Biafran Colt of arm

Biafran Colt of arm
Biafra is my Right

Thursday 11 April 2019

Letter To Theresa May Concerning Rwandan Genocide


RWANDAN GENOCIDE:

AN OPEN LETTER

TO THERESA MAY

10 April 2019.

Dear Theresa May,

I am delighted to write this onerous letter to you. This is my very first time of writing officially to you since you took over the political baton from your predecessor, David Cameron, who resigned shortly after it was announced that his country had voted to leave the European Union. Saying congratulations to you will be somewhat hypocritical considering the fact that the government which you are solely navigating has so far not performed credibly that will warrant any form of applause.
My primary aim of writing this letter to you is to remind you and the people of Britain that what goes around must surely comes around. And that no matter how long it tarries, one day the chicken will return to roost. As no man, no matter how swift, can run faster than his shadow.
Madam, I was outrightly shocked to my born marrow after I happened upon a short post you made on the 7th of April, 2019. In the said post on your Facebook page, you warmly acknowledged the victims of Rwanda genocide. The Rwanda war (a war, which lasted from 1990 to 1994, arose from the long-running dispute between the Hutu and Tutsi groups within the Rwandan population), which consumed about 1.2 million innocent lives, has continually remain an indelible pogrom in the global terrain. It was a war that showed the savage disposition of the black man. Above all, I must not fail to commend you for hypocritically joining other forerunners of peace and justice around the globe in remembering those innocent Rwandans who were horrifically butchered in that irresponsible war.
Madam, I am seriously worried over your double standard deposition and that of the British government. I am saying this because Britain, after 58 years, has refused, and even made several covert and overt effort in ensuring that the topic of Biafra genocide is not discussed anywhere. In fact, it is also obvious that Britain and other war mongers, who benefited from the spoils of the war, have been able to ensure that the media giants around their domain never make the mistake of discussing the issue of Biafra genocide, and even if they will do, the discussion will be marred with so much subjectivity. The mission is simple, Make Biafra the villain and make those economic hitmen who orchestrated and benefited from the war the victims.
It is now glaring to all and sundry that there exist a monumental conspiracy against the issue of Biafra genocide. What transpired in Rwanda cannot and will never for any reason be approximated to the blood bath which took place in the Biafran and Nigerian war. Many can choose to buy into the misleading narrative of 'civil war', but to me, there was no iota of civility in that war. It was more of a total annihilation of the Biafran specie. The motto of the war was simple, 'clean them up by any means and take over the oil'. The oil was more relevant than the lives of the indigenous people.

Madam, there are graphic and video recordings on the Nigerian and Biafran war available to the public. It shows how millions of children from Biafra, which is presently known as the Eastern part of Nigeria were starved to death during the war. Considering verifiable data at the public disposal, about 2 million innocent children died as a result of starvation. There were no food and medication. Children turned to skeletons with bloated stomach. While the total of 5 to 6 million civilians died in the senseless war.
During this ethnic pogrom, BBC, a British owned media house, was lying to the world that it wasn't a war and that what was going on was merely a police action to quell a mild rebellion. While this mindless mendaciousness was being sold to the global community, the British government and their allies, with interest in the oil rich Biafra, were secretly arming the Nigerian government to commit the most hideous crime and genocide in the history of mankind.
The war at the end of the day amounted to a huge collateral damage. Human and material resources were unreasonably wasted. Though the kingpins of the war will always say, 'no victor and no vanquish', but unfortunately, such bogus mantra is nothing but a spinless lie designed to rewrite what ought to be. Biafra lost millions of promising lives and their properties worth billions of pounds (in the present day estimate) were confiscated. Thousands of industrialists and families who had huge sums in banks lost it. Some were given 20 pounds out of the thousands they had before the war while others never received a dime.
Madam, the British government that spearheaded and also gave logistics to their surrogate in Nigeria during the war, has never for one day remembered and show a heartfelt remorse for the criminal role they played in that war. Is it not an act of hypocrisy and wickedness of the highest order? It worries me, to a great extent, that the British government has become more recalcitrant in ensuring that the injustice done to Biafrans during and after the war is never discussed, and expiation fully made on it. Moreover, efforts have not been made to bring to book those depraved hitmen who orchestrated the war for their selfish aggrandizement.
However Madam, as the number one citizen of Britain, you may attempt to feign ignorance of Biafra genocide, but I promise you one thing, a day is coming when the chicken will return to roost. The entire British empire in one way or the other will have to taste the same poison they served Biafra in 1967 to 1970. It may not be now but in the near future. Probably, the future generation may ignorantly bear the consequences of the dastardly action of Harold Wilson.
Conclusively Madam, I will like to throw up a challenge to you. If you truly think the British government has regretted and repented from the prominent part they played in the Nigeria and Biafra war, I will suggest you use 30th of May, 2019 (the day Biafrans around the universe use to remember and mourn their loved ones who were victims of 1967 to 1970 war), to show a warm solidarity to Biafrans as they will be remembering the victims of Britain and Nigeria's callousness. This solidarity can be demonstrated by asking BBC to run a one week video documentary that will show full footage of kwashiorkor stricken children from Biafra, and how international markets, institutions of learning and residential areas were mercilessly bombed and looted by the Nigerian troops. Also, how mothers and their young daughters were brutally molested and raped in the presence of their husbands and fathers.
This solidarity can be further demonstrated through a sincere change in the aspect of policy direction in the Biafra question, which means that Britain as a matter of national pride and importance must compel Nigeria to do the needful so that there can be an end to this long overdue issue of Biafra being an independent nation. If this can be done, then I can say that Britain has regretted and repented from the despicable role they played in the Biafra genocide.
Accept my letter with utmost sincerity.
Kalu Nwokoro Idika
Kalu Nwokoro Idika is a political analyst
for Family Writers Press.

IS THIS THE BEGINNING OF
 THE END?
The current state of the Biafran struggle for self-determination has transcended the level the Nigeria political power brokers can contend with. The case has snowballed into an international matter which is capable of questioning the future of the Nigerian state and its sovereignty. The on-going case between the federal Government of Nigeria versus Nnamdi Kanu over the trumped up allegation that the latter committed treasonable felony, for which he and the four others were arraigned at the federal high court of the federal Republic of Nigeria, and later alleged to have jumped bail has taken a new dimension. But as it was widely reported in the Nigerian media and from principal witnesses and the lawyer of the foremost Biafran leader that the security of the state with all state security and war apparatus invading the house of the IPOB leader at Afararukwu in Abia state with the intention to eliminate him and in the process State violence was visited on the entire community where lives were massively lost and the state of the safety of the IPOB leader and his whereabouts was unknown after the military operation. Subsequently after the above scenario, the court reconvened to continue with the trials only for the case to get twisted when the court insisted that the IPOB leader must appear in court to face trail over the case brought against him by the prosecutor which in this case is the Federal Government of Nigeria. The argument for and against over why the IPOB leader who later appeared in Israel and have been making series of broadcasting statements on Radio on the events surrounding how the state, some Igbo leaders, conspired with the bench to get him eliminated while he is still under the protective bail of the court of which he had vowed never to appear to again to answer the allegation of treasonable felony placed on him by the Nigerian state and he continues to vehemently insist that he has committed no crime for which he could be accused let alone treasonable felony, as what he is agitating for ,is the freedom of his people under the concept of self-determination and secession which is well embedded in the Nigerian constitution, extant laws which is the common laws and international conventions, treaties and conference resolutions . He made series of revelations concerning the Nigerian leadership and how and why he, could never get justice in a Nigerian court presided over by a Nigerian judge.
Following Nnamdi Kanu’s decision not to appear in court again, there has been series of court arguments in which at a point the court was contemplating forfeiting the bail bond of the sureties that stood in for his bail and there were counter opposition to this intending decision of the court that eventually made one of the sureties suing the judge of the court to another division of the court seeking for his right to be protected by his court. This action was followed by subsequent Binta Nyako’s court ruling to absolve the sureties of any wrong doings and decided to revoke the bail right granted the IPOB leader and issued a bench warrant arrest against anywhere the IPOB leader is sited and be brought to court to face his trials. This above order of the court was made against all the entreaties by legal representations of the IPOB leader and the others to present the actual information concerning why their clients could no longer appear in court, every attempts by the defendants representatives to present these facts to the court of what the security operatives did which led to the disappearance of their client was rebuffed by the trial Judge.
The reaction of the above insistence of the court that the embattled IPOB Leader must face trial took a new twist when he declared in one of his radio broadcast on Radio Biafra, London that he is not a Nigerian and he is suing the Nigerian Government to a court in the British court challenging the decision of the Nigerian court to revoked his bail and many other reliefs that he may be demanding to advance the course of the Biafran struggle.

In his last broadcast on Radio Biafra, the Biafran Leader exposed some section of the Nigerian laws predicated on some sections of the provision of 1999 Nigerian constitution and some existing laws that legalized his demand for a separate Biafran State out of Nigeria. He spoke so confidently about the justiciability of these laws as they are written in Black and white which formed parts of the common laws of the federation of Nigeria and no court in the country has any powers to assumed any jurisdiction concerning these sets laws when they are connected to process for demand for outright secession or struggle for self-determination for a separate homeland out of Nigeria, once the process do not contravene the process laid down in the criminal code of the federal Republic of Nigeria. The citation of some of these laws that he cited are;
1, That under the Shagari administration in 1983, there was a law passed by the National Assembly in Lagos during that political era titled “The Law of the Federation of Nigeria” which enable any Region or a people, who felt that they are political, economic and socio-cultural oppressed within Nigeria State, to be assisted by the government of the country to freely exited the Nigerian federation to seek for separate homeland where the above deprivation can be redressed.
2. That there was a decree promulgated under the general Babagida administration titled “The Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, cap 10” The above law re-consolidated the rights of secession and self-determination to any people and parts of Nigeria, which was initially asserted in the 1983 laws, can comfortable pullout of the Nigerian federation with the supports of the Nigerian State.

3. That there was also consolidation of the above two laws that legalized the calls and struggle for secession and calls for self-determination under Nigerian common laws passed under the democratic administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo titled “The Law of the Federation of Nigeria” passed in 2004. This Act powered Nigeria to be a state party positively with all technical assistance to any Region or peoples in Nigeria seriously advocating for exit out of the Nigerian federation. But from all indications, it could be assumed that it is the criminal class political elites, traditional rulers and business and corporate professionals along North and South divide who are the albatross and the stumbling block to the enforcement of these above laws to segments and groups who had long rejected the unworkable and fraudulent National unity that has bought deaths, genocide, ethnic cleansing, pains, under-development, poverty, massive uncontained corruption practices within the public and private sectors at all strata of the Nigerian society.

The Nnamdi Case versus Federal Republic of Nigeria has been slated for a court in the United Kingdom on the 29th of April, 2019. Nigeria’s legal representation will be expected to make appearance at the hearing and trials of this historic case. Many paradox box and hidden secrets which were initially not made known to the Nigeria people will be uncovered under oath. And the legality for demanding for one separate country out of Nigeria will be tested. All Nigerian laws that supported the calls for self-determination in the country will be tested. All international treaties and conventions both at the international and at the regional level which Nigeria is a signatories to will be invoked. What amount to acts of treasonable felony within the context of the Nigeria criminal code system? Why the South and the North be run or criminal code versus penal code system if the country is truly a united federation and why the federation created by the British should not be urgently terminated? Why the amalgamation document of 1914, if such document existed, must be presented in the British court on the 29th of this month in the UK court and the legality of such document and its contents having any legal effect of the law binding consequences further on the remnants of the succeeding generations who are now the victims of such evil amalgamation? And whether the independence constitutions and the subsequent ones, are subjected to the popular endorsement of those who were referred as Nigerians via a fallout of an outcomes of popular referendum.

All self-determination and separatists in Nigeria must developed vested interests in the case between Nnamdi Kanu and the federal Republic of Nigeria, later this month in the United Kingdom and be ready to take their stand over the fallout of the case in question. Our problems as a people started by the British in 1914, may also be finally be settled in the British court once and for all.

MAKANJUOLA ADIGUN MUHAMMED.
                  Mary Slessor Was A Big Lair 
Mary Slessor Was A Big Lair
Beware of white folks and their history. What i shall prove to you now will shock you . The so call history written by white folks and propagated by church missionaries accusing the igbo of killing twins was nothing but a fabricated lie.

They said mary slessor stopped the killing of twins in ala igbo , Asi asi !!

Think again about the name ejima ,
"Ejiri mara ibe ya or Eji mara ibe ya ".
It means when you see one , you have seen the other.

To do this you have to have them as grown up who are part of society where they showcase their unity of soul which is the true nature of ejiiri mara ibe ya (twins).
This name explained properly how the igbos view twins .
They were seen as replicas of one another or identical humans, thus it is normal to tell one what you want to tell the other and do to one what you do to the other . When gift are given to one it is also given to the other .
This name in itself has no negative connotations but positive all the way.
Therefore it proved that the igbo's had always respected twins.
Here are more Profs ;
1. Mary slessor had no single book on how she stop the killing of twins in Igbo land.
2. How can you stop the killing of twins but kill the same people as slaves ? (Please refer to trans Atlantic slavery)
3. Wikipedia and other reference works never mentioned that there were such practice in Ala Igbo .
4 Maungo park also discovered river Niger Asi asi !!
5. No omenala custodian agree that this ever happened.
6. The very existence of Nso Ani Igbo disagree with this infanticide story.

7. The white folk Marry slessor was a colonialist , spy and a cheap blackmailer.

A stranger can't tell you your history, worse of all an enemy can keep your good records.

Copied from mazi Akajiofo

#SupportBiafraReferendum

#GOJOINIPOB NOW


No comments:

Post a Comment