Category: Prose

Posted in Prose

The General outsmarted us all!

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

By now you must have watched and analyzed that TV interview performance. I sent you the link line to it. Did you experience any jaw drop on watching it? I did! Have you tried to explain that performance to yourself? I have tried myself and I keep coming back to this explanation – the general conned us. What we saw was a deliberate charade designed to throw Nigerians off guard and to encourage any tendency in the other party to under-rate him. The ensuing complacency in that party would then play to the general’s advantage.

How else can one explain the alarming incidence of very absurd answers to very clear questions that one witnessed? Some of the responses were “Bakin Zuwoesque”, whilst others were brilliantly and blatantly Kafkaesque. I am convinced that the display was deliberate. It could not be the reflection of incompetence and ineptitude. Generals are generally not that blank. And remember that to get to the rank of general, one necessarily has to go through some very rigorous training exercises and courses both at home and abroad. A subaltern would not even have responded the way he did.

And it cannot be an indication of a series of “senior moments” that kept reoccurring throughout that interview – such an explanation would immediately show him to be unsuitable for the post he so much craves for. And it cannot be the result of PDP juju as some others have claimed either.

Which then brings me back to the feigned incompetence explanation. This feigned incompetence theory assumes further credibility when one recalls that none of his usually boisterous social media supporters has come forward to respond or defend his performance. All have kept mum.

You will be surprised by my conclusion – a man who can convincingly feign such ignorance and project such blankness must have advanced skills in the art of concealment and politics, and should thus be able to outfox all the foxes and lions in his party. He has risen very highly in my estimation since pulling off this brilliant tour de force.

Posted in Prose

Reflections on credulity and credibility

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

The incidence of celebrities, authority figures and eminent persons making commentaries on social affairs, the state of the economy and governance etc. is on the rise. We are now assailed from every corner by judgments of, and commentaries on people, places, periods and events by such celebrities and eminent persons. Not all of these judgments and commentaries are however backed by evidence. What should be our reactions before such claims, commentaries and judgements? Is there not a difference between an opinion and a fact? Are the opinions of a celebrity always right? Should we always believe them? Must we suspend criticality when processing the views of such persons?

The reflections below on credibility and credulity were prompted precisely by these questions. My hope is that by the time you have gone through these reflections, you would have come up with your own personal strategy and processes for sieving statements, claims and commentaries for facticity and accuracy, and are thus more able to separate facts from opinions, no matter their sources. Enjoy the reading. Let me also have the benefit of your comments on these reflections.

  1. The chances of a claim being believed as true are largely a function of two things – How credible the source is or judged to be & how credulous the receiver is!
  2. It is so easy for a credible source or a source that is judged credible to deceive a credulous audience.
  3. That deception will continue to happen until the “ahaa” moment.
  4. Wisdom is discovering that even your long trusted, infallible and credible source can sometimes be economical with the truth!
  5. Credulousness/credulity exposes us to massive manipulation and exploitation.
  6. Credulity comes with huge social, emotional & economic costs.
  7. Not all that that your credible source puts forward is true!
  8. Do not mistake capacity for linguistic elegance with capacity for telling the truth. Lies are often packaged in beautiful prose.
  9. Raise your credulity threshold. Be more critical! “Shine your eyes”!
  10. The more critical you are, the more you are likely to discover flaws in the “perfect” logic of that credible source.
  11. Once you begin to discover flaws, inaccuracies, distortions and lies in your credible source, his/her credibility starts to wane.
  12. Healthy skepticism is one useful remedy to problems of credulity.
  13. In our attitudes/receptivity to statements from others, we are constantly exposed to two types of errors called Type I and Type II errors.
  14. Remember your research methods course from tertiary education? Type I versus Type II errors? A bit similar but not the same!
  15. Type I error in belief is known as erroneous incredulity- refusing to believe something that is true because of quarrels with the source!
  16. Type II – erroneous credulity – believing something that is false to be true because of your infatuation with the source!
  17. The challenge in life is how to avoid type 1 belief errors – erroneous incredulity whilst still being critical & “sieving” all statements.
  18. For type II belief errors, we simply have to shine our eyes. There are powerful people who would not brook any challenge to their views. All they desire is to hold people captive to their views and go to every length to ensure that such mental captivity perdures.
  19. One of the most difficult things to do is to maintain the right level of critical distance enough to evaluate and to challenge, where necessary, the views of someone who has distinguished herself/himself.
  20. Healthy skepticism towards the views and opinions of such a person is usually considered as indicative of either jealousy or outright incivility or impetuosity.
  21. And yet such persons have been known to exploit their credibility and to stretch it beyond limits.
  22. They have been known to exploit their credibility to call people names, to smear people, to ridicule others and to march boldly on spaces where even angels tremble to tiptoe over.
  23. All this they can do because they have been successful in one field of human endeavour or the other.
  24. Someone who has distinguished herself/himself in any given field invariably builds up some credibility as a result of success in that specific field of pursuit.
  25. It is not unusual for such a person to make commentaries in other fields of pursuit.
  26. Danger starts to loom when such a person begins to feel that credibility built up in one area immediately confers omniscience on her/him and elevates her/him to a pansophist.
  27. Unless checked, such a person may begin to use credibility gained in one field to become the supreme arbiter on every social issue under the universe.
  28. I call this tendency to use credibility in one field to seek credibility in another the transfer of credibility. Humans engage frequently in such transfer of credibility.
  29. Let me try to illustrate. We may have a case where we find a geophysicist making comments in the area of rock music.
  30. Where such comments are made on the basis of solid evidence, our respect for the person making the comments should grow.
  31. Where, however, the person making the comments is simply appealing, either explicitly or implicitly, to his/her established credibility in one field and building his/her right to be believed on that alone, then we should be on our guards.
  32. For example, that V.S. Naipaul said something on “Azonto” dance steps does make it true or false. Check his sources. Check his logic. Distinguish opinions from facts. Become more critical. If Naipul is simply transferring his credibility as winner of a Nobel prize for literature and using this to get you to an uncritical acceptance of his opinion, then sack that opinion. The opinions of a Nobel prize are not beyond falsification.
  33. Also that Niels Bohr said something, say on race and intercultural dialogue, does not make it true or false. Check his sources. Check his facts. Check his logic. Recognize his contributions to atomic physics but also recognize that expertise in atomic physics does not immediately confer competence in race and culture. Raise your credulity threshold.
  34. Equally, that Einstein said something on politics does not make it true or false. Check the facts. Question his sources. Raise your own criticality
  35. These three examples are chosen to invite us all to be more critical.
  36. They are also intended to show that human beings can and do try to transfer their credibility from areas where they are authorities to others where they are not or may not be!
  37. In these areas where they are not authorities, such persons would still want to impose their views on others and present their opinions as if they were revealed truths.
  38. We are often victims of such people and suffer mind control by them for a number of reasons.
  39. One reason for our credulity before such people emerges from the interaction of herd feeling, laziness and inertia. Everybody believes them, so why should I not? And If I have believed them up till now, why should I start doubting them now?
  40. Another reason is that most of us have been socialized into uncritical acceptance of views by any authority figure. Such persons thus exercise a strong stranglehold on public opinion.
  41. The stranglehold these persons exercise on public opinion and thinking is aided by our culture of idolization of the successful.
  42. Such idolization soon morphs into “person idolatory” such that any attempt to examine this person’s views critically soon amounts to heresy!
  43. Anything this type/class of people says soon amounts to “cast in diamonds truths”.
  44. But such idolized persons soon over-reach themselves. Their formerly enraptured audiences soon begin to discover that they have feet of clay. People soon discover that not only are such people fallible, but they do tell lies and can be very petty and partisan.
  45. So, let me sum up –
  46. Credibility is a plus for the source; credulity is a negative for any audience.
  47. Credibility is a bit like virginity. Lose it and you have lost it!
  48. Credibility is an asset. Draw down recklessly on it without any replenishing and soon it runs out.
  49. Credibility is optimized in environments of high credulity.
  50. A celebrity uses her/his credibility to exploit the credulity of an uncritical public.
  51. Erroneous credulity is bad for any society.
  52. Losing one’s credulity is one key milestone in cognitive and emotional development.
  53. Celebrities are entitled to their personal opinions, but not all opinions are true!
  54. Name calling has a certain appeal but it still does not amount to a proof. Ask any lawyer!
  55. Concluding comment – let your speaker earn your confidence. Do not let him/her take advantage of or abuse your credulity.
Posted in Prose

Jottings on Credibility and credulity

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

  1. Credibility is a positive for the source; credulity is a negative for any audience.
  2. Credibility is a bit like virginity. Lose it and you have lost it!
  3. Credibility is asset. Draw down recklessly on it without replenishing and soon it runs out.
  4. Credibility is optimized in environments of high credulity.
  5. A celebrity uses her/his credibility to exploit the credulity of an uncritical public.
  6. Erroneous credulity is bad for any society.
  7. Losing one’s credulity is one key milestone in cognitive and emotional development.
  8. Celebrities are entitled to their personal opinions, but not all opinions are true!
  9. Name calling has a certain appeal but it still does not amount to a proof. Ask any lawyer!
Posted in Prose

The First Casualty in Any War is ….

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

Aeschylus said that truth is the first casualty in any war. I disagree. Truths do not tell themselves. Truths are told by human beings. Lies, the antonym of truth, are also told by human beings. To tell a lie, a human being makes a first choice. That choice involves stilling the voice of conscience. It involves a deliberate choice to conceal the truth. It involves a deliberate choice to be dishonest. A deliberate choice to be dishonest implies the death of the human conscience. In any war, and at any of its phases, when men decide to tell lies and to raise the stature of lying, they are signaling that something – the human conscience – has already fallen casualty within them. The death of conscience then accelerates other deaths.

The first casualty in any war, indeed in any conflict, is therefore not the truth but the human conscience. The death of conscience then accelerates other deaths. Once the conscience dies, other deaths follow in quick succession and with depressing geometric progression. Conscience, ndo!

I look at Nigeria and marvel at the death of conscience in a number of persons who seek political offices. For such, democracy and elections are nothing else but conflict and war.  I marvel at the same death in their agents and their supporters. I marvel at the volume of lies that are churned out and hurled in the direction of the public, all meant to deceive and to confuse…and I am filled with a strong sense of dread. God save us

Posted in Prose

Section 68, a Speaker’s Defection and the Depreciation of Honor

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

Aminu-Tambuwal-2

Last week came the long expected announcement. The Speaker of the Federal House of Representatives had defected to the APC. At the extraordinary convention to welcome Tambuwal and celebrate the “catch”, the national chairman of the APC John Odigie Oyegun was exultant, and for very good reason. The fourth citizen of the realm, he kept repeating, was now with the “progressives”. It was celebrations galore as the brooms came out to sweep in a new member, a clean democrat from the “People Undemocratic Party”.

Errors and self revelations are not uncommon in such moments of celebration. When they do happen, the errors should be forgiven whilst special note should be made of the revealed character flaw. Odigie-Oyegun’s betrayal of gross partisanship in his claim that the containment of Ebola in Lagos and Rivers states was proof and example of the efficiency of APC led states falls into a special category of errors. But he should be forgiven for the tastelessness in his choice of exemplar whilst we note this penchant for making deceptive claims. The wine of “success” does at times impair proper functioning, and the APC drank quite some as it celebrated that day and into the night.

The country woke up the next day to learn that Mr Tambuwal’s security detail had been withdrawn on instruction of the IGP. That move was totally unnecessary. It made Tambuwal look like the innocent victim of police high-handedness. The withdrawal of the police detail also earned him a sizeable chunk of public sympathy, a large part of it completely unmerited when one considers what Mr Tambuwal did, failed to do and has not done till date. The withdrawal of the security detail was based on a hasty reading and interpretation of section 68 of the 1999 constitution.

The provisions of the said constitution on the implications of defection by an elected member to another party are quite clear. Section 68, sub 1 quoted in full below spell these out.

  1. (1)A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if –

(a) he becomes a member of another legislative house.

(b) any other circumstances arise that, if he were not a member of the Senate or the House of Representatives, would cause him to be disqualified for election as a member;

(c) he ceases to be a citizen of Nigeria;

(d) he becomes President, Vice-President, Governor, Deputy Governor or a Minister of the Government of the Federation or a Commissioner of the Government of a State or a Special Adviser.

(e) save as otherwise prescribed by this Constitution, he becomes a member of a commission or other body established by this Constitution or by any other law.

(f) without just cause he is absent from meetings of the House of which he is a member for a period amounting in the aggregate to more than one-third of the total number of days during which the House meets in any one year;

(g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected;

Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored; or

(h) the President of the Senate or, as the case may be, the Speaker of the House of Representatives receives a certificate under the hand of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission stating that the provisions of section 69 of this Constitution have been complied with in respect of the recall of that member.

The withdrawal of the detail was based on reading 68 (1) (g) in isolation! If the IGP had read 68 (2) which details the process and necessary actions to be taken in the event of such a member defection, the withdrawal of the detail would not have been so precipitate. Section 68, sub 2 is reproduced below. That section clearly indicates the person to take action to give the defector the very well deserved red card!

(2) The President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, as the case may be, shall give effect to the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, so however that the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives or a member shall first present evidence satisfactory to the House concerned that any of the provisions of that subsection has become applicable in respect of that member.

Mr. Tambuwal was fully aware of these provisions at the moment of his defection. The only person who could declare his loss of his membership of the house and by implication the immediate cessation of his status as Speaker is the Speaker, that is Mr Tambuwal himself! And Aminu Tambuwal is in no hurry to do just that. Mr Tambuwal is currently content to eat his cake and still have it. The best way to visualize this situation is to imagine a game of football where an elected referee suddenly abandons his supposed neutrality, signs up for one side and immediately commits a red card offense by that act. But nobody except the offending referee can issue a red card in the short and medium terms after the offense. Only a judge can cause a red card to be issued to the erring referee. Until this is done, the mayhem which the referee created will persist and its ripple effects may widen in scope and strength as the game is now played with feverish tempo and red hot tempers. Spectators would either be cheering or screaming, depending on which of the teams they support.

Such is the mess that we are in. Such is the mess Aminu Tambuwal has put us the country in all because he and his handlers were clever enough to see this gap in our constitution and to exploit it. Clearly, Mr Tambuwal must be enjoying himself due to this peculiarity in our constitution. But why would our constitution contain clauses and sub-sections that make for the type of messy situation that Tambuwal’s defection has created, one may ask? It is so easy to blame the constitution writers for situations like these. But truth be told, which constitution writer would ever suspect that a speaker of a house would ever defect and still want to hold on to his/her position? A John Andrew Boehner dumps the Republican Party and defects to the Democratic Party in the US and still wants to remain speaker? This is neither feasible nor imaginable!

In sane polities, elected members of houses who wish to defect to another party first resign the elected positions they hold, then defect and thereafter seek re-election (in a bye election) on the platform of their new parties. We saw this happen recently in the UK when a member elected on the Conservative Party platform resigned from the party, resigned his seat and signed up with UKIP. He then took part in the bye election as the UKIP candidate and won! That is the path of honor. But not so in this country where honor is now so depreciated that persons who choose to act with honor are now scorned and pooh-poohed. The honorable path for Tambuwal is to resign as member of the house and seek re-election on the platform of the APC. The honorable thing for Mr. Tambuwal to do is not to hold the country hostage by clinging to constitutional and legal technicalities. Not all that is legal is necessarily honorable. Aminu Tambuwal’s decision brings to a point in his political journey where the road now forks into two paths. One path leads to honor even though its surface in its initial stretch is littered with difficulties. But that path holds immense rewards in the long term. That path beckons to Aminu Tambuwal. We hope he takes it. Whilst waiting for Tambuwal to act with honor, his security detail should be restored.

This present crisis is one caused by the gross depreciation of honor in this country. However, unless controlled now, the current crisis may scale up and spiral out of control. In the long term, Section 68 of our constitution should be amended. All defections to another political party by elected representatives must be preceded by a resignation of membership of the house the person was elected into. The same principle should be extended to state governors who cross carpet. This is one way we can begin to check the irritant of political prostitution that is now invading our land.

Posted in BIBLICAL EXEGESIS, Prose

Readings and Reflections -26th Sunday ordinary time – on Sin and Death

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A Ihebuzor

The readings today deal with sin and its consequences, the first reading in particular. Sin leads to death. Iniquity leads to death, some slow on-set, some instant and some others gradual, and yet some others death by increment and accretion, often times invisible to the eye. And by death here, I mean death in its several forms – physical, emotional, spiritual, economic social and communal death. There is also the death of the conscience, a death that then unleashes other forms of deaths and which spawns unimaginable deviance. Sin and vice in whatever form lead to destruction, decay and death. In communities, they lead to a decline in social capital, the destruction of bonds, the extinction of trust, the erosion of values and the suffocation of good sense, decency, equity and balance. Bad becomes good, good is mocked at and derided, social pressure draws more converts to evil, evil is praised and sin and its proceeds are celebrated.  Man, “homo superbus” reaches for the dial on the control box and dims the voice of God, snuffs out the light of truth and puts shades on the candle of love. The voices of victims of violence and violations are choked, the innocent are injured by the mighty and impunity is unleashed and struts around a demoralized world.  Look around you for proofs of these very broad statements that I have made. The wages of sin is death. Whilst sin is a violation of God’s statutes, its immediate consequences are always social and are felt in the here and now in this material earth. For every sin, there is a spiritual loss followed by a socio-economic debit. When you sin you offend God and hurt man.

Righteousness redeems a nation and a people. It leads to life. Righteousness is simple. It simply consists in knowing God and in living His living and life giving words. The sinner who renounces his/her life of sin, of cruelty, of stealing, of lying, of defaming, of distorting, of purveying partial truths, and packaging opinions to the unwary as if these were truths and returns to God is readmitted to God’s favors and God’s love and to Life. But this return, repentance and reconciliation must go beyond theatrics and verbal display. Words accompanied by action, action driven by the spirit of God and His laws. Love God, Love your neighbor. If you love God, you will not break His commandments. If you love your neighbor, you would not cheat him/her, you would not tell lies against him/her. If you love God, you would not commit idolatry. Demoting God from the top of your value system is a form of idolatry. Putting money and power at the pinnacle of your value system is a form of idolatry as these become your new gods. These new gods lead you to all forms of aberrant and emptying behaviors – they lead you to things like election rigging, graft, rent seeking behavior, cronyism, grabbing public assets, false declarations, looting, importing sub-standard items, free-riding behavior, contract inflation, unprofessional project monitoring/evaluation, biased audits, skewed and dishonest Op-Eds etc. Let me give a very trivial example concerning love of neighbor – If you love neighbor, you will not drive in such a manner as to push him or her off the road, but most of us who come to public podiums to sound off on the ills of society do this on end! When last were you polite to the other road user? If you loved your neighbor, you would demonstrate courteous road behavior. In the work place, you would be polite and fair to all your staff, you would deal with an even hand with all. The second reading contains a listing of attributes that conduce to a life free from sin – humility, kindness, compassion, mercy, saying no to selfishness, resisting vainglory behavior and recognizing the needs and the rights of others.

Christ reminds us in very strong words of the need for a return to God in word, in truth and in action. His strong words underlie the importance of true repentance. The truly repentant reap the rewards of paradise. Let this assurance challenge and drive us to turn away from the evils and iniquities of this world.  Let it challenge us to reject the false and cheap values of the devil and to embrace the eternal and life giving values and laws of God, the summary of which are – the discipline and mastery of self based on and driven by a love of God and neighbor.  May we set about achieving this critical, live saving and spiritually elevating behavior change from this Sunday – and may God’s spirit guide, strengthen and animate us in this venture, Amen!

Posted in Prose

El-Rufai, Boko Haram apologist, political opportunist or verbal contortionist? Your call!

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

I visited my archives and found a rejoinder I wrote to this article by Malam Nasir El-Rufai. It is still worth reading for two reasons. The first is the persisting BH scourge which has been marked lately by the increasing savagery, mindlessness and bestiality of their attacks. The kidnapping of innocent schools in Chibok and the earlier slaughter of school children outside their dormitory represent the high point of this campaign of sadistic and mindless savagery. The second reason to read the article again is related to recent attempts to firm up, embellish and market a four variants model of Boko Haram by Mr El-Rufai. How solid is the evidence for such a model? How good is a model building that picks, chooses and stretches evidence at the whims of convenience? What levels in frequency of occurrence justify inferences and conclusions on which such a bold four variant models is built?  Such questions are worth asking as the country struggles to separate fact from fiction and facts from faction-driven twists and distortions. Model building is a serious business and is different from an exercise embarked upon out of spite and bitterness and in a style characterized by malicious flippancy. In its present form, Mr El-Rufai’s four variants model is not very persuasive. Its intentions are not to clarify issues but to obfuscate and to divert attention and public wrath from the sponsors and apologists of BH. The reader will recall that Malam El-Rufai had in the recent past, with plenty of characteristic indecent haste, given great publicity to an interview granted by Dr. Davis which had suggested, by implication, that Gen Ihejirika was a BH sponsor. Gen Ihejirika has since replied and the reader is advised to read all three sources – the Davis interview, the El-Rufai uncritical publicity blitz of the same and the General’s Response and make up his/her mind as to where truth, sanity and decency lie.

Click here for the El-Rufai article – and read my rejoinder below. At the end, ask yourself this question, in consideration of the said article, my rejoinder and recent outbursts by Malam El-Rufai whether we are dealing with a BH apologist, a political opportunist, a verbal contortionist or simply with a man in acute need of help.

=========

This is a very revealing write-up. Though well researched, the findings of the research are selectively used and herein lies its major flaw. Malam El-Rufai may not want to be seen as apologist and spokesperson for the BH but this is the impression that stays with one as one goes through much of this article. Let me illustrate with one or two examples.

I will be drawing excerpts liberally from the write up by Mr Nasir El-Rufai (NER for short in the rest of this comment) as I make my long comment, with advance apologies to NER for any plagiarism.

NER describes BH as peaceful in origin. But read below –

“In April 2007, Sheikh Jaafar was murdered in cold blood while praying in his mosque in Kano by assailants that years later turned out to be suspected members of a sect to be known as Boko Haram, operating out of Bauchi State”.

Can such a group be correctly described as “largely peaceful”. Largely peaceful should be made of more peace conducing acts!

NER affirms “Many in the North see the patent inaction of the authorities as the advancement of a sinister agenda to destroy an already near prostate northern economy through occupation, militarization and disruption of socio-economic activities. The federal government has done nothing to deny these or indicate otherwise, and the state governments have acquiesced to the cavalier attitude of the Villa.”

This is mischievous, inaccurate, unhelpful and is deliberately crafted to further incite a section of the country against the rest. NER knows that action has been engaged and is on-going yet NER finds it convenient and expedient to the advancement of the agenda he defends to deny these.

NER also tries to distinguish between what he calls variants of BH – “Many of us believe that there are at least four variants of Boko Haram – the real BH and three other fakes – sponsored by the government, politicians and criminal groups – that use the brand to advance their own self-centered agendas”. Questions for NER – who is this “Many of us” and where is the evidence base for this belief? Unless substantiated, such sweeping statements are simply exercises in sensationalism and are very unhelpful.

NER says nothing in this write up of the consistent targeting of symbols or institutions of Christianity by the BH. This is a deliberate omission that weakens the credibility of his analysis of the causes of the BH terrorism. Rather, NER is at pains to point out greater northern and Muslim casualties as a result of BH terrorism. Here, he creates the unfortunate impression that his primary concern is with the lives of northerners and Muslims, a focus which I believe betrays a mind-set we should all condemn. One also notices with great concern the very subtle manner NER tries to elevate BH terrorism to the level of an insurgency challenge.

NER appears to know what does not motivate BH and can thus advise those thinking of an amnesty type program to go back to the drawing board! To what does NER owe this knowledge?  Yet NER recommends dialogue and “honest discussions” between government and BH, and with that the implicit that either that there have not been such dialogues or that discussions that have taken place so far have not been honest!

NER’s section where he mentions the Maitatsine is particularly worrying since it could be read to mean that persisting difficulties with unearthing BH in the north could reflect surrounding community acceptance and admiration of this group. If this is true, then there is indeed great cause for worry. If it is not then NER’s “the current situation in Kano and Borno States is one in which the military occupiers are killing more innocent people than Boko Haram, which injustice is creating resentment against the Army” should be read as unfortunate attempt at creating resentment against law enforcement agencies carrying out a difficult national assignment against a terrorist group that vanishes into and blends with the crowd.

NER’s last paragraph reads like a recommendation and endorsement of terror tactics and he achieves this through very crafty paragraph editing. The paragraph commences with an argument that military solutions alone against terrorists do not work, and then shifts to a case for government to act to stop the loss of lives and to deliver a country that works for all. He then ends by urging government to bend over backwards to make this happen. Implicit in all of this is that things are not working well for portions of the country who are now up in arms. This way, NER hopes to reposition and brand the BH terror campaign as a crusade for social justice and not as a manifestation of religious fanaticism, extremism and intolerance which has now been tapped into by a bigoted political elite. And by the way, is the implied threat in NER’s last sentence really necessary?

Posted in Prose

19th Sunday Ordinary Time – Readings, Reflections and Prayers

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

Love, peace, truth, kindness, justice and faith, key elements in our life and journey on earth are mentioned in the readings for this Sunday. Easy to say words, but often difficult to actualise in our daily existence. Though mostly lived in society and in the company of others, life is a personal search for meaning and self actualisation fired by a vision that drives our mission and purpose on earth. In our search for meaning and for what is good, we end up searching for God, our creator and the author of all that we are. We usually search for God in the big events of life and in so doing lose the many opportunities to see Him, to meet Him and to engage with Him in the more simple events where His presence may be found – in lonely places, in the face of our neighbours, in the stranger looking for love, in the cry of a child whose parents have been killed in airstrike, in the battered wife looking for protection and in the lonely drunk dazed and lost. Yes, we miss such opportunities because we forget these unforgettable lines – whatsoever you do even to the least of these brethren of mine, that you do unto me.

And faith too. We profess it like Peter, perhaps even more profusely. Come the least wave, the slightest suggestion of a storm, of an upheaval and we sink. And we scream our faith to the roof tops but do not match these with good works – James 2 is an inconvenient read…..but “too much talk is not good for evening mass” – So, let me end this short sharing with prayers for us all

  • May you find God in the simplicity of ordinary day to day events;
  • May you meet God in the quietness of small moments;
  • May truth and kindness meet and unite in your life;
  • May justice and peace embrace, kiss and fuse in our lives;
  • May our faith give you courage to walk on troubled waters and not sink;
  • May faith be our bridge over the troubled waters of life;
  • May your faith be revealed through and matched by your good works;
  • May love, truth, kindness, justice and peace fused as one become our operating software;
  • And may we see the kindness of God and be granted His salvation.

HAPPY SUNDAY, HAPPY WEEK and may God bless you.

Noel

Posted in Prose

God’s wisdom – reflecting on the scriptures 17th Sunday Ordinary time

Posted on by Noel Ihebuzor

By 

Noel A. Ihebuzor

Read the scriptures today from the catholic liturgy – they are instructive – they talk to us about true wisdom, God’s call and wonderful purpose and the beauty of the kingdom. And as you read, may God bless you according to his riches in glory.

Permit me a few quick comments on the readings. The first reading is very significant. God asks a man King Solomon to choose from the immensity of His (God’s) gifts. The dialogue is a lecture on how to engage God – Humility, self abasement, acknowledgement of God’s supremacy and a plea for a gift not for self aggrandizement but to successfully undertake a God assigned task, advance the Kingdom, to advance humanity and the request is beautiful but amazing in its stark simplicity but totality! – understanding heart and wisdom to rule and judge

Give your servant, therefore, an understanding heart
to judge your people and to distinguish right from wrong. 

How so badly we need wisdom in our world of today – wisdom to decide and to choose, wisdom to know the worthwhile and the futile, wisdom to know the good, the bad and the ugly, wisdom to know what truly matters! And it is so easy to think we are wise as we are surrounded by the latest gadgets and gizmos of the ICT laced 21st century. But there is wisdom and there is wisdom. And true wisdom only comes from God. So let us all, like Solomon, ask God today for that true wisdom. Once we have this wisdom that comes from on high, every other thing will fall in place. I dedicate the first reading to all my friends, to all of Nigeria, to GEJ, to the catholic Church (clergy and laity) in Nigeria as they seek to resolve the “Ahiara Crisis” and to all nations who think that might is right in their engagements with weaker neighbours. Let Wisdom prevail.

And next to the psalm.

The psalm (psalm 119), I dedicate to us all. May God’s kindness comfort us all!

May we delight in God’s commands and hate all false precepts

May we keep God’s word and love them more than every other treasure in this world

May God call you according to His wonderful purpose for your life

May the scripture, Roman 8, that everything works together for good for those God calls find expression in your life.

May you realize and appreciate the special meaning of “everything” in that scripture– as this means the lows, the highs, the disappointments, the failures, the slips, the falling down, the rising up, the challenges, the successes yes, everything, all working together in a synergy enhancement mode

May God call you, May He justify you & may He Glorify you IJMN!

Remember that line from that familiar song – “and whilst on others thou art calling, do not pass me by”! Well the problem is that He calls us always, like the good shepherd that He is, but the things of this world, our materialism, the company we keep, our obsessions etc  block our ears so that we no longer hear; they cover our eyes with translucent gauze so that we fail to see when He beckons to us. May we therefore be sensitive to His call, to His signs and to His beckoning! When He calls and you answer, you qualify for the justification. And the justification is not because of your great deeds but by and because of His grace, by His strength which are made perfect when we garb ourselves with humility, install the latest version of Obedience 7 as our operating software  and display love, justice and kindness to all of His creatures and creation.

May we be found worthy at the end of time for heaven, a place of abode for those who allowed God’s word and wisdom to install and reign in the hearts and hearth.

May heaven be our portion, our “oke”. May we sing with Obaraeze Chima Eke, “Chim awokwalam oke le! Chi gi awokwalagi oke! (Translation – My God, please do not deny me of my portion/inheritance. May your God not deny you of your portion/inheritance)!  Amen.

Happy Sunday –

Noel