Democracy, Free Elections and US Observers in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis

Democracy, Free Elections and US Observers in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis
By
© Professor Amechi Okolo, Ph.D.
The recent announcement that a 40-member team of American and international observers will be going to observe Nigeria’s elections in April 2007 evokes some serious thoughts and considerations. What I feel about the announcement is conflicted because I am a Nigerian living in America, which means that I know and have experienced a few things about elections in both countries that are not sanguine. This paper is, therefore my critical analysis of the idea of Americans going to observe Nigeria’s elections based on my historical experiences, researches and records of elections in both countries.

Perhaps, the first thing I want to say is that we also need foreign observation of our own presidential elections in America because of the chronic election frauds in this country. For example, President Bush stole the 2000 and 2004 elections. Many people know it and said or did nothing. Therefore, it is sheer hypocrisy for the west to be chanting or shouting of election frauds in Africa and the third world and ignores the United States, which is the historical capital of election frauds in the world. Anyone interested in the U.S. election frauds must first go and read, Andrew Gumbel, Steal This Vote: Dirty Elections and the Rotten History of Democracy in America (New York: Nation Books, 2005) and others[1] before he/she starts yelling, pointing his/her fingers or opening his/her mouth about election frauds in Nigeria or elsewhere.

Nigeria has historically had very serious elections frauds. Ever since I can remember, elections have been rigged and have been very fraudulent in Nigeria. Election frauds are the scourges we have had to live with and have been fighting with limited or no success to curb them. We have, nevertheless, at least, acknowledge them, discuss them and vow to eliminate them each time with limited or no success. If acknowledgement of a problem has anything to do with resolving the problem, Nigerians can say that we are moving forward. The current Obasanjo government in Nigeria is, however dismal regarding election frauds. It stole the last elections in broad daylight to elevate rigging and election frauds to ridiculous heights. What they do in Nigeria now is a joke by any standards of democratic election but the government has been able to get away with most of its shenanigans because of its strong political and military ties with the equally fraudulent and roguish Bush administration in America.

Therefore, one important import of the criminal, lawless Bush administration in the U.S. is the expansion, exportation or globalization of election frauds to other parts of the world; and the sanctioning of lawless, imperial and incompetent administrations worldwide. Bush protects such administrations, invites them frequently to the White House, showcases them as “responsible” and friendly administrations, signs secret military protection pacts and deals with them, sends secret military forces to them including embedding top U.S. military advisers and personnel in the country’s defense headquarters as long as they support Bush’s war on terrorism. Therefore, that is the deal we now have in Nigeria. My President Obasanjo in Nigeria is in full bed with my President Bush here in the U.S. This paper is therefore my open cry to the world for help because I am being squeezed on both sides – in my natural home and in my adopted home – my two presidents are election frauds and cheats – and they are in copulation. Hence, Obasanjo gets full protection from Bush to do whatever he wants in Nigeria. It is a shame. It is a pity but that is the status of most third world countries now.

If you are with Bush and support his war on terrorism, he protects you and allows you to oppress and mis-administer your people. If you oppose him or are not with him, but want to do good things for your people, Bush will call you a terrorist and bomb you out of existence. Remember Saddam. He was their friend. They set him up, protected him, gave him chemical materials and helped him bomb and decimate his peoples as long as he was doing their biddings for them. However, once Saddam became independent and started doing something good for his people, U.S. turned against him with vengeance. They branded him all sorts of terrible names, raked up some horrible things he did with them, and then concocted a kangaroo court that found him guilty and hung him overnight before you could even say Jack Robinson, to silence him forever, in case he begins to spill on them. If you still doubt me or think I am kidding or exaggerating, also remember how Bush threatened to bomb Pakistan “back to stone age” if they did not support his terror war.

It was interesting to note that until his execution that Saddam believed that Americans would release him and make a deal with him for the restoration of peace in Iraq. He did not know that the Bush forces are the ultimate gangsters who do not even care about peace in Iraq. The question is who tells anybody that Bush really wants peace in Iraq? The continuing crisis and violence in Iraq is what gives Bush and Co the basis to continue the occupation and exploitation of Iraq and to continue to oppress, dupe and exploit Americans and for their global force projection, so Saddam was fundamentally flawed in thinking that Bush really wanted a way to end the Iraq violence.

In fact, I believe that it would be a calamity for Bush if all resistance and violence in Iraq were to suddenly end now. What would then Bush do? You want him to become a regular president instead of the “War President”, which is what gives him the imperial pomp and status that he really wants. Therefore, we must be careful about what we want or what we say we want. The truth is that we, the ordinary Americans and Bush are in very different camps and opposite poles, and we want different things. The common Americans like us want peace in Iraq to end the Americans and Iraqi deaths and sufferings. Bush and Co. on the other hand created the American/Iraqi deaths and sufferings; and have benefited enormously – socially, politically and economically from the deaths and violence they created. They are therefore happy with the war because they benefit from it and want it continue.

So the Iraqi violence is the raison d’être for the Bush mafia. It was the reason why they came into being and is the reason for their continued existence. Hence, anyone looking for the end of Iraq violence as long as the Bush mafia has anything to do with it is living in a fool’s paradise, just as Saddam lived until the Bush forces snapped the noose around his neck. Seriously, where would the Dick Cheneys, the Halliburtons, the Black Waters, etc. make their next big unaccountable bucks if Iraqi violence were to suddenly end. Does anyone think that the billions stolen, lost, squandered, misplaced, etc in Iraq vaporized into the thin air? No, they did not. They are in the pockets of the Dick Cheneys, the Hallibourtons, Black Waters, etc. So tell me where they will find another such lucrative golden egg, if you close the Iraq sector – in Iran, in Syria, North Korea, in Zimbabwe, in Nigeria, etc – any of those sectors would be far more difficult to open and would be far less lucrative or profitable, so will be far easier for them to keep open the super lucrative one, Iraq, which they already have.

The truth is that the Bush forces are equivalent to the Shakespearean “merchants of death”, which what I also call the merchants of horror. They are always shopping for deaths and horrors. They live by blood. They are bloodsuckers. They suck blood because it is what keeps them alive and anyone expecting anything different is delusional. Simply put, violence, blood and deaths earn the Bushes huge and unaccountable profits. I mean unaccountable profits because only war environments allow for the kind of unprecedented huge profits the Bushes have been making in Iraq.[2] So why would they give it up? Tell me. Unless when we, the people, take back the country. Peace would be a calamity for them. Their soaring stocks would collapse unless they scramble to create another Iraq. These are the ugly truths. The political economy of this Iraq war, which shows that it has created unprecedented unaccountable profits for the Bush forces, must be understood otherwise we make jackasses and laughing stocks of ourselves as the Dick Cheneys, the Halliburtons, the Black Waters, etc, take their real stocks and loots to their banks.

At the end of year, Dick Cheney gets his Halliburton stock papers and sees the quadruple jump, he call his wife, Lynne and they pop open a Champaign in celebration. They sing and vow that they war has been good and must continue. The other families in Brooklyn, New York, in Middle America -- the common Americans – receive their own news. A sergeant knocks at their door and delivers the dreaded news -- their loved ones have been blown apart and killed in Iraq. They sob, cry and grieve. Their loved ones are gone, too soon. In addition, forever. This is America. The two Americas – one prospering, happy, enjoying and cheering the war. These are the war cheer leaders, the draft dodgers and the chicken hawks of America – the Dick Cheneys of America. The other families, the rest of us-- fighting, dying, suffering and grieving.

The Bush corporate forces have had it so easy in America. There is no other country that would have allowed them to create the “perfect storm” that has allowed them to as easily loot the national treasury as they are doing in America, which is why I called America, “the most corrupt country” in the world. In any other country, they would have been arrested, charged with treason, looting, grand larceny, mass murder and all the other high crimes. However, in America, they are presidents, vice-presidents, Secretaries of Defense, Secretaries of State, and all the high voltage positions in the country. This is unprecedented massive fraud on the American people. Representative John Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania announced that there are 126,000 contractors in Iraq doing billions of dollars on contracts without supervision and/or accountability[3].

It started with Dick Cheney as the Defense Secretary under Papa Bush (or Bush 41) in late 1980s to early 1990s. First, Dick Cheney was a draft dodger. This means he did not go to Vietnam War when young patriotic men of his age went to defend the country. He invented and used all sorts of loopholes including having babies to avoid going. Therefore, he did not go to Vietnam and he did not serve in the armed forces. However, it still did not matter for Papa Bush to appoint him Secretary of Defense. I wonder if Bush 41 can tell us where Dick Cheney had the military experience to justify his appointment as the Secretary of Defense. None. So, that appointment was pure and simple political corruption.

And, it was that appointment by Bush 1 as Secretary of Defense that sowed the seeds for Dick Cheney’s ridiculous, run-amok, arrogance, pomposity, stupidity, delusion and utter contempt for the truth and for Americans. Yes, if you were appointed Secretary of Defense with no credentials and has been allowed to operate and get whatever you want in the system, and in anyway or through any means you want, both legal or illegal, why should you not be emboldened enough to assume that you are a special royal breed and that we are his underlining. In other words, Dick Cheney is simply a throwback from the dark ages of primitivity and feudal lords. He simply does not understand or belong to the modern age. Finally, he deserves to be in chains and left in prison to rot for the rest of his life; and watch how modern democracy works.

Maureen Dowd of the New York Times wrote one of her best columns on Dick Cheney when Senator Dick Durbin called him delusional. I have posted this exceptionally well-written article on my blog – youwritecenter.blogspot.com – for more global exposure. She wrote:
Dick Durbin went to the floor of the Senate on Thursday night to denounce the vice president as ''delusional.'' It was shocking, and Senator Durbin should be ashamed of himself. Delusional is far too mild a word to describe Dick Cheney. Delusional doesn't begin to capture the profound, transcendental one-flew-over daftness of the man. Has anyone in the history of the United States ever been so singularly wrong and misguided about such phenomenally important events and continued to insist he's right in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?[4]
She continued:
It requires an exquisite kind of lunacy to spend hundreds of billions destroying America's reputation in the world, exhausting the U.S. military, failing to catch Osama, enhancing Iran's power in the Middle East and sending American kids to train and arm Iraqi forces so they can work against American interests. Only someone with an inspired alienation from reality could, under the guise of exorcising the trauma of Vietnam, replicate the trauma of Vietnam. You must have a real talent for derangement to stay wrong every step of the way, to remain in complete denial about Iraq's civil war, to have a total misunderstanding of Arab culture, to be completely oblivious to the American mood and to be absolutely blind to how democracy works. In a democracy, when you run a campaign that panders to homophobia by attacking gay marriage and then your lesbian daughter writes a book about politics and decides to have a baby with her partner, you cannot tell Wolf Blitzer he's ''out of line'' when he gingerly raises the hypocrisy of your position.[5]
Finally, she asserted:
Mr. Cheney acts more like a member of the James gang than the Jefferson gang. Asked by Wolf what would happen if the Senate passed a resolution critical of The Surge, Scary Cheney rumbled, ''It won't stop us.'' Such an exercise in democracy, he noted, would be ''detrimental from the standpoint of the troops.''[6]


On the other hand, may be experience and competence do not matter in the appointment of Secretary of Defense? This question is very important because the most important function Dick Cheney did as Secretary of Defense was what he did for himself – he succeeded to push through a bill in Congress that privatized a good chunk of the duties and activities of America’s armed forces to Halliburton. When he left Pentagon, Dick Cheney became the CEO of Halliburton, which he turned, along with its subsidiary, Black Water, into the largest and most lucrative private military contractor in the world. Mr. Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton when Bush appointed him to chair the search for his presidential running mate in 2000; and after exhaustive search, Mr. Cheney, eventually found himself.

Then, they stole the election and implanted themselves as our government[7].Once they seized the White House, the most important thing they began to plan was how to invade Iraq – a plan their PNAC mafia group had been peddling since the presidency of Ronald Reagan. The mafia group known as “The Project of the New American Empire” (PNAC) had been pleading with various governments to invade Iraq to no avail. President Reagan thought they were nuts and ignored them, President Bush 41, also ignored them while President Bill Clinton rebuffed them until they installed their own person in the White House in the name of President W. Bush who was then eager and willing to do their “invade Iraq” biddings.

And once Iraq was successfully invaded and destroyed, Dick Cheney’s Halliburton and Black Water, etc organized mega billions “no bid” contracts for themselves to service American and coalition armed forced and to “rebuild” Iraq. This is what I call “corruption par excellence.” It is unprecedented in the history of governmental and executive corruptions. Please, show me anywhere in the history of human affairs where a Secretary (or Minister) of Defense privatized the country’s armed forces to his company, stole the presidency of the country, then invaded and destroyed another resource-rich country and awarded his company huge no-bid mega billions contracts to service the armed forces and “rebuild” the country. I must add that the attack was based on lies and totally unprovoked. Hence, if can find a more corrupt system than the one I have described or if you think or know that my description is wrong, please counter it and let me know, otherwise America, under Bush/PNAC administration remains on my list as the most corrupt country in the world.

In any other country, there would have been uproars and countless inquiries, Congressional investigations, etc. as people realize the huge lies they have been told. More importantly, the uproars and investigations will not be just to find out if the “pre-war intelligence was manipulated” as the Democrats now “bravely” want to do, but to expose the treasonable and felonious roles of Dick Cheney and Halliburton in the push for Iraqi wars. Simple logic shows that:
(a) since Dick Cheney was the head of Halliburton,
(b) Has been the staunchest proponent and supporter of Iraq war as the Vice-President based in lies[8],
(c) Halliburton and subsidiaries have benefited most financially from the war through their “no-bid” contracts,
(d) Therefore, Dick Cheney’s and Halliburton’s nefariously lied to America and the world; and plotted the Iraqi war so that they could rake in the huge profits they now make in Iraq[9].

That Americans are rarely discussing and/or investigating this war along the above logic is mind bugling and is one reason Noam Chomsky and others called America, “a failed state” or “Rogue Nation[10]” Please, I need to be told if my logic is wrong, and if it is, which of my syllogisms is wrong. In addition, since all my syllogisms and deductions – a, b, and c are correct, indisputable, incontrovertible and empirically verifiable truths then my conclusion (d) must be correct, ipso facto or quad errant demonstrandum (QED).

I am therefore not happy that foreign observers are coming to observe our April elections in Nigeria because I know that they will only be there to sanction Obasanjo’s candidates. United States has also historically had very fraudulent elections. In recent times, the brazen theft of 2000 election by W. Bush is legendary, unprecedented and akin to daylight robbery, but elections were never free and fair in America, contrary to their projections. Five criminal, shameless, no-good Supreme Court judges (O’Connor, Thomas, Rehnquist, Scalia and Kennedy) who should be behind bars in any true just and democratic society selected Bush. Read, The Betrayal of America: How The Supreme Court Undermined The Constitution And Chose Our President by Vincent Bugliosi; and Supreme Injustice: How The High Court Hijacked Election 2000 by Alan M. Dershowitz for more details. Bush repeated similar frauds and again, stole the 2004 election. Read, Fooled Again, How The Right Stole 2004 Election by Mark Crispin Miller again, for more details.

Therefore, we have a well-known and properly documented rogue and felonious presidency in America to which the world turns blind eyes only to keep shouting about fraudulent elections in Nigeria and other third world states. Americans should not be going to observe Nigeria’s elections. They should invest the time and energy to fix, repair and observe their own hopelessly broken, unjust and unfair electoral system. Americans also deserve free and fair elections. My heart bleeds, any time I see these pretend do-good Americans, like Jimmy Carter or Madeleine Albright or others go to observe elections in other countries because I know they should start right here in America, which is the capital of world election rigging.

I wrote Jimmy Carter in 2003 to remind him to observe the 2004 election so that the theft of 2000 did repeat. Carter wrote me back to say that he is not allowed to observe US elections. I therefore told him that his works at global election observations are therefore hypocritical, it he could not prevent it at home in his own country. Later he formed a bi-partisan committee with James Baker to study election frauds and rigging in America[11]. To date, nothing positively concrete has happened to alleviate our fears that poor blacks and Hispanics will be allowed to vote in the coming 2008 elections[12]. What I told Jimmy Carter in 2003 about observing US elections still stands today with regards to the current NDI observation of April 2007 elections in Nigeria. Madeleine Albright and NDI should come back home to the United States and join us in our rigorous battles to ensure free and equitable elections in America. Leave Nigeria and other countries alone. Physician, heal thyself first. United States is a rotten apple and should not be allowed to be infesting others with its election malaise and malfeasance. There is very little that is honorable and/or admirable about America’s democratic process. I should know. I have been studying and teaching it for decades now.

As stated, the U.S. is sending a 40-team delegation to monitor and observe the coming April, 2007 elections in Nigeria. According to reports:

Former United States Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright is leading a 40-member international election observation team to Nigeria next month.The National Democratic Institute (NDI) is sponsoring the delegation which includes political and civic leaders, election experts and regional specialists from Africa, Asia, Europe and North America to Nigeria from April 16 to 24 to observe the 2007 general elections. A statement signed by Dr. Keith Jennings, NDI Nigeria’s Country Director noted that through the observation mission, NDI seeks to demonstrate international support for, and interest in, a democratic electoral process in Nigeria. The delegation will be NDI’s 10th observation mission to Nigeria since the country’s transition from military to civilian rule in 1999. It is part of the institute’s long-term program to support Nigeria’s democratic institutions.[13]
It continued:
The delegation which shall have notable personalities including Albright, who is also the Chairman of the NDI Board of Directors will also have Joe Clark, former Prime Minister of Canada; Mahamane Ousmane, Speaker of the ECOWAS parliament and former President of Niger; and Amos Sawyer, former President of Liberia It will also include Jeanne Shaheen, Director of the Institute of Politics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University and former Governor of New Hampshire in the US; and Justice Yvonne Mokgoro of the Constitutional Court of South Africa Other members of the delegation are Ms. Beverly Baker-Kelly, lawyer and former Deputy Registrar of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, well-known U.S. human rights leader Martin Luther King III and Kenneth Wollack, president of NDI. The delegation will be joined by a team of long-term NDI observers from Cameroon, Canada, Côte d’Ivoire, Indonesia, Kenya, Sierra Leone and the United States, who will arrive Nigeria this week to observe the campaign period in all of the country’s six geo-political zones prior to the April 14 state legislature and gubernatorial elections and the April 21 National Assembly and presidential elections[14]. (Emphasis mine)
Now, our American bosses have chosen Madam Albright to go and sanction the theft of Nigeria’s elections by Obasanjo’s cronies. Last time it was the infamous Liar-in-Chief, Colin Powell and Jimmy Carter that were sent to do the dirty job of sanctioning Obasanjo’s “re-election,” which was more of “re-selection” just as Bush was “re-selected” here in America in 2004.[15] The conclusion of the Powell team then was that “the elections were rigged but that it could not have changed the outcome of the election.” Smart guys. They must be super-smart to observe that the elections were rigged and also knew that Obasanjo was duly elected.

Now that Madam Albrights team has been set in place, we will watch to see the hack job they will do. The question is who is observing the observers? Who is monitoring the monitors? More importantly, who are the monitors or the observers working for? Are they working for Nigeria’s interests? Or for the interests of the imperialist forces of the U.S. and the west? These are some of the critical questions they must examine and answer for themselves, for Nigerians, for Americans and for the world before they embark on their mission. I will send this article to the team for them to know that the world is watching/monitoring/observing them as they monitor/observe Nigeria’s election.

What/Who is the NDI?
Before we can make any reasonable analysis and/or conclusions about NDI’s activities and its observer team for Nigeria’s elections, it will be necessary to understand what or whom they are. First, NDI claims that they love to see Nigeria’s smooth transition to democracies and that they have been helping Nigeria transit to Democracies for ten years. If that is true, they said nothing when Obasanjo battered and destroyed democratic elections and processes in Anambra in 2003. His thugs held Anambra state hostage, burnt down buildings and properties, abducted/changed governors because state budgetary allocations were not shared with them. If they did nothing, which was true, then they are Obasanjo’s stooges who are not needed now.

Secondly, in this April 2007 elections, Obasanjo’s election hatched man, Professor Maurice Iwu is working hard to eliminate Dr. Chris Ngige and Mr. Peter Obi from contesting. We strongly hope that he fails because they are the only two credible candidates for the state governorship. He only wants Andy Uba, Obasanjo’s protégé to be the sole contestant, thus guaranteeing his selection as the next governor of Anambra state. Any honest democratic election in Anambra state must include Dr. Ngige and Mr. Peter Obi because they were the two governors that are dear to the people of Anambra state – Dr. Ngige because of the great unbelievable roads/infrastructure he built during his tenure; and Mr. Obi because of his association with the immutable Dim Odumegwu-Ojukwu who is still highly loved and respected by a great majority of Igbos.

Then apart from the election shenanigans in Anambra state, the prospects of free elections throughout the federation is very tenuous. President Obasanjo, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Chairman, Chief Nuhu Ribadu, Chief Bayo Ojo, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Professor Maurice Iwu, Chairman of INEC have all conspired to keep Vice-President Atiku Abubakar and other anti-Obasanjo candidates from contesting. And, if understandably, the NDI cannot do or say anything against the partisan disqualifications, then you must withdraw from Nigeria because the only other thing you will do for this election is to end up legitimizing Obasanjo’s corrupt election practices.

What I am saying is that there is no way your activities in Nigeria now will support democracy because you are structured to support Obasanjo’s corrupt election designs or be kicked out of the country by him. Therefore, simply by continuing to stay and operate in Nigeria, you have elected to collude with the nefarious Obasanjo election forces. This is obvious and clear. You are therefore lying to yourself or to Nigerians to say that you are promoting democracy in Nigeria or elsewhere. NDI states its global objectives as:

NDI is engaged in transitions to democracy in nearly every corner of every continent, monitoring elections, training political and civic leaders, advising parliaments and promoting opportunities for women and youth.[16]

Then having elected to stay and collude with Obasanjo in defrauding Nigerians, NDI constructed an elaborate deception structure that is designed to obfuscate, confuse and conceal their real purpose from Nigerians as I will presently show. When this huge deceptive structure is unmasked, it become clear how the NDI is part of the gigantic Bush’s WMD (weapon of mass deception), in his war on terror.


First, NDI is organized and funded by the American government, the CIA , USAID and private funds which is usually how US funds major CIA operations. So the claim by NDI that they are non-partisan organization is correct. However, the word ‘non-partisan’ has specific meaning in America. Normally, it means a joint venture by both the Republicans and the Democrats, which is what NDI is, with a Democratic leadership. Nigerians should, therefore not understand NDI’s ‘non-partisan’ to mean that it is country neutral because it is an American partisan organization that cares for the interests of America only. NDI has no interests in Nigeria’s goals except those that favor America. Does this mean that I am against Nigeria dealing with NDI or any other American organization? The answer is no. Nigeria may deal with them as long as they know that the organizations are not neutral do-gooders. This means that Nigerians must guard themselves before lying in bed with them. Nigerians must also read, John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man to know the terrible and horrible havocs American organizations like NDI and others commit in the third world.

However, NDI is a very partisan organization because it was set up, organized, maintained and sustained by America with the combined public and private resources and funds to take care of America’s global interests. This means that NDI is a non-partisan American organization designed to take care of America’s partisan interests abroad. This is important so that when NDI brags about being non-partisan, Nigerians should agree and remind them that they are still American, carrying America’s interests. The non-partisan aspect of NDI is for America’s internal politics and has no relevance to Nigerians.

This means that NDI must stop branding itself as a non-partisan global organization. It is a partisan American global organization by the CIA and USAID to penetrate, soften condition and prepare the civil societies ready for western penetration and imperialism. NDI is an American non-governmental organization, (NGO) designed for deep penetration of enemy territories under humanitarian and other noble guises. They usually have resident Director like Dr. Keith Jenning in Nigeria. His role as the CIA clandestine forward operator in Nigeria is to water, grow and fertilize the ground for American imperialism. He is leading the first brigade to capture and hold the ground. And, according to John Perkins, if he fails, the “jackals” will move in and do the executions.[17]

Dr. Jenning should read this book by John Perkins, which is a brilliant expose of what he does to understand that his real mission is now open secrete. John Perkins was a brilliant covert operative like Dr. Jenning until his conscience forced him to change his mind, come clean and wrote the best-selling expose.

Their role of Dr. Jenning in Nigeria is to garner intelligence, keep tab of local operatives, and identify potential collaborators with western imperialism, snitches, troublemakers and resistance centers. Dr. Jenning is generally to grow and nurture “good guys” and potential “good guys” in the system and to eliminate “bad guys” and potential “bad guys” in the system by quietly killing/poisoning them[18]. Of course, the most important tasks of covert operatives like Dr. Jenning is during elections when they must work extra hard to make sure that only favored and preferred candidates are declared winners. This is beautiful because this is where Dr. Jenning has done the greatest job for his bosses by totally organizing and streamlining Nigeria’s electoral processes under NDI’s control.

I must confess that it is chilling and that it is my most uncomfortable findings while researching for this paper to find out how pervasively structured the NDI has prepared Nigeria and Nigerians for their own version of our April 2007 election results. I have never been as depressed as I was while doing research for this paper to find out how the great people of Nigeria have been manipulated and structured by NDI and Dr. Jenning for the electoral outcome that NDI, CIA and the west prefer.

In fact, from available records, it appears that the Madeleine Albright 40-member observer team that will be visiting Nigeria from April 16 – 24, 2007 will only be going there for confirmatory purposes because the NDI resident Director in Nigeria, Dr. Jennings and his thousands of staff have already finished the difficult and tedious leg-work of organizing Nigerians to ensure CIA preferred results in Nigeria’s April, 2007 elections. With banner headlines that shrilled, “NDI Facilitates Civil Society Pre-election Conference:” NDI declared:

November 22-23, 2006 will perhaps be remembered for a long time as a milestone in Nigeria’s electoral process. That was when over 200 representatives from professional bodies, civil society organizations, religious leaders, the media, political parties, INEC, the National Assembly and the Nigeria Police Force met in Abuja to exchange ideas on the April 2007 elections. The Pre-election Conference took place at time many were voicing fears that a huge section of the voting population might be disenfranchised due to the logistic and administrative failures that had characterized the voters’ registration and revalidation exercise then being conducted by INEC. Concern had equally been expressed over issues such as the participation of women and of youths in the elections and the role of the security forces and the media.[19] (Emphasis mine)

The thought is pathetic, chilling, very regrettable, utterly shameful and indefensible that forty-seven years after our independence, that the proud , hard-working and illustrious people of Nigeria should allow one rickety Dr. Jenning of NDI to organize our elections for the CIA by reaching into the inner crannies and centers of our society. Police Commissioners, INEC officials, National Assembly members, etc. – whom do they think Dr. Jenning is? Or the NDI to be working so intimately with him? Do we still have anything called national integrity? Or national honor? That is worth preserving? If this is why we fought for independence, then I think that the spirit of our founding fathers –
Ahmadu Bello, Obafemi Awolowo and Nnamdi Azikiwe – will be smarting in their graves now when they realize that we have turned over their hard-won battles to any rickety American that straggles around. Further, boasts that it has united domestic election monitors in the country. This is designed to ensure that the domestic/local monitors are on the same page with their foreign bosses:


NDI Unites Domestic Election Monitors: The credibility of Nigerian elections has been an issue of great concern to all. To encourage the major non-partisan civil society organizations engaged in election monitoring to harmonize their positions, to collaborate for more effective coverage and to speak with one voice, NDI brought the major domestic election monitoring groups and other key stakeholders together in January for a three-day consultation at Abraka in Delta State[20].

Also, in addition:

In addition to NDI partners – Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), Institute for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (IHRHL), Justice Development and Peace Commission (JDPC), the Labour Election Monitoring Team (LEMT) as well as the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Federation of Moslem Women Associations of Nigeria (FOMWAN) and the Muslim League for Accountability (MULAC), the meeting was attended by the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) and the Alliance for Credible Elections (ACE). All past and present chairs of the TMG Steering Committee were also in attendance.[21]


This confirms that NDI has “international” backing for its actions – that it is the leading imperialist agent on this. Then:

The organizations present agreed to adopt a common checklist as developed by NDI, and to harmonize the deployment of monitors. They also agreed to work together on the collection and transmission of data, and worked out a basic method of issuing a common interim statement on the conduct of the elections. (Emphasis Mine)

By agreeing to “a common checklist as developed by NDI,” everyone agreed to work under NDI rules. It bleeds my heart to read these very delicate and sensitive and even illegal arrangements that were reached with NDI and Dr. Jenning. I thought that we have INEC that is responsible for the deployment and harmonization of election monitors and for collection and transmission of data. Finally, and perhaps, the most chilling is that they also, “worked out a basic method of issuing a common interim statement on the conduct of the elections” This is usually the statements that international observers usually issue after elections to legitimize elections they support. We are now seeing that it is usually the result of pre-arranged decisions. Then Dr. Jenning tells us how many monitors, he hoped to saturate Nigeria with – about 50,000 – during the process.

In all, the groups present hope to deploy up to 50,000 monitors, although ACE and TMG are also in discussion with other organizations such as the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) and the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA), who also wish to be involved in election monitoring.[22]

This number literally amounts to army of occupation, especially when the people they are attacking do not know their sinister intentions. They finally set up a Steering Committee chaired by Professor Ayoade to effect their grand design. The notable thing here is that Dr. Jenning’s name did not appear in any of the designs. This is how covert operators work – behind the scenes – with wands of cash to clear his way.

At the end of the meeting, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed by all the groups present, under which they agreed to establish a Steering Committee chaired by Professor J.A.A. Ayoade of The Institute for Social Studies and Administration (TISSA). An Information Technology Committee was also established to advise the group on the best ways of collecting, entering and transmitting the data generated by the work of the observers.[23]

Having successfully set up the election structure as explained above, Dr. Jennings exploded in joy, affirmation and arrogance. He declared:

The stage is thus set for an authoritative verdict from non-partisan civil society on the conduct of the 2007 elections. The commitment of the various groups to work together can be gauged from the fact that both the IT and the Steering Committees have already swung into action[24] (Emphasis mine)


Dr. Jenning finally tell us that he has established the center that will give authoritative verdict from non-partisan civil society. This means that his center will announce legitimate election results, which also means that any result not approved, recognized or opposed to NDI figures is illegitimate and unacceptable – and these include all INEC figures and announcements. .
The current Chairman of Nigeria’s electoral Commission, Professor Maurice Iwu was a friend. He was at the University of Nsukka, Nigeria when I was at the University of Ife, Nigeria; and the last time we met and talked was in 1991 at my apartment in Brooklyn, New York, when he was visiting New York on his way to a stint in Pennsylvania, I believe. He later went back to Nigeria. I was here when his appointment as the Chair of the very crucial Independent National Electoral commission (INEC) was announced, and I am glad for him, but Maurice must know the history of election riggings in Nigeria and must not allow himself to be used to legitimize Obasanjo’s election shenanigans.

I will like to feel that my generation, especially my friends and acquaintances in the academia are special breed of incorruptible Nigerians, Professor Iwu would therefore be disappointing a lot of his friends if he turns out to be simply Obasanjo’s hatched man like the Chairman of Federal Election Commission (FEDECO), when we were young.

I need to explain, that unlike the United States, which does not have a central election organizing authority, that the INEC in Nigeria is very powerful. It is the central election organizing authority and has the final say on many issues pertaining to elections in Nigeria. It sets election dates, registers voters, screens and approves political parties and candidates, certifies elections and announces winners, among others. Since, the INEC has broad powers over elections in Nigeria it is the hotbed of controversy during Nigeria’s elections that Americans may not even begin to imagine.

Hence, specifically, Maurice must remember how previous chairs of the Commissions plunged Nigeria into chaos because of their partisan behaviors. Maurice, you owe it to this generation to do better than our fathers, in terms of elections because we now know better. So myself and your many friends and operatives at Nigeria’s universities are expecting better performance from you. These said, I wish you luck and I wish Madam Albright luck.

Further, Professor Iwu recently announced that the dates for April elections must never be changed as some are pressuring to do. According to This Day:

Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman, Professor Mau-rice Iwu, yesterday dismissed speculations that the general elections scheduled to begin April 14 could be shifted, assuring that the elections would hold as already planned. “Anybody making the plans to shift the election days would be embarking on an exercise in futility,” he said. “The Constitution is very clear and unambiguous on the modality for elections. Not even the Supreme Court has the powers to change the election dates because the Constitution provides the modality,” he told a group of journalists at an interactive session held in Abuja[25]

Therefore, it looks like the chair is pulling his weight and standing his ground in the hazardous business of Nigerian elections. However, the one other feature that is most troubling to me is the American role in the elections. Again, according to This Day:

The United States Government yesterday tasked the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to ensure transparency and adhere strictly to the rule of law in the conduct of the forthcoming general elections in Nigeria. It specifically urged the electoral commission to obey court rulings on the disqualification and substitution of candidates in order to boost the credibility of the April 14 and 21 2007 polls. The United States Ambassador to Nigeria, Mr. John Campbell made the position of his home government known at the dedication ceremony of the newly built American International School, Abuja (AISA) located in the Durumi District of the Federal Capital Territory.

It continued:
According to the envoy, the United States Government has provided $15 million assistance to ensure the success of the Nigerian general elections and was watching with keen interest to see Nigeria transit successfully from one democratic government to another through the ballot box.[26] (Emphasis mine).

My point is what business has United States providing $15 million to help Nigeria’s election. First, it is undue interference into Nigeria’s internal affairs. Elections are sacred national processes and the hallmark of their sovereignty. Therefore, for a foreign power to provide money for that process is rude, open, abrasive and arrogant injection and intrusion into the internal affairs of Nigeria, the way Americans would not accept. I remember how it caused national uproar when a Chinese contributed money towards Clinton/Gore’s elections; and I remember how people demanded Clinton’s and the Chinese heads. It was even a Chinese individual with no government connection. Yet Americans were as mad as hell that he tried to buy influence in the country.

In this Nigerian case, the US Ambassador arrogantly announcing and declaring the he was providing $15 million dollars for Nigeria’s elections. Some of the relevant questions for Ambassador John Campbell are: Why does he think that it is appropriate for him to provide $15 million for our elections? Would it be fine for him if Nigeria’s Ambassador to the U.S. provides $15 million to Americans for the 2008 elections?

For the avoidance of doubt, the United States is not and cannot be interested in Nigeria’s successful transit from one democratic government to another as Ambassador Campbell said. The Ambassador knows that he is lying and that it is not true because the U.S. has never helped a third world state to establish democracy or transit from one democratic government to another. Show me one, if you can find. More importantly, the U.S. does not itself practice democracy, so it cannot provide or give what it does not have. No one can ever give what it does not have. The U.S. practices plutocracy – government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich; and not a democracy, which is a government of the people, by the people, for the people.[27]

While there is no historical example of where the U.S. has helped a third world state establish democracy or transit from one democratic government to another, there are abundant examples of where US sabotaged a democratic government or its transition to another democratic government. In fact the historical US roles in the world has been to plant, sustain and maintain autocratic governments throughout the world. Few examples will suffice – Allende’s Chile in early 1970s; Patrice Lumumba, Osagefo Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sukarno of Indonesia, Saudi Arabian kingdom, Murtala Muhammed of Nigeria, Moshood Abiola of Nigeria and many others.

The CIA Assassination of Chief Moshood Abiola:
Moshood Abiola was killed by America as he was being released from prison to become the president of Nigeria. America was scared of the “stubborn and obstinate” Abiola becoming the president of the oil-rich, populous and important country like Nigeria. Abiola was a superrich billionaire – very well known and respected in Africa and the world. He was also, very well connected. He had many powerful and influential friends in the US and throughout the world because his business empire was global. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the former Secretary-General of the UN was his good friend. Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Colin Powell, Andrew Young were among his many influential friends, acquaintances and connections in the US. These were in addition to the business and corporations’ moguls he was structurally connected with in the US and elsewhere because his business empire was gigantic and global.

However, in spite of all the above, the one thing that America and the west could not tolerate about Abiola was because he was uncompromisingly Nigerian, African and black. Moreover, he had a very deep sense of the social injustice, exploitation and imperialism on Africa. He, thus became the leading proponent of reparation – African, African-American demand for massive economic compensation by the west for slavery, imperialism and their historical injustice and exploitation against Africa and the blacks. Talking about reparation, Randall Robinson of TransAfrica fame stated:

Blacks should come broadly to know that we do not approach this looming national debate as supplicants. The appeal here is not for affirmative action but, rather, for just compensation as an entitlement for the many years of heinous US government-embraced wrongs and the stolen labor of our forefathers. We only make the claims that other successful group complainants have made in the world. Put simply, we too are owed.[28]

Most frightening for the west, however, Abiola was not just any academician, like us, rattling for reparation and against imperialism, exploitation, etc. He had the money and was willing to put his money where his mouth was. In 1990, he established a multi-million dollar fund and offered one million dollar grant to any university in America and the west if they established a Department of Black Studies that promoted active studies on reparation. The result was that the study of reparation became a hot and gained respectability among academicians and universities in the early 1990s, as they scrambled to get the dangling Abiola fund by establishing and promoting Black Studies for the study of reparation.

Abiola further followed his challenge to academia but hosting a worldwide PBS program on reparation. The program which aired on America’s Channel 13 was hosted and narrated by Chief Abiola himself. It was highly advertised and watched. Abiola had enough money to literally do whatever he wanted. His focus then was on reparation, and he poured money into that. I remember watching Abiola then as he took journalists through a tour of Badagry, which was a slave port in Nigeria, and dramatized/showed them how Nigerians were chained, hurled into ships and sent to America and the west as slaves from whence they never returned. He argued that they destroyed our economy, carried away our most productive citizens and made them work in America and the west for free. Therefore, Africa and African-Americans must now be compensated for those horrible crimes and exploitation.

Unfortunately for Nigerians, African-Americans and for all those interested in social justice, Abiola was shortly, thereafter “drafted” by the opposition coalition to run for president in Nigeria’s 1994 elections. He accepted the offer, which I personally think he should not have, because he was already doing something that was more useful to humanity. However, the important thing was that he accepted the offer as their presidential candidate -- and, like the many other things Abiola did, he poured his all into it and won the presidential election. That was when the west swung into action.

The thought of Chief Abiola becoming the president of Nigeria was too scary for the west. They know him very well. He was an integral member of their inner circles. He was intelligent, well-informed, hardworking, obstinate, highly-opinionated, had a high sense of justice and injustice; and above all was very, very rich. Nigerians were quite happy and comfortable all those qualities of him, which was why we elected him. But the west was scarred stiff of having to deal with Abiola with the enormous power, wealth and influence of Nigeria behind him so they moved to get the pliant Nigerian government to abort the election. I should remind you that pliant African governments were part of what Abiola campaigned against during the election.

Nigerians and Abiola refused to accept the cancellation of the election results, and typical of Abiola, he got himself sworn-in as the president of Nigeria, after which, the government arrested him and put him in jail on July 12, 1994. In jail, Abiola was recalcitrant. He maintained his position that he won the election and was the legitimate president of Nigeria. Meanwhile, Nigerians continued their resistance and observed June 12 as their national resistance day when lectures, speeches, riots and protests were organized around the country and US Embassy .under what came to be known as the June 12 Movement. Nigerians organized against the US Embassy because they felt that America was behind the cancellation of the elections, which Abiola won.

The political standoff continued and intensified in Nigeria as Abiola remained in jail and Nigerians continued to protest the cancelled election until 1998 when the military president suddenly died thus creating a new national leadership vacuum. The June 12 Movement then clamored for the release and installation of Abiola as the president. The interim president agreed to release Abiola but not as president. Abiola refused and maintained that he would only leave the prison as the president of Nigeria. Meanwhile there were intense negotiations as many pro-American world leaders visited him in prison to convince him otherwise but he refused. It was clear that the world leaders were coming at the urging of America, and all they wanted to do, was to talk Abiola out of his “stubborn” insistence that he would not leave the prison unless as president four years ago.

During that time, the world eyes were glued on television watching the daily, even minute-by-minute developments and unfolding melodrama and saga in Nigeria. It was an astonishing spectacle and remarkable strength of character to watch a man refuse “freedom” even after four years of solitary confinement because of what he believed. Abiola’s “stubbornness” was loved and cheered by Nigerians, but it confirmed and strengthened the worst fears of America and the west that Chief Abiola would be too inflexible to deal with as president, hence their resolve that he would never become president. Like I said earlier, Nigeria is too important for America to be left alone for Nigerians hence, it must be controlled, via satellite pliable agents like the present President Obasanjo. Chief Abiola certainly did not fit the mold. Many African leaders visited him and tried to talk him out of his resistance but he refused. Kofi Annan, the newly installed Secretary-General of the UN then visited him and pleaded for his masters, but Abiola refused. According to reports:

The fate of Abiola has played a major role in attempts to lend credibility to Abubakar's claim of a democratic transformation. The United States and the European governments have accepted the legitimacy of the proposed elections. Every attempt had been made to secure Abiola's co-operation and endorsement of a "peaceful transition" that would leave the power of the military intact and thwart the genuine strivings for democracy by the Nigerian people. The government was insisting that Abiola give up his claim to a presidential mandate in exchange for his freedom[29].
The reports made clear that the western imperialist forces were behind the major Nigeria’s government decisions on Abiola then. It stated:
The regime was tacitly supported in this demand by all the major imperialist powers. On June 27 British Deputy Foreign Minister Tony Lloyd visited Nigeria on behalf of the European Union. He called for "the establishment of an electoral process in which the voters are in control." This statement was interpreted as a shift away from the EU's previous position that Abiola be installed as president.[30]
The reports also made clear the amount of international attention Nigeria got at the time because of Abiola. It stated:
That same week United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, along with Commonwealth Secretary General Emeka Anyaoku, paid an official visit to Nigeria and held talks with the new military ruler. Annan was allowed to visit Abiola in a safe house. At a July 1 press conference the UN head said the military government had agreed to free all political prisoners, and that Abiola's release was "only a matter of time". The secretary general emphasised that Abiola did not entertain ambitions to become president, which appeared to meet the precondition laid down by the military for his release.[31]
The spin master was on here as we can see that Mr. Annan had gone into a spin overdrive to pressure Abiola to accept their imperialist offer not to press for the presidency. Even President Bill Clinton weighed in then to calm the waters after America had assassinated Abiola. The reports also clarified why Nigeria is very important to America and the west. Hence, according to the reports:
Following Abiola's death, US President Bill Clinton dismissed speculation of foul play and said he had been encouraged by steps taken towards democracy by the military. Kofi Annan called for calm to be restored. Nigeria ranks as the fifth largest supplier of oil to the American market, and US firms account for nearly half of Nigeria's output of petroleum and natural gas.[32]
The report also clarified the crucial, exploitative roles of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Nigeria.

The International Monetary Fund has long been demanding sweeping economic changes to open up Nigeria’s economy to international investment. Within Nigeria the bourgeois opposition to the military regime is divided on many questions. Some opposition groups were demanding a national government to be headed by Abiola after his release. Some feared that Abiola would strike a private deal with the army[33].

Kofi Annan even offered Abiola that he would be allowed to contest in the presidential election, which would be internationally supervised but Abiola refused to leave the prison. Finally, the US sent the Under Secretary of State, James Pickering, who knew Abiola when he was the Ambassador to Nigeria, to meet Abiola in prison. What happened next was unthinkable, unimaginable, and sent shock waves through out the country and the world. Abiola suddenly died in prison, in the presence of and while meeting with Mr. Pickering, the US Ambassador on July 7, 1998. According to New reports:

The death in custody of Chief Moshood Abiola on July 7 has polarised an already tense political situation in Nigeria. There have been major riots and protests following the sudden death of the imprisoned opposition leader. A number of people are reported to have been killed in clashes with police. The biggest protests have occurred in Lagos and the rest of Yoruba region in the southwest that formed the political stronghold of Abiola. Abiola became incapacitated during a visit by the United States Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering and a delegation of US diplomats. The US officials were meeting with Abiola to discuss his role in what is being presented by the West as Nigeria's transition to democratic rule.[34]
It continued:
Pickering later said that Abiola, having suddenly developed trouble breathing, "went into the toilet and came out obviously very distressed." A doctor was called and arrived in 10 minutes. Abiola was taken by car to the clinic of the head of state of Nigeria, where doctors "worked fully for 90 minutes in all conceivable ways" to save him. A government statement said Chief Abiola died of an apparent heart attack. Oppositionists charged that the military had killed him. His daughter Hafsat said, "We have been trying for 18 months to get my father access to his doctor.... We now know why it was so important to keep his condition secret from the people. [He died] either because medical neglect brought on a heart attack, or because they poisoned him[35]" (Emphasis mine).
I have taken some steps to explain the Abiola saga because of its great imports on the important issue of America transiting democracy in Nigeria and the third world for which Ambassador Campbell was peddling his $15 million dollars. First, Nigeria does not need $15 million from any country. We are a very rich country. We are a member of OPEC and a major supplier of oil to the US. Besides oil, we have enormous reserves of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), which is fast becoming the vogue in addition to oil as the global energy source. Therefore, $15 million is mere pittance and chicken change to the billions we make from our oil revenue. Our problems are the corruptions and embezzlements that are perpetrated by Nigeria’s historical governments and this Obasanjo government, which is being protected by the Bush forces here in the US. Nigerian governments have been inherently corrupt. In fact, in the 1970s, Newsweek once dubbed Nigeria, “The Most Corrupt Country” – and I do not know many Nigerians who will debate or doubt the high level of official corruption in Nigeria.

Unlike the United States where students are taught and have learnt to love, honor, worship, adore and sheepishly follow their governments, including, even the outrageously roguish, criminal and incompetent Bush/PNAC administrations, Nigerians and Nigerian students were taught from the beginning that Nigeria’s governments are chronically corrupt. This fundamentally cultural difference between Nigerian and American students allows for more open discussions and knowledge of official corruptions in Nigeria unlike the United States where many public and many students are largely unaware and ignorant of their governments’ activities and shenanigans. Nigerians have not achieved much in cleaning up the governments, though, because our governments always invite their foreign friends and benefactors to protect them, just as Obasanjo has done with Bush. They also prevent or even kill any genuine leader from emerging in Nigeria as in the case of Murtala Muhammed, Idiagbon and Abiola. Thus, the report was loud about Nigeria’s corruption:

The military's plunder of oil revenues has climbed steadily. A commission established by Abacha after he grabbed power in 1995 calculated that the theft of petroleum proceeds between 1990 and 1994 by General Ibrahim Babangida's regime exceeded $12 billion, nearly equal to the annual national budget. Abacha is believed to have skimmed off an even larger proportion of national resources during his rule.[36]

So the best that US can do for Nigeria now is to leave her alone, stop meddling in our internal affairs, and stop trying to influence our politics and elections either way. Nigeria is a terribly sick country. Some of our problems are self created and generated since Nigeria’s creation by our colonial master, but clearly the best way forward for the country is for America to stop its historical unwholesome meddlesomeness in the country. I vigorously wrote against foreign meddlesomeness in Nigeria in my doctoral thesis at Purdue University in 1978, which has since been published as a book, titled, Foreign Capital In Nigeria, 1945-1985: Roots of Underdevelopment[37]. I vigorously argued then and I still believe in it today that Nigeria and many other third world states would do better if they allowed for minimal foreign capital investments and intrusion into their economies, body politics and societies. In other words, while the standard orthodoxy like the Bush forces, the IMF and the World Bank always call for free trade and more foreign investments in third world countries to ensure their growth, my recommendation has always been the opposite – minimize foreign intrusions and investments – and encourage local individual initiatives. On foreign intrusions – investments, etc. – my maxim is clear, viz., fear the Greeks even when they bring presents i.e., quid, quid, id est. timeo danaos et donna ferentes,

Therefore, Nigeria will do a lot better and the world will do a lot better when the US minds its own business – when the US stops making other nations’ affairs their own business. Anytime that US intrudes into a country’s politics, it does one of the following:

It helps the current oppressive anti-people regime to consolidate its position and stranglehold on its people by providing the regime some security logistics to ensure its longevity.

If it is conducting elections, it helps it rig the elections to ensure that the election of the “right” candidates. The “right” candidates are simply those who will do America’s biddings and not those who will serve the interests of their people.

In addition, if the “wrong” candidates happen to win the election and setup a government, US will either physically destroy that government and/or start calumnious slander propaganda against the country and its government to ensure its demise.

And if you are a popular government and does not listen to them, America will import thugs to destabilize your country, invade, kidnap you and ferret you out of the country and dump you somewhere in far away no man’s land and ensure that you will no longer have communications with your people, as they did Aristide of Haiti. Cuba, Hamas, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, etc are also typical examples.

So if America comes into Nigeria’s elections, they will make sure that pliant and pliable candidates – candidates that they can manipulate -- and these will be Obasanjo’s candidates win. This statement is empirically verifiable. America’s definition of democracy for the third world is simply any government that does or will do its will and not a government that is elected by the people.

Popular sovereignty or election by the people – democracy – does not mean a thing to America – in America as well as elsewhere – so long as the government does America’s will. The Palestine Hamas government is a typical example. America has campaigned and worked against it – not minding that they are the popular wishes of the Palestine people. The case of President Allende of Chile whom the US killed in 1972 is still etched in my memory. Americans brutally murdered Allende and set up the savage dictatorship General Pinochet just because they did not like him. Allende belonged to a socialist party, and Henry Kissinger, the notorious US Secretary of State in the 1970s wondered why Chileans would elect a socialist in a democratic election.

The point is that America does not and has never cared about democratic elections in US or elsewhere. America’s ranting about democracy is a ruse designed to deceive her citizens and bamboozle the world. America is only interested in whether the government agrees with it on not and not whether is democratically elected or practices democracy. So Ambassador Campbell, show me America’s record of accomplishment of helping democracy in Nigeria or elsewhere. You cannot because there is none. You are therefore lying and do not have any credibility for making the claim that your money is to help Nigeria’s democracy, and you know it. In addition, if you or anyone still has doubts that I may be wrong, please, go and read, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins. According to him:

Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign “aid” organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet’s natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortions, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions, during this time of globalization. I should know; I was an EHM.[38]

Mr. Ambassador, read it from the horses mouth, -- from Mr John Perkins -- and you can see that rigging elections in the US and elsewhere i.e., globalizations of election rigging -- is one of America’s modus operandi. I did not write the book. It was an American high operative like you that wrote it when he got remorse for the horrors and terrors he was sent around the globe to commit. May be one of these days your own conscience will spank you and you will come clean too. When you come clean and write such a book, please, let me know for my students and I will like to read it. We are watching and keeping track of your nefarious activities in Nigeria.

Also may be, Ambassador Thomas Pickering who is now an Undersecretary of State at the State Department, Washington, DC may also one day come clean and write his own book. After all, some of the good books we have read about America’s policies and actions have come from former high government operatives like you. However, the best and the most useful ones have come from high government operatives who bugged by their conscience, changed their mind and wrote a full honest exposure books that detailed the crimes against humanity they committed in the name of and protected by the seal of the American government. Those people did that because they wanted closure with God and had to atone for their sins against us -- the common people or whom Frantz Fanon called, The Wretched of the Earth[39].

One thing you must know, Ambassador Pickering, is that this country belongs to us, the common people and the wretched of the earth because of our sheer numerical superiority. Therefore, if you keep stomping on us, exploiting us, brutalizing or even killing us, we will rise one day, take back the government and restore the government to democracy, as promised in the noble ideals of America’s independence declaration. You were sent from Washington to slay Chief Abiola, or Angel Gabriel, who was supposed to deliver Nigeria from the clutches of oppressive American and western imperialist forces and lied about it but we do not believe you.

Your master President Clinton vouched for you – that you did not kill Chief Abiola, but we did not believe either. Clinton’s statements are particularly instructive for me. I love President Clinton. I think that he is inherently a good man. He was a good president. I campaigned for him and voted for him. I was against his impeachment and I wrote vigorously against it[40]. So I guess, you can call me a good Clinton supporter But he was wrong for saying that Mr. Pickering did not kill Mr. Abiola because he did. Ambassador Pickering was sent to do the dirty job because America was simply too scared of dealing with a prospective President Abiola of Nigeria. Abiola was too Nigerian, too black, too African-American for America’s comfort. Besides, Abiola carried his Nigerianness, Africanness, blackness and African-Americanness overtly in his phenotype as well as solidly and proudly in his genotype. Simply put, Abiola was, if you have ever seen a proud black man, that was Abiola – a typical James Brown, “Black and Proud” man.

He intensely felt that the black man was as good as any white man; and always demanded full respect in his dealings with the white man. We swapped many stories about him at University of Ife. One such stories talked about how one white director came to see him in Lagos. When the man became disrespectful as their discussions soured, Abiola ordered his security to throw the man out of the window. I am sure it was not true – that it was just a legend – but it was the kind of myth or fable that swelled around Abiola. The truth though, was that we liked it at the university because we were proud to see a Nigerian who stood up to our imperialist oppressors. So Abiola exhibited and exhumed black manhood, strength, confidence, intelligence, success, achievement, loud, outspoken and forward-looking – features that mortified America and the west. And if Abiola had carried those features to the United Nations, the impacts would have been decidedly changed for blacks, Africa and the third world. International diplomacy would have certainly changed for the better because Abiola was both blunt and a goal-getter. The United Nations has never had or dealt with a loud, arrogant anti-imperialist and personally very rich leader of the richest, most populous African/black country as President Abiola would have been. So the tables of international diplomacy might have considerably changed to the detriment of the US and other oppressive forces.

These were the results that America and the west did not want at the United Nations, hence, they sent Ambassador Pickering to fix the problems. Mr. Pickering was sent because he had been an Ambassador in Nigeria, had known Chief Abiola, and must have attended some of the many parties and ceremonies that Abiola threw or gave for ambassadors and foreign dignitaries in Nigeria during his tenure. The truth is that even as an “ordinary” citizen, Abiola was always larger than life in Nigeria. So these were the reasons why Mr. Pickering was chosen and sent to Nigeria; and I believe that his specific instructions were:
(a) Go down to Nigeria and talk to Chief Abiola, get him to accept the offer of freedom he was being offered. Also, tell him that he would be allowed to context next elections whenever. Assure him, give him guarantees of all these, etc,
(b) However, if he remains stubborn and insists that he must come out as president, then kill him because we absolutely will not let him be the president of Nigeria. He is simply to much for us; and Nigeria is too important for us to gamble with.
(c) Besides, we have already wasted too much time in all these fruitless discussions, and negotiations with him, which seems to be going no where.
(d) Much more importantly, you must kill him quickly if he does not agree, because the June 12 Movement and the Nigerian opposition are fast swelling out of hand around him, so Abiola must be killed immediately, otherwise Nigeria was about to be engulfed into an uncontrollable popular mass revolutionary movement.
(e) So, Mr. Pickering, you must kill Abiola immediately, if he continues to resist, in order to quell and deflate the dangerously bourgeoning popular, mass revolutionary movement swelling around Abiola at the time.
(f) Finally, America and the west knew that Chief Abiola would win the presidency anytime it was held if he eventually agreed with them not to go for the immediate presidency then.. In fact such a situation would even have been worse for America and the west, because Abiola, the opposition movements and June 12 Movements would all have been more radicalized and bitter. So Abiola had to die.
(g) The realization that postponement would not help them made it imperative that he must be physically eliminated and soon – immediately.
(h) If Abiola came out and ran for presidential election later, he would win. Abiola was big and popular when he was drafted by the Social Democratic Party in 1993 as their presidential candidate which was why he won. But in 1998, after four years of being in prison, most of which was in solitary confinement, the myth and legends of Abiola had soared to unimaginable heights. Abiola’s four years of military confinement had conferred on him similar aura and status akin to what twenty-years of confinement did to Nelson Mandela. The result was that either way, Abiola had won America and the west. If the America set him free as the president, he would, he would start doing all the things they feared he would do. If they let him free but denied the presidency, Abiola, who had gotten even more popular, would win even bigger next time.. So, again, the only way to deal with Abiola was to kill him, otherwise, sooner or later, they would confront an even bigger, bolder and more powerful Abiola.

The above were some of the major instructions and briefings given to Ambassador Pickering on his way to Nigeria. He cannot deny it. I taught courses on foreign policy and some of Nigeria’s top officials of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Abuja and around the world were my students so I know what I am talking about. When top officials are sent out on such sensitive and potentially explosive missions, they are given and/or must be given specific instructions based on their knowledge of the local conditions. And I will not be surprised if President Clinton did not know the details of Ambassador Pickering’s death mission to Nigeria because it would have been coordinated by his boss the, the Secretary of State Madeline Albright.

The above explains why Madeline Albright is now being sent to monitor Nigeria’s April 2007 elections. She sent her Ambassador to Nigeria in July 1998 to kill Chief Abiola and to destroy the genuine democratic wishes of Nigerians. They were scared that Abiola represented authentic Nigerian/black voices both in Nigeria and at the UN.. Now she is being sent, as the expert and experienced horror and death merchant to go back to the scene and repeat her nefarious deeds. The simple truth here is that I do not have any confidence that Madam Albright would do anything good for Nigeria. I can only say that given her track records, which I outlined above, Nigerians should be wary of her and watch her very well

Like I said earlier, Ambassador Pickering was sent from Washington to murder the indomitable Chief Abiola before he could become the Nigerian president and have the opportunity to do even greater things for Nigeria, Africa, Africa-Americans and the world. By murdering Chief Abiola, Ambassador Pickering deprived Nigeria of one of her greatest and most dynamic sons, and I hope that one day, conscience remorse will force him to come clean to explain how why he killed Abiola on July 7, 1998.

I watched Ambassador Pickering on television, here in New York as he explained how and why Abiola died while he was visiting. The Ambassador said something like, “they were talking when suddenly Abiola felt uncomfortable, went to the bathroom, drank something and died” I watched the news that evening with a couple of my friends and no one believed Ambassador Pickering’s explanations; and I have not met anyone since then who believed him. Everyone I know believed that they murdered him – that America murdered him. Therefore, Mr. Ambassador, you must know that the prevailing story out there is that Abiola is the victim of America’s political assassination; and if you have any other proof to supports your claims, bring them up, otherwise you are the adjudged murderer or hit man. May be you were the jackal who was sent to do finish the dirty job when others failed: Again, according to John Perkins:

People like me are paid outrageously high salaries to do the system’s bidding. If we falter, a more malicious form of hit man, the jackal, steps to the plate. And if the jackal fails, then the job falls to the military[41]

Chief Abiola had great plans for Nigeria, Africa and African-Americans. Could anyone imagine Abiola at the United Nations with Africa, African-America and third world problems. The dynamics of the United Nations would have completely changed because one thing Abiola detested to his bones was the arrogance of the west. I believe that, if Abiola had become the president of Nigeria, he would have effected important structural changes there to the benefit of the third world. First, he would have attacked the oppressive veto structure with which the US dominates and dictates policies at the UN. Then he would talk of baby -- reparation, imperialism and exploitation with his energy and passion that no one can march. For example, since Abiola’s death, reparation has reverted to being the themes of mere academic and classroom discourses and occasional speeches. Randal wrote a very good book on reparation, which I use in my classes, but no one listens to us because we are mere academicians. Abiola was the macho man with real muscle. But we have lost him. Madam Albright and Ambassador Pickering killed him. One thing certain is that Bush will not get near him with his arrogance and empty pomposity because Abiola would stop him cold. He did not suffer fools. So one thing I know is that the world would have been better for all, if Abiola had lived – if Americans had not killed him.

We might not have had this war on terror, the Iraqi war and Iraqi quagmire. May be, the world would have been by now talking about our real problems like how to eradicate poverty, diseases, or even environmental pollution because Abiola talked a lot and did a lot about those these problems and funded their research in Nigeria’s universities long before he even ran for the presidency. The point is that the whole world lost a lot with the death of Abiola.

Now, after Ambassador Pickering and his boss, Madam Albright killed Chief Abiola, they hoisted Obasanjo, who has been their CIA Agent on us as our President – and he has proceeded to do all the things that Abiola would never have done. President Obasanjo has been maximally incompetent, corrupt, arrogant and imperial. Obasanjo first, wanted to change the constitution to extend his tenure for another third term. It must be complete idiocy, unpardonable arrogance and buffoonery for Obasanjo to think he is the only person good enough to be the Nigerian president. Given his level of corruption and embezzlements, the only reason Nigerians allowed him to stay for eight years was because he embedded himself in Bush and ringed himself with America’s military personnel, advisers and logistics. I am grateful to Wole Soyinka, Atiku and many other laudable Nigerians who put their feet down to stop Obasanjo’s megalomania. Also, President Obasanjo once fired Vice-President Atiku and appointed another vice-president until he was reminded that a vice-president is not a member of his cabinet that he can hire and fire at will. The near total collapse of amenities and infrastructure in Nigeria is unbelievable given the quadrupled price of oil during his tenure. The roads are collapsing due to lack of repairs, fuel is hardly available in a super fuel producing country like Nigeria. Electricity is rarely available in any part of the country, except in Aso Rock – the presidential village. The bureaucracy is clogged and not working. Corruption is rampant, entrenched and growing. Thus, according to the Senate Report on PTDF corruption and embezzlement:
The seven-member Senate review committee set up to revisit the report of the ad-hoc committee on the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF) has indicted both President Olusegun Obasanjo and Vice- President Atiku Abubakar over wrong-doings in the management of the fund. The committee has also recommended that both of them should be referred to the Code of Conduct Bureau for further action.[42]
They are talking of billions of oil slush money, which the presidency embezzled; and are now blaming each other like rogues that have caught hands down.

The only area where Obasanjo has done very well is in the area of his personal self-protection and he did that through his shameless and treasonable copulation with the equally very corrupt and roguish Bush regime in the United States. Obasanjo once set up an Economic Development Council and appointed Robert McNamara, the one time US Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War in the 1970s, as its Chairman. I wonder the expertise an octogenarian who last served America some thirty years ago could have which Obasanjo could not find in Nigeria -- a country teaming with all sorts of experts. The truth is that Robert McNamara has absolutely nothing to contribute to Nigeria’s development, which is not available in multiple numbers in Nigeria. McNamara’s appointment was, therefore not based on his expertise because he has none. It was a payoff for McNamara’s roles in establishing the CIA connections for Obasanjo in the 1970s when McNamara was in active service – and it was a connection that has been mutually very beneficial and therefore worth celebrating by creating a crony job for him. It was therefore more as a retirement payoff, in the sunny good-weathered Nigeria, for a man who did him good some thirty years ago – for the man who made the CIA connections for him in 1970s – a connection on which he has so roughly ridden on our backs since then. If this is not gross of political corruption, tell me what it is.

In conclusion, the coming election is the result of great struggles by Nigerians because Obasanjo forces never wanted it. They used all sorts of forces to stop or postpone it but Nigerians’ doggedness finally prevailed. I salute all Nigerians for the gigantic struggles and for the magnificent victories they won even just by having this election, which Obasanjo never anticipated or would have been just a coronation for his third term of four more years of his shenanigans, bumbling incompetence, corruption, arrogance and imperial opulence.

Now he is going, and on May 29, 2007 he will be gone forever. We may then decide to arrest him to account for his mismanagement and embezzlements. But that is a matter for another day. Meanwhile, let me congratulate and celebrate with another great Nigerian who did the country proud by insisting on this election – Senator Nnamani, the President of the Nigerian Senate. The way he restrained Obasanjo in the two most critical issues of third term amendment and PTDF scandal investigation restored integrity and dignity to the Nigerian Legislature. Senator’s Nnamani’s work ethics are clearly very commendable and I salute him.

The coming presidential election is very crucial because it is the first democratic transition we will have in the post-military coup era because I truly believe that no military officer will be insane enough to try to seize the government again by force. The Nigerian presidency is available to any Nigerian; and who ever wants it, should go and contest for it. This is why I do not like the idea of stopping Atiku, the current Vice-President from contesting. He should be allowed to contest, to try his luck with Nigerians and if Nigerians elect him the president, good for him. I think that removing him from the list is part of Obasanjo’s grand strategy since Atiku led the fight to stop Obasanjo’s third-term bid. Professor Iwu’s defense of removing Atiku from contesting is not credible. He is only doing Obasanjo’s hatchet job, which is a shame. I however hope that the Supreme Court will reinstate him so that he takes his chances with Nigerians. It is part of Obasanjo’s imperial shenanigans.

Obasanjo’s imperial designs really astonish me. That he is not happy and grateful for all that Nigeria has done for him and for all he has stolen from us is the height of human ingratitude and buffoonery. His Otta farms and its huge poultry were all with money he stole from us, and in a sane system, he should be arrested and all our money recovered, yet he does not appear to be grateful. He still wants more from us like Oliver Twist.

What special qualities does Obasanjo really think that he has? None -- except his CIA connections that helped him assassinate our first dynamic and true Africanist, President Murtala Muhammed and made him president in the 1970s and this time again. The CIA killed Muhammed because of his massive support for Angola’s MPLA war and struggles against the American and apartheid South African puppet Savimbi in the 1970s. US was furious the Muhammed sent massive Nigerian troops under General Adekunle to help the MPLA forces so the notorious Henry Kissinger of US arranged for to assassinate and replace him with Obasanjo, their pliant agent. That was how Obasanjo became Nigeria’s president in 1976.

Again, the CIA’s hands were everywhere to install Obasanjo as our president in 1999 after his release from prison. The CIA cleared the way for Obasanjo’s presidency by murdering Abiola who was the rightful president-to-be at the time as explained earlier. Further, the CIA worked to edge out former Vice-President, Alex Ekwueme who had organized PDP and was slated to become its presidential candidate when Obasanjo suddenly swept him off. Personally, I was mad then for Ekweme’s quick and timid concession of the presidential candidacy to Obasanjo who has no other credential than the huge slush fund he dangled around and distributed at the party’s nominating conventions in Jos and elsewhere.

I opposed his nomination then, because I thought that Obasanjo was a fake who was being imposed on us by the CIA forces who wanted their assured, tried and tested, pliant and pliable agent as head of Nigeria. I called Ekwueme then and counseled against his quick concession of the candidacy to the upstart Obasanjo. I believed than and still believe now that Ekwueme did enough work to earn the PDP’s candidacy in 1999 – that it was his right and should not have conceded it to anyone who had stacks of slush fund to throw around. Further, I advocated that Ekwueme should not support or endorse Obasanjo’s candidacy even if PDP nominated him. Ekwueme ignored all the advice and enthusiastically endorsed Obasanjo to my disappointment and the disappointment of all those who value fairness and social justice because Ekwueme diligently organized PDP before Obasanjo swooped in at the last hour.

Without Alex Ekwueme’s support, Obasanjo would never have been “elected” the president in 1999 because he had no support at all in western Nigeria which was Awolowo country who detested him for handing the country over to President Shagari in 1979, among others. With the western Nigeria staunchly anti-Obasanjo in 1999, only the Eastern and Northern Nigeria, where Obasanjo did not have any support were left. Eastern Nigerians were ready to follow Alex Ekwueme who also had good support from the North because of his loyal service to President Shagari and NPN as the Vice-President in from 1979 – 1983. So, in 1999, the former Vice-President Chief Alex Ekwueme was not only the candidate who built and organized the PDP, but was also the candidate who had the most national support while Obasanjo had zero regional and zero national support. Yet, the CIA was able to enthrone his as the PDP presidential candidate and eventually “elected” him President of Nigeria.

The successful imposition of Obasanjo on Nigeria was another quiet and unmitigated triumph of CIA/western grand designs for Nigeria because the only major success Obasanjo achieved in his eight-year administration of Nigeria was to make himself the darling of W. Bush White House and Nigeria, the haven for western imperialism. Obasanjo literally became and extension of Bush White House where he visited often. Tell me what Obasanjo did with his many visits and photo-ups with Bush in the White House except to get instructions and clarifications from them, his real bosses.

Honestly, tell me what Obasanjo, the president of Nigeria, the most powerful, the richest and the most numerous African nation was doing commiserating with W. Bush, the most horrible, the most racist and roguish president of America, if not to receive further policy instructions and clarifications. W. Bush cares and has done nothing for blacks and minorities since his criminal selection as our own president here in America. Katrina and his many other pro-racist policies speak for themselves.

So, why should a noted African leader commensurate with an American president who oppresses blacks and minorities in America? Obasanjo was elected to rule Nigeria in Nigeria’s interests and not to prostitute Nigeria to the CIA and western interests as he did – and the legitimate interests of Nigeria include standing up for the interests of Africa-Americans in America, just as Israelis care for the American Jews, and vice versa. Obasanjo’s copulation with W. Bush was, therefore destructive of Nigeria’s interests and the interests of Africans in Diaspora because all our interests are interwoven. Obasanjo is therefore a disaster to global interests, unlike Abiola’s unachieved vision or the policies of the dynamic President Murtala Muhammed whom Obasanjo helped murder on February 13, 1976.

General Murtala Muhammed was chosen by a group of young officers who overthrew General Gowon on July 29, 1975 in a bloodless coup while he was attending OAU Summit in Uganda. He became a unique Nigeria’s Head of State; and his regime was dynamic, corrective, vigorously anti-corruption, proudly pro-African and pro-Marxist regimes, all to the chagrin of the CIA and the west, hence they arranged to assassinate him within just six months. According to Max Siollun:

Very few of Nigeria’s former military leaders are spoken of with any great affection. There is a notable exception: General Murtala Muhammed. The time of his regime is recalled with nostalgia by Nigerians of both civilian and military persuasions as a golden age. Whereas today, military rule, and military rulers, have been demonized, Murtala gave Nigeria a glimpse of the principled and dynamic leadership that its citizens crave[43].
He continued:

Gowon’s regime had remained neutral in the simmering "cold war" between the world’s then two super powers: the USA and the Soviet Union. Gowon’s regime bought weapons from the Soviets while remaining on cordial terms with western nations. However, Murtala’s regime embarked on a more assertive foreign policy. Contrary to the wishes of the USA, it unilaterally recognized the Marxist MPLA as the legitimate government of Angola. Murtala then rallied other African countries to follow suit, and backed up his diplomatic action with massive financial aid to the MPLA. Some western powers may have become concerned that the new regime in Africa’s richest country was galvanizing African countries to recognize a government with Communist ideology[44]

In 1975, during the MPLA Angolan crisis, at the height of the cold war, I was completing my doctoral program in international political economy at Purdue University; and I was also the President of African Students’ Association – a very vocal students’ movement that was very actively involved in the rigorous civil rights and anti-apartheid movements and struggles of the time. Under the auspices of Africana Studies Department of the university, we organized a teach-in and lecture series on. “The Angolan Struggles for Independence,” where I gave a lecture titled, “American Imperialism and the Struggles for the Liberation of Angola” to a packed hall. The highlight of my lecture was captured by the media headlines, “Kissinger Cannot See Beyond His Nose” which was the focus of my lecture. Henry Kissinger, who is ferociously anti-communist, is the arch-agent of imperialism. He was the super-Secretary of State for Presidents Nixon and Ford, and the principal officer who organized the brutal assassination of President Allende of Chile and the imposition of Pinochet dictatorship in Chile. Kissinger was furious at the MPLA progress in the Angolan civil war then with the CIA, western and apartheid Namibian/South African backed Jonas Savimbi’s UNITA. The two opposing parties that competed for Angola’s independence in the 1970s were MPLA, backed by Soviet Union and Cuba versus UNITA backed by the CIA, the west and the apartheid forces of Namibia and South Africa then[45].

The period of the Angolan crisis was when Murtala emerged on the scene as Nigeria’s Head of State. He immediately threw Nigeria’s massive economic, military and political power decisively behind MPLA to the consternation, surprise and anger of Kissinger who lashed at Nigeria. Nigerians, Africans, blacks and progressives all over the world loved and cheered Murtala’s actions. My speech then reflected my pride and agreement with my President who was doing Nigerians and blacks proud. For the first time, a Nigerian president brought Nigeria squarely on the side of the world progressive forces – USSR, Cuba, etc. Nigerians were thrilled, ecstatic, and proud and walked tall. Nigerians just loved Murtala’s rigorous opposition to Kissinger and his western imperialist forces, which the caption of my lecture showed.

This is 2007, some thirty years after the Angolan crisis and I am still nostalgic about Murtala’s regime. It still remained the best regime we have ever had. I call that the golden age of Nigeria when our government was genuinely Nigerian and Nigerians were proud of their president and government. Murtala’s government was a dynamic progressive African regime that used Nigeria’s vast wealth for the benefit of Nigerians and Africans to the disgust and anger of Kissinger, CIA and the west hence they killed him within only six months, and replaced him with their lackey and puppet, Obasanjo in 1976.

Murtala declared his government a "corrective regime" that would tackle the corruption that was increasingly becoming part and parcel of government institutions. His "corrective" methods involved a house cleaning operation to sweep away all remnants of Gowon’s regime. As soon as Murtala became the Head of State, all of the twelve governors that had served under Gowon were immediately dismissed from their posts and retired. Murtala also ordered a probe into their conduct in office. Ten of these twelve governors were found to have illegally enriched themselves while in Government. Murtala said they had "betrayed the trust and confidence reposed in them by the nation….(and) betrayed the ethics of their professions and they are a disgrace to those professions. They are, therefore, all dismissed with ignominy". Only Brigadiers Oluwole Rotimi, and Mobolaji Johnson were found innocent of allegations of corruption. All civilian ministers except Shehu Shagari and Ali Monguno were also found guilty of corrupt enrichment and were stripped of illegally obtained assets[46]. (Emphasis Mine)
Murtala was therefore also on a house cleaning exercise to rid Nigeria of corruption, which Kissinger, CIA and the west did not want him to accomplish before they killed him, and:

Investigations after the coup caused a public furor when it was disclosed that Lt-Col. Dmika (the coup leader) had visited the British High Commission while the coup was in progress. Nigerian authorities were angered that the British took their time before warning them of Dimka’s movements and intentions. This allied to suspected CIA knowledge of the coup caused anti-British and American sentiments in the nation[47].


Hence because of Murtala’s obvious Nigerian and African assertiveness, CIA and the west decided to kill him The mutineers later justified their coup by explaining that they were angered because Murtala was "going communist[48]".

Going “communist” was and is the scarlet word for American governments. America has historically killed or destroyed governments or leaders for “being communist”. Hence, the worst charge America can throw against anyone – whether American or foreign – is to be socialist or communist. Most Americans do not know or even care to know what the words mean and/or the differences between them – all they know is that socialists/communists must be destroyed, killed. McCarthyism, the paranoid hunt for communist infiltrators in America by the anti-communist crusader, Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s was the embarrassing public low point of anti-communism in America but America’s DNA has been fundamentally anti-communist, and CIA has been the linchpin in America’s crusade against communism[49]. Also, read the speech delivered by Senator Joseph McCarthy before the Senate on June 14, 1951 for more details[50]. Thus, when, Allende won the presidency in Chile in 1970, Henry Kissinger declared, "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people.[51]" (Emphasis mine).

This meant that a country that chose a communist government, in a democratic election, is irresponsible according to Kissinger and that it was the duty of America to correct that country’s irresponsibility, by removing/destroying the government and/or killing its leader. Thus:
President Nixon directed CIA to prevent Allende's inauguration through a military coup. One of the opponents of a coup, Army Chief of Staff General Rene Schneider was assassinated, but Allende took office as scheduled[52]. (Emphasis mine).
Further:
The United States also increased training Chilean military personnel in the United States and Panama. According to notes taken by CIA director Richard Helms at a 1970 meeting in the Oval Office, his orders were to "make the economy scream." It was widely reported that at the covert level the United States worked to destabilize Allende's Chile by funding opposition political groups and media and by encouraging a military coup d'état. The agency trained members of the fascist organization Patria y Libertad (PyL) in guerrilla warfare and bombing, and they were soon waging a campaign of arson. CIA also sponsored demonstrations and strikes, funded by ITT and other US corporations with Chilean holdings. CIA-linked media, including the country's largest newspaper, fanned the flames of crisis. [53]

Further, Michael Parenti concurred and agreed that the CIA plays crucial and diabolical roles in the world. He wrote:

In 1978, syndicated columnist, Jack Anderson revealed that the CIA had recruited mafia hit men for “international murder missions,” and that “for over twenty years, the Justice Department has been winking at crimes committed by employees of the Central Intelligence Agency… The CIA supplied arms and money to the Italian and Corsican mafias to beat and murder members of the communist-led dockworkers’ unions in Italy and France in 1947 and 1950. After the unions were broken, the mobsters were given a freer hand transporting tons of heroin from Asia to Western Europe and North America. The CIA buttressed anticommunist drug lords in Southeast Asia and Afghanistan whose opium production and distribution increased tenfold assisted by the agency itself[54].

He continued:

CIA involvement in Central America contributed to the U.S. cocaine epidemic of the 1980s. CIA planes transported guns and supplies down to right-wing mercenary troops in Nicaragua, the “contras,” and procapitalist political and military leaders in other Latin countries; the planes were then reloaded with cocaine for return trip to the United States. The CIA itself admits having known and done nothing about narcotic shipments to th inner city populations in this country. Even the usually pliant New York Times reported that a CIA “anti-drug unit” was involved in cocaine trafficking at that time. Drug infestation can serve as a useful social control mechanism. National security authorities prefer to have young African-American and Latino males shooting themselves up with needles and each other with guns rather than organizing militant revolutionary groups as in the 1960s[55].

The CIA does not operate only against foreign governments and leaders, it also kills/destroys American leaders. Thus, Michael Parenti continued:

A mountain of evidence exists suggesting that elements of intelligence community, assisted by certain mobsters, were involved in the assassination of President John Kennedy in 1963 and in the subsequent massive cover-up. Kennedy was considered a dangerous liability by the intelligence community because of what were perceived as his “liberal” foreign and domestic policies, including his unwillingness to pursue an all-out ground war in Indochina, and his determination to bring the intelligence community under firm executive control[56].

It is therefore clear that the American CIA is an out-of-control gangster and bandit organization. It is a monster that operates its own rules extra-legally in domestic and foreign theatres. The CIA killed Malcolm X, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and a host of other black, Indian and Hispanic leaders that they did not like, but if the CIA could also kill its own popular president (JFK), and cover it up, we are then talking about a strange and unique animal. They killed JFK because he was “going liberal”, and got away with it, with no scratches or blemishes, why would anyone care if they killed Murtala because he was “going communist?”

Nigeria is even more crucial to America now because we supply about a fifth of US oil needs and Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela has become truly independent of Washington. So the control of Nigeria has become more imperative for America, which must start with the control of April elections. Hence, Nigerians must know that the coming election is a watershed for America, which wants to ensure that its lackey or puppet is “elected” to carry on their role for Nigeria just as Obasanjo did for years.

Ekwueme’s timid acceptance and acquiescence of Obasanjo’s candidacy in 1999 was regrettable and did a great harm to Nigeria. If Ekwueme had not supported Obasanjo’s candidacy in 1999, it would have been impossible for him to “win” the presidency then because Obasanjo had no support anywhere in the country then. The truth was that the 1999 presidential election in Nigeria was Ekwueme’s to lose. He had worked hard for it. Everyone knew it. His personal credentials were impeccable. He had been a good loyal NPN member, a hard-working vice-president of President Shehu Shagari, and had courageously worked assiduously to oppose Sani Abacha’s imperial dictatorship. Therefore, he was in excellent standing for the presidency then. Thus, according to Pini Jason:

Ekwueme's political profile has risen in recent times. During the crisis arising from the annulment of the Abiola election in 1993, he chaired the All Politicians Summit which Abacha's security men tried to disrupt. Ekwueme stuck to his guns and brought the meeting to a successful close. During the 1995 constitutional conference, he again played a prominent role. When some sections of the country threatened to secede, Ekwueme came up with a minority report that suggested the rotation of the presidency among the six geo-political zones in the country. This implied a "power shift" from north to south that has now been largely accepted as a way forward.[57]
Besides, Ekwueme bravely built the structure, PDP for the election:
Ekwueme's courage was again demonstrated when he organised the group of 34 eminent Nigerians, as the G-34 group, which gave nine unassailable legal reasons why Gen Abacha should not be allowed to "succeed himself" as a civilian president. After Abacha's death, Ekwueme converted G-34 into the PDP[58].
So, we can see that Ekwueme literally built the PDP, Peoples’ Democratic Party, which is Nigeria’s governing party now. Obasanjo was in prison then. General Abacha had arrested, charged and imprisoned him on charges of plotting a coup. The question is, was it true? Was Obasanjo plotting a military coup to overthrow Abacha then? I have no evidence either way; and Abacha’s regime was so imperial, dictatorial, reprehensible, and hated that Nigerians were not willing to give the charges any considerations. But when the dusts are cleared and you think of it seriously, you will see that there might have been very good grounds for Abacha’s coup charges against Obasanjo and his subsequent arrest and imprisonment.
Abacha’s regime was a thorn against the CIA and the west for his many policies, which they detested and were driving them nuts. I remember when a US Senator, Carol Moseley-Braun – the first American-American woman to be elected to the US Senate – visited General Abacha in Nigeria. Americans wanted to rip her apart, when she came back to the United States. America never forgave Senator Carol Moseley-Braun for going to “fraternize” with their enemy; and it was one reason why they ensured that she was not reelected to the senate. I also remember how Americans hit the roof and were mad at Minister Louis Farrakhan for visiting Abacha in Nigeria. They attacked him in the press, smeared his name and tried to ostracize him – all because he visited Abacha. Also, President Bill Clinton avoided having any contacts with Abacha because he was regarded as a pariah. During his African tour, he carefully avoided going to Nigeria to underscore America’s dislike of Abacha. It was only after the CIA had successfully installed Obasanjo, that Bill Clinton made an official elaborate trip to Nigeria.

The point I am making is that since the CIA furiously hated Abacha’s regime, it was not beyond their modus operandi to recruit their agent to try to remove Abacha. Abacha’s claims, therefore had lots of credibility. Given what I now know about Obasanjo, I am now willing to support Abacha’s charges that Obasanjo was plotting to overthrow him then. This means that our media should now stop stating that Obasanjo’s arrest by Abacha was based on fake charges. No. It was at least, based on substantial credible circumstantial evidence. If this is the beginning of a positive revisionist history of Abacha, so let it be, and I am willing to champion it because much of what is available now convince me that Obasanjo might have been used by the CIA to overthrow and remove Abacha.
Given CIA’s problems with Abacha, they could therefore have recruited their agent, Obasanjo to replace Abacha. Many things about Obasanjo are fishy. One thing however is clear; he sold Nigeria back to Washington and the west far deeper than many Nigerians could margin. And the struggles to recover Nigeria from the clutches of the Obasanjo backed CIA/western imperialist grips could be more grim, ominous, bloody and deadly than even the struggles for our national independence. Obasanjo is therefore, not only a disaster, but a traitor for historically selling Nigeria to foreign forces and occupiers, for helping them loot Nigeria In addition, his second regime has been the worst Nigerians have had to endure, on any level of governmental evaluation. The only place where Obasanjo is popular is in the western media confirming that he is their agent. Otherwise, can anyone remind me of another real African leader that was praised by the west I cannot remember because there is none.
As a social science professor and living in the heart of the beast, I can say with certain credibility that the CIA and the west never praises an African leader who is doing something good for his country and Africa. They usually kill or replace him with their man, which was what they did with Patrice Lumumba of Congo, Osagefo Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso, Samora Machel of Mozambique; and many others. African has really suffered a lot of set backs due to the evil machinations of western imperialism and it is people like Obasanjo who have aided them all along should be the main focus of our attack now.
Obasanjo is therefore a disgrace to Nigerians and Africans. Nigeria never made more money any other time than during his regime. Ironically, it was because Bush, Obasanjo’s mentor and benefactor, invaded Iraq that the price of oil shot through the roofs, and thus presented Nigeria with unprecedented windfall revenue. And what did Obasanjo do for Nigerians with our windfall revenue? Nothing, zero nothing. I invite all his praise mongers in the United States and the west to travel to Nigeria to witness and experience the abject mess Obasanjo left Nigeria in his eight years of stewardship. They will see a great country, they will meet and love Nigerians because Nigerians are great, lovable and caring people, but they will also see a country in a high level of progressive depredation and dilapidation. All he did in eight years, was to enrich himself, his friends and cronies; and then imprison those who oppose him in anyway. Obasanjo’s greatest “success” however, was his friendship with W. Bush, the most horrible president we have ever had in the United States, and an avowed anti-black, anti-common people leader.
Because of Obasanjo’s friendship with Bush, western press therefore praises him as the “respected” Nigerian leader. The truth is that he is a rogue who did nothing for Nigerians except embezzle their funds. And I hope, it will be one of our priorities in the next dispensation to recover our money from Obasanjo, and punish him appropriately so as to teach our future leaders the good lesson that no one should be allowed to steal our money, treat us with contempt and as shabbily as he did.
Obasanjo who was nowhere through out Nigeria’s struggles with Abacha’s vicious imperial dictatorship when Ekwueme was organizing the G-34 Group which he later converted to PDP, later usurped the party and has since used it as his personal fief. Despite the above impeccable credentials of Chief Ekwueme, the CIA still pushed Obasanjo through to become PDP’s presidential candidate because they did not know Ekwueme or know him enough to supplant Obasanjo, their tried and trusted agent.
But despite his high international profile, Obasanjo is resented, disliked and vehemently opposed by his own people. In the recent elections, he was thrashed in his home base of Abeokuta by the Alliance for Democracy. The Yorubas do not see him as one who will work for their interests because he says that he is a national and not a tribal leader[59].
The critical question is, who was funded Obasanjo’s candidacy in 1999? Thus, according to Mr. Jason:
Those promoting Obasanjo's candidacy are retired generals. Notable among them is Maj Gen Aliyu Mohammed, now retired, who was Gen Ibrahim Babangida's national security adviser. Mohamed and Babangida are reported to have pledged billions of naira to Obasanjo's campaign. Obasanjo caused an uproar when he donated N220m and 200 cars to the PDP. Where did he get the money?[60]
The rumor then was that Halliburton funded Obasanjo’s presidential bid in Nigeria in 1999 – a charge for which the CEO, Dick Cheney was cited and to be investigated by the Congress until the Republicans killed the investigation. Now that rigorous Congressional oversights are coming back with the Democratic takeover of the Congress in November 2006, I will refer the case back to Congress to investigate the sinister and criminal roles of the CIA, Halliburton, Dick Cheney and Olusegun Obasanjo in undermining Nigeria’s democratic processes in 1999.

Remember, we are still talking about Halliburton, the notorious no-bid, Iraq war profiteer contractor headed by the draft-dodger, chicken-hawk, no-good, delusional liar. It is the same notorious Halliburton and its war-mongering, blood-suckers and blood-hounds in Iraq that is being associate with funding Nigeria’s elections. No Nigerian will commit any treason worse than receiving Halliburton/Cheney’s blood money for elections, so I hope the Nigerian National Assembly and the American Congress will get to the bottom of this accusation because there is no living official anywhere in the world that is more dubious, more corrupt and more secretive than Dick Cheney. Further comparing Obasanjo and Ekwueme’s support, Mr. Jason had this to say:
Unlike Obasanjo, who does not have the support of his own kinsmen, all nine eastern states where Ekwueme comes from, gave him a vote of confidence[61].
Obasanjo was further detested in 1999 because:
He is accused of denying Awolowo a deserved victory in the 1979 presidential elections. His critics say that he worked against Chief Moshood Abiola before his election victory in 1993[62].
It means that Obasanjo had no political base at all in 1979, yet the CIA was able to make him our president. This brings me to the CIA plans in 2007, which is why Madeline Albright’s election observer-team is very crucial and worrisome to me. Nigerians must make sure that they have not come to install their candidates in Nigeria again. Like I said earlier, I cannot think of when the United States ever did anything good for Nigeria or the blacks in America, let alone this vicious Bush administration (I live and teach in the United States, so I should know), I therefore cannot imagine Madeline Albright’s observer team working in Nigeria’s interests.
I am a simple man guided by simple philosophy; and all I am saying about Madeline Albright observer team, is that based on my observations, research and experience that blacks are the butts of this American society, which treats us here in the United States as thrash, thrash and thrash. Some forty years ago, Malcolm X had declared it much more clearer when he stated that, “Blacks have only been catching hell in America.” He continued:
Blacks have never seen the fruits of American democracy. They have only experienced the thorns of American hypocrisy.”
Some forty years later, especially under Bush, we are still catching hell in America. Katrina and many others are there to prove my point. Therefore, African governments that deal with Bush, especially when it comes to democracy and free elections should never forget the fact that Bush was selected president on the broken, battered and smashed backs of blacks in America. Therefore, Bush has absolutely zero credibility with regards to democracy and free elections in America or anywhere in the world; thus no country that desires free democratic elections should ever allow Bush or his agents near them. He will obviously distort the elections and make sure that his agents are “elected.” They will obviously skew the elections to suit America’s interests.
The case of Liberia was a typical recent example where the Bush went in and reorganized the will of the people. In their first presidential election, George Weah, a populist of Congress for Democratic Change, led election with 28.3% while the Bush favorite, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Unity Party, was crawling behind with 19.8% i.e. about 10% clear lead. Yet the CIA pushed Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf to “win” the election with about 20% in the runoff election on November 8, 2005. George Weah and his supporters protested vigorously but the Bush forces had made up their mind – they were never going to let the Liberians express their will by electing someone who was loved them over their own tried and tested agent. Ms. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf is a typical house slave. She had a white, German grandfather; and had represented Citibank and World Bank in the region. World Bank and the IMF are the leading Washington-based, White House-controlled Bretton Woods international financial institutions through, which America has organized and ruled the world since 1945. This means that if you successfully worked for either of them, Washington would trust you over a soccer star popular with the common Liberians. Hence:
In the first round of 2005 voting, she came second with 175,520 votes, putting her through to the runoff vote on November 8 against former footballer George Weah. On November 11, the National Elections Commission of Liberia declared Johnson-Sirleaf to be president-elect of Liberia. On November 23, they confirmed their decision saying that Johnson-Sirleaf had won with a margin of almost 20% of the vote. Independent, international, regional, and domestic observers declared the vote to be free, fair, and transparent. Her inauguration took place on January 16, 2006; foreign attendees of the ceremony included Condoleezza Rice, Laura Bush and Michaelle Jean. On March 15, 2006, President Johnson-Sirleaf addressed a joint meeting of the United States Congress.[63]”
It was the US Ambassador, Donald Booth who organized the election rigging for Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf and he was the first to congratulate her in highly publicized photo-ups. After that, note those who attended her inauguration ceremony on January 16, 2006 to understand where she is. Then on March 15, 2006, barely two months after her inauguration, she was in Washington celebrating with Bush after which, she addressed a joint meeting of the US Congress, “asking for American support to help her country become a brilliant beacon, an example to Africa and the world of what love of liberty can achieve[64]”
President Johnson-Sirleaf was wrong and a liar. She knew that she was not there because Liberians voted for her but because the US forces fixed her in. More importantly, she knew that US has never helped any country become the “brilliant beacon” to Africa. May be, she can point to such a country for us in Africa. The next important thing she did on March 17, 2006, just two days after she came back from visiting her bosses, was to pressure Obasanjo to hand Charles Taylor over to Bush – a position that Bush has been pressuring Nigeria ever since.
It is doubtful if George Weah would have done those favors for Bush as smoothly and easily as Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf joyfully and smilingly did. However, the more important question is whether the arrest and detention of Charles Taylor served a useful purpose for the people of Liberia and Africa or whether it was just another affirmation of Bush’s “war on terror,” which means the expansion of Bush’s hegemonic designs[65].
Need for UN Election Observation Team:
The point of these examples is to show Nigerians, the American public and the world what America does when she gets into the election processes of other countries. There is nothing for me believe that the structures and events of NDI, the resident Director, Dr. Jenning and the 40-member international observer team led by Madeleine Albright are unique and specific to Nigeria. What I have uncovered in this research is huge beyond any previous imagination. This research uncovers the joint combined efforts of the White House, the CIA and USAID to organized an international election observer gang or mafia group known as NDI to plan, organize and structure “democratic” elections worldwide.
The democratic processes and efforts of Nigeria and many other countries are therefore in serious jeopardy. They are under massive attacks by NDI which operates worldwide with huge slush funds budgeted and laundered by the White House, the CIA, USAID, other relevant US Government agencies and private US corporation and humanitarian funds. The private funds are very important for NDI not just for the additional operating funds they provide but because such funds allow NDI to claim that it is a non-partisan civil organization – a claim that gives it operating room; and allows it greater maneuverability and flexibility in Nigeria and other countries.
Thus, the first impression that NDI projects in its massive, deep penetration of the Nigerian society is that it is a non-partisan civil society which completely masks and obfuscates that it is really an American CIA based organization working for America’s interests alone. Many Nigerians would not work with NDI and Dr. Jenning if they know that they are CIA covert operatives. The top government officials, police commissioners, top security officers, National Assembly officers and legislators, the INEC chairman and his officers and many others who cooperated with Dr. Jenning to organize and consolidate Nigeria’s electoral processes and outcome through the NDI have all cooperatively sold Nigeria to the CIA, according to Obasanjo’s grand designs.
Disband NDI’s 50,000 Monitors: I do not have any beef with the over 50,000 innocent hard-working Nigerians who were recruited by Dr. Jennings as is election monitors because the do not know that they were engaged in anti-Nigerian activities. However, they must be disbanded immediately and all NDI activities folded in Nigeria. NDI and Dr. Jennings are dangerous to Nigeria. No nation worth its salt should ever allow foreign organization and personnel to penetrate their electoral processes as deeply as Dr. Jenning and NDI have done in Nigeria with Obasanjo’s blessing and guidance.
Therefore, Left with me, the “American observer” teams should not be recognized to come and observe our elections in Nigeria. They will only come if Nigerians are given equal, reciprocal access to observe and report on America’s elections. The principles of mutuality and reciprocity must be recognized; entrenched and structured in inter-nation election observation otherwise it will be pure and simple paternalism; and just another instrument of imperialist exploitation and domination.
The truth however, is that many “democratic” elections are rigged or fixed. Bush in America and Obasanjo in Nigeria might have highlighted the ugly phenomenon of election rigging or fixing, but it is fairly well known that very few elected leaders were actually popularly elected. Currently, the US does not allow other countries to observe its own elections, yet it goes around the world to observe others’ elections and pontificate about them. That is arrogance and unmitigated paternalism, which has only been going on because of the world’s shameless appeasement to Bush power.
For example, why would Zimbabwe not send an observer team to monitor America’s elections, which have always been seriously flawed to make even Nigerians shudder. The Bush forces always batter Mugabe and his elections, yet Magabe knows that Bush is a rogue president who was never elected by the free will of the American people. There are abundant records to show that he got “elected” in 2000 by scrubbing, removing and/or not allowing over one hundred thousand blacks to vote. He did essentially the same thing in his 2004 “reelection” in Ohio. The records are there for anyone to see. So why would Mugabe forces allow themselves to be battered by Bush without also vigorously throwing such counter charges back.
It bleeds my heart to see Americans lecture anybody about democracy because United States is the “most undemocratic of all democracies”, which is what I have been teaching my students long before the Bush’s open and notorious election robbery of 2000. The truth is that ever since I was a graduate student at Purdue University in the 1970s, my professors have always talked about the many great deficiencies of America’s democracy and the need to reform/modify its many deficiencies, viz. the electoral system, lack of full black votes, etc. I was therefore still stock in my 1970 mode when I taught electoral system in the class when the Bush tsunami of 2000 came and literally blew me off.
Therefore, since most countries have electoral problems, the United Nations should be used to monitor elections. Monitoring elections should therefore be organized and structured by the United Nations for the following reasons:
· Election frauds are global problems with grave implications for global peace and security
· They are not random problems, they occur with predictable regularity.
· Election frauds are not geo-specific. They are global and not confined to any specific region of the world.
· Therefore, only the United Nations has the mandate, the mission and the potential to handle such global, regular and potentially explosive problems.
· Currently, only the US is striding the world like the knights in shining armor fixing elections and pontificating on election problems around the world which must not be allowed to continue because the United States is fundamentally flawed itself on elections. Asking US to go monitor elections in other countries is like asking “the rat to watch over the cheese box,” as my Caribbean colleague told me when I told him of US going to observe Nigeria’s elections.
· Therefore, United Nations is the only institution that can legitimately monitor democratic elections around the globe. Jimmy Carter organization, NDI and other American based NGOs that purport to monitor elections because they are interested in furthering democracies are all fake otherwise they should be monitoring US elections and should have been the first to be first to have refused the world to recognize Bush since he stole 2000 election.
· My writing, shouting, teaching and lecturing since 2000 that Bush is a rogue president who did not win election is because they did not do the job they profess to do. If they had done their job, they would have declared the obvious which was that Bust did not win the election and I would not have shouting ever since that we have an election rogue, a fake and a pretender at our White House.
· Therefore, these NGOs should not be allowed to continue their fakery around the world when they refuse to monitor election frauds in America -- their home base.
Strange enough, the unique thing about Bush’s presidency is not that he stole the presidency or his arrogant and pompous demeanor but the fact that many Americans and the world accept his obvious election frauds and criminal subversion of our constitutional election ethos. The 1876 generation were far better steeled than we are today. President Rutherford Hayes was ridiculed as “Your Fraudulency”[66] during his tenure (1877-1881) by the Democrats because he stole the presidency from their candidate, Samuel Tilden in the 1876 election, while in 2000, Bush gets presidential accolades everywhere even though most people know that he stole the 2000 election from Al Gore. It does not speak well of our generation. It either shows that we are too chicken to stand up for truth or that we do not care about truth, rules and principles – both of which is not good for character, family or moral values.
Looking at the list of INEC published candidates, my preferred candidate is Pat Utomi, the ADC candidate. He is credible. I have known him since 1983 during “Verdict ‘83” when we were television analysts for National Television Authority (NTA); and his programs and policies are what Nigeria needs now. I hope he is elected, but I am not holding my breath. The other candidate I like on the list is Dim Odumegwu-Ojukwu. He has been my friend since 1982 when I convinced the government of President Shehu Shagari and Vice-President Alex Ekwueme to allow him to return to Nigeria from his exile base in Ivory Coast where he had been since the end of the civil war in 1970.
I was the first Nigerian to propose Ojukwu’s return to the federal government back in 1981 when it was a highly “politically incorrect” topic to discuss around high government officials, let alone, in the State House, Lagos. I remember how Ekwueme was rattled and uncomfortable the first time I introduced the topic and discussed it with him at his office in State House, Ribadu Road, Lagos. He did not want to touch the topic because it was very sensitive and politically incorrect. He thought that his NPN allies would not entertain the return of Ojukwu from exile then. However, I pushed the policy because I knew that it was good for the country, and would benefit his party, NPN.
I must however thank and congratulate Vice-President Ekwueme for his eventual decision to agree with me and bring Ojukwu back from exile in 1982 in spite of his initial hesitations and objections. It was a very courageous decision because there were many real and imagined stiff opposition against it then. Besides, he had many NPN colleagues who were not favorably disposed to granting amnesty to Ojukwu to come back. For me, it was an easy decision. As an academician, I am accountable to no one but my conscience. I started pushing the policy in 1981 once I did my research, and was convinced that it was a sound national policy. Actually, I got the initial idea after I gave a seminar on military strategy to the troops of General Domkat Bali in Kaduna then. That was the first time I met Commodore Ebitu Ukiwe who was with Bali then, and the seminar was before the coup that brought two of them to power in Lagos as Defense Minister and Vice-President respectively. I did not know then that I was conferencing with the two men who would soon occupy prominent powerful positions in a new military administration in the country. The important thing though, was that the seminar went well. General Bali and his officers loved enjoyed it and I did too. I raised many controversial issues, which we discussed and thrashed out. The seminar was friendly, argumentative, conversational and useful; and I could see that Bali and his officers enjoyed it.
My seminar with General Domkat Bali in Kaduna plus my other contacts with other top civilian officers firmed me up to request the federal government to grant Ojukwu amnesty to return from exile and to argue it vigorously with Vice-President Ekwueme and others. I had taught military strategic studies at Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ife, Nigeria for ten years and my many professional contacts with the Nigerian military then had convinced me that the military was not opposed to Ojukwu’s return from exile as some others thought. So I started discussing the very sensitive issue with the vice-president with certain knowledge of the Nigeria’s armed forces which he obviously did not have, hence his initial resistance.
I was still discussing my request with Ekwueme in his office when his details reminded him that it was time to go home, so I escorted him to his car as he invited me to his house the next Saturday to conclude the discussions. Thereafter, his motorcade departed and I drove back to my university. I went to his house on the appointed day and we continued the discussion. On the second day of our meeting, I tagged on the request for Gowon’s amnesty to my pleas. General Gowon was Nigeria’s Head of State who fought the Nigerian civil war against General Ojukwu, who was Biafra’s Head of State. Ojukwu left for Ivory Coast on exile when the war ended on January 10, 1970 while Gowon continued as Nigeria’s Head of State until he was overthrown on January 29, 1975 in a military coup while attending African Summit meeting in Uganda. Gowon left for exile to London from Uganda.
Hence, by a coincidence of fate, the two Nigerian foremost protagonists were in exile in 1981. I therefore knew felt that lumping my requests for their amnesty together would make my requests much easier and more palatable for Ekwueme to handle and present to his federal government colleagues than asking for only Ojukwu’s return.
I guess the vice-president had had some time to think more about the issues since we first met in his office. He was curious about my requests and was ready with a few “tough” questions for me. As anticipated, he told me flat out that the question of Gowon’s amnesty was understandable for him because Gowon was never charged with any crime. I reminded him that Ojukwu was also never charged or tried by any court, and that he would like to stand for such a trial, if the government wanted it. However, I told him that the trial of Ojukwu was not what Nigeria needed at that time; and would do Nigeria no good to begin to try him in court then. Then, he wanted to know why I was very interested in Ojukwu coming back – a topic that no other person dared broach with the federal government at that time. He also stated that Ojukwu rebelled against the federal government and wondered if he was still not rebelling.
After the initial discussions of my request with Ekwueme in his office, and in retrospect now, I can understand his initial hesitations then. However, as stated, I pressed on the case because I was convinced that, in the 1980s, Nigeria needed Ojukwu back in the country for our national healing, wholeness, and national reconciliation; and in keeping with the “no victor, no vanquished” policy that ended the civil war in January 1970, instead of letting him rot away in exile, in Ivory Coast. The discussions were long and intense yet friendly and convivial. I arrived at the vice president’s official residence about 10. a.m. and left around 4 p.m. So I spent some good time there. He was a great and hospitable host. I had launch and drinks and mingled with Senator Annah and other top Nigerians who were also visiting the vice-president. Eventually, we retired to his study for private specific discussions of why I was there.
First, it sounded like I was being queried in court. His questions were many, specific and serious. He wondered why I was very interested in Ojukwu’s case instead of asking for a job with the federal government like my colleagues from the university. He told me that when I first started making contacts with him asking for an appointment to speak with him, that he thought that it was for job purposes and was in fact, thinking of the appropriate job I could do for his government when he initially granted me the appointment to see him. I thanked him for his nice statements, considerations and “offer” but told him that I loved teaching and was not seeking to swap my job as a university professor; and that I was there to discuss Ojukwu’s amnesty and return from exile.
Then, I tried to present my case – why Ojukwu should come home – in the best way, and as polite and forceful as I could. I told the vice-president that his government needed to bring Ojukwu back as a major step towards healing the wounds of the civil war. Further, I told him that it was not enough for him, an Igbo man, to be the vice-president of the country while Ojukwu, the man who led Igbos in the war, which was very popular with the Igbos, was still out on exile. More importantly, I told him that it would benefit his party and himself a lot personally if they bring Ojukwu back because Igbos will be very grateful to the federal government for that, which would rub off on him as the vice-president.
Further, I told Chief Ekwueme that my proposal would actually save his own job as the vice-president because there was a ground swelling of opinion against his keeping the high position as the vice-president in the coming 1983 election. The reason was that his party, (NPN) got only 4% in Igbo land in the 1979 elections and was therefore upset that he could not deliver. I told him that I was therefore, actually offering him a lifeline with which to swing back to his people, the Igbos so that he could get their support and keep his job for the 1983 elections. Otherwise, NPN would dump him in 1983. I knew that then. I had deep contacts with the NPN and the federal government, so I knew what I was talking about.
I further told the vice-president that he should therefore consider Ojukwu as the unique and lucky variable for him for use to salvage his own popularity with the Igbos and thus, increase his standing within NPN. Without Ojukwu’s special situation then, he was doomed to marginal existence with the Igbos, because the Igbos were never going to vote for NPN. However, if the vice-president and NPN brought Ojukwu back, the Igbos would be grateful, might change their mind and vote NPN in 1983.
The vice-president then asked me if Ojukwu would join his political party, the NPN if he came back. I told him that I did not know the answer to that question. I told him that I had never personally met Ojukwu by that time, had never talked to him and therefore could not answer that question, but that it was not a necessary or useful question to ask me. I further, explained to him that I did not expect them to ask or demand that condition from Ojukwu before granting him amnesty to come back. I explained to him again, that NPN and himself personally, would reap huge benefits if Ojukwu returned then, whether he joined their party or not, because Igbos would know that it was the federal government of NPN that brought their hero back and that himself, Chief Ekwueme was the vice-president who orchestrated the whole process.
Moreover, I knew that the vice-president needed the boost from Ojukwu’s return for his political survival within NPN and in Igbo land far more that Ojukwu actually needed to come home to Nigeria because by then he actually built a very successful business in Ivory Coast. He was a special guest of the legendary founding president of Cote d’Ivoire, Felix Houphouet-Biogny who literally adopted him as a son. He was therefore living in Cote d’Ivoire then as a highly popular celebrity. The Igbos in Nigeria knew it, loved him even more; and were making frequent trips to Cote d’Ivoire to meet him. Besides the Igbos, many other Nigerians were also very infected by his celebrity and mystical wartime exploits and were happy to be associated with him.
In fact, a political party, GNPP of Ibrahim Waziri had already named him his running mate for the 1983 election. It was a campaign ploy. Waziri was from the North and he wanted the Igbo votes to win the presidency in 1983 elections, so he had to propose their most favored so as his vice-presidential running mate, even though he was still in exile. Also because I was based as Ife, the heart of Yorubaland, and with the connections I had developed at Purdue University[67] with the Awolowo family, which was the leading political family of the Yorubas, I knew that Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the man for who my university was renamed and the leader of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), was going to make the return of Ojukwu his main campaign theme for the 1983 elections in his quest for Igbo votes.
The point was that, in 1981, many Nigerians – Igbos, Hausas, Yorubas, etc, -- loved, admired General Ojukwu, Leader of the secessionist Biafra, wanted him back home from exile and were eager, ready, willing and itching to capitalize on his rising national, regional and international popularity for their own political ends by calling for his amnesty and return from exile. there was a rising popular demand for Ojukwu’s return that was everywhere, that filled the air, which anyone who cared could feel and sense, except the federal government top operatives. They were living in the bubble and did not know how Nigerians and others felt; and I took it upon myself to break that bubble and bring Dr. Alex Ekwueme and our federal government to reality.
It is a shame that government often find themselves in such bubbles and just kept stuck in there resisting all attempts to pull them out and show them reality. We have similar problems in America now with the Iraq war where Bush and Cheney are literally wackos living in yonder world unconnected with where we, the common, ordinary real-world Americans and human-beings live. If Dick Cheney and Bush live in the real world, they will know that on November 7, 2007, that we massively told them to bring home our troops from Iraq now, now and now. We told them that we have heard all their logics, that if we pull out that Iraqi insurgents will not follow us to US and that all they want is for us to leave them alone. These are all what Americans are saying. Yet, the Bushes and Cheneys are surging forward. What can I say except that they live in bubbles or are delusional.[68]
Government often, stuck their heads in the sand and refuse to come out even as its own self destruct. Such was the mode of our federal government in 1981 that it needed all the power of a bulldozer to pull it out of its doldrums. Luckily, I had that bulldozer, in the person of Dr. Akweke Nwafor-Orizu, which I used to pull Ekwueme and his government out of the gutter they were in with the Igbos. I knew of the serious concerns and fears of Ekwueme and some top NPN and federal government officers were unfounded because of my expertise and courses at the university on strategic studies, political economy and public policy. Many top government civilian and military officers took my courses. They liked what I thought, we developed relationships and became friends. Many of my students went on to occupy top positions in Nigeria’s military and civilian administrations.
Apart from my courses at the university, I was also a consultant and gave yearly seminars at the Nigerian Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Jaji, Jos. Nigeria. NIPSS was the most prestigious and exclusive think tank for the training of the crème of Nigerian military and civilian power elite. Every Nigerian top military and civilian officer went there or was angling to go there. It was modeled after the concept of Aristotle’s “philosopher king” where national leaders were immersed for one year in the art of good governance. My yearly sojourns at NIPSS was quite exhilarating, very challenging and mutually useful. It allowed me the opportunity to interact and mingle with our current and assured future military and civilian leaders as well as to propose and explain my ideas and principles of good governance in an unencumbered environment and with no conditions attached.
Hence, we had very frank and open discussions at NIPSS seminars, and they were part of where I developed my “Ojukwu return” concept and strategy, which I took to the vice-president and confidently argued and explained. Unfortunately, after the rigorous and lengthy discussions with the vice-president, it did not seem to me that I convinced him to push for the return of Ojukwu by his government, so I left him with a sort of warning and/or clarification to sort of summarize our discussions. Therefore, mindful of history, and for clarity and clarifications, I said to the vice-president before I left his house:
Sir, please let it never be said, that I was here begging for the return of Ojukwu from exile because that was not what I was doing. The truth is that Ojukwu will come back to this country and he will come back a hero. The only issue I am here for, therefore, is to see if you and your government will have the wisdom to benefit from his eventual and inevitable return by proactively bringing him back. The Igbos will be enormously grateful for your action, and thus increase the miserable 4% support they gave you in 1979 election[69].
I was not satisfied with his tepid response because I did not get any firm commitment that he would work towards the return of Ojukwu and I was not going to give up. Therefore, I remembered my high school principal, the late Dr. Akweke Nwafor-Orizu who was also a former president of Nigeria. At that time, I did not know any connections Nwafor-Orizu had with Dr. Ekwueme, but I knew that, though retired, he had been a very influential politician in the country. He was also once president of Nigerian senate; and I knew that he was the chair of NPN in the state – Ekwueme’s political party at the time. I also knew that. Dr. Nwafor-Orizu and Ojukwu came from the same town, Nnewi, so I proceeded to meet him in Nnewi to complain and/or seek his help.
Dr. Nwafor-Orizu’s massive estate in Nnewi, which he called, “God’s Village” actually had more security to navigate than the State House in Lagos, which I successfully did with great luck and determination. The important thing though, was that Dr. Nwafor-Orizu was very happy to see me. He remembered me very well as I expected he would. I had not seen or met him since I graduated from his high school – National High School, (NHS), Nnewi -- in 1964. I was a tempestuous and rebellious teenager then for which he expelled me from his school many times only to readmit me each time, at the intervention and pleadings of my class teachers, the vice-principal (who actually ran the school) and my mother of blessed memory who always came to plead with him even as I protested, confirming the case that mother knows best.
However, my personal relationship with Dr. Nwafor-Orizu changed on our graduation day when he surprised everyone by announcing that he actually admired my person and character because I was honest, straightforward, honest and hard-working unlike some of his “favorite” students whom he called snitches, thieves and liars. He also acknowledged that my teachers and his vice liked me because of those admirable and honorable qualities, and that they were looking up to me to help produce the best WAEC examination result for the school[70]. He then proceeded to reveal that he really liked me because I reminded him of his youth when he was as rebellious, hard-working and intelligent as he said I was. Dr. Akweke Nwafor-Orizu, in his typical arrogant way, enjoined the school to go and check out his own records as a youth going to school and growing up in the town, and they will find out that, “I was behaving like Amechi.” He then proceeded to gave me the best testimonial of all the students. I was flabbergasted, the vice-principal was hilarious, and my teachers were jumping with joy while the student body rose in affirmation and acclamation. It was a beautiful day for me – the crowning apex of my tumultuous high school career.
When the WAEC result came out in the Spring of 1965 and I was lucky to have as god as everyone had predicted because I really studied very hard for those exams then, Dr. Nwafor-Orizu sent for my mother to go an bring me back to the school. My Mother came to fetch me at Port Harcourt where I was already moving on with my life. I reluctantly agreed to follow my mother back to Nnewi to meet with Dr. Nwafor-Orizu who was very happy with my WAEC results. My set at NHS had 100% passes with five Grade ones, and as expected I was luckily one of them. When I met Dr. Nwafor-Orizu with my mother, he was elated and offered me scholarship to go to university. I thanked him for kindness but declined the offer. They were both very disappointed in my refusal to accept the scholarship offer. Dr. Nwafor-Orizu finally told my mother to bring him another son to train for free since I had proved incorrigible. I however assure my mother and Dr. Nwafor-Orizu that I would go to the university even though I was not sure how I would do it then, but that was how I left my high school proprietor, principal, president of the Nigerian Senate and former president of Nigeria in Nnewi in the spring of 1965.
I was happy for my school and myself the graduation day in December 1965 because the “confessions” of Dr. Nwafor-Orizu vindicated the social justice struggles that I had waged with him during my years at the school. It also created another a higher level of respect for him because it was not easy for such a high-powered politician in Nigeria or elsewhere to admit and confess that he was wrong in his dealings with a lowly young commoner and nobody like me. He was under no compulsion to do that; and nobody was expecting that. Therefore, it was done out of complete free will and volition, and hence, based on high moral character, which I adore and salute. I was therefore convinced; on the last day of my high school, that Dr. Nwafor-Orizu was truly a great and wise leader and politician -- something he had tried to convince me all my years with him to no avail. I believe that it takes a great mind to admit he was wrong especially when he was under no compulsion or facing no consequences. However, that was what happened at Nwafor-Orizu’s National High School, Nnewi in December 1964. Even though we quarreled through out my years at NHS, we parted as friends and with deep respect for each other.
It was therefore natural that when I got into “trouble” over an important national policy that I would seek out my mentor, my benefactor for help and counsel. I therefore went to Nnewi to cash my capital with Nwafor-Orizu – a huge capital that I had banked with him since 1965. After the customary greetings, I started telling him why I came. I started by telling him that I had some problems in Lagos. He felt sorry and thought that it was personal and promised to do whatever he could to help me out. I told him that it was not personal but related to public policy. When I told him that my problem was related to public policy, he pounced on his chest and said I should tell him what it was and he would solve it because he, “was the custodian of national secrete.” The glow and imperial arrogance, for which I knew and once hated him came alive, and which ironically I enjoyed then because he was going to use it to solve “my” problem. He then told me that there was no important thing the federal government did in Lagos, which President Shagari and/or Vice-President Ekwueme did not come to Nnewi to discuss with him. He then brought out his visitor’s book to show me top government officials that visit him. He then told me that he remembered how determined, focused, hard-working and honest I was as a young man and that he would go any length with me if I was still that way. I assured him that I still tried to do my best.
That conversation was vintage Dr. Nwafor-Orizu and I thanked him profusely for his confidence. I then asked him what he thought of the idea of amnesty for Ojukwu so that he could return from exile since they were from the same town, Nnewi. Dr. Nwafor-Orizu looked me straight in the eyes and said, “Well, actually, Ojukwu’s father who was one of the richest Nigerians was my friend, and I was his mentor when he came back from overseas. However, he got very arrogant and disrespectful when he was the Head of State of Biafra, and did not give me the respect due me as a former president of Nigeria.” He paused and continued, “However, I like the idea of amnesty for him, I think it is a good idea. I think it would help Nigeria heal, because for one thing, Ojukwu captured and represented the soul of the Igbos, even though he misused and abused it, which was why we lost the war. But, yes. He should come back.” I thanked him immensely for his very correct summary and conclusion about the situation, which very correctly approximated my own position. I told his that that was exactly what I thought. Then I told him that I had gone to Lagos and talked with Alex Ekwueme, the Vice-President, and that I was not happy with his attitude towards it – that he appeared cold and not receptive to the idea, and that that was why I came to him for help.
Dr. Nwafor-Orizu then further told me that my problem was easy because he personally nominated Dr. Ekwueme for vice-president position because he fought and won that right in NPN. He also told me that Ekwueme always worked very cooperatively with him. H e checked his calendar and told me when next the vice-president would visit him and assured me that he would tell him to try to bring Ojukwu back as I said because it would be good for the country and for the party. He thanked me for my thoughts and efforts and assured me that he would tell Ekwueme that that I was his “political son” and that he should listen to me. I thanked him profusely and left.
When next we met in Lagos, the vice-president confirmed his meeting and discussions with Dr. Nwafor-Orizu in Nnewi during the April, Easter vacation of 1981. That was my last involvement in the amnesty decision for Odumegwu Ojukwu. The next time it hit the news media and the airwaves, it was Dr. Chuba Okadigbo, the erstwhile flamboyant, President Shagari’s presidential adviser who dominated the news of Ojukwu’s imminent return. Thus, according to Obiora Uzokwe:
I had prepared a commentary about Nigerian politics and her politicians for publication today, but on getting the news of the passing of Dr. Chuba Okadigbo, I decided not to air it in deference to the fallen nationalist. His death was a shock to many, including this writer. I may have disagreed with his politics, especially lately, but will never forget how I felt about him the day Chief Odumegwu Ojukwu came back from exile in the early eighties. At the Enugu airport, he was one of the first to disembark from the aircraft that brought the Biafran hero home. He was said to have been instrumental in chief Ojukwu's pardon and I could not help but be proud of him for helping to broker the deal. I watched the duo of Dr. Okadigbo and Chief Ojukwu in admiration and felt a surge of hope going through me. Before Ojukwu's convoy drove off in the direction on Nnewi, I continued to think to myself that with titans like Okadigbo and Ojukwu, the Igbo tribe was blessed[71].
He continued:
Even before Ojukwu's return, Dr. Okadigbo was full of promise; his television appearances were spectacular and electrifying. His arguments and logic were always sound and presented in the most convincing and colorful manner. He had a powerful command of the English language and was never bashful about using that strength. At that time, Dr. Okadigbo and people like Ikenna Nzimiro showed that you could criticize the government of the day and get away with it[72].
The fact was that Dr. Chuba Okadigbo was too chicken even to mention Ojukwu let alone discuss his return when I started it in early 1981. I remember going to discuss it with him in his office at the State House, Ribadu then, and he told me that he could not discuss it because it was too sensitive, unless I wanted him to lose his job. So, it was not until I had done the difficult job of breaking the government down and forcing them to accept that it was feasible, possible and in the national interest as well as politically beneficial to NPN that the political bosses accepted the policy of Ojukwu’s return; and then gave Dr. Okadigbo the green light to go ahead and negotiate the details of his return.
I want to make it clear that I have no dispute with Uzokwe’s statements above. In fact, I would agree with him on most of it. The only point I am making is that I was the one who initiated it and did the tedious ground work to get it approved before the political hacks jumped on the bandwagon. I was happy and very proud for the dynamic way Dr. Okadigbo executed his instructions because that was exactly what I had predicted to the vice-president when we discussed it in his residence –“that Ojukwu would come back a hero.”
There should be no disputes about the facts as I have laid them down in this paper. The former vice-president, Dr. Alex Ekwueme is still alive and active. He is therefore available to verify the authenticity of my story, which is very important to set history correct. Besides Dr. Ekwueme, his adviser then Dr. Christian Mbadunuju also authentically verified my story. Dr. Mbadunuju who later moved on to become the Governor of Anambra State in the post-Abacha regime wrote me then, in his capacity as Ekwueme and State House Officer, to thank and congratulate me for “my great advice and wonderful political foresight concerning Ojukwu’s return.”

The Igbos officially received and welcomed Ojukwu back at Igbo-Ukwu, the Ibo heartland where prominent Ibos had the opportunity to welcome him. Dr. K.O. Mbadiwe, the grandiloquent and larger-than-life Ibo politician was the master of ceremony at the opulent estate of Chief Ugochukwu. Ojukwu was meanwhile given the title of “Ikemba, Nnewi” and thereafter Ekwueme began to chaperon him around the state in what came to be known as “Onye Ije Nno” (Welcome Home Traveler) Mercedes 500 motorcade.
The multiple travels and associations of Ekwueme with Ojukwu enhanced Ekwueme and his party’s (NPN) popularity in Igbo land and made the party to win the governorship of Igbo land in 1983 elections – from the miserable 4% they received in 1979 election – it was an unprecedented remarkable feat.
That remarkable NPN achievement made President Shagari to invite and grant me a private audience at the State House after the 1983 elections. The meeting was scheduled to last for fifteen minutes when I was ushered into the presidential executive office at the State House, but when I came in, it lasted for an hour and half as the president thanked me profusely for the many useful advice I gave his government over the years. The president was generally eager to let me know that he was aware of the great, good and useful advice I gave his government regarding Ojukwu’s return that enhanced their position in Igbo land during the years.
After Ojukwu’s return, Vice-President Ekwueme, Dr. Chuba Okadigbo a nd other Igbos in top positions with the federal government and the NPN were no longer regarded as pariahs in by the Igbos. The return of Ojukwu immediately transformed all the NPN political operatives as “respectable” politicians and Igbo leaders.
Thus Ekwueme who would have languished as marginal operative, despised by his people, the Igbos because of his association with NPN became a stalwart politician and Igbo leader. The same thing happened to other top NPN operatives like Dr. Chuba Okadigbo and others. Mr. Obiora Uzokwe glowing tribute to Dr. Okadigbo when he died solidly reaffirms my position that the return of Ojukwu fundamentally transformed the status of fledgling Igbo NPN politicians and operatives. They moved from being at the margins and sidelines of Igbo politics to the center of Igbo politics. Thus, Mr. Uzokwe acknowledged:
I may have disagreed with his [Okadigbo’s] politics, especially lately, but will never forget how I felt about him the day Chief Odumegwu Ojukwu came back from exile in the early eighties. At the Enugu airport, he was one of the first to disembark from the aircraft that brought the Biafran hero home. He was said to have been instrumental in chief Ojukwu's pardon and I could not help but be proud of him for helping to broker the deal. I watched the duo of Dr. Okadigbo and Chief Ojukwu in admiration and felt a surge of hope going through me. Before Ojukwu's convoy drove off in the direction on Nnewi, I continued to think to myself that with titans like Okadigbo and Ojukwu, the Igbo tribe was blessed[73].

Ojukwu’s return clearly changed Igbos perception of Dr. Okadigbo and others; and the more connected they were perceived to have been with the decision to return Ojukwu, the greater their bumps. Therefore, Ekwueme, NPN and all its operatives received big bumps from Ojukwu’s return, as I had predicted. In 1981, Vice-President Ekwueme and other NPN Igbo operatives were similar position to top black operatives like Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice in the Republican Bush administration. They hold top government positions, but blacks still see them as sellouts because American blacks just do not identify with the Republican party. There are debates as to whether it is good or bad for blacks to decisively vote Democratic, as they have done for decades now, the truth is that blacks vote over 90% Democratic and less than 10% Republican. Therefore, any black that is a Republican in America generally looks strange and weird. Chief Ekwueme and Dr. Okadigbo looked strange and weird and odd then until Ojukwu’s return changed peoples’ perception of them.
President Shagari was particularly proud and amazed that I did all the good things for his government free and with no strings attached. He told me that he was aware that I had refused requests to work formally with his government before, and was happy to hear that I had recently reconsidered my position to accept a formal position with them. I had never sat face to face with a president and Head of State. I can only say that it was an awesome, unbelievable and unforgivable experience to realize you are sitting before the most powerful man in the country.
In the State House Guest Room, there were ambassadors and other foreign and national dignitaries who were sitting and waiting their schedule to meet the president of Nigeria while he was lavishing his time with the rickety and no-body me expressing his gratitude for the great things I did for his government, which was mainly my Ojukwu return proposal. Other NPN stalwarts were also quite grateful to me for helping them. Maitama Sule, not notch NPN titan came to my Presidential Hotel suite then to “personally thank me and my wife for my great help to their government.” I was very grateful for his kindness and generosities and promised to oblige. As I left, he handed me a gold presidential seal with his name inscribed. I value it a lot and still keep it today as memorabilia. The intriguing thing for me then, was that the dusts of the 1983 elections had not cleared, when the NPN great struggles and in fights for the 1987 elections began and intensified – a political fight that General Buhari rudely interrupted on December 31, 1983 when he violently overthrew Shagari regime.
Before I met President Shagari, the NPN Secretary-General visited me many times to offer and review many possible positions for me in the new administration. All of them knew that I was not eager about government positions and that I had ignored such earlier gestures from Ekwueme. However, they were finally able to convince me about a particular position they wanted me to do which they said, “needed someone with high intellectual energy like myself” – and that was the position President Shagari was referring to when I personally met him at the State House a few days later. Hence, I knew that the party and the government were seriously considering me then – even though, I was not a member of NPN or any political party.
In conclusion, there has been too many foreign penetrations and intrusions into Nigeria’s internal affairs for any Nigerian not to feel violated and aggrieved. However the activities of NDI and Dr. Jenning by usurping and organizing Nigeria’s electoral process as it deemed appropriate is a new and very regrettable low for Nigeria. Meanwhile, the Nigerian INEC is going around pretending that it is conducting elections when NDI and Dr. Jenning have wrapped up everything as they wanted it.
The crucial question for Professor Iwu is what is NDI and who is Dr. Jenning. Are all the things he said that he has done in his memos and his websites fake? What about his claims that, “NDI Facilitates Civil Society Pre-election Conference in Nigeria”, and his gloat that “November 22-23, 2006 will perhaps be remembered for a long time as a milestone in Nigeria’s electoral process.” Or Dr. Jenning’s claim that NDI unites election monitors? Whose country is it actually? And who is Dr. Jenning? You are actually doing worse than when Nigeria was still under direct colonialism. Or is there something I do not understand?

Who is Professor Ayoade of The Institute for Social Studies and Administration (TISSA)? Dr. Jennings made him Chair of the Steering Committee o f the election. Who does he report to? Is he INEC staff?

The Council of State recently visited you where you showed them INEC’s logistic center to emphasize your readiness for the elections which is great, Buhari and others praised your readiness for the election. My question is that I did not see you talk about NDI, Dr. Jenning and Madeleine Albright’s 40-member observation team that is at the core of your election preparations and through which you intend to legitimize your planned election grafts or am I wrong? My point is that either you are completely out of the loop, i.e. you do not know anything about the planning of the elections, which means that Dr. Jenning’s own version of election preparation is correct, or you are deliberately deceiving us, pretending and making it look like you are really preparing for an election. So, please tell us which one is true? I am really confused.

Further, INEC recently announced that two British firms Gilat and Witness would handle the transmission of election results. The announcement only compounds the problems for INEC and Nigeria. The question is who are these firms? Why are foreign firms given charge of our elections? The truth is that whether British or American, they are still foreign and still American. Britain does not have independent views on serious global matters these days, let alone on an issue as important as Nigerian election. If Maurice does not know it, with the “loss” of Venezuela to America, United States will never let anybody decide Nigeria’s elections except themselves. This means that this election will only confirm the American will as determined and published by NDI. Iwu and Obasanjo are only their surrogates. Shame on two of you, saboteurs, enemies of Nigeria and collaborators with Nigeria’s enemy. I only wish that I am wrong.

The other aspect of it is, what really do you want us to do with this your latest information of two British firms? Are we supposed to start rejoicing that after forty-seven years of independence, you have succeeded in selling us beck to our former colonial masters to handle our elections because we are unable to do it or because they are the only one that knows how to do it? When Chief Sam Mbakwe cried in the 1980s that we should bring back Britain, our colonial master to rule us, people knew that he was joking, but I am sure that he would even be shocked to know that in 2007, one Professor Iwu actually brought back Britain to conduct elections for us and was quite proud to announce it from the rooftops. I emphasized the word professor because that title connotes a person of letters – a learned person, one who knows, or who should know what Nigerian sovereignty means. I am truly scared of Nigeria now; and I am not blaming Obasanjo but you who should know.

Again, Maurice Iwu and Obasanjo have opted to disqualify Senator Ifeanyi Araraume from contesting for Imo Governor despite that he was nominated by PDP and confirmed by the Supreme Court. The same thing with the Speaker of Rivers State Rotimi Amaechi. Obasanjo cited their “anti-party” activities for disqualifying them. Obasanjo’s role is very disturbing. He is behaving like a dictator. He had wanted to perpetuate himself. Now he wants to ban anyone who opposes him from contesting. Obasanjo must not be allowed to turn Nigeria into a banana republic. He must allow Atiku to run. He has a right to try his luck. Obasanjo is a shame. After we allowed him to rule us two times, all we got from him is his lousy attempt to perpetuate himself indirectly through surrogates, since he could not do it directly.

Finally, The Appeals Court has just issued its ruling that supports Obasanjo’s ban of Atiku’s presidential candidacy which you, Chief Akin Osuntokun, Mallam Uba Sani and all other Obasanjo operatives’ support. I do not know what are Gani Fawehinmin’s problems for supporting such a terrible decision, but I know that it will be a sad day progressive forces through out Nigeria to find a genuine patriot and historically giant social justice fighter like Gani on the same side with the renegade, corrupt and incompetent President Obasanjo of Nigeria. Gani, does that mean that you have now removed your name from the list of progressive lawyers in the country – from the list of those whom people will turn to and look up to during oppressive periods. It will be a pity for Gani to degenerate and to sink so low as to keep company with Obasanjo who should actually be jail as we try to recover our loots from him. Gani, I remember your historic inquiry at Oduduwa Hall, University of Ife when you single handedly investigated the government massacre of our students in 1980. The memory of the bold and fearless Gani as he challenged the federal government, conducted his inquiry and read his findings is etched in my memory; and I will refuse to erase and replace it with a placid Gani coddling with Obasanjo.

I am however, more interested in Niyi Idowu, Chairman of NBA. He courageously declared that INEC has “no power whatsoever to disqualify any candidate.” I am also happy with the position of Bamidele Aturu who declared that, “There is no specific or general permission in any law that permits INEC to screen and disqualify candidates.” These are honorable positions that promote democracy. Decisions that ban or disqualify candidates from contesting are fascist; and I hope that Professor Maurice Iwu will be the agent of democracy and progress instead of being the agents of negativity and dictatorship.


[1] Read, Andrew Gumbel, Steal This Vote: Dirty Elections and the Rotten History of Democracy in America (New York: Nation Books, 2005); Tracy Campbell, Deliver the Vote: A History of Election Fraud, An American Political Tradition, (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2005); Steven Hill, Fixing Elections: The Failure of America’s Winner Take All Politics, (New York: Routlege Press, 2002).


[2] For war profiteering read, Smedley Butler, War Is a Racket (New York: 1935); For Iraqi war profiteering watch the DVD, Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers (A Robert Greenwald Films, 2006)
[3] John Murtha, CNN, April 5, 2007
[4] Read, Maureen Dowd, “Daffy Does Doom”, New York Times, January 27, 2007

[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] For more details, read Vincent Bugliosi, The Betrayal of America: How The Supreme Court Undermined The Constitution And Chose Our President (New York: The Nation Books, 2001); and Mark Crispin Miller, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They’ll Steal the next One Too -- Unless We Stop Them, (New York: Basic Books, 2005).


[8] For more read, Joe Conason, Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth (New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2003); and David Corn, The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception (New York: Crown Publishers, 2003)
[9] Read, Robert Young Pelton, Licensed to Kill: Hired Guns in the War on Terror (New York: Crown Publishers, 2006)
[10] For more details, read: Noam Chomsky: Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy and Noam Chomsky, Rogue States: The Rule of Force in World Affair. Also read, William Blum Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 2000) and Clyde Prestowitz, Rogue Nation: American Unilateralism and the Failure of Good Intentions (New York: Basic Books, 2003).

[11] Read, “Building Confidence in US Elections. Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, September 2005”. Organized by Center for Democracy and Election Management, American University, Jimmy Carter and James Baker, Co-Chair.
[12] Mark Crispin Miller, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They’ll Steal the next One Too -- Unless We Stop Them, (New York: Basic Books, 2005).
[13] Albright Leads Election Observer Mission to Nigeria, This Day, Funmi Peter-Omale in Abuja, Nigeria. 03.20.2007

[14] Ibid.
[15] Mark Crispin Miller, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They’ll Steal the next One Too -- Unless We Stop Them, (New York: Basic Books, 2005); Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman, How the GOP Stole America’s 2004 Election & Is Rigging 2008, (Columbus, OH: Free Press, 2005); Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman, eds. Did George W. Bush Steal America’s 2004 Election? Essential Documents – Includes the Conyers Report, (Columbus, OH: Free Press, 2004); John Fund, Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy,(San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2004)




[16] NDI is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, tax-exempt organization. For more information please contact us at development@ndi.org or call 202-728-5599

[17] John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (San Francisco: BK Books, 2004)

[18] Good and bad guys are here defined purely in terms of service to imperialism and America’s interests. Good guys are those who serve America’s interests , while bad guys serve the interests of their own countries.
[19] Nigeria Election Watch, AsscessDemocracy.org, April, 2007.

[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Ibid.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Kola Ologbondiyan and Funso Muraina, This Day, “Iwu: Nothing’ll Make INEC Shift April Polls: Offers no guarantee on Atiku, others” (From in Abuja, 03.22.2007

[26] Onwuka Nzeshi, This Day, “ Elections: US Government Advocates Transparency” ( Abuja, 03.23.2007 )

[27] Read, Kevin Phillips, Wealth and Democracy (New York, Broadway Books, 2002), p. xi and passim; Michael Parenti, Democracy for the Few, (New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002).

[28] Randall Robinson, The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks (New York: Dutton Books, 2000), p. 246 and passim.
[29] Chris Marsden, “Death of Moshood Abiola increases tensions in Nigeria” WSWS : News & Analysis : Africa, 9 July 1998
[30] Ibid.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Ibid.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Ibid.

[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid.
[37] Read, Amechi Okolo, Foreign Capital in Nigeria, 1945-1985: Roots of Underdevelopment (Lagos: Heartland Books, 1987)
[38] John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (San Francisco: BK Books, 2004), p ix., and passim

[39] Frantz, Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, (New York: Random Books, 1974), passim.
[40] Read, Amechi Okolo, “Why Impeachment is Good for Clinton.” SocialJusticeForum.blogspot.com
[41] Perkins, Op. cit., p. xiii.
[42] Sufuyan Ojeifo, This Day, “PTDF: Senate Committee Indicts Obasanjo, Atiku. •Refers report to Code of Conduct Bureau (Abuja, 03.22.2007)

[43] Read, Max Siollun, “The Rollercoaster Life of Murtala Muhammed” (Port Harcourt: Niger Delta Congress, 2002)
[44] Ibid.
[45] MPLA is Movement for the Popular Liberation of Angola and UNITA is National Union for the Total Independence of Angola.
[46] Siollun, op. cit.
[47] Ibid.
[48] Ibid.
[49] Read, The Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates of the 82nd Congress, First Session, Volume 97, Part 5 (May 28, 1951-June 27, 1951), pp. 6556-6603.

[50] Senator Joseph McCarthy: The History of George Catlett Marshall, Modern History Sourcebook: 1951

[51] Read, Allende's Leftist Regime, Intelligence Resource Program

[52] Covert Action in Chile, 1963-1973, a Staff report of The Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities (US Senate), 18 December 1975; William Blum, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II, (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995).

[53] Ibid.
[54] Michael Parenti, Democracy for the Few, (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002), p. 156.
[55] Ibid.
[56] Op.cit., p. 157.
[57] Pini Jason, “Obasanjo or Ekwueme,” New African, ( February, 1999).
[58] Ibid.
[59] Ibid.
[60] Ibid.
[61] Ibid
[62] Ibid.
[63] BBC News, November 2005; and allafrica.com
[64] Ibid.
[65] Noam Chomsky: Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy (New York: Metropolitan Books: 2006).

[66] Read, John S. Cooper, “The Stolen Election of 1876.” Suite 101 ( November 12, 1999).
[67] Chief Awolowo’s in-laws were my junior and friends at Purdue University. Their senior brother was married to Awolowo’s daughter who visited us at Purdue.
[68] Read, Maureen Dowd, Op.cit.
[69] This is a direct quote of my closing statement to Vice-President Alex Ekwueme during my meeting with him in his official residence in Lagos in Spring, 1981.
[70] West African Examination Council (WAEC) examined and awarded final certificates for all high schools in Anglophone West Africa.
[71] Alfred Obiora Uzokwe, Africa World (Monday, September 29, 2003)

[72] Ibid.
[73] Alfred Obiora Uzokwe, Africa World (Monday, September 29, 2003)