for his person and ability, all of which are summed up in the unflattering and insulting opinion that he is unfit to rule. But rebellion, as he and his aides also secretly hold and whisper in pianissimo tones, should be crushed rather than mollified.

When political battles are cast in military terms and symbols, such as Dr Jonathan and his brash aides have done, it portends danger for both the state and the combatants. For even harmless feints, which former President Olusegun Obasanjo is besotted to in his uncalculating and continuing obsession for relevance, can easily become a gritty test of wills from which it is impossible to climb down. Dr Jonathan has faced many tests since he assumed power some four years ago, but none of those tests has produced in him the maturity, reflection, astuteness and perspicuity great leaders acquire after passing through trials. On the contrary, every notable test he has faced and every dubious victory he has achieved has made Dr Jonathan more intransigent, less contemplative and given to romanticising brute power. Having thus allowed himself to be persuaded that he faced war against the rebel governors, and after having cast himself obliquely as a war leader who needed to take decisive and powerful steps to rein in dissent, Dr Jonathan has decided to go for broke.

While it is incontestable that the many haphazard and unthinking policies of Alhaji Tukur spurred rebellion in the party, and while the president was more careless in overseeing the affairs of the party than he has deliberately courted trouble and disaffection, it is fair to say that his current temper is a reaction to the impertinent goading of the G-7 governors. By coming out with an alternative power structure on the day the PDP held its special convention in Abuja, and doing so with such secrecy as ridiculed, if not humiliated, the presidency and its coercive agencies, few failed to notice that the G-7 governors had also gone for broke. Given the stiffness of their conditions for peace in the party, it seems inconceivable that the rebellious governors left room for any peaceful settlement now or in the future.

There is little doubt that the aggrieved G-7 governors drew first blood, and the president had to respond whether he liked it or not. What is in dispute, however, is whether in the circumstances the president has reacted with the decorum becoming his office and the restraint and circumspection he has claimed for himself for so long. By any standard, sacking nine ministers in one fell swoop is not only excessive and inexcusable, it is indicative of the president’s poor judgement in cabinet selection. It is also doubtful whether Dr Jonathan can convince himself, let alone the country, that the ministers he sacked were either incompetent or underperforming, or whether they were the only guilty ones. More crucially, even if he wishes to assemble a war cabinet for Poll 2015, as some now speculate, it is hard to see from where he would recruit those field officers who can deliver the easy victory he covets and who would not succumb to the rabidness and thoughtlessness of his man Fridays. Yet, it is well known in Abuja that it is his leadership style, not to say his lack of visionary depth, that predisposes his presidency to repeated mishaps, humiliation and crushing defeats.

Any rebellion, such as the one triggered by the G-7 governors, is not strange in politics. In fact many established democracies, which run the parliamentary system, have witnessed the kind of political rebellion that is making Dr Jonathan froth at the mouth with rage. There will, therefore, always be rebellion, and presidents and political leaders must have the common sense and moderation to tackle it when it arises. Sadly, Dr Jonathan has approached the rebellion in his party with unseemly and demeaning comportment. Because he and his predecessors unwisely personified party leadership and have accreted enormous party powers to the presidency, it has been difficult for him and his predecessors to confine party disagreements to party boundaries. Instead, they have formed the bad habit of transferring disagreements to the presidency and foisting a needless crisis on the country, thereby threatening not only good governance, or indeed governance of any sort, but also peace and stability.

Encouraged by sycophants, jobholders and some insensitive South-South political leaders and herdsmen of jaundiced votes, Dr Jonathan has embraced a fanatical and unyielding style of crisis management. We always knew he was not a democrat, nor, like Chief Obasanjo, can ever be, but his ham-fisted manner of conflict resolution and his monarchical approach to general politics have so polluted and prejudiced the atmosphere that for the first time, this column has started to fear that the foundation of Nigeria is threatened. The threat, it must be reiterated, is not because there is crisis at all, but because the men in power lack the reasoned agility to respond in ways that will reassure everyone that those in power are rational, patriotic and civilised people. One of the variables in the crisis is the 2015 presidential poll. Dr Jonathan, of course, has the right to contest in 2015, and that right can be advanced and defended intelligently; but his opponents also have the right to discourage him as much as they can without being subjected to unconstitutional, not to say autocratic, measures.

I suspect that no one but fate itself can restrain Dr Jonathan. He will fight everywhere and every person, and he will spare nothing, not even the constitution, in waging his self-inflicted war. Democracy and its spinoffs are dispensable to him, for after all, he has never shown he understands what they mean. He has a vague notion of the greatness of the country he presides over, but that notion does not include its peace, stability, growth or superiority over other African nations. He knows a thing or two about what the presidency stands for, but his perception is coloured by the traditional African system of hero-worship, superstition and idolatry. This was why, for instance, he and his men took umbrage when his opponents described his style as kindergarten. So, let us brace ourselves for the worst or be prepared valiantly to reclaim our democracy, or what is left of it, from the hands of charlatans. Dr Jonathan, it is clear, is incensed by the seemingly harmless effort to limit him to a one-term president. He will do everything to destroy his opponents, and if need be, the country, not only because he has taken the fight personally, but also strangely because, for a 20th century man, he views politics and leadership from an antediluvian prism.

TheNation

What Does Obasanjo Really Want?

0101 SK-backpagex.jpg - 0101 SK-backpagex.jpg

Simon Kolawole Live!: By Simon Kolawole, Email: simon.kolawole@thisdaylive.com

With former President Olusegun Obasanjo, you buy one and get one free. Problem is: you never know what you are getting. You could be getting a peacemaker and a troublemaker in one bundle. I am always conflicted trying to decode Obasanjo’s personality. One moment, I find myself describing him as the best president Nigeria has ever had. The next moment, I am cursing him as the worst thing that has ever happened to us. The best of humans live with their own contradictions and underbellies, but Obasanjo easily stands out, perhaps because of the prominent role he has played in our nationhood - and, more so, the way he keeps intruding into our lives.

Here is a sampler. Having been raising the hand of President Goodluck Jonathan during the 2011 presidential campaign, Obasanjo retired to his hotel room one night and sent for Malam Nasir el-Rufai, an ally of Gen. Muhammadu Buhari. According to el-Rufai in his tell-all book, Accidental Public Servant, Obasanjo lamented that Jonathan was not going to make a good president. He asked el-Rufai to tell Buhari that he was ready to support him against Jonathan. Obasanjo reportedly suggested that Buhari should pick Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala as his running mate, then go into an alliance with the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and offer Asiwaju Bola Tinubu the Senate Presidency. Obasanjo, el-Rufai said, promised to get some “wealthy people” to fund Buhari’s campaign.

What happened next? Unknown to onlookers, Obasanjo’s grouse with Jonathan was that his daughter, Iyabo, had been denied the PDP senatorial ticket for Ogun Central, and his sudden support for Buhari was an attempt to exact his pound of flesh - or blackmail the PDP into giving his daughter the ticket. It was obviously not an attempt to save Nigeria from Jonathan’s “weaknesses” as he claimed. El-Rufai noted that immediately a curious court judgement gave the PDP ticket to Iyabo, Obasanjo swiftly changed his tone and began to canvass that they should help Jonathan work on his “weaknesses”. That is the real Obasanjo. Those who know him will testify that he is eternally self-centred. He believes the world revolves around him.

It is believed that the crisis currently rocking the PDP has the signature of Obasanjo. Nobody knows where he is going yet. Even the people working with him cannot swear that they know his game plan. By the way, I love the PDP crisis. Having ruled Nigeria since 1999, the party has grown too big for its own good. There are many states in Nigeria where PDP is the only party. Other parties only exist on pieces of paper or in INEC’s computer. Sadly, the PDP goes into every general election virtually assured that it would win. Getting the PDP ticket is as good as winning the election. That is not good for our democracy. I believe politicians must fight and sweat for every vote. That way, they know the worth of victory. That can actually make our democracy work for everyone.

But this PDP crisis, unfortunately, is not about how to make this democracy work for everyone. Let us look at two of the characters at the centre of the drama: Obasanjo and General Ibrahim Babangida. Not so long ago, Obasanjo described Babangida as a “fool at 70” for criticising his (Obasanjo’s) management of the Nigeria’s oil wealth for eight years. Obasanjo said: “If Babangida had decided, on becoming a septuagenarian, that he will be a fool, I think one should probably [not] answer a fool because you may also become like him.” In kind, Babangida replied: “Calling me ‘a fool at 70’, especially by a man reportedly and allegedly accused by his own son of incest, is at best a compliment. Nigerians surely know who is truly a fool or the greatest fool of this century.” Both of them are now suddenly in bed together, fooling around, but I refuse to be fooled.

What about Obasanjo and his former vice-president, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar? They were engaged in a very public and bitter feud but they are now dancing to the same tune again. I don’t need to repeat the words they have exchanged publicly in the last seven years, but I’m sure Nigerians still vividly remember Obasanjo’s popular line, “I dey laugh o”, when informed that Atiku had been chosen as the Northern consensus candidate for the PDP presidential primary in January 2011. Laughter unlimited! Remember Rt. Hon. Rotimi Amaechi? In 2007, Obasanjo viciously dropped him as the PDP governorship candidate in Rivers State, saying publicly that his candidature had “K-leg”. It took judicial activism for Amaechi to be made governor. Obasanjo and Amaechi are now in the same PDP faction, but I refuse to be fooled.

Obasanjo, luckily, is coming across to Nigerians as a peacemaker and an icon of democracy. He is the statesman trying to resolve the PDP crisis! Obasanjo as a peacemaker and icon of democracy is nothing but comedy. During his time as president, between 1999 and 2007, he removed three PDP chairmen and saw to the ouster of three Senate presidents. He illegally removed two governors under the pretext of declaring state of emergency. He watched with pleasure as his boys set Anambra and Oyo states on fire and capped it all by withdrawing the security aides of Governor Chris Ngige. If Obasanjo is your hero of democracy, I am sorry for you.

Now that he is reportedly rallying a faction of the PDP against Jonathan, you have to ask yourself: what is motivating Obasanjo? What does he really want? Is he genuinely trying to atone for his Yar’Adua “error” by helping to return power to the North in 2015? Will he backtrack if Andy Uba is given the PDP governorship ticket in Anambra and the revocation of the Lagos-Ibadan expressway concession is reversed? Will he pull back at the last minute again and ask his followers to “manage Jonathan’s weaknesses” when he finally gets what he wants? With Obasanjo, you don’t know what you are going to get. Just be careful. You have been warned.

And Four Other Things...

WAR-MONGERING
The threat by Niger Delta militant leader, Mujahid Asari Dokubo, that there would be war if President Goodluck Jonathan is not returned to power in 2015 is, to put it mildly, reckless. The militants can claim that they are only reacting to the sentiments expressed by some Northern elders that the North must take back Aso Rock in 2015. They can even claim that Jonathan, like his predecessors, is entitled to two terms. But, ladies and gentlemen, what’s war got to do with it? Jonathan himself has told us several times that his ambition is not worth the blood of anyone. I am still expecting a strong-worded condemnation of Dokubo’s threat from the Presidency...

LAGOS 2015
I was appalled when I read a statement by the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) asking that the next governor of Lagos State should be a Christian. The chairman of Lagos PFN, Alex Bamgbala, said: “Christians have supported the two Muslim administrations in the state since 1999 and it is only fair that they give room for their Christian counterparts to be elected in 2015.” This proposition, which started as a joke some years again, is getting out of hand. Since when did we start voting on the basis of religion in Lagos State? Do they want to turn Lagos to another Kaduna State? Are we going backward or forward? Who is behind this idea?

MOKOLA BRIDGE
Are you following the controversy over the Mokola Bridge, Ibadan, Oyo State, constructed by Governor Abiola Ajimobi? Boy, O Boy! I have never seen anything like this in my life. Ever since it was inaugurated months ago, it has been the only major topic of discussion in the state. The government and the opposition have continued to trade words over the length, the capacity, the cost and, now, the person who conceived the idea. The discussion happens on a daily, even hourly, basis. I have been forced to ask if Ibadan people have no interesting things to discuss apart from a bridge. You would think they are discussing a space station or mission to Mars.

HELP FOR KESHI
My suggestion last week that Stephen Keshi needs some “technical help” if the Super Eagles are going to make any impact at the 2014 World Cup generated more interest than I intended. No, I am not saying the NFF should employ a foreign boss for him. Keshi will remain the boss, but on his own, he can bring in someone to help him with game-reading. World-class coaches do that. I have seen the Super Eagles struggle in some matches that a little technical tinkering could see them win. They could have beaten Spain at the Confederations Cup after dominating long periods. But that one thing was missing. And, remember, they could only defeat Tahiti!

ThisDay

TUKUR AT 78: The life of an embattled PDP National Chairman

on September 15, 2013 / in Politics 9:07 am / Comments

By HENRY UMORU
This is the story of how the National Chairman of People’s Democratic Party, PDP, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, who operates from the Wadata Plaza, Wuse Zone 5, carry out his activities daily, with a cursory look at his actions after the August 31 Special National Convention of the party where the former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who hails from the state with him, stormed out alongside six governors and later formed a ‘New PDP’.
Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, who hails from Adamawa State, North-east, was born on September, 15, 1935. He was governor of old Gongola State between October 1983 and December 1983. He also served as Minister for Industries and Chief Executive Officer, Nigerian Ports Authority, NPA before his election as PDP National Chairman, March 24, 2012.
Tukur, Tafidan Adamawa, was also the Executive President of the African Business Roundtable and Chairman of the NEPAD Business Group.
Before the March 24, 2012 PDP National Convention where he emerged for the plum office, zoned to the North-east, there were aspirants like Professor Rufai Alkali; the former Acting National Secretary, Dr. Musa Babayo; Gambo Lawan; Ibrahim Shehu Birma; former Bauchi State governor, Adamu Muazu; among others, who came out very strongly, but were forced to step down.
Since he became the National Chairman, however, it has not been rosy for Tukur, especially with the stiff opposition he faced from the governors, some stakeholders and leaders of the party to the National Working Committee (NWC), led by him.

PDP Chairman, Bamanga Tukur

Amid the opposition came the report of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, which picked holes in the PDP 2012 Convention, alleging faults in the emergence of the NWC members but cleared him, the National Financial Secretary, Elder Bolaji Anani, the then National Secretary, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, and the then National Auditor, Bode Mustapha. The INEC report forced all the NWC members except Tukur and two other members, Anani and Mustapha, to resign. Oyinlola had earlier been kicked out following a court order which sacked him.
But the opposition against Tukur was not totally unexpected. As one of the founding fathers of the PDP, his mission has been to rescue the party, to return it to the people by allowing them to be part and parcel of decision making of the party. When he became the National Chairman,Tukur had vowed to turn around the ruling party through a 12-point agenda of action which he submitted to the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the PDP.
He promised that the agenda for transforming the PDP and Nigeria would be operated religiously with stakeholders playing major roles, such that the effect of the agenda would be felt across Nigeria, Africa and the rest of the world within a 12-month calendar period.
The Tafidan Adamawa, who noted that the era of party supremacy was back, however, stressed that all elected members of the PDP would be uphold the programmes and manifestoes of the party in national interest.
The agenda, according to the PDP Chairman, would rest on Triple-R, Triple-E and Triple-D and this would offer a road map in solving the nation’s problems including terrorism, energy crisis, insecurity and corruption, adding that the Triple-R agenda would start with a genuine reconciliation process for members to embrace the party and its programmes while aggrieved members would be made to have a sense of belonging. The reformation of the PDP and a process of total rebuilding based on equity and justice would also hold paramount in the overall agenda, even as he said that the programme on Triple-D agenda would center on Defence, Diplomacy and Dialogue. He added that the ground work he had made on the agenda had convinced him that the endemic challenges of insecurity and scanty foreign investments in Nigeria would soon become a thing of the past.
However, midway into the August 31 Special National Convention, Tukur got a rude shock at the convention ground as the PDP split into two with former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and six northern governors staging a walk out to later address a press conference on the formation of a ‘New PDP’ while a former acting National Chairman of the party, Alhaji Kawu Baraje, was named the National Chairman, Dr Sam Sam Jaja, the Deputy National Chairman, and Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, the National Secretary.
Atiku and the governors were at the venue of the convention until 2.45 pm that Saturday when the names of candidates to be voted for were read and it was discovered that the name of the immediate past Deputy National Chairman, Jaja, had been removed, leaving only the former National Organising Secretary, Prince Uche Secondus, as the sole candidate for the office of Deputy National Chairman.
The governors in the ‘New PDP’ are Sule Lamido of Jigawa; Abdulfatah Ahmed of Kwara; Aliyu Babangida of Niger; Aliyu Magatakarda Wamakko of Sokoto; Musa Rabiu Kwankwaso of Kano; and Murtala Nyako of Adamawa. Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State, under suspension from the PDP, immediately joined the ‘New PDP’.
Others in the ‘New PDP’ are deputy governors of Sokoto, Murktar Shagari; Abdullahi Umar Ganduje of Kano; Ahmed Musa Ibeto of Niger state; former governor of Kwara State, Senator Shaaba Lafiagi; former governor of Nasarawa state, Senator Abdullahi Adamu; Senator Magnus Abe; chairman, House Committee on finance, Honourable Abdumumini Jibrin; Honourable Farouk Lawan, and many other members of the National Assembly, among others.
Since the split in the ‘PDP family’, there have been moves by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, former Military President Ibrahim Babangida, ex PDP National Chairmen Ahmadu Ali and Senator Barnabas Gemade, as well as other elders of the party to reconcile the warring factions.
Meanwhile, Tukur, 78, seems to be weathering the storm. He still resumes at Wadata Plaza between 10 and 11am everyday except when he is out of town like on Wednesday when he had to travel to Calabar, Cross River State. But there are also some days that he drives to Wadata plaza around 9am especially when high profile visitors come around. On such days, people know as his convoy races in from Sky Memorial Shopping complex with heavily armed policemen accompanying him and, once he drops from the car, he goes to his office on the third floor. The moment Tukur enters his office, he will ask his police men to leave while his Principal Secretary, George Korgba, briefs him.
Other aides will take their turns to brief him.
Thereafter, he attends to visitors. Members of the PDP NWC have assess to Tukur’s office any time. Then, there are some powerful Nigerians that he must call and they include President Goodluck Jonathan, Vice President Namadi Sambo and a close friend, Professor Emeka Enejere.
He does not eat in the office.
Tukur is said to be settling down to work with his new deputy, Secondus; the National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh; National Woman Leader, Mrs Kema Chikwe; National Youth Leader, Abdullahi Maibasira; Deputy National Secretary, Onwe Solomon Onwe, among others.
To keep the Wadata Plaza busy, there have been solidarity visits. Conference of PDP State Chairmen from the thirty-six states and the Federal Capital Territory, on Monday, were on hand to endorse President Goodluck Jonathan for the 2015 presidential election during one of such solidarity visits, citing his transformation agenda as reason for that, just as they also passed a vote of confidence on Tukur.
According to the Chairmen, members of the party must remain steadfast as there was no reason to panic against the backdrop that “ the transformation programme of the PDP-led administration will surely take us to 2015 and beyond.”
Responding, Tukur, who noted that the challenges confronting the PDP were not beyond solution, said that nobody wants to invest without profit, adding, “Whatever disagreement that may show up in the party is not beyond resolution. If we bring a proposal and the majority believes that proposal should be shelved, amended or discarded, so be it”.
Thanking the state PDP Chairmen for ensuring that the principle of internal democracy was upheld in the state chapters, he urged them to always ensure consensus in their states, even as the National Chairman said that it was critical to guarantee the delivery of true democracy dividends to the people and the relevance of the party at all times.
Tukur, who maintained that the PDP was the only party that could guarantee the unity of the country, said that the party believes in freedom of expression irrespective of whatever situation it may find itself, adding, “It does not really matter, democracy to me, means that the majority will have their way but the minority will have their say.
“We believe that every member of the party has the right to express himself. Majority will have their way while the minority will have their say. We have the hope to lead our people in the comity of nations. Nigerians accept our party as their own party. Our difficulties are not beyond solutions. Whatever the disagreements, they are not beyond resolutions.
“We are the managers of the party and you are our field commanders…People like us are at our departure lounge and we must pay back to our nation. My prayer is that all of you should do better than me, your father. Only PDP can guarantee the unity of Nigeria today, integration of Africa. I agree that I’m an analogue man and you are digital, but you must be an analogue man first before you move to digital. Nobody wants to invest without profit. You must all do better than me.”
But the mood of some visitors to the National Chairman ‘s office is sometimes aggressive. A good example is that of the delegation from Kano which stormed the Wadata Plaza on Tuesday, demanding action against Governor Kwankwaso and the sack of the State Working Commttee, SWC.
The Tukur leadership is said to be disposed to granting their request as it is believed to have concluded arrangements to put in place a Caretaker Committee for the Kano PDP.
At the Wadata Plaza, the staff are, in the meantime, believed to be concerned about the crisis rocking the party, especially how it will end, as well as issues of welfare and monetization.
Tukur is embattled as he celebrates his 78th birthday, today.

- See more at: http://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/09/tukur-at-78-the-life-of-an-embattled-pdp-national-chairman/#sthash.hCmSKpl6.dpuf

The Painful Consequences Of ASUU Strike

The lingering industrial strike action by the Academic Staff Union of Universities comes with a lot of cost for both students and lecturers. Two months after ASUU embarked on an industrial action, negotiations between the union and the Federal Government is still deadlocked.

“Because the devil also finds work for ideal hands, these students may be getting involved in other things that may not be good for the economy; those who are just idling about at home could cause security problems.”

Like professor and Dean, Faculty of Arts, University of Lagos, Yomi Akinyeye, noted, ‘one cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs.’ In other words, one cannot achieve something without causing a few inconveniences.

According to Akinyeye, the strike will not only affect the students and the lecturers, but also the country’s economy, in the long run.

“Most of the problems that Nigeria is currently facing would have been better solved if the issues are properly addressed and the priorities set right. The academic calendar of the students has already been disrupted. This would mean the adjustment of their time table and a delay in their year of graduation. The man hours lost over this period would have to be paid for,” Akinyeye noted.

Considering the duration of the strike, which has lingered since July 1, the total sum in salary for the lecturers may run into billions of naira.

The strike also has a spiral effect on the nation’s education and economic sector, noted professor of Science and Technology Education, University of Lagos, Duro Ajeyalemi.

He stated that while the dreams of many students in their final year have invariably been put on hold, the delay in the university academic calendar will also increase the competition among candidates willing to gain admission into the universities.

These factors will also cause an increase in the number of fresh graduates in the labour market at the end of the academic year, he said.

The earlier the Federal Government resolved the matter, the better for the economy, Ajeyalemi advised.

Even students that believe in ASUU’s struggle are tired of sitting at home. An undergraduate student of the University of Lagos, Joshua Oyeniyi, wrote: “I write on behalf of the millions of dreams that are getting squashed by the day as the total shut-down of our universities persists. I write on behalf of the future of the several hundreds of thousands who have been privileged, amidst the stiff competition for admission, to grasp tertiary education but may end up worse than their disadvantaged counterparts, since they may never finish, much less finish on schedule their educational pursuits.”

He pleaded with the Federal Government to honour the 2009 agreement with ASUU so that students could return to the lecture rooms and pick up the pieces of their “scattered semesters.”

For the head of Department of Communication and Language Arts, University of Ibadan, Dr. Ayobami Ojebode, the impact of the regular strike actions embarked upon by ASUU would be most felt, not only in the quality of graduates being churned out by the country’s public universities, but also by the labour market and employers of labour. Like he put it, the country has a “greedy and rabidly impatient employment system.”

“Graduates, everywhere, are like computers. You don’t buy a laptop today and expect that right now, it must run your salary system for you, and compute your departmental results and do everything you want. No computer is configured to do all of that. You must sit down and programme it; install the right software and input data. Employers in Nigeria have to understand that.

“When you employ a graduate, and you expect him to speak the language of your organisation, write your memos in your house style, or operate your fabrication machine as if that is the only one known in the wide world, you are being unrealistic in your expectations, impatient and greedy. Fresh graduates have to be trained – that is, you must install your software in them and input data into them,” he said.

Many analysts have argued that considering the issues involved, the fruits of this strike would certainly not taste sweet for any of the parties involved.

TON

Condoleezza Rice Recalls Birmingham Bombing That Killed Childhood Friend

By Verna Gates

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama, Sept 13 (Reuters) - When a church bombing killed four young black girls on a quiet Sunday morning in 1963, life for a young Condoleezza Rice changed forever.

The racial attack on the 16th Street Baptist Church, in the former secretary of state's hometown of Birmingham, Alabama, rocked the nation and led to sweeping changes in laws governing civil rights.

But for Rice, just 8 years old at the time, the tragedy meant the death of a little girl she used to play dolls with, and the loss of her own youthful sense of security.

"As an 8-year-old, you don't think about terror of this kind," said Rice, who recounted on Friday her memory of the bombing and its aftermath in remarks to a gathering of civic leaders in Birmingham as part of several days of events leading up to the 50th anniversary of the bombing on Sept. 15.

Rice's hometown had become a place too dangerous for black children to leave their own neighborhoods, or go downtown and visit Santa Claus, or go out of the house after dark.

"There was no sanctuary. There was no place really safe," she said.

Rice's friend, 11-year-old Denise McNair, died in the blast along with 14-year-olds Carole Robertson, Addie Mae Collins and Cynthia Wesley. Their deaths at the hands of Ku Klux Klan members garnered national support for passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Events for the 50th anniversary of the bombing will include a screening of filmmaker Spike Lee's new documentary, "Four Little Girls," and a memorial service on Sunday scheduled to include U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Rice has a treasured photo of her friend accepting a kindergarten certificate from Rice's father, who was a pastor at another church. McNair had gone to preschool there. McNair's father was the community photographer, documenting birthday parties and weddings in happier times.

"Everyone in the black community knew one of those girls," Rice said.

Her father told her the bombing had been done by "hateful men," she said, but it was an act that later uncovered something ultimately good.

"Out of great tragedy, people began to recognize our humanity, and it brought people together," said Rice.

The bombing left its mark on her even as an adult, when as U.S. Secretary of State under President George W. Bush, she used the experience to understand the plight of Palestinian and Israeli victims of bombs and attacks during peace negotiations.

"I told them I know what it is like for a Palestinian mother, who has to tell her child they can't go somewhere," Rice said, "and how it is for an Israeli mother, who puts her child to bed and wonders if the child will be alive in the morning."

But with all of the progress made in civil rights during the 50 years since the blast, Rice cites education as the biggest impediment to equality in modern times.

She expressed dismay at racial disparities in the quality of education for minorities and criticized the "soft bigotry of low expectations" in a system she said challenges black students less than others.

"Even racism can't be an excuse for not educating our kids," she said. "If a kid cannot read, that kid is done. A child in a bad school doesn't have time for racism to be eradicated. They have to learn today." (Edited by Karen Brooks and Eric Walsh)

HuffingtonPost