The grounds on which General Buhari is being promoted as
the alternative choice are not only shaky, but pitifully naive.
History matters. Records are not kept simply to assist the
weakness of memory, but to operate as guides to the future.
Of course, we know that human beings change. What the
claims of personality change or transformation impose on us
is a rigorous inspection of the evidence, not wishful
speculation or behind-the-scenes assurances. Public offence,
crimes against a polity, must be answered in the public space,
not in caucuses of bargaining. In Buhari, we have been
offered no evidence of the sheerest prospect of change. On the
contrary, all evident suggests that this is one individual who
remains convinced that this is one ex-ruler that the nation
cannot call to order.
Buhari – need one remind anyone - was one of the generals
who treated a Commission of Enquiry, the Oputa Panel, with
unconcealed disdain. Like Babangida and Abdusalami, he
refused to put in appearance even though complaints that were
tabled against him involved a career of gross abuses of power
and blatant assault on the fundamental human rights of the
Nigerian citizenry.
Prominent against these charges was an act that
amounted to nothing less than judicial murder, the execution
of a citizen under a retroactive decree. Does Decree 20 ring a
bell? If not, then, perhaps the names of three youths - Lawal
Ojuolape (30), Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and Bartholomew
Owoh (26) do. To put it quite plainly, one of those three –
Ogedengbe - was executed for a crime that did not carry a
capital forfeit at the time it was committed. This was an
unconscionable crime, carried out in defiance of the pleas and
protests of nearly every sector of the Nigerian and
international community – religious, civil rights, political,
trade unions etc. Buhari and his sidekick and his partner-in-
crime, Tunde Idiagbon persisted in this inhuman act for one
reason and one reason only: to place Nigerians on notice that
they were now under an iron, inflexible rule, under
governance by fear.
The execution of that youthful innocent – for so he was, since
the punishment did not exist at the time of commission - was
nothing short of premeditated murder, for which the
perpetrators should normally stand trial upon their loss of
immunity. Are we truly expected to forget this violation of
our entitlement to security as provided under existing laws?
And even if our sensibilities have become blunted by
succeeding seasons of cruelty and brutality, if power itself had
so coarsened the sensibilities also of rulers and corrupted their
judgment, what should one rightly expect after they have been
rescued from the snare of power” At the very least, a
revaluation, leading hopefully to remorse, and its expression
to a wronged society. At the very least, such a revaluation
should engender reticence, silence. In the case of Buhari, it
was the opposite. Since leaving office he has declared in the
most categorical terms that he had no regrets over this murder
and would do so again.
Human life is inviolate. The right to life is the uniquely
fundamental right on which all other rights are based. The
crime that General Buhari committed against the entire nation
went further however, inconceivable as it might first appear.
That crime is one of the most profound negations of civic
being. Not content with hammering down the freedom of
expression in general terms, Buhari specifically forbade all
public discussion of a return to civilian, democratic rule. Let
us constantly applaud our media – those battle scarred
professionals did not completely knuckle down. They resorted
to cartoons and oblique, elliptical references to sustain the
people’s campaign for a time-table to democratic rule. Overt
agitation for a democratic time table however remained
rigorously suppressed – military dictatorship, and a
specifically incorporated in Buhari and Idiagbon was here to
stay. To deprive a people of volition in their own political
direction is to turn a nation into a colony of slaves. Buhari
enslaved the nation. He gloated and gloried in a master-slave
relation to the millions of its inhabitants. It is astonishing to
find that the same former slaves, now free of their chains,
should clamour to be ruled by one who not only turned their
nation into a slave plantation, but forbade them any discussion
of their condition.
So Tai Solarin is already forgotten? Tai who stood at street
corners, fearlessly distributing leaflets that took up the
gauntlet where the media had dropped it. Tai who was
incarcerated by that regime and denied even the medication
for his asthmatic condition? Tai did not ask to be sent for
treatment overseas; all he asked was his traditional medicine
that had proved so effective after years of struggle with
asthma!
Nor must we omit the manner of Buhari coming to power and
the pattern of his ‘corrective’ rule. Shagari’s NPN had already
run out of steam and was near universally detested – except of
course by the handful that still benefited from that regime of
profligacy and rabid fascism. Responsibility for the national
condition lay squarely at the door of the ruling party,
obviously, but against whom was Buhari’s coup staged?
Judging by the conduct of that regime, it was not against
Shagari’s government but against the opposition. The head of
government, on whom primary responsibility lay, was Shehu
Shagari. Yet that individual was kept in cozy house detention
in Ikoyi while his powerless deputy, Alex Ekwueme, was
locked up in Kiri-kiri prisons. Such was the Buhari notion of
equitable apportionment of guilt and/or responsibility.
And then the cascade of escapes of the wanted, and culpable
politicians. Manhunts across the length and breadth of the
nation, roadblocks everywhere and borders tight as steel zip
locks. Lo and behold, the chairman of the party, Chief
Akinloye, strolled out coolly across the border. Richard
Akinj ide, Legal Protector of the ruling party, slipped out with
equal ease. The Rice Minister, Umaru Dikko, who declared
that Nigerians were yet to eat from dustbins - escaped through
the same airtight dragnet. The clumsy attempt to crate him
home was punishment for his ingratitude, since he went
berserk when, after waiting in vain, he concluded that the
coup had not been staged, after all, for the immediate
consolidation of the party of extreme right-wing vultures, but
for the military hyenas.
The case of the overbearing Secretary-General of the party,
Uba Ahmed, was even more noxious. Uba Ahmed was out of
the country at the time. Despite the closure of the Nigerian
airspace, he compelled the pilot of his plane to demand
special landing permission, since his passenger load included
the almighty Uba Ahmed. Of course, he had not known of the
change in his status since he was airborne. The delighted
airport commandant, realizing that he had a much valued fish
swimming willingly into a waiting net, approved the request.
Uba Ahmed disembarked into the arms of a military guard
and was promptly clamped in detention. Incredibly, he
vanished a few days after and reappeared in safety overseas.
Those whose memories have become calcified should explore
the media coverage of that saga. Buhari was asked to explain
the vanished act of this much prized quarry and his response
was one of the most arrogant levity. Coming from one who
had shot his way into power on the slogan of ‘dis’pline’, it
was nothing short of impudent.
Shall we revisit the tragicomic series of trials that landed
several politicians several lifetimes in prison? Recall, if you
please, the ‘judicial’ processes undergone by the
septuagenarian Chief Adekunle Ajasin. He was arraigned and
tried before Buhari’s punitive tribunal but acquitted.
Dissatisfied, Buhari ordered his re-trial. Again, the Tribunal
could not find this man guilty of a single crime, so once again
he was returned for trial, only to be acquitted of all charges of
corruption or abuse of office. Was Chief Ajasin thereby
released? No! He was ordered detained indefinitely, simply
for the crime of winning an election and refusing to knuckle
under Shagari’s reign of terror.
The conduct of the Buhari regime after his coup was not
merely one of double, triple, multiple standards but a cynical
travesty of jus tice. Audu Ogbeh, currently chairman of the
Action Congress was one of the few figures of rectitude
within the NPN. Just as he has done in recent times with the
PDP, he played the role of an internal critic and reformer,
warning, dissenting, and setting an example of probity within
his ministry. For that crime he spent months in unjust
incarceration. Guilty by association? Well, if that was the
motivating yardstick of the administration of the Buhari
justice, then it was most selectively applied. The utmost
severity of the Buhari-Idiagbon justice was especially
reserved either for the opposition in general, or for those
within the ruling party who had showed the sheerest sense of
responsibility and patriotism.
Shall I remind this nation of Buhari’s deliberate humiliating
treatment of the Emir of Kano and the Oni of Ife over their
visit to the state of Israel? I hold no brief for traditional rulers
and their relationship with governments, but insist on
regarding them as entitled to all the rights, privileges and
responsibilities of any Nigerian citizen. This royal duo went to
Israel on their private steam and private business. Simply
because the Buhari regime was pursuing some antagonistic
foreign policy towards Israel, a policy of which these
traditional rulers were not a part, they were subjected on their
return to a treatment that could only be described as a head
masterly chastisement of errant pupils. Since when, may one
ask, did a free citizen of the Nigerian nation require the
permission of a head of state to visit a foreign nation that was
willing to offer that tourist a visa.?
One is only too aware that some Nigerians love to point to
Buhari’s agenda of discipline as the shining jewel in his
scrap-iron crown. To inculcate discipline however, one must
lead by example, obeying laws set down as guides to public
probity. Example speaks louder than declarations, and rulers
cannot exempt themselves from the disciplinary strictures
imposed on the overall polity, especially on any issue that
seeks to establish a policy for public well-being. The story of
the thirty something suitcases – it would appear that they were
even closer to fifty - found unavoidable mention in my recent
memoirs, YOU MUST SET FORTH AT DOWN, written long
before Buhari became spoken of as a credible candidate. For
the exercise of a changeover of the national currency, the
Nigerian borders – air, sea and land – had been shut tight.
Nothing was supposed to move in or out, not even cattle
egrets.
Yet a prominent camel was allowed through that needle’s eye.
Not only did Buhari dispatch his aide-de-camp, Jokolo – later
to become an emir - to facilitate the entry of those cases, he
ordered the redeployment – as I later discovered - of the
Customs Officer who stood firmly against the entry of the
contravening baggage. That officer, the incumbent Vice-
president is now a rival candidate to Buhari, but has
somehow, in the meantime, earned a reputation that totally
contradicts his conduct at the time. Wherever the truth lies, it
does not redound to the credibility of the dictator of that time,
General Buhari whose word was law, but whose allegiances
were clearly negotiable.


http://saharareporters.com/2007/01/14/crimes-buhari-wole-soyinka

The blood of those innocent youths killed will continue to follow Buhari

I won't vote





Prof wole soyinka , teaching history since 1914. I love this man

The man is a criminal.

GEJ TILL 2019

I hv just finishd reading and bookmarking this thread...

Who can list all the atrocities of Buhari

Any deserning mind that loves nigeria's progress should NOT VOTE Buhari

I invoke barcanista, omenka, pataki, berem, obiagelli, passingshot, maclatunji, etc, spirits here..

2007 news, right?

Surely at this phase of our history, Buhari stands head and shoulders high above The Clueless One.

And I don't want to think that the same Prof will not have worse things to say about Nebuchadnezzar.

I will help you with his words for El Clueless and PDP.

Just give me some time.

PassingShot:
2007 news, right?

Surely at this phase of our history, Buhari stands head and shoulders high above The Clueless One.

And I don't want to think that the same Prof will not have worse things to say about Nebuchadnezzar.

What is yr opinion about what was said in this '2007 news'. Abi, you no read am??

taharqa:
What is yr opinion about what was said in this '2007 news'. Abi, you no read am??

My first comments are unambiguous if you know how to read between the lines. It's not in my place to deny allor any of those perceived and real offenses. Have we said that Buhari has no blemishes? No, we haven't and we're not going to say that. What we're trying to drum into your heads is that for all that it's worth, Buhari is far better than your Clueless One.

An example of what Soyinka says about Mr. Clueless:

Soyinka-AND-Jonathan
Jonathan worse than Nebuchadnezzar –Soyinka 0
BY OUR REPORTER ON DECEMBER 3, 2014 BREAKING NEWS, TRENDING
Nobel Laureate, Prof Wole Soyinka, says President Goodluck Jonathan is worse than neo-Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, describing Jonathan as a President that embraces impunity.

According to the account of the Holy Bible, Nebuchadnezzar at the height of his reign became too arrogant and God tampered with his heart and made him to eat grass and live like an animal for seven years.

The title of the text Soyinka read at the briefing was, “King Nebuchadnezzar – The Reign of Impunity.”

The opening of the address read, “I shall not insist that the historical/biblical figure of Nebuchadnezzar is uniquely apt for the pivotal figure of the ‘democratic’ history in the making at this moment – for one thing, Nebuchadnezzar was a nation builder and a warrior.

“One could argue even more convincingly for the figure of Balthazar, his successor, or indeed Emperor Nero as reference point – you all remember him – the emperor who took to fiddling while Rome was burning. However you should easily recall why I opted for King Nebuchadnezzar – the figure that currently sits on the top of our political pile himself evoked it, albeit in a context that virtuously disclaimed any similarities, even tendencies.”

He blamed Jonathan for the security invasion of the National Assembly, during which lawmakers resorted to scaling the fence of the Assembly complex to gain access to the chambers.

He said, “The act of scaling gates and walls to fulfil their duty by the people must be set down as their finest hour. They must be applauded, not derided. If shame belongs anywhere, it belongs to the Inspector General of Police and his lavish adherence to illegal and unconstitutional instructions – to undermine a democratic structure, and one (to make matters worse) convoked in response to an emergency of dire concern.

“What sticks to this policeman (Abba) is worse than shame, it is infamy. Such a public servant deserves to be publicly pilloried, tried and meted a punishment that is appropriate to treasonable acts, if only to serve as a deterrent to others in positions of responsibility under the law. To demand less is to reduce ourselves below the status of free citizens of a free nation.

“For this latest outrage, one in an escalating series of impunity, the buck stops yet again at the presidency and that incumbent, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, continues to surprise us in ways that very few have conjectured.”

He said the split in Nigeria Governors’ Forum last year in which 16 governors had the final say over 19 other governors showed that the President was willing to do anything to achieve his political goals.

Soyinka said the barring of governors by policemen from entering Ekiti State to campaign for former Governor Kayode Fayemi in June showed that Jonathan was not only a dictator but was encouraging impunity by encouraging security agents to disrespect constituted authority.

He also berated the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Suleiman Abba, whom he said was appointed for the sole purpose of achieving Jonathan’s selfish ambition.

He said Jonathan was using ethnic sentiments to ensure his return to Aso Rock next year, describing the President’s recent visit to the Obafemi Awolowo University to consult with Yoruba leaders as appalling.

He said doing such on the same day Boko Haram attacked a mosque in Kano was irresponsible, adding that Jonathan’s quest for power had prevented his ability to think out a way to stop terrorists.

He said, “The shambles that punctuated a presidential campaign visit at the OAU a few days ago merely underline the total alienation of President Jonathan from the reality that has engulfed the nation.

“That a national leader should go campaigning on the platform of ethnic support at a time when priorities dictate a united national engagement for survival is a grotesque undertaking that was tragically rebuked in the massacre of worshippers and desecration of the Kano mosques almost simultaneously with the alienated gathering of selected crowned heads.

“Long before Nyanya, long before Chibok, long before the mildest of then now innumerable violations of our basic right to exist as free citizens, the march of a nation towards implosion has dominated the landscape but an obsession with the pettiness of power has obscured remedial vision and thus, the creative options constantly open to prescient leadership.”

Soyinka said the refusal of other countries to continue to help Nigeria in the fight against terrorism was because the foreign countries were cynical of Nigeria’s claim to fight insecurity.

He said by sacking a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Gbenga Ashiru, at a time when Nigeria needed to strengthen its foreign policy, Jonathan had shown the he preferred to play politics than deliver the true dividends of democracy to the people.
He said insecurity would have been curbed if Nigeria had learned from what happened to Mali wherein al-Qeda militants brought the nation to its knees.

He said, “The lesson of Mali was completely lost on complacent leadership, however, leaving time and space for alien invaders to make common cause with the internal, unleashing detruction at will and dancing around a nation whose armed forces have acquitted themselves creditably on foreign missions.

“The architect of the initial policy of containment was the recently deceased Gbenga Ashiru, then Foreign Minister, unceremoniously removed for the ends of premature politicking, before the logical development of that initiative.

“Now of course, the very manipulators of Ashiru’s removal are falling over one another, to heap praises on the quality of his achievements in office.”

Soyinka said Nigeria had come to a point where citizens would now have to defend themselves since the government had failed to ensure the safety of the citizens.

However, the Presidency on Tuesday said Soyinka was only playing the ostrich by accusing Jonathan of being worse than King Nebuchadnezzar.

Senior Special Assistant to the President on Public Affairs, Dr. Doyin Okupe, said, in a text message sent to one of our correspondents, that it was saddening that the Nobel Laureate also failed to apprehend Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State, who he described as the “national champion of impunity and official recklessness.”

He said, “Our eminent professor also sadly plays the ostrich as he failed to reprimand Governor Amaechi who is the national champion of impunity and official recklessness.

“The administration of President Goodluck Jonathan proves itself as the most liberal, keeping faith with adherence to rule of law and tolerance.”

When wud they just respond witout mentioning GEJ?

Prominent against these charges was an act that
amounted to nothing less than judicial murder, the execution
of a citizen under a retroactive decree. Does Decree 20 ring a
bell? If not, then, perhaps the names of three youths - Lawal
Ojuolape (30), Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and Bartholomew
Owoh (26) do. To put it quite plainly, one of those three –
Ogedengbe - was executed for a crime that did not carry a
capital forfeit at the time it was committed.




Hmmmm

Some peeps have a very very short memory.

eaglechild:
Prominent against these charges was an act that
amounted to nothing less than judicial murder, the execution
of a citizen under a retroactive decree. Does Decree 20 ring a
bell? If not, then, perhaps the names of three youths - Lawal
Ojuolape (30), Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and Bartholomew
Owoh (26) do. To put it quite plainly, one of those three –
Ogedengbe - was executed for a crime that did not carry a
capital forfeit at the time it was committed.




Hmmmm

Some peeps have a very very short memory.

Very short memory indeed...

taharqa:
When wud they just respond witout mentioning GEJ?

lol

Buhari's crime against Nigeria are just too many. The blood shed spilled in his name alone in 2011 cannot be qualified. In real civilized societies, Buhari will be taken to old people's homes to reflect on his sins.