There is a big world of conspiracy theories out there. Conspiracy theories attempt to impose ‘a neglected or depressingly mundane angle’ as truth on every event. I remember shortly after the war in Iraq commenced, I read an off-beat part of a newspaper attempting to link Bush and Bin Laden - an elaborate thought pattern was hammered out to illustrate that Bush and bin laden were  friends and the so-called ‘hostility’ actually a scam. I found the conspiracy theory really weak neither did I find another one pointed out by someone to me in the wake of the last Sept 11 anniversary. ‘The plane crashes’ he said with palpable passion ‘was sponsored by Bush.’ He had watched a programme on TV showing many ‘contradictions’ that portrayed the September 11 attacks as the handiwork of Bush and the American government. I have overheard people say the war in Iraq is a ruse to steal or control Iraqi oil. These views present no logic to me. Someone once told me that MASSOB is funded by the Federal Government to get the Igbo into war again – how hilarious. I have heard reasons why Biafra declared secession and I have defeated them with facts, but I won’t dwell on them here, not being the object this article.

Whenever I read newspapers I find that I subconsciously create profiles of them. Within minutes I can tell the ideological leaning of the site - whether leftwing, rightwing etc - and therefore the type of written works it publishes. Newspapers may tacitly or overtly promote a parochial line of operation; that as well as the sometimes competitiveness of getting written works published by an editor. This competitiveness spurns an immensely and absurdly creative journalistic energy. What passes of as a social treatise may just be a four-handed spruced up commercial sensationalism. I believe less than 5% of what I read in the media or elsewhere because I’m fully aware of editorial bias and other narrow underpinnings. In this tight atmosphere what passes as ‘speculative journalism’ may just be conspiracy theories. What I have just outlined, I dare say, mostly defines the writing world. I am only prepared to concede a slight minority to written media works of any enlivening quality.

Here we gain an insight into the revisionism of history. My initial inquiry into Nigeria ’s history saddled me with constructions that roused my suspicion as to their accuracy. The story of the Jan 1966 coup was presented as an open and shut case, being summarily dismissed as an unsuccessful, irrational and tribal attempt at Igbo domination over the nation. In various analysis I perused over, I wasn’t struck by an immense subjective rendering of the motives of the perpetrators, rather, there seemed to be a hurry to treat it to rubber-stamping ethnic censure. The few non-Igbo speaking amongst them were quickly treated to an iron-metal hammering of exclusion. Yet years on, voices  still sing. Due to Nigeria ’s tortuous, deliberate emphasis on ethnic politics my attention has been turned again - not that I succumbed to the ethnic label of the coup - to the Jan 1966 coup in our history. I would have thought a tireless bust of energy would go towards disclosing the real intention of the coup. In any court of law, whether of civil or criminal jurisdiction an evidential burden of proof must be discharged in other to secure a conviction or liability. Nobody rushes into court with flimsy, weak evidence and leaves without being subjected to sarcastic jibes. I believe, for there to be any headway in Nigeria the lessons of history must be gold-cased and held tightly. I mostly do not trust Nigerians on matters of Nigerian ethnicity any more than I trust a dog with a bone. How do we define a Nigerian revolution today? Must a Nigerian revolution have a well-represented ethnic spread and religious content to be viable? How would a cross-ethnic support for liberation be interpreted? Suspicion? Fear? Catch 22…The perils of neglecting history.

The only crime the perpetrators may have committed was their failure to spread the long knife  to reflect ‘federal character’. In an atmosphere with a strong sense of ethnic identity it is not hard to imagine the speed of the ethnic labelling, when the nation had had litmus tests of ethnic undercurrents . Sadly the ethnic suspicions and divisions pervading the four corners of Nigeria show no sign of abatement: they manifest  in different pretences like ‘federal character’, ‘revenue allocation’ all in a bid to truncate an atmosphere were hardwork prevails: pretences that are at their root pathologically averse to domination by an immensely qualified workforce ready to deploy skills from the four corners of the earth.

It is not hard to see why corruption strives. The average Nigerian is not disturbed by corruption with an ethnic sting. If Nigerians were really serious about solving the myriad of corrupt practices across the country why haven’t taken to task people who represent them even at the basic level – local government? Corruption finds a home in the mentality that the ‘political winner’ takes all. ‘ Nigeria is about what you get,’ their actions say. It took me quite some time to come to terms with the sordid yet real fact that the Nigerian population supports corruption at state, local and federal levels. Those who rail against them are seen as nuts.

Forty years after the first coup shattered Nigeria ’s first independent ‘democracy’ and ushered in a military regime questions abound, fundamentally the motive of the coup: was it inspired by a desire to extricate Nigeria from the numerous ills of the first republic?

Forty-one years after the coup former secretary of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Mr. Odia Ofeimun disclosed to the Guardian,  what he terms ‘serious lies’ told about the coup and the plan to hand over power to Chief Obafemi Awolowo, "People were told that it was an Igbo coup but that is not correct. It is a very interesting part of the Nigerian story. In the first place, there have been many serious lies that have been told by our leaders in the last 45 years of Nigeria 's history. Our leaders have not been bold enough to tell us the truth.’’

He said, "The interesting part of the Nigerian story and Awolowo's story would have been explained in the book written by Chukwuma Ifeajuna. It would have been clearer what actually happened. That book said the plan of the coup makers was to release Awolowo from jail and make him their own leader. And if Awolowo, because of his principles, refused to be their leader, they would lock him up in the State House and issue decrees in his name. If that book had been published early, the story that it was an Igbo coup would have been debunked and it would have been a different ball game…"

featurediarist1@yahoo.com 

Robot  Villager

# 1 var sbtitle3723=encodeURIComponent(Awolowo’s f...Read the full article. Posted by Robot| 07.05.2007 07:03

Exxcuzme  Villager

# 2 I dont understand-what is this article all about? Posted by Exxcuzme| 07.05.2007 09:04

Mikky jaga  Villager

# 3 Exxcuzme, The article is about Awo and the civil war It is about some people trying to rewrite history. It is about an unpublished book by an author, long dead, and therefore can not authenticate the contents of the book. It is about a writer that tried to quote a portion of an interview out of context The result of all the above is an article that leaves the reader hanging "like the man with the elephantiasis of yonder trying to climb a wall" apologies madam. Posted by Mikky jaga| 07.05.2007 11:26

Remi Oyeyemi  Villager

# 4 Having worked with Odia Ofeimun sometime in my career as a journalist, I am willing to give him a benefit of the doubt on his take on Ifeajuna's unpublished book. Ofeimun has a lot of credibility. I admit that it would have been more helpful if the book had been published or if the author was still alive. However, what I do not get is the writer's objective in the piece above. I am at a loss as to what he is trying to pass across. Posted by Remi Oyeyemi| 07.05.2007 13:03

wharfsnake  JJC

# 5 This writer must have done an excellent as none of the readers could figure out his motives. let me suggest to the readers that if you read this article again without your tribal prejudices, you might find the meaning and motive of the writer. Posted by wharfsnake| 07.05.2007 14:25