DISCOURSE (261) with Dr. Aliyu Tilde
An in house survey into the cultural origins of Boko Haram movement in Nigeria
So many readers have sent text messages asking me to write on the radical sect Boko Haram. I was afraid that a Chaji would pick his pen and compel me to divulge my view on the crisis which started from Bauchi and which is the more reason why Chaji would grill me. Chaji and his likes have constituted a terror to regular writers. They deny us the privacy of opinion; everything we know or think of is a public property which we must render regularly. We have no right to silence. Chaji? May good fortunes save me from the wrath of his pen! Well, to escape that, today, I have decided to say something about the phenomenon. The reader must be ready to wear an armour because this piece is written with a very sharp knife.
It is futile to speak on the halal or haram of boko. I rather intend to discuss the cultrual roots of the movement. But first let us settle the issue of nomenclature which some writers got wrong. On the authority of Professor Mahdi Adamu Ngaski, a celebrated historian, author of The Hausa Factor in the History of West Africa, and former Vice Chancellor, Usmanu Danfodio University , in Hausa, 'boko' simply means 'fake'. Before it was largely consigned to western education, boko was often used to connote the “fake bride', amaryar boko, who rode the horse in place of the real bride as the convoy of celebrants escorted her to her new home. The real bride would secretly be carried earlier by two or three women to her home. So when western education came to Hausaland, the learned rejected it and gave it a derogatory connotation, ilimin boko, 'fake education.' Sadly, this name has remained the standard translation of 'western education' among all Hausa speaking people of West Africa and I have never heard of any effort to change it, except the ilimin zamani that is sparsely applied. To date, there is no alternative nomenclature for makarantar boko, 'fake school' that connotes modern schools for western education.
My discussion with the Professor on boko took place in December 1984 in Sokoto.
One would wonder how much has changed in our perception of western education during the last century. (By 'our', or the third person plural, throughout this article means Muslims living in Northern Nigeria .) Though we have schools and universities, governments and companies, all founded on the western models, there are still problems in varying degrees among different groups with the assimilation of western education as an acceptable cultural medium or its recognition as a body of knowledge which is indisputably necessary for our survival today.
To many, the perception is like that of our ancestors: boko is haram – forbidden – so it must be rejected or, if acquired, abandoned, as we have seen in the case of the present Boko Haram group. An extreme variety of this thought was represented by the Maitatsine movement, which in the early 1980s rejected even the use of western technological products like watches, bicycles, radio and television, unlike the new Boko Haram who allow the use of even cameras, handsets and computers, as explained by its leader in his final moments.
Akin to this belief is the notion among some learned traditional Islamic scholars that 'government' is haram and public property and finances belong to nobody, so they can be looted whenever possible. I came across this idea in Sokoto in the aftermath of the 1983 coup. The mighty who lived fat on public funds were arrested. It was then I heard someone justifying stealing public funds in a private discussion: to, malammai sun ce halal ne cin dukiyar gwamnati tunda bat a kowa ba ce. My effort to present the contrary was futile.
Mainstream Muslims in this country view western education as useful, but they still hold the West with a lot of suspicion due to the existing hostile relations between the Muslim World and the West. Though this group recognizes western education as a body of knowledge to which Islamic culture had significantly contributed for centuries in the past, the lingering suspicion has continuously hampered the domestication of the knowledge and its internalization in the region. So we go to school only to obtain a certificate that will earn us a job without imbibing the principles and fundamentals that enabled the West to excel in such knowledge and technology; those principles and fundamentals are seen as alien, never to be imbibed.
We deride whoever embodies western practices like keeping to time, pubic accountability, banking, gender equality, family planning, etc. Early scholars, like the late Egyptian, Muhammad Abduh, who visited Europe and returned to say “they have seen Islam where there are no Muslims” are castigated as 'westernized,' while those who called for wholesale adoption of western values and culture, like the late Taha Husein, are condemned as westerners; some even would not hesitate to call them infidels.
Here in Hausaland, a bature is not only a European, but anyone who adopts western practice like keeping to time, monogamy, family planning, games, leisure, tourism, reading, western dress, etc, though a only few of such practices contravene Islamic injunctions. Though Islam is still revered as the reference point of culture and the ultimate arbiter of cultural conflicts, we readily mock anyone who attempts to practice it as the Arabs do. For example, we reject the honest public servant by suggesting that he relocates to Saudi Arabia where Islam is practiced: “Wai shi gaskiya. To in gaskiya yake so, ya koma Madina da zama”. Even the Qur'an is not spared. When one recites the Qur'an as it should be recited, following the rules of tajweed, we deride him as a balarabe – Arab: Mhm. kakale, wai shi balarabe. It took centuries and a national competition on Qur'anic recitation that started in the mid 1980s before northerners finally accepted the practice.
More dangerous, perhaps, is our reluctance to use our faculties to simplify our lives and improve our productivity. We have not invented anything in agriculture beyond the basic tools which our ancestors used for millions of years: the same hoe (fartanya), and plough (garma). Governments had a Herculean task selling the idea of fertilizers to farmers. Now that they have accepted it, corruption, which some malams justify, has prevented them from accessing it. Also, the dress has been the same since we borrowed the babbar riga from Mali and kaftans from the Arabs. The bante (which the Kanuri call afuno) was very much prevalent in the region as late as the early 20th Century. We wear both the riga and the kaftan during the harmattan cold and during the hot summer. Any attempt to borrow other wears to suit the weather as shown by the Qur'an is repulsed, unlike in the Arab world where they have different dresses for different situations. In fact, if you do not wear these 'uniforms', many of us do not consider you as fully Muslim.. Simple. The hijab, on the other hand, is now imposed even on babies!
Research and extension personnel in agriculture are daily frustrated with the strong repulsion to any new idea, variety or practice. Foreign breeds of cows were imported forty years ago by the Sardauna but we still look at Murtala Nyako with admiration because he alone was the first to defy the odds and maintain a modern dairy farm for many years. For over four decades, we condemned the high milk yielding Frisian or the high meat yielding varieties of cows as foreign, shanun turawa. This inertia also contributed to the 'death' of the tractor and other instruments of mechanization such that governments' focus on boosting agricultural production is now limited to supply of inorganic fertilizer for the additional reasons of fat contracts and lucrative middlemanship. So glaring is our boko haram attitude that many state governments recently preferred to import farmers from Southern Africa and support them with free land, huge capital and heavy subsidies. They argue that if we are given agricultural loan, which hardly reach us anyway, we prefer to invest it in human, instead of crop, propagation. How true they are!
Our general contempt for knowledge is outstanding, making us to prefer ignorance as a companion. The more knowledgeable you are or try to use that knowledge, the lesser are your chances of survival. Our entire political ethos is built on ignorance such that hardly would anyone succeed except if he is ready to put aside the correct thing he knows and behave as, or obey, the ordinary or ignorant who has never been to the four walls of high school. In interviews, a good performing candidate is rejected for a mediocre that will play the game of his sponsors.
The overwhelming majority of our political representatives and appointees are not the best from their constituencies, some cannot even write their names properly; that is why they hardly contribute to debates in the National Assembly. In our conferment of traditional titles, there has never been an occasion where the educational contribution or the honesty of anyone was celebrated with a traditional title; it is simply sycophancy and money, no matter how dirty.
An illustration of our contempt for knowledge lies in the way we tackle problems when they arise. How else can we explain the cold blooded massacre of Boko Haram members in Bauchi and Maiduguri , much of which is now correctly loaded on President Yar'adua, the foremost proponent of the rule of law? Where is the rule of law when the President ordered the Police and the army to crush them or deal with them 'siquayale'? In fact, so ruthless was this Malam B that just before embarking on his Brazil trip, he told the world that the group will be crushed by that evening. He succeeded in crushing them but at the expense of justice, earning the country another medal of shame as an uncivilized nation, and attracting sympathy for the sect.
Well, we are hardly visited by justice anyway. In-group hostility has always been our identity. That is why the same President who ordered the immediate massacre of Boko Haram members readily offered amnesty and money to Niger Delta rebels who are a thousand times more armed, who have killed, maimed, kidnapped so many, destroyed property and crippled the economy.
From the foregoing, it appears that we are culturally repulsive to any thing modern, from whatever direction it comes. Simply put, we are Boko Haram. Otherwise, what could explain our backwardness in every national endeavour – economic, social and political? Why do we have, for example, the lowest per capita income in the country, the lowest life expectancy, the lowest academic achievements as exemplified in our having the least number of academic institutions, fewer numbers of graduates and higher education applicants despite our high population? Why do we have, on the other hand, the highest poverty and highest maternal and infant mortality rates? Why do we fail to see the disjoint between our collective repulsive attitude to common sense and modernity, our boko haram attitude precisely, on the one hand, and modernity on the other? Why do we choose to be blind? Why can't we come out of the self-imposed Boko Haram prison that our ancestors built over a century before?
Unfortunately, we are today paying a very high price for this negative attitude. It has led to the shrinkage of our social sphere. We are increasingly isolating ourselves by our escalating intolerance for the attitude and cultures of other Nigerians. Honestly, that is why we lost the ground in the so, called Middle Belt. Politically, our preference for mediocrity has heavily reduced our significance from where it was, say, during the Second Republic . Also as a result, those of us from the far northern north have even considerably lost the sympathy of Muslims from the Middle Belt because we have built notoriety for ethnic self-preference and unfounded superiority complex which is based on nothing but ignorance.
The future is even bleaker if we consider the attitude of our youths. On campuses today, for example, we allow our students to grow with this isolationist attitude: in almost every faculty or department they now form societies of Muslim students, something unheard of in the 1970s and early 1980s when we were undergraduates. Of course, Muslim Student's Society, like Fellowship of Christian Students, was there as an umbrella for all Muslims on the school and campus, but never was such a religious grouping formed at the departmental level where we freely socialized and exchanged ideas with Christians and even pagans. It is in our interest to actively discourage this new segregationist trend.
Also, as we graduate, we sort of come across a barrier that socially separates us from other Nigerians. We have thousands of avenues to socialize in addition to our places of work. But we hardly do so. Christians will socially associate with Christians only, and Muslims with Muslims. How can we have peace then? Let me quickly affirm that the Qur'an has permitted such associations between us and the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) even to the extent of marriage and nutrition. Oh. I have forgotten that the Qur'an is a body of knowledge, and knowledge is the last thing we will subscribe to.
The Boko Haram group of late Malam Muhammed Yusuf was therefore a natural offshoot of our culture. We must admit this much because we have actively done very little to prove otherwise. And to be candid, Muhammed Yusuf was never the first to propagate such ideas and be accepted by our elites. The anti-western books of Abdulkadir as-Sufi, an English convert to Islam, were popular among many Muslims on our campuses in the early 1980s. That too led to many dropping from universities and abandoning public appointments, though not on a large scale or in a confrontational way like Boko Haram. What is more interesting here is the concord against modernity between two opposing sects of Islam: Sufism, as represented by as-Sufi, and Salafiyya, as represented by Mohammed Yusuf. This is no coincidence, though, but a fact that shows there is something inherently and universally wrong in how many of us conceive the role of Islam in this modern age.
Boko haram ideas will remain with us for quite some time unless we consciously change our attitudes and actively campaign against them. What is sad is the danger of how the group will leave behind the technology of making bombs among a population that is characterized by conflict, poverty and ignorance. This will certainly affect the future of peace in the region. The people who those bombs will hit will not be the masses but the leaders who have financed and exploited such groups to achieve their political ends.
I wish we Muslims in this part of the country will adopt the attitudes of the first generation of Muslims, the sahabah and those that followed them in righteousness (may God be pleased with them all) who, in pursuit of the teachning of the Holy Prophet (SAW) opened their hearts to various forms of knowledge and technology and from all sources: Chinese, Indian, Persian, Roman, European, African, etc. They revived the writings of Aristotle and bequeathed them to medieval Europe . They partook in technological development just as any other society, leaving behind a legacy of discoveries that were ironically the foundations of the very boko we ignorantly reject. They freely associated with everyone and were so liberal that their domains served as sanctuaries even to Jews when they were twice expelled from Europe . Many of them partnered with them in trade and war and married Christian wives. I wish we will liberate our minds and give scholarship its due regard because with ignorance as our anchor we will have little to achieve and everything to lose.
In conclusion, I must say that Yar'adua would need more guns to silence the anti-modern boko haram attitude in us. If he cannot, the burden then rests with us. We must shoulder the task of giving our society a new inspiration that will integrate it into the world of knowledge, society and culture. We must come out of our Boko Haram enclave to embrace civilization in all its ramifications and make meaningful contributions to the future of this country and the world at large. This is my opinion on Boko Haram hoping that mighty Chaji will spare me an interrogation and that my reader has not sustained a deep cut from my bold assertions.
http://www.desertherald.com/back_cover.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday 24 August 2009
Word of advice to Adamu Adamu and others
“If it is to make a choice between society without government and society without media, you make that of society without government.”
--- Former American President.
Political commentators, activists and columnists took the pages of Trust newspaper since last month on the questions which Shehu Mustapha Chaji asked Malam Adamu Adamu, a columnist with the paper in respect of Bauchi State 's political fracas.
Adamu Adamu means different things to different people. To some, he is an intellectual who has distinguished himself in a dominated media industry, others think he is an outstanding and diligent columnist, while others think of him as an activist.
I read many articles ranging in the media, from Shehu Mustapha Chaji's piece to Adamu Adamu to John Danfulani to Yusuf Gamawa and the recent one which I read on page 12 of Thursday, August 6, 2009, edition of Daily Trust by Hamisu Gumel.
Thank God, we are in democratic dispensation which gives freedom of expression, thoughts, ideas, opinion, objection, criticism etc. To be candid, no society can truly develop or progress without journalism. It is journalism that makes people to know the happenings of the society and to make their own contributions for stability, unity and progress.
Of course, Yusuf Gamawa, Hamisu Gumel and Shehu Chaji has the constitutional rights to write and query Malam Adamu Adamu over his silence on the present political brouhaha in Bauchi State, because even the Almighty God stated in the Holy Qur'an that “Ask those who know, if you don't.”
It was Shehu Chaji's article that made Malam Adamu Adamu to open up in the second part of his column of Friday, July 31, 2009, titled, “Talking silly on Bauchi II.” It was then that many people knew what they don't know about the role played by Malam Adamu Adamu. It was when Chaji asked that people came to know.
Journalism is the timely reporting of events at the local, provincial, national and the international levels. In journalism, there are many challenges. Most times, it is a very risky job. Anything can happen to you as a journalist. As a journalist, some or most times you don't have choice, you have to tell the truth, you have to be fair. You must not be biased. You must bear in mind that you have the power of the pen in your hands. Malam Adamu, this power has to be used fairly to change the society for better no matter what.
As a journalist, you must not accept bribe, be biased or anything related to that. You must desist from any practice that can bring about degrading of the journalism profession (or you in person).
To be a good journalist, you must have a curious mind, endurance, self control, patience, tolerance, understanding, dedication, perseverance and lots more. You should have an eye for what is different. You should also be interested in societal progress. Again, to be a good journalist, you can study anything and write on many things.
In short, it takes a lot to be a good journalist. But nowadays, people fail and others defend people when they fail to admit their mistakes, when they commit one. We hope and pray that Nigerian journalists will try to be fair, and balanced their reporting for societal changes and progress, peaceful coexistence, political stability, mutual understanding and national development.
In a nutshell, I appeal to Malam Adamu Adamu to know that neither Shehu Chaji nor John Danfulani has anything personal against him, as Hamisu rightly stated in his article. John was not instigating the media against you. All of us are exercising our constitutional right in a democratic system of government.
Malam Adamu Adamu, what gives people hope and meaning is the pursuit of meaningful and noble purpose. Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about issues that bother us.
One of the easiest ways to change your society is to help others achieve their dreams. Malam Adamu, you should use the opportunity of being a renowned columnist to change the society for good.
Adamu Muhd Usman wrote from Kafin Hausa, Jigawa State.
adammusman@yahoo.com
http://www.desertherald.com/issues.htm#3
--- Former American President.
Political commentators, activists and columnists took the pages of Trust newspaper since last month on the questions which Shehu Mustapha Chaji asked Malam Adamu Adamu, a columnist with the paper in respect of Bauchi State 's political fracas.
Adamu Adamu means different things to different people. To some, he is an intellectual who has distinguished himself in a dominated media industry, others think he is an outstanding and diligent columnist, while others think of him as an activist.
I read many articles ranging in the media, from Shehu Mustapha Chaji's piece to Adamu Adamu to John Danfulani to Yusuf Gamawa and the recent one which I read on page 12 of Thursday, August 6, 2009, edition of Daily Trust by Hamisu Gumel.
Thank God, we are in democratic dispensation which gives freedom of expression, thoughts, ideas, opinion, objection, criticism etc. To be candid, no society can truly develop or progress without journalism. It is journalism that makes people to know the happenings of the society and to make their own contributions for stability, unity and progress.
Of course, Yusuf Gamawa, Hamisu Gumel and Shehu Chaji has the constitutional rights to write and query Malam Adamu Adamu over his silence on the present political brouhaha in Bauchi State, because even the Almighty God stated in the Holy Qur'an that “Ask those who know, if you don't.”
It was Shehu Chaji's article that made Malam Adamu Adamu to open up in the second part of his column of Friday, July 31, 2009, titled, “Talking silly on Bauchi II.” It was then that many people knew what they don't know about the role played by Malam Adamu Adamu. It was when Chaji asked that people came to know.
Journalism is the timely reporting of events at the local, provincial, national and the international levels. In journalism, there are many challenges. Most times, it is a very risky job. Anything can happen to you as a journalist. As a journalist, some or most times you don't have choice, you have to tell the truth, you have to be fair. You must not be biased. You must bear in mind that you have the power of the pen in your hands. Malam Adamu, this power has to be used fairly to change the society for better no matter what.
As a journalist, you must not accept bribe, be biased or anything related to that. You must desist from any practice that can bring about degrading of the journalism profession (or you in person).
To be a good journalist, you must have a curious mind, endurance, self control, patience, tolerance, understanding, dedication, perseverance and lots more. You should have an eye for what is different. You should also be interested in societal progress. Again, to be a good journalist, you can study anything and write on many things.
In short, it takes a lot to be a good journalist. But nowadays, people fail and others defend people when they fail to admit their mistakes, when they commit one. We hope and pray that Nigerian journalists will try to be fair, and balanced their reporting for societal changes and progress, peaceful coexistence, political stability, mutual understanding and national development.
In a nutshell, I appeal to Malam Adamu Adamu to know that neither Shehu Chaji nor John Danfulani has anything personal against him, as Hamisu rightly stated in his article. John was not instigating the media against you. All of us are exercising our constitutional right in a democratic system of government.
Malam Adamu Adamu, what gives people hope and meaning is the pursuit of meaningful and noble purpose. Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about issues that bother us.
One of the easiest ways to change your society is to help others achieve their dreams. Malam Adamu, you should use the opportunity of being a renowned columnist to change the society for good.
Adamu Muhd Usman wrote from Kafin Hausa, Jigawa State.
adammusman@yahoo.com
http://www.desertherald.com/issues.htm#3
Thursday 6 August 2009
In defence of Adamu Adamu
“Vulgar people take huge delight in the faults and follies of great men”- Schopenhauer
An article appeared on the back cover of Daily Trust of Wednesday, July 29, with the above caption written by one John Danfulani which was purposely directed against the personality and character of Adamu Adamu, the Friday columnist of the Daily Trust.
It was, as the writer claimed, a response to Malam Adamu’s piece which was a response to an earlier write-up by one Shehu Mustapha Chaji titled “Questions for Adamu Adamu.” Danfulani’s piece was laced with utter vulgarity and foul language which in a normal circumstance, could not warrant a reply by a person with a sense and decorum, but as the wise saying goes that “the charlatan will put in his pocket in the mouth of the wise who fails to speak out in public,” I consider it an obligation to respond, lest the public be tempted to believe the lies.
I read both Shehu Chaji’s write up and Adamu Adamu’s response (if we can still call it a response) and did not find any thing similar to a show of arrogance in the latter’s response, as claimed by Danfulani. I also didn’t see any condemnation or use of foul language or harassment against Chaji in that piece. But perhaps Danfulani has a special way of reading peoples’ intentions against their writings as his ramblings suggested. But even if that was the case, here we are only judging the columnist based on what he put down on paper, not speculating on his assumed intentions.
I marvelled at this outpouring of venom on the columnist, because any body who is acquainted with the nature of such writing debates (challenges and rejoinders) knows it is common for a writer to say that his opponent’s claims are not worth his reply and that does not make him arrogant. Danfulani’s grouse against Adamu (at least that’s what he shows on the surface) was his refusal to write and castigate Governor Isa Yuguda to their delight just because he is an influential writer and came from Bauchi State. See! If Malam Adamu thought Chaji’s piece wasn’t important to warrant his attention, it is his own right, as there is no law that says one must buy or dance to another person’s opinion. If he felt it was not his desire now to comment on Bauchi politics, then let him be. After all, he is a national columnist and he can pick any national, regional or state issue to discuss as he deemed like any other writer without coercion from any body.
Any body is free to write and express his opinion on the Bauchi politics either in support or against the Governor; this is democracy, no hindrance. Why the desperate effort to use Adamu Adamu as a megaphone? Even if Malam Adamu openly supported Governor Yuguda, I don‘t see any problem in that, for he is also a Nigerian citizen like every one of us, entitled to his rights of choice and opinion. Instead of venting their anger on the columnist for refusing to be hoodwinked into assuaging their whims, such people can go ahead and write their own articles on the happenings in Bauchi politics, period. At least since they have the guts to castigate Malam Adamu, let them direct their diatribe on Yuguda’s administration since that is the very reason they want to crucify the writer.
John has veered away from the normal norm of criticism by openly expressing his harboured hatred against the Adamu Adamu. Glaringly goaded by sheer mischief and uncanny effort to rubbish a hard-earned reputation and credibility, Danfulani did not even did not even allowed Adamu to conclude that piece (as the second part of it was yet to be published) before descending on him with such unreserved abusive language. He was in a haste to pass verdict on him even before reading the writer’s complete thought on the issue. Abusive language, they say, is easy to use. Thus, it does not require a deeper insight to understand Danfulani’s evil intentions in rushing in with his hurriedly prepared piece before the appearing of Malam Adamu’s second part of his discuss. And by doing that he was mischievously intending to pre-empt the writer by diffusing the monds of his readers against whatever Malam Adamu would write in that upcoming piece thereby portraying him in bad light. But then, are the readers this foolish?
Another thought yet would tell you that Danfulani (whoever he is ) is one of the rabble rousers who purposely try to make name or gather attention by ‘challenging” reputable writers like Malam Adamu Adamu, and do it just to see their names in writings. Often fledgling, idle and disenfranchised writers resort to almost vicious assaults on whichever prominent person is unlucky to have caught their unguarded evil fancies. Therefore, Danfulani’s singling out of Adamu Adamu was not without purpose even as he appeared to be more catholic than the pope, venting anger supposedly on behalf of Shehu Chaji whom he described as moral icon. However, as opposed to his abusive diatribe, Chaji’s was less uncharitable, which shows that Danfulani had a personal score to settle with Adamu Adamu. But the most laughable was Danfulani’s claim that he was fighting Adamu on a moral ground. Kai! If we may ask: From which moral pedestal was Danfulani condemning Adamu’s morality? Which moral scale did he use to measure Adamu’s response to Shehu Chaji’s charge? No wonder he was so carried by emotions throughout his write up he didn’t bother to see that he was off the mark, dwelling on “discussing” personality instead of issues. Indeed his writing was bereft of substance on the issue at hand.
Gumel wrote from Limawa Quarters, Gumel, Jigawa State
Finally, since Adamu will not buy the point, John, why not leave him alone and look for a willing bloke to do the dirty job for your likes.
http://www.news.dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3965&catid=49
An article appeared on the back cover of Daily Trust of Wednesday, July 29, with the above caption written by one John Danfulani which was purposely directed against the personality and character of Adamu Adamu, the Friday columnist of the Daily Trust.
It was, as the writer claimed, a response to Malam Adamu’s piece which was a response to an earlier write-up by one Shehu Mustapha Chaji titled “Questions for Adamu Adamu.” Danfulani’s piece was laced with utter vulgarity and foul language which in a normal circumstance, could not warrant a reply by a person with a sense and decorum, but as the wise saying goes that “the charlatan will put in his pocket in the mouth of the wise who fails to speak out in public,” I consider it an obligation to respond, lest the public be tempted to believe the lies.
I read both Shehu Chaji’s write up and Adamu Adamu’s response (if we can still call it a response) and did not find any thing similar to a show of arrogance in the latter’s response, as claimed by Danfulani. I also didn’t see any condemnation or use of foul language or harassment against Chaji in that piece. But perhaps Danfulani has a special way of reading peoples’ intentions against their writings as his ramblings suggested. But even if that was the case, here we are only judging the columnist based on what he put down on paper, not speculating on his assumed intentions.
I marvelled at this outpouring of venom on the columnist, because any body who is acquainted with the nature of such writing debates (challenges and rejoinders) knows it is common for a writer to say that his opponent’s claims are not worth his reply and that does not make him arrogant. Danfulani’s grouse against Adamu (at least that’s what he shows on the surface) was his refusal to write and castigate Governor Isa Yuguda to their delight just because he is an influential writer and came from Bauchi State. See! If Malam Adamu thought Chaji’s piece wasn’t important to warrant his attention, it is his own right, as there is no law that says one must buy or dance to another person’s opinion. If he felt it was not his desire now to comment on Bauchi politics, then let him be. After all, he is a national columnist and he can pick any national, regional or state issue to discuss as he deemed like any other writer without coercion from any body.
Any body is free to write and express his opinion on the Bauchi politics either in support or against the Governor; this is democracy, no hindrance. Why the desperate effort to use Adamu Adamu as a megaphone? Even if Malam Adamu openly supported Governor Yuguda, I don‘t see any problem in that, for he is also a Nigerian citizen like every one of us, entitled to his rights of choice and opinion. Instead of venting their anger on the columnist for refusing to be hoodwinked into assuaging their whims, such people can go ahead and write their own articles on the happenings in Bauchi politics, period. At least since they have the guts to castigate Malam Adamu, let them direct their diatribe on Yuguda’s administration since that is the very reason they want to crucify the writer.
John has veered away from the normal norm of criticism by openly expressing his harboured hatred against the Adamu Adamu. Glaringly goaded by sheer mischief and uncanny effort to rubbish a hard-earned reputation and credibility, Danfulani did not even did not even allowed Adamu to conclude that piece (as the second part of it was yet to be published) before descending on him with such unreserved abusive language. He was in a haste to pass verdict on him even before reading the writer’s complete thought on the issue. Abusive language, they say, is easy to use. Thus, it does not require a deeper insight to understand Danfulani’s evil intentions in rushing in with his hurriedly prepared piece before the appearing of Malam Adamu’s second part of his discuss. And by doing that he was mischievously intending to pre-empt the writer by diffusing the monds of his readers against whatever Malam Adamu would write in that upcoming piece thereby portraying him in bad light. But then, are the readers this foolish?
Another thought yet would tell you that Danfulani (whoever he is ) is one of the rabble rousers who purposely try to make name or gather attention by ‘challenging” reputable writers like Malam Adamu Adamu, and do it just to see their names in writings. Often fledgling, idle and disenfranchised writers resort to almost vicious assaults on whichever prominent person is unlucky to have caught their unguarded evil fancies. Therefore, Danfulani’s singling out of Adamu Adamu was not without purpose even as he appeared to be more catholic than the pope, venting anger supposedly on behalf of Shehu Chaji whom he described as moral icon. However, as opposed to his abusive diatribe, Chaji’s was less uncharitable, which shows that Danfulani had a personal score to settle with Adamu Adamu. But the most laughable was Danfulani’s claim that he was fighting Adamu on a moral ground. Kai! If we may ask: From which moral pedestal was Danfulani condemning Adamu’s morality? Which moral scale did he use to measure Adamu’s response to Shehu Chaji’s charge? No wonder he was so carried by emotions throughout his write up he didn’t bother to see that he was off the mark, dwelling on “discussing” personality instead of issues. Indeed his writing was bereft of substance on the issue at hand.
Gumel wrote from Limawa Quarters, Gumel, Jigawa State
Finally, since Adamu will not buy the point, John, why not leave him alone and look for a willing bloke to do the dirty job for your likes.
http://www.news.dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3965&catid=49
Monday 3 August 2009
Adamu Adamu: Not a politician
By JOHN DANFULANI |
Ibrahim Gamawa, whom I suspected is Adamu Adamu’s tag-team mate made a piece in Thursday’s 30th July Daily Trust in defence of the former hypercritical priest of moral shrine Adamu Adamu. He unsuccessfully tried to show his initial lack of interest in these exchanges, but could not stand by such feelings to the end. And finally rolled-up his sleeves, picked a pen and jointed this titanic fray that one suspects will not finish before Christmas. It is now a balanced equation of a tag-team of twos, with Chaji/Danfulani axis versus Gamawa/Adamu team.
Like his co-team mate, he wobbled and fumbled round issues and ended up not seriously addressing any raised by me or Chaji or helped Adamu’s case.
Else, what was the point he was making by accusing us of playing “someone else’s script”? Since when did people who advance moral questions become mischief makers? If posing moral questions, evangelising, and accusations is an act of mischief, is your Adamu not the biggest Nigerian shareholder in the venture? Because his entire journalistic career which spans over two decades was anchored on asking moral questions, preaching morality, and mischievously accusing others of lack of it.
Gamawa also opined that “I do not want to delve into the accusation of arrogance and other issues on Adamu”, of course you will not, because only your hero has the right to use words as desired. How can you detach these titles and phrases from wanton arrogance: “talking silly about Bauchi”, “given to some clowns”, “this nation might have tolareted corruption but should never be allowed to accept it could tolerate insult to its collective intelligence by those who daily inflict and then add salt to it, our collective injuries”, “in the past my attitude even to reasonable rejoinders…”.There were countless other arrogant and contemptuous sentences and phrases in his weak response to Chaji,s moral sermon.
There were conspicuous lacunas of logic in thinking because at some point he asserted that “Adamu was right to say that his duty as a journalist should not be restricted to Bauchi, and it is nobody’s responsibility to tell him when or who to write about. Since there is the possibility that his opinion may be influenced and as such he will not be objective in his writing”. In this case, Adamu and his supporter swam their illogical wings into our waiting net. Was Adamu not aware of this possible influence ab initio when he picked on Muazu and his government? By your confession, which is quite true, we state our case that all Adamu wrote on Muazu was influenced and prejudiced by interest. What is remaining, is to forward an apology to Muazu and being a true Muslim, Muazu and some of us that were hoodwinked to believing him will forgive, forget and forgo.
The last sentence of his fifth paragraph was laughable and portrayed his parochialistic perception of what is politics, who is a politician, and what event is political. You stated that Adamu is not a politician? Who else is, in this world? These are rather some of the insults to our collective intelligence that your master accused others of. It is my utmost belief that Adamu was not careful, otherwise he would have stumbled on that phrase in your piece and outrightly pruned it out. But Adamu is still recouping from Chaji’s merciless shelling and my back up blitzkrieg of Wednesday; so, it will be hard for him to see all the contradictory statements in the write up.
Activities of Adamu in 2003 and 2007 confirmed that he is not only a Hobbsian political animal but a living and practicing one with the main opposition party ANPP. Can Gamawa tell us what Adamu was doing when he said in his reaction to chaji “throughout 2003 I was virtually Shekarau’s sentry standing by Buhari” In the said duty, was Adamu Adamu standing sentry in a military parade ground or in a political rally? Your guess is as good as mine.
Again, Adamu told us before the 2007 general elections that he was resting his moral pen because he was joining Buhari’s presidential campaign trail. He actually left because some of us stopped seeing his Friday sermons in the Trust. Many actually saw him close to Buhari wherever the Gen. went. Votes hunting actually took them to Bauchi where Adamu and Buhari appeared and successfully sold Malam Isa Yuguda to the conscious people of Bauchi who are now thinking whether the product Adamu and co “seduced” them to buying was worth the price. Then, can somebody with fertile conscience write and tell us that Adamu Adamu is not a politician? By nature and practice, he was and will continue to be one until he answers the call of Allah to reunite with Him, the angels and other saints in aljanna.
These are some of the deceits and holier-than-all mantra some of us are out to combat and totally eliminate from the system. People like Adamu have exhausted their barns of deceits and bare faced fabrications against the system and people. The role of a pen man is not evangelizing a principle he does not believe or wished it exist.
Lest I forget, Chaji has advanced further questions to Adamu Adamu and by extension his tag-team friend, are we likely to get answers soon?
http://www.newnigeriannews.com/politics.htm
Ibrahim Gamawa, whom I suspected is Adamu Adamu’s tag-team mate made a piece in Thursday’s 30th July Daily Trust in defence of the former hypercritical priest of moral shrine Adamu Adamu. He unsuccessfully tried to show his initial lack of interest in these exchanges, but could not stand by such feelings to the end. And finally rolled-up his sleeves, picked a pen and jointed this titanic fray that one suspects will not finish before Christmas. It is now a balanced equation of a tag-team of twos, with Chaji/Danfulani axis versus Gamawa/Adamu team.
Like his co-team mate, he wobbled and fumbled round issues and ended up not seriously addressing any raised by me or Chaji or helped Adamu’s case.
Else, what was the point he was making by accusing us of playing “someone else’s script”? Since when did people who advance moral questions become mischief makers? If posing moral questions, evangelising, and accusations is an act of mischief, is your Adamu not the biggest Nigerian shareholder in the venture? Because his entire journalistic career which spans over two decades was anchored on asking moral questions, preaching morality, and mischievously accusing others of lack of it.
Gamawa also opined that “I do not want to delve into the accusation of arrogance and other issues on Adamu”, of course you will not, because only your hero has the right to use words as desired. How can you detach these titles and phrases from wanton arrogance: “talking silly about Bauchi”, “given to some clowns”, “this nation might have tolareted corruption but should never be allowed to accept it could tolerate insult to its collective intelligence by those who daily inflict and then add salt to it, our collective injuries”, “in the past my attitude even to reasonable rejoinders…”.There were countless other arrogant and contemptuous sentences and phrases in his weak response to Chaji,s moral sermon.
There were conspicuous lacunas of logic in thinking because at some point he asserted that “Adamu was right to say that his duty as a journalist should not be restricted to Bauchi, and it is nobody’s responsibility to tell him when or who to write about. Since there is the possibility that his opinion may be influenced and as such he will not be objective in his writing”. In this case, Adamu and his supporter swam their illogical wings into our waiting net. Was Adamu not aware of this possible influence ab initio when he picked on Muazu and his government? By your confession, which is quite true, we state our case that all Adamu wrote on Muazu was influenced and prejudiced by interest. What is remaining, is to forward an apology to Muazu and being a true Muslim, Muazu and some of us that were hoodwinked to believing him will forgive, forget and forgo.
The last sentence of his fifth paragraph was laughable and portrayed his parochialistic perception of what is politics, who is a politician, and what event is political. You stated that Adamu is not a politician? Who else is, in this world? These are rather some of the insults to our collective intelligence that your master accused others of. It is my utmost belief that Adamu was not careful, otherwise he would have stumbled on that phrase in your piece and outrightly pruned it out. But Adamu is still recouping from Chaji’s merciless shelling and my back up blitzkrieg of Wednesday; so, it will be hard for him to see all the contradictory statements in the write up.
Activities of Adamu in 2003 and 2007 confirmed that he is not only a Hobbsian political animal but a living and practicing one with the main opposition party ANPP. Can Gamawa tell us what Adamu was doing when he said in his reaction to chaji “throughout 2003 I was virtually Shekarau’s sentry standing by Buhari” In the said duty, was Adamu Adamu standing sentry in a military parade ground or in a political rally? Your guess is as good as mine.
Again, Adamu told us before the 2007 general elections that he was resting his moral pen because he was joining Buhari’s presidential campaign trail. He actually left because some of us stopped seeing his Friday sermons in the Trust. Many actually saw him close to Buhari wherever the Gen. went. Votes hunting actually took them to Bauchi where Adamu and Buhari appeared and successfully sold Malam Isa Yuguda to the conscious people of Bauchi who are now thinking whether the product Adamu and co “seduced” them to buying was worth the price. Then, can somebody with fertile conscience write and tell us that Adamu Adamu is not a politician? By nature and practice, he was and will continue to be one until he answers the call of Allah to reunite with Him, the angels and other saints in aljanna.
These are some of the deceits and holier-than-all mantra some of us are out to combat and totally eliminate from the system. People like Adamu have exhausted their barns of deceits and bare faced fabrications against the system and people. The role of a pen man is not evangelizing a principle he does not believe or wished it exist.
Lest I forget, Chaji has advanced further questions to Adamu Adamu and by extension his tag-team friend, are we likely to get answers soon?
http://www.newnigeriannews.com/politics.htm
Saturday 1 August 2009
Talking silly on Bauchi [II]
Written by Adamu Adamu
adamuadamu@dailytrust.com
Immediately after the 2007 election, even though I am not in politics and will never be; and even if I were ever to be so, I wouldn’t be in the PDP from which he came or the ANPP into which he went, Governor Isa Yuguda offered me the post of Secretary to the State Government. I declined this immediately because I knew it was something I would not do under any circumstance. I told him why but promised to help in any way I could.
Even before the government had fully taken off, he appointed me chairman of the committee set up to review the work of the Transition Committee that oversaw the handover. We worked on its reports and produced the documents that became the subject matter of the judicial commission of inquiry that is currently looking into the affairs of the governorship of Alhaji Ahmadu Adamu Mu’azu; and this perhaps is the main reason why His Excellency decided to remain outside the country.
After the committee’s work, the governor asked me to accept the post of adviser to him on whatever it was I wanted. Here, in fact, the deputy put more pressure on me to accept than the governor himself did, perhaps believing that if I joined the government, it would help his position. But I made my position clear that I would not work for the government.
Later, in the presence of the deputy, the governor renewed an invitation he had earlier made to me to compile and document all the assignments he had given me and all the advice I had offered to him into a consultancy agreement so that I could be paid. Though I understood the concern behind all these offers and all the kindness intended, I felt insulted and declined.
Though there are many problems in Bauchi, the most unexplainable has been the failure of the government to utilize good counsel. And looking at a few of these self-created problems—or rather, solutions looking for problems—it is difficult to explain why they should exit in the first place. Let us look at three that Chaji touched and see why they cannot be my concern in the manner he suggested. He talked about Yuguda’s decamping, his conduct towards General Buhari and his plan to impeach his deputy.
To me as a journalist, the ANPP and the PDP were just political parties; and if I opposed Yuguda’s decision to decamp to the PDP, I didn’t do it as a result of some preference for the ANPP. According to him, I was the only one who opposed him; and I did so only on moral, not on partisan political, grounds. I told him if he did decamp, he would lose whatever political mutumci he had and the state would be out of his control. But Yuguda was made to believe that the people of Bauchi would not oppose his move; and that they were only apprehensive that if he did decamp, he might abandon his programmes. I told His Excellency that the majority of the people of Bauchi who overwhelmingly voted for him didn’t know or care a hoot about programmes.
They elected him for four reasons. First, there was this almost universal unpopularity of Ahmadu Mu’azu. Second, Mu’azu chose as gubernatorial candidate someone who was seen as his sheepish protégé, by reason of which he also became equally unpopular. Third was the non-threatening image of Yuguda and the belief that he would never be as high-handed as Mu’azu was, and the people’s desire for change which they hoped to realize in him. And finally, and most importantly, there was the decisive endorsement of Buhari that Yuguda received. Buhari not only endorsed him but took time off his own campaign to campaign for Yuguda; and he went round all but one of Bauchi’s 20 local governments for him. This was something he had not done for any other ANPP gubernatorial candidate.
A fifth reason that is often not mentioned is the directive by Abuja that the security forces shouldn’t allow the incumbent governor to rig the election. It is not mentioned because it will seem to have been cancelled by the armed turnout of the people of Bauchi to protect their votes. Nevertheless, without this decision, the electoral commission could still have rigged and announced a different result; but that day, the Federal Government knew that there would have been an unprecedented bloodbath.
Taking all this into consideration, it is indeed incomprehensible that Yuguda would ever speak about Buhari the way he did in that radio interview. But I couldn’t see how a personal decision to be ungrateful by an adult politician could be my problem, just because I am his friend. It was fortuitous and totally uncalled for and false—and to me embarrassing, no doubt, because even if Buhari had not done anything for Yuguda, and even if the office he held or the popularity he enjoys had not precluded a governor from speaking about him in that fashion, Yuguda’s knowledge of my closeness to the General should have been enough to make him think twice.
The charges against the deputy governor, which, it should be remembered, were being assembled only after the impeachment move had already been made, were all baseless; and it might in the end well prove to be more the result of incapable investigation than actual culpability. It would be a botched-up working back from a predetermined end.
It was indeed unfortunate that matters have had to come to this impasse. When the impeachment crisis erupted just before I traveled out, I met the governor in connection with it. Initially, the governor wanted to pretend that it was only an affair between the deputy and the state legislature, until I reminded His Excellency that he was talking to a journalist. Then he told me that the deputy had been disloyal to him. When I asked to know the disloyalty, it became apparent that it was his refusal to decamp along with the governor to the People’s Democratic Party, PDP. I reminded the governor that he could not complain to me about a matter that I myself opposed. Incidentally, this was the same thing I told him when he complained to me about my younger brother who was spearheading the opposition to him in the state legislature.
At any event, I could see that the governor had forgotten what I told him about his deputy; because immediately after the election, I told him that Alhaji Garba Mohammed Gadi, the deputy, was the administration’s most valuable asset; because he had all the qualities that the governor and all the other principal officers of his government lacked.
But really except for the close relationship between the deputy governor and me, it is really none of my business if he is impeached. That is the business of politicians; and since that is the way they play it here, the deputy governor must have known and accepted—or, at the very least, foreseen—the possibility, if not the inevitability, of such an eventuality, even if he will not ordinarily have expected it.
I cannot therefore see how my comment, if it comes, before or after the impeachment of Alhaji Garba, can constitute unfairness to the people of Bauchi State. The fact that it may happen, however, will not make the impeachment right; but neither will it be a shame for the deputy governor if eventually it does. And that’s exactly what I told the deputy governor when he asked my opinion whether he should resign or not. I told him not to resign under any circumstances. It would be more honourable for him to wait and be impeached.
http://news.dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3593:talking-silly-on-bauchi-ii&catid=47:daily-columns&Itemid=31
adamuadamu@dailytrust.com
Immediately after the 2007 election, even though I am not in politics and will never be; and even if I were ever to be so, I wouldn’t be in the PDP from which he came or the ANPP into which he went, Governor Isa Yuguda offered me the post of Secretary to the State Government. I declined this immediately because I knew it was something I would not do under any circumstance. I told him why but promised to help in any way I could.
Even before the government had fully taken off, he appointed me chairman of the committee set up to review the work of the Transition Committee that oversaw the handover. We worked on its reports and produced the documents that became the subject matter of the judicial commission of inquiry that is currently looking into the affairs of the governorship of Alhaji Ahmadu Adamu Mu’azu; and this perhaps is the main reason why His Excellency decided to remain outside the country.
After the committee’s work, the governor asked me to accept the post of adviser to him on whatever it was I wanted. Here, in fact, the deputy put more pressure on me to accept than the governor himself did, perhaps believing that if I joined the government, it would help his position. But I made my position clear that I would not work for the government.
Later, in the presence of the deputy, the governor renewed an invitation he had earlier made to me to compile and document all the assignments he had given me and all the advice I had offered to him into a consultancy agreement so that I could be paid. Though I understood the concern behind all these offers and all the kindness intended, I felt insulted and declined.
Though there are many problems in Bauchi, the most unexplainable has been the failure of the government to utilize good counsel. And looking at a few of these self-created problems—or rather, solutions looking for problems—it is difficult to explain why they should exit in the first place. Let us look at three that Chaji touched and see why they cannot be my concern in the manner he suggested. He talked about Yuguda’s decamping, his conduct towards General Buhari and his plan to impeach his deputy.
To me as a journalist, the ANPP and the PDP were just political parties; and if I opposed Yuguda’s decision to decamp to the PDP, I didn’t do it as a result of some preference for the ANPP. According to him, I was the only one who opposed him; and I did so only on moral, not on partisan political, grounds. I told him if he did decamp, he would lose whatever political mutumci he had and the state would be out of his control. But Yuguda was made to believe that the people of Bauchi would not oppose his move; and that they were only apprehensive that if he did decamp, he might abandon his programmes. I told His Excellency that the majority of the people of Bauchi who overwhelmingly voted for him didn’t know or care a hoot about programmes.
They elected him for four reasons. First, there was this almost universal unpopularity of Ahmadu Mu’azu. Second, Mu’azu chose as gubernatorial candidate someone who was seen as his sheepish protégé, by reason of which he also became equally unpopular. Third was the non-threatening image of Yuguda and the belief that he would never be as high-handed as Mu’azu was, and the people’s desire for change which they hoped to realize in him. And finally, and most importantly, there was the decisive endorsement of Buhari that Yuguda received. Buhari not only endorsed him but took time off his own campaign to campaign for Yuguda; and he went round all but one of Bauchi’s 20 local governments for him. This was something he had not done for any other ANPP gubernatorial candidate.
A fifth reason that is often not mentioned is the directive by Abuja that the security forces shouldn’t allow the incumbent governor to rig the election. It is not mentioned because it will seem to have been cancelled by the armed turnout of the people of Bauchi to protect their votes. Nevertheless, without this decision, the electoral commission could still have rigged and announced a different result; but that day, the Federal Government knew that there would have been an unprecedented bloodbath.
Taking all this into consideration, it is indeed incomprehensible that Yuguda would ever speak about Buhari the way he did in that radio interview. But I couldn’t see how a personal decision to be ungrateful by an adult politician could be my problem, just because I am his friend. It was fortuitous and totally uncalled for and false—and to me embarrassing, no doubt, because even if Buhari had not done anything for Yuguda, and even if the office he held or the popularity he enjoys had not precluded a governor from speaking about him in that fashion, Yuguda’s knowledge of my closeness to the General should have been enough to make him think twice.
The charges against the deputy governor, which, it should be remembered, were being assembled only after the impeachment move had already been made, were all baseless; and it might in the end well prove to be more the result of incapable investigation than actual culpability. It would be a botched-up working back from a predetermined end.
It was indeed unfortunate that matters have had to come to this impasse. When the impeachment crisis erupted just before I traveled out, I met the governor in connection with it. Initially, the governor wanted to pretend that it was only an affair between the deputy and the state legislature, until I reminded His Excellency that he was talking to a journalist. Then he told me that the deputy had been disloyal to him. When I asked to know the disloyalty, it became apparent that it was his refusal to decamp along with the governor to the People’s Democratic Party, PDP. I reminded the governor that he could not complain to me about a matter that I myself opposed. Incidentally, this was the same thing I told him when he complained to me about my younger brother who was spearheading the opposition to him in the state legislature.
At any event, I could see that the governor had forgotten what I told him about his deputy; because immediately after the election, I told him that Alhaji Garba Mohammed Gadi, the deputy, was the administration’s most valuable asset; because he had all the qualities that the governor and all the other principal officers of his government lacked.
But really except for the close relationship between the deputy governor and me, it is really none of my business if he is impeached. That is the business of politicians; and since that is the way they play it here, the deputy governor must have known and accepted—or, at the very least, foreseen—the possibility, if not the inevitability, of such an eventuality, even if he will not ordinarily have expected it.
I cannot therefore see how my comment, if it comes, before or after the impeachment of Alhaji Garba, can constitute unfairness to the people of Bauchi State. The fact that it may happen, however, will not make the impeachment right; but neither will it be a shame for the deputy governor if eventually it does. And that’s exactly what I told the deputy governor when he asked my opinion whether he should resign or not. I told him not to resign under any circumstances. It would be more honourable for him to wait and be impeached.
http://news.dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3593:talking-silly-on-bauchi-ii&catid=47:daily-columns&Itemid=31
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
