Lt. Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu wrote to Lt. Col. Victor Banjo

 BACK  TO  HISTORY :

 Lt. Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu wrote to Lt. Col. Victor Banjo commanding him to invade and liberate Western Nigeria (Yorubaland) from the “Hausa/Fulani dominated Nigeria”.

 From: The Military Governor,

Republic of Biafra,Enugu,

22nd August, 1967.

My dear Victor,

 1. For some time now, you and I have been discussing the circumstances that have led to the current and inevitable disintegration of what was the Federation of Nigeria. We have been fully convinced that the aim of the Hausa/Fulani complex has ever been, and will ever remain, the total domination of every other part of what was known as the Federation of Nigeria. It is impossible to forget that the crisis which led to the army take over in January 1966, the coup of the Northern soldiers led by Gowon in July 1966, the wholesale and indiscriminate massacre of the people of what is now Biafra- and, to a less degree,the people of the Mid-West and West, including the Yorubas, were all the direct result of Hausa/Fulani attempt to subjugate and use as tools,the gallant people of Western Nigeria namely the Yorubas. We do not need to remind ourselves of the heavy losses in life and property suffered by the Yoruba people in their fight for justice and freedom during 1965.

 2. Sharing our belief that the people of Yorubaland have a right to live a life of equality and self-respect and justice free of domination and dictatorship from any quarter, you have both identified with the cause of the Biafra struggle for survival and expressed your determination to see the people of Yorubaland freed from Hausa/Fulani domination.

We, the people of Biafra, for our part are willing and have decided to give you and the people of Yorubaland every assistance to achieve your aim.

 3. After clearing the whole question with my Executive Council, I, as the Commander in Chief of the Biafran Armed Forces, have decided to place at your disposal Biafran forces, for the liberation of

Yorubaland on the following clear conditions:-

 (i)You will have nothing to do with the Military Administrator in the Mid-West Territory during your sojourn there prior to your move to the West.

 (ii)The willingness and preparedness of Biafra to assist any part of the former Federation of Nigeria wishing and willing to liberate itself from the Hausa/Fulani domination, does not in anyway whatever

Abacha Didnt Die On Top Of Women or Of Posioned Apple -Al-Mustapha.

Former Chief Security Officer, CSO, to the late Head of State, Gen Sani Abacha, Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, has dismissed claims that Abacha died after eating an apple from his concubines. 
.
Narrating how the former Head of State died, Al-Mustapha said contrary to insinuations, the sudden collapse of the health system of Abacha started on “Sunday, 7th June, 1998 right from the Abuja International Airport, immediately after one of the white security operatives or personnel who accompanied President Yasser Arafat of Palestine shook hands with him, Abacha.”
.
Al-Mustapha said shortly after the hand shake, he “noticed the change in the countenance of the late Commander-in-Chief and I informed the Aide-de-Camp, Lt. Col. Abdallah, accordingly. He, however, advised that we keep a close watch on the Head of State.” He said, “Later in the evening of 8th June, 1998, around 6p.m; his doctor came around, administered an injection to stabilize him.
.
 He was advised to have a short rest. Happily, enough, by 9p.m; the Head of State was bouncing and receiving.visitors until much later when General Jeremiah Timbut Useni, the then Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, came calling. He was fond of the Head of State. They were very good friends. “They stayed and chatted together till about 3.35a.m. 
.
A friend of the house was with me in my office and as he was bidding me farewell, he came back to inform me that the FCT Minister, General Useni was out of the Head of State’s Guest House within the Villa. I then decided to inform the ADC and other security boys that I would be on my way home to prepare for the early morning event at the International Conference Centre. “At about 5a.m; the security guards ran to my quarters to inform me that the Head of State was very unstable. At first, I thought it was a coup attempt. Immediately, I prepared myself fully for any eventuality.

What is a Jew, a Semite, a Zionist? Key terms explained

Vanguard Nigeria. Sunday, March 3, 2019

What is the difference between a Jew, a Semite and a Zionist? With such terms are often confused or misused, here is a guide to what each word means.

– Jew –

Originally a Jew was an inhabitant of the ancient kingdom of Judah that existed in the Middle East, centred on Jerusalem, from around 940 to 586 BC.

The term Jew originates in theBiblical Hebrewword“yehudi”, which means “from theKingdom of Judah”.

The word passed into Latin as “judaeus”; the “d” was dropped as it evolved into “giu” in Old French, later moving into early English in various forms from the year 1,000.

It also is the root of Judaism, the Jewish religion which is one of the world’s oldest monotheistic religions and established more than 3,500 years ago.

Its principle tenet is that there is only one God, who is the creator of the universe and with whom Jewish people have a special relationship.

Jews can be atheist, being Jewish by heritage but not believing in the God of the Bible.

Jewish law says the faith is transmitted through the mother, even if in the Bible people are identified by their paternal ascendants.

Israel’s 1970 “Law of Return”, which gives Jews the right to live in the country, defines a Jew as a “person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and is not a member of another religion.”

– Semite –

Jews are not the only Semites: this term refers to people linked through related languages including Hebrew but also Amharic, Arabic and Aramaic.

Created by German historian August Ludwig Schloezer (1735-1809), the word is drawn from the name of one of the sons of the Bible’s Noah, Shem, who is considered the ancestor of all Semites.

His descendants are said to have migrated from theArabian peninsula to Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine around 3,000 years ago, and then into the Horn of Africa around 700 BC.

BIAFRA IS THE NEMESIS OF NIGERIA -LNC 06/02/17

By Tony Nnadi
Secretary-General, Lower Niger Congress.

 Biafra is the nemesis of Nigeria. Both are now mutually exclusive. For one to live, the other must die. In 1970, Nigeria got a Pyrrhic Victory over Biafra. The then French President, Pompidou (next from Charles De Gaulle), whose Country played more than a casual role in the entire imbroglio and who knew what most people did not know about that Biafra War and the People against whom the genocide was directed, had warned the bloody, murderous aggressors, marauding as One-Nigeria, led by willing-tool Yakubu Gowon and his collaborator-in-chief, Awolowo, to immediately address the issues that led to that War with Biafra (1967-1970), otherwise in no more than 30 years, the generation that did not wield guns in the Battlefields of Biafra, would rise up to conclude that War on their own terms. 

Obdurate Nigeria did the opposite, by deploying several punitive policies to put down the East, compounding the woes and devastation already imposed by that War on the East and its Peoples and environment. Shuttering of the Eastern Economic Corridor which was a carry-over of the Land, Air and Sea Wartime blocade of Biafra, Mass expropriation by way of Abandoned Property,  £20-per-pre-war-account heist. Indigenization Decrees. Thick Glass ceilings for Public Office, Civil Service, Military, Police against the East.

Caliphate-propped  Head-Slave, Olusegun Obasanjo whose heinous roles in that War, especially towards the tail-end, remains a subject of genocidal Inquisition, went about gloating and boasting about the death and burial of Biafra, for many years, in absolute folly.

By 1999, so bad had things gone that Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, (former CBN Governor, now Emir of Kano), whose grandfather was the Emir of Kano, deposed by Premier Ahmadu Bello,  raised an urgent alarm and admonition to the Alliance of the Northern Bourgeoisie and the Yoruba Bourgeoisie, along the same lines as the 1970 Pompidou's premonition, concerning the impending Biafra Exit Hurricane that would be driven by a younger generation of terribly oppressed Biafrans, who neither know or care about Ojukwu or Nzeogwu, for their own reasons, emanating from the scorching of Nigeria.
Sanusi had warned that when that day comes, no Conference would solve the problem of Nigeria. Here are the words of Sanusi:

"The Northern Bourgeoisie and the Yoruba Bourgeoisie have conspired to keep the Igbo out of the scheme of things. They have been defeated in War, rendered paupers by Monetary Policy Fiat, their properties declared abandoned and confiscated, kept out of strategic public sector appointments and deprived public services. The rest of Nigeria forced them to remain in Nigeria and has continued to deny them equity. Our present political leaders have no sense of history. There is a new Igbo man who not born in 1966 and knows nor cares about Nzeogwu or Ojukwu. There are Igbo men on the streets who were never Biafrans. They were born Nigerians and are Nigerians, but suffer because of the actions of earlier generations. They would soon decide that it is better to fight their own war and maybe, find an honourable peace than to remain in this contemptible state in perpetuity. The Northern Bourgeoisie and the Yoruba Bourgeoisie have exacted their pound of flesh from the Igbos. For one Sardauna, one Tafawa Balewa, one Akintola and one Okotie-Eboh, hundreds of thousands have died and suffered....If this issue is not addressed immediately, no Conference will solve Nigeria's problems" (Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, at a Public Lecture Titled: "Issues in Restructuring Corporate Nigeria" 11th September, 1999, at Areas House, Kaduna, cited at page 167 of Ezeani Emefiena's book, "IN BIAFRA AFRICA DIED").

As actors in the field of play, the LNC can say with a measure of certainty, that that day spoken about by Sanusi in 1999 is here. That day Nigeria was warned about in 1970 by France has come. 

As the defunct Nigerian Federation is being taken to its interment,  the Biafra that went into hibernation mode since 1970 is sprouting back to life, unstoppably. The 1967 War is about to end. A Referendum already being processed, will decide the future of the Territory.

3Million Volunteers are currently being Registered by the LNC for training and deployment towards various Referendum Tasks.

Tony Nnadi
Secretary-General,
Lower Niger Congress.
06/02/17

SIT-AT-HOME: Do Igbo really want to leave Nigeria?

Written by Clifford Ndujihe, Deputy Political Editor

~vanguard Nigeria. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2018

• Igbo will be comfortable in a restructured Nigeria - Agbakoba
  
  
• 98% of Igbo will say no to Nigeria in a referendum -Elliot Ukoh

Today's largely successful compliance, for the third time, with the sit-at-home order of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, in most cities of the South-East geo-political zone; parts of Port-Harcourt, Rivers State; and Asaba, Delta State, has many implications for the polity.

It shows the ground and support that the IPOB and other pro-Biafra groups are gaining in the South-East. It has also raised the question of whether or not the Igbo really want to leave Nigeria. Arguably, the Igbo are the most dispersed and travelled people in Nigeria. They are found in virtually all villages in the country and reputed to have huge investments in terms of buildings and businesses outside Igbo land. Put in another way, they have invested more in other parts of the country than any other ethnic group. Hence they stand to lose more if anything untoward happened to Nigeria as an entity.

However, in spite of these massive investments that could be endangered, a host of Igbo are deep in the struggle for the actualization of the Republic of Biafra. The first battle for Biafra ended 48 years ago after claiming an estimated three million lives in a 30-month civil war. Since 1999, various struggles for Biafra have claimed thousands of lives.

Yesterday's sit-at-home by IPOB was to protest the killings of unarmed IPOB and Igbo youths during peaceful protests by soldiers; the maltreatment, arrest, detention, and humiliation of 127 Igbo women, who protested in Owerri, recently; and Operation Python Dance III in the South-East among others.


Igbo will be comfortable in a restructured Nigeria- Agbakoba

Asked his take on the success of the sit-at-home order in many parts of Igbo land, former President of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA and human rights lawyer, Dr. Olisa Agbakoba, SAN, said the development has worrying implications for the country.

His words: "I think the reality is that the nation has gone out of control. The rudiments of governmental authority have been seriously eroded. In the latest ranking of the failed states index, Nigeria is listed as a distressed state. This means Nigeria has ceased to be in control of its territorial environment as a result of insecurity, breakdown of law and order, ethnic insurrections and a host of other actions.

"What this shows is that Nigeria is in a very parlous state. It is questionable how far the Federal Government is exercising its territorial authority over the sovereign regions of Nigeria. IPOB is a rebel government whether we like it or not. The extent the rebel government can generate enthusiasm among the people is another question that will be answered by the success of the sit-at-home order. There are many rebel governments in Nigeria. Boko Haram is a rebel government. Niger-Delta militants are rebel governments, etc. There is a crack in the sovereign control of the Nigerian government.

"It is very worrying that within Nigerian territorial environment, an ethnic group can generate enthusiasm and recognition from the people. It has great implications because if they can do it successfully now, they can do it at the 2019 general elections and that is not good for the peace and good governance of Nigeria."

My regrets as head of state-Gowon

Written by Henry Umoru
~Vanguard Nigeria. Wednesday, December 13, 2017.

Gen. Gowon

ABUJA-TWENTY Six years after relocation of the seat of government to Abuja, former Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon, retd, said yesterday that his only regret was that he did not use his power and position as the head of state to appropriate land for his personal use.

He also said as the Commander-in-Chief, he had powers to make Jos, and not Abuja, the capital of Nigeria but refused to do so.because he was not prepared to be clouded by sentiments and selfishness.

He said he took these decisions because of his conviction that personal interest should not override national interest.

Gowon, who spoke at the 26th anniversary exhibition and commemoration of the movement of the seat of government from Lagos to Abuja, organized by the Federal Capital Territory Archives and History Bureau in Abuja yesterday, said he did not make Jos the capital because he was also afraid of being accused of parochialism, given the fact that Jos was close to his place of birth.

According to him, the idea of moving from Lagos to Abuja was conceived by his government in 1974, and that those who were passionate about the ideas, such as the late General Murtala Mohammed, continued with the project after he left government.

He noted that the first place he found that looked strategic and beautiful for the capital of Nigeria was Jos in Plateau State, adding, however, that he could not sustain his thought on it because he didn't want to be accused of parochial and favouritism.

He said: "One of the places I saw that attracted me was somewhere in Plateau, those of you who know the place, especially close to Jos forest, will agree that the area is beautiful and I thought that place was beautiful for the capital city.

It's wrong to blame Igbo for January 1966 coup - Iwuanyanwu

Written by Emmanuel Elebeke
~vanguard Nigeria. Monday, November 6, 2017.

…Says Ojukwu never supported secession.

 Iwuanyanwu

abuja-Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, stalwart and publisher of Champion newspaper, Dr. Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu has debunked the belief that Igbo policial leaders instigated the January 1966 coup that ended the first republic.

Chief Iwunyanwu made the assertion at the weekend during the celebration of his 75th birthday in Abuja.

He said it was wrong for anybody to insult Igbo by claiming that political leaders from the region masterminded the coup, when in the real sense, the same Igbo leaders stopped the coup from actualising its main objectives.

"Before I die, I want to correct the erroneous belief being fed to Nigerian youths that the January 1966 coup was instigated by Igbo leaders. It is not true. Yes, the person who led it was an Igbo from Delta State but he had with him people from other tribes: Yoruba, Niger Delta and other places.It was a purely military coup. It was not Igbo coup. There was no time Igbo leaders told the military to carry out the coup.

"If for anything, Nnamdi Azikiwe was very sad at the death of Tafawa Balewa, Ahmadu Bello and others. I want the younger generation of Nigerians to know that they are being told lies.”

On why the coup failed, he said: "I want them also to know why the coup failed. It failed because an Igbo man, General Aguiyi Ironsitook up arms and arrested the coup plotters and put them in prison.

”Ironsi was the one controlling the army then. If he had supported the coup, it could have succeeded. So,it was Igbo that stopped the coup. Ironsi was eventually killed because all of us said we do not want unitary government. We wanted political restructuring. We are very serious about it and many Nigerians have said it."

ASABA MASSACRE: SEEKING HEALING 50 YEARS AFTER (AN ADDENDUM)

Written by Temple Chima Ubochi
Email: ubochit@hotmail.de
Bonn, Germany

We come nearest to the great when we are great in humility (Rabindranath Tagore)The parents eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'? (Ezekiel 18:2)
The thought that really crushes us is the thought of the futility of life of which death is the visible manifestation (Giacomo Leopardi)Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (William Shakespeare)

After reading Azuka Onwuka's heart-rending masterpiece on the Asaba massacre (link below), I started soliloquizing, wondering why Lt. Col. Muritala Mohammed, assisted by Major Ibrahim Taiwo, and their men of the Second Division of the Nigerian Army, during the genocide called civil war, were so callous and evil to massacre unarmed Asaba civilians even when they declared they were for peace; pledged their allegiance to Nigeria; and renounced any support for Biafra?

The government that took over Nigeria after the failed first coup, but was sacked by the northern counter coup led by Muritala Mohammed, TY Danjuma et al: Head-of-State and Supreme Commander of the Nigerian Armed Forces, Major-General Johnson Thomas Umunakwe Aguiyi-Ironsi (centre) with his Regional Military Governors from left to right; Lieutenant-Colonels, Hassan Usman Katsina (North), Francis Adekunle Fajuyi (West), Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu (East) and David Akpode Ejoor (Mid-West), 1966 (Courtesy: Alex Otti)

Then, I started looking for answers why the second battalion of the Nigerian army, under the leadership of Muritala Mohammed, isolated Asaba town, and why the Asaba people were marked out for elimination, afterall, Asaba is not inside the Igbo mainland? It then occurred to me that the calculated effort to massacre Asaba people was vindictive.

A year before the massacre, some junior army officers sacked the First Republic government of Nigeria through a failed bloody coup. One thing leading to another, few prominent Northern leaders were killed, and a military government was enthroned - the then Nigeria's Prime Minister, two Premiers, politicians and top ranking soldiers were killed, and that coup later led to that civil war of 1967-1970. The northerners termed that coup an Igbo one, despite the fact that the officers who carried it out came from all parts of Nigeria. The leader of that coup was Major Kaduna Nzeogwu, and was from Asaba. The massacre was a payback for Asaba for producing Nzeogwu who led the coup that killed some northern leaders.

Muritala Mohammed; as a military officer; civil war commander; and head of state was a fiend incarnate; unfortunately, people didn't know or see how devilish he was, before he went the way of those he sent to their early graves. Tell me why Asaba people should be singled out for elimination, because Kaduna Nzeogwu was from there? Afterall, Dimka or Orka's respective towns or people were not sequestered for elimination after their own failed coups.

Biafra Videos: Explosive secret about Biafra hidden from the world for nearly 50 years by Britain and Nigeria

Who lifted the veil on Biafra?

~The SUN Nigeria. Thursday, June 1, 2017.

A major thematic concern of Chinua Achebe's last literary work, "There Was a Country", is the official ring of secrecy, which was run around the subject matter of Biafra by successive Nigerian governments. Achebe's concern here is that Nigeria as a country is living in denial. A country called Biafra existed. A war of attrition was fought over it. While the war lasted, the world quaked. The big powers were involved. British armoured tanks and Russian planes were freely deployed. The Arab League joined in the war. They were all on the side of the federal aggressors. In the face of mounting humanitarian crisis, the World Council of Churches, the Caritas and the Red Cross came in to save lives. They provided Biafra with food aids. At the end of the fratricidal strife, some three million lives were lost. The war was the inevitable consequence of a state-sponsored pogrom directed at the Igbo people in 1966. After 30 gruelling months, the Biafran resistance caved in. The new republic was crippled by huge odds. It collapsed.

This momentous event did not escape the attention of writers. They penned their experiences and concerns in various genres. Strangely, however, the Nigerian state did not want to commit the events of the war to history. It shut it out both from current affairs and historical studies. The country conveniently ignored the subject by refusing to talk about it. It treated the matter as if it never took place. It censored any form of discussion, bordering on Biafra. It decreed that the subject must never be discussed officially. History was not allowed to incorporate it. It must never be taught in schools so that those who were not old enough to witness the events of that period will never get to know about it. The result was that the lessons that ought to have been learned from the historical upheaval were, regrettably, lost.

But the ploy of keeping the matter secret did not work. Regardless of the fact that our schools are barred from broaching the subject matter of Biafra in their curricula, the issue has remained an open enterprise. Younger Nigerians whose mothers were not yet married when the cataclysm took place know that there was a country called Biafra. They do not just know that, post-Civil War men and women from the defunct republic are very much aware of what transpired between 1966 and 1970. They are very conscious of the events of those years. They know about the republic in which their people found solace. 


They romanticise it. They yearn for it. They are not interested in the odds. They do not even imagine any hang-up. They want the dream republic because they believe that it would guarantee their generation and future generations of Igbo the space and freedom they need to actualise their potentials. They feel claustrophobic in the Nigerian environment. They are aware of the fact that Nigeria discriminates against them on the basis of their place of origin. They have borne the degradation for too long. Their patience has run out. That is why they are insisting on Biafra. What all this tells us is that in spite of the restrictions imposed on the subject matter, the silences are so loud that even the unborn are already thinking Biafra.

Trekking from Enugu to Umuahia was my toughest task in Army – IBB

~Vanguard

General Ibrahim Babangida (rtd),

Former Nigeria military President Ibrahim Babangida has said that his toughest encounter in the army was trekking from Enugu to Umuahia where he sustained injury during the Nigeria civil war.

Babangida made this known at an interactive session with newsmen to mark his 75th birthday in Minna on Tuesday.

“Movement from Enugu to Umuahia was very tough and challenging because you need to be physically fit to be able to undertake that kind of journey on foot.

“We had to go through the jungles and the hills. I think it was my toughest encounter in the army because that was where I got wounded in April 1969,'' he said.

He said that he joined the army for the purpose of being in the force to protect the country.According to him, being in the military means that you must subject yourself to a constituted authority to execute all the tasks assigned to you by government.He said that the constitutional roll and international treaties made it possible for military personnel to serve anywhere in the world.

The former military president said that the military job was more challenging than being the president of a country.He explained that as an army officer you would lead men to danger because your life and their lives depend on you as the commander.

“If they have faith in you they follow you. If you have faith in them you go along with them.“So, it is more challenging than being a president,'' he said.Babangida further said that being a president or Head of State, you have to seek people's advice, interact and discourse with them to get solution based on the prevailing circumstances.

“Being a military officer you are the only one leading your troops hoping on you. If you lead them wrongly you will kill many of them.“So, I consider the military more challenging than the political job,'' he said.

1976 Coup: Why I declined taking over after Murtala’s death –Obasanjo

~Vanguard Nigeria. Tuesday, August 16, 2016

ABEOKUTA—Former President Olusegun Obasanjo said, yesterday, that he was persuaded to take over as Head of State, shortly after General Murtala Ramat Muhammed was killed in the 1976 coup.

The then Head of State, Gen Muhammed, along with his aide-de-camp, ADC (Lt. Akinsehinwa), orderly and driver were assassinated on February 13, 1976 while on his way to work in a black Mercedes Benz car.

Obasanjo said he, as the then Chief of Staff of Supreme Headquarters and the late Muhammed had worked for the peace of the country before the Lt. Col. Buka Dimka struck in the bloody coup.

While reflecting on the coup, Obasanjo declared that Nigerians had thought that the bloody coup would end the nation called Nigeria.

The former President said this when he played host to the cast and crew of the yet to be released film, “1976” at the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidential Library, OOPL, Abeokuta.

According to him, there were misconceptions about the coup, which upturned the political situation at that time.

He explained that the misconception stemmed from the fact that most of those involved in the coup were Christians and for killing the Head of State, who was a Muslim, it was seen as a bad signal for the nation.

He said: “The killing of a Muslim on a Friday by a gang thought to be Christians, particularly, when we remembered the first coup, which upturned the political situation gave a bad signal.

Obasanjo, however, described the film, which abridged parts were shown as “a mixture sweet and sorrow will make us to remember ourselves not to go back to the dark days, which put us in go-no-go situation.”

Commending the team for the production, he said, “we can have more of this, as there are more national issues that can be portrayed. We are capable of the best and that is what this film has shown that.”

The Executive Producer of the film, Tonye Princewill said the cast and crew of “1976” was on tour of the country to seek support and endorsement for the film, billed to premier in November.

Princewill said the visit to Obasanjo was important, “considering his position at that time in the country, we deem it fit to come and show him the film and curry his endorsement, which as you can see we had gotten.”