Our very own first lady Speaker of the House of Representatives in Nigeria has decided to become a sit-tight politician in spite of the furore generated by her poor decision making and questionable intention.
A panel investigated the process by which the contract for the renovation works on her official residence and that o her deputy was awarded and raised questions on both the amount awarded and the process by which the award was made.
She was indicted for not following due-process, for awarding the job at a questionable rates and for awarding the job to companies that were not registered to do business etc. etc.
What is amazing however is that an eight-year veteran of the House of Representatives could be so naive as not to know how due-process works.
Due-process happens to be one of the mantras of the ruling party to which she belongs!
Her Waterloo came about as a result of intellectual paucity and an inability to understand that politics is a game of balance. She refused to give unto Ceaser by ensuring that all constituencies represented in the House had their interest catered to and so is about to be consumed by the genie of "due process" released by her own political party! Talk about self-immolation!
I am also amazed by PDP and their head-in-the-sand ostrich posture.
They appear to believe that this will all blow away especially since they appear to have been able to muzzle the civil society and labour groups that would have been up in arms about the situation.
I think that the party could have burnished their tarnished armour a bit by quietly releasing her. Frankly, I do not think that she could have anything on the party that she would have used as a bargaining chip to checkmate such a move by her party. She was meant to be a rubber-stamp leader, hence the party's apparent unwillingness to let her go. They may also be scared of crowning a Speaker who will get there and begin to demonstrate the he had a mind of own.
I pity most our "captive" President who does not appear to have a real voice in the party heirachy enough to ask the party to call their members to order and move the present Speaker out before more damage is done.
This same party had the presence of mind to substitute duly elected party candidates with hand-picked ones in the last election, a move that is beginning to experience the "Obi phenomenon" as the election results are becoming unravelled through nullification by the Judiciary.
Let me at this point give kudos to the men and women in our judiciary who want to do their jobs thoroughly without interference from any quarter, and have been able to do so in some landmark judgements that demonstrate that they hold the rule of law sacrosanct.
Mrs. Speaker must go because she has refused to be a part of our growing democracy and anti-corruption culture, she must be told that the age of the of the dinosaurs is over. Long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Long live democracy!
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Monday, October 15, 2007
Of gay Bishops...
I have read with facsination all the press, good and bad, about gays in religious orders, and just recently the Catholic church removed a bishop or whatever for giving an interview where he admitted to being gay and all that.
My first reaction to this type of issue is very simple, it is puerile to say the least for a person to join an order and then insist that the order must change their rules to suit him. He then seeks a reinterpretation of their historical processes in order to accommodate his position!
Hey! Gimme a break! You cannot tamper with a manuscript you did not write in order to make the interpretation suit you.
The most honorable thing to do would be to remove yourself from that group and form your own. Otherwise you would be guilty of wanting to eat your cake and have it at the same time. But I guess these days there are only a few honest and honorable men on hand.
You may accuse Christianity of being archaic, myopic, insular, use any english word you want, but please do not try to change it into what you want. That is the height of selfishness and against the spirit of democracy and rights entrenched therein. Anyway, talking of democracy, it is taking a serious bashing from people who imagine the rights of the few must be imposed on the rights of the many.
This brings me to the issue of gay marriage. Why do you want to force an institution that does not acede to your actions to validate it? Is it not to bring that institution down to your level and thus rubbish it? In most societies, common law relationships are recognised and the two individuals can have a pre-nuptial or post-nuptial agreement about any aspect of their relationship by asking a lawyer to draft such a document and filing it with the appropriate authorities, so what do they really want? What is the real agenda?
The Bible talks about God and our relationship with Him. I cannot imagine why someone would claim to believe in God and not believe what He says. Or on the other hand, if you don't believe in God why do you want an institution that derives its existence from Him to validate your lifestyle? I would imagine those people are insincere to say the least.
Another issue is that of gays wanting to adopt children! How can a relationship that cannot naturally produce children want to bring them up! This is unthinkable for me. Children are produced when a man and a woman come together. That unit provides a natural environment for nurturing the young, and both the man and woman have their respective parts to play. Before now, adoptions were done by couples who either could not have any children, or want more children and could not have or by those who have children but want to provide a nurturing environment for those children who do not have parents to look after them.
I believe that people who claim to be gay should really look at themselves well. Their relationship is based on one party being the "female", while the other is the "male". Have they not come back to the natural order of things as nature created it? I think the appropriate arms of medical and social sciences should take a look at this and bring some insight into the matters involved to the attention of the "gay" community.
Enjoy your day!
My first reaction to this type of issue is very simple, it is puerile to say the least for a person to join an order and then insist that the order must change their rules to suit him. He then seeks a reinterpretation of their historical processes in order to accommodate his position!
Hey! Gimme a break! You cannot tamper with a manuscript you did not write in order to make the interpretation suit you.
The most honorable thing to do would be to remove yourself from that group and form your own. Otherwise you would be guilty of wanting to eat your cake and have it at the same time. But I guess these days there are only a few honest and honorable men on hand.
You may accuse Christianity of being archaic, myopic, insular, use any english word you want, but please do not try to change it into what you want. That is the height of selfishness and against the spirit of democracy and rights entrenched therein. Anyway, talking of democracy, it is taking a serious bashing from people who imagine the rights of the few must be imposed on the rights of the many.
This brings me to the issue of gay marriage. Why do you want to force an institution that does not acede to your actions to validate it? Is it not to bring that institution down to your level and thus rubbish it? In most societies, common law relationships are recognised and the two individuals can have a pre-nuptial or post-nuptial agreement about any aspect of their relationship by asking a lawyer to draft such a document and filing it with the appropriate authorities, so what do they really want? What is the real agenda?
The Bible talks about God and our relationship with Him. I cannot imagine why someone would claim to believe in God and not believe what He says. Or on the other hand, if you don't believe in God why do you want an institution that derives its existence from Him to validate your lifestyle? I would imagine those people are insincere to say the least.
Another issue is that of gays wanting to adopt children! How can a relationship that cannot naturally produce children want to bring them up! This is unthinkable for me. Children are produced when a man and a woman come together. That unit provides a natural environment for nurturing the young, and both the man and woman have their respective parts to play. Before now, adoptions were done by couples who either could not have any children, or want more children and could not have or by those who have children but want to provide a nurturing environment for those children who do not have parents to look after them.
I believe that people who claim to be gay should really look at themselves well. Their relationship is based on one party being the "female", while the other is the "male". Have they not come back to the natural order of things as nature created it? I think the appropriate arms of medical and social sciences should take a look at this and bring some insight into the matters involved to the attention of the "gay" community.
Enjoy your day!
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Princess Diana
I have followed with disbelief the various commissions and investigative panels set up to investigate the cause of Princess Diana's death. Millions of tax payers' money has also gone into these excercise in what? Futility?
First of all none of these will bring her back and it's been about 10 years? Waoh!
I must say that the persistence in digging will not allow the country and family (especially her sons) to have closure.
What has also become apparent to me is that the lady did not live up to her responsibilities as a public figure and a member of the royal family.
I'm aware that some people will want to call for my head. However the first thing I will say is that any position we occupy in life will confer both PRIVILEGES and RESPONSIBILITIES. A person who is interested only in the privileges without being ready to pick up the accompanying responsibilities is not fit for that position in the first place.
It is like Gordon Brown or George Bush insisting on doing their own thing and going out without security because they wanted to live a "simple life".
Princess Diana did not understand that her position could have reinvented the monarchy in UK and taken it into the next century. What did we have? A mentality of I, me and myself that made her conclude that she could take on a centuries old institution on.
Well she miscalculated and ended up hurting not only herself but her sons who have had to live with the paparazzi's version of their mother's life. They would have to try very hard not to be affected by it.
The life she chose directly led her to the people and places she found herself in resulting in her tragic death.
I wish she would be left to rest, so that her family and friends can continue with their lives as best as they could. Mr. Fayed and other conspiracy theorists should please leave us alone!
First of all none of these will bring her back and it's been about 10 years? Waoh!
I must say that the persistence in digging will not allow the country and family (especially her sons) to have closure.
What has also become apparent to me is that the lady did not live up to her responsibilities as a public figure and a member of the royal family.
I'm aware that some people will want to call for my head. However the first thing I will say is that any position we occupy in life will confer both PRIVILEGES and RESPONSIBILITIES. A person who is interested only in the privileges without being ready to pick up the accompanying responsibilities is not fit for that position in the first place.
It is like Gordon Brown or George Bush insisting on doing their own thing and going out without security because they wanted to live a "simple life".
Princess Diana did not understand that her position could have reinvented the monarchy in UK and taken it into the next century. What did we have? A mentality of I, me and myself that made her conclude that she could take on a centuries old institution on.
Well she miscalculated and ended up hurting not only herself but her sons who have had to live with the paparazzi's version of their mother's life. They would have to try very hard not to be affected by it.
The life she chose directly led her to the people and places she found herself in resulting in her tragic death.
I wish she would be left to rest, so that her family and friends can continue with their lives as best as they could. Mr. Fayed and other conspiracy theorists should please leave us alone!
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
So unfair!
Yeah life is good alright, but for some its just the pits.
I saw a programme the other day on CNN about Criminally insane persons and one case was just so pathetic and the outcome so unnecessary.
A young man is sent for treatment by his parents, he suffers from delusions, has been known to be violent and had once turned a gun on two of his father's friends.
Despite reports by the father, the institutions said they could not compel him to take medication.
As for me the worst aspect of this case was that an advocacy group got to this boy and convinced him that he did not need to take medication if he did not want to!
This was a disturbed young man who could not control himself! The hospital also refused his parents access to his medical records.
He was released from the institution and his parents took him back. End of story? No!
One day the dad came back and found that in one of his rages he had brutally murdered his mother!
What did the advocacy group and medical personnel say? They said in essence, "We did not know it was that bad", "We could not violate his privacy rights" etc etc ad nauseam!
Who will comfort his father, who had repeatedly warned authorities that his son was unstable.
The lady died an untimely death and who is to be held responsible? The medical authorities or a meddling unqualified advocacy group who think a person's right to freedom is all that matters irrespective of other peoples' right to life and personal safety?
Who?
Like could have been much better for the young man, his parents and the society at large if the constitution could be interpreted in the spirit in which it was written rather that in the letter.
The letter kills, the spirit gives life!
I saw a programme the other day on CNN about Criminally insane persons and one case was just so pathetic and the outcome so unnecessary.
A young man is sent for treatment by his parents, he suffers from delusions, has been known to be violent and had once turned a gun on two of his father's friends.
Despite reports by the father, the institutions said they could not compel him to take medication.
As for me the worst aspect of this case was that an advocacy group got to this boy and convinced him that he did not need to take medication if he did not want to!
This was a disturbed young man who could not control himself! The hospital also refused his parents access to his medical records.
He was released from the institution and his parents took him back. End of story? No!
One day the dad came back and found that in one of his rages he had brutally murdered his mother!
What did the advocacy group and medical personnel say? They said in essence, "We did not know it was that bad", "We could not violate his privacy rights" etc etc ad nauseam!
Who will comfort his father, who had repeatedly warned authorities that his son was unstable.
The lady died an untimely death and who is to be held responsible? The medical authorities or a meddling unqualified advocacy group who think a person's right to freedom is all that matters irrespective of other peoples' right to life and personal safety?
Who?
Like could have been much better for the young man, his parents and the society at large if the constitution could be interpreted in the spirit in which it was written rather that in the letter.
The letter kills, the spirit gives life!
Friday, July 20, 2007
Hello blog lover, I'm here!
Ha!
Just image me publishing on da web! Feels mighty great as a matter of fact.
I love the written word and I'll be posting some of my poems for y'all to read. Sure hope you enjoy them.
I've actually been looking for an opportunity to hone my writing skills while ventilating some of my beliefs and ideas and for me this is a great opportunity. So, you can see why I say, "life is good, bro". Enjoy today! There will never be another opportunity to do so.
The "good old days" are happening right now but somehow we miss out because we think there's something round the corner that is better. Sure, that may be so, but since you have'nt turned the bend yet, why not savour what you can of this moment right now.
I'll be back and you be good!
Just image me publishing on da web! Feels mighty great as a matter of fact.
I love the written word and I'll be posting some of my poems for y'all to read. Sure hope you enjoy them.
I've actually been looking for an opportunity to hone my writing skills while ventilating some of my beliefs and ideas and for me this is a great opportunity. So, you can see why I say, "life is good, bro". Enjoy today! There will never be another opportunity to do so.
The "good old days" are happening right now but somehow we miss out because we think there's something round the corner that is better. Sure, that may be so, but since you have'nt turned the bend yet, why not savour what you can of this moment right now.
I'll be back and you be good!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)