ELECTION 2011: A “POLITICALLY INCORRECT” VIEWPOINT (4)

"He used the power of incumbency, including access to facilities provided and run by public funds; massive funds from patronage seekers, and “policy-bribes” to muscle his way through.  He simply threw out the rule book, because he had the power to do so. That is not character, and certainly not Christian."

As we have said, it is a sad irony that a widely acclaimed “free, fair and credible” general election has led to violence involving colossal loss of lives and properties, which has led to public confrontation, accusations and counter-accusations of culpability, and/or wrong-headedness, not just within the political class, but also within the rank of our religious leaders, left our nation to such level of dividedness that we have not experienced in a long time.

Many, who invested a lot of time and energy into forcing the hands of both the executive and the legislature into opening the national treasury and poured resources into the process of making the election more credible, might even be wondering, if it was worth it. Particularly so, now that it seems the harvest was a bit of shaking for the status quo, accompanied by massive death and destruction. But they need not worry or wonder, for as we stated last time, “the so-called post-election violence was not caused by how free or fair the elections were. They are the result of frustration arising from the fact that a northern Moslem candidate lost to a southern Christian, in circumstances that were seen as brazen use of state power.”

We have noted that, inconvenient as it is, we must engage with the fact that “there are obvious substantial linkages between the faith and region of origin of the winner/loser and those of the perpetrators/victims of the violence. The winner is Christian and southern and so are majority of the victims of the violence and vice versa.” The point was made that many who privately agree with this point of view are too politically correct to state it publicly. Of course, there are also those who would disagree. Such people will find corroboration from the fact, as has been widely publicized by  CPC chieftain, Nasir El-Rufai, that in Christian-dominated Southern Kaduna, most of the victims were moslems and mosques were also torched. It would very educative to find out when the riots started in that area, and whether or not, they were reprisals. Whatever the case, however, the preponderance of evidence, confirms the substantial linkage we posit here.

It is this linkage that explains some public utterances including that of Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, President of Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and co-chairman (with Alhaji Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar, Sultan of Sokoto and President-General, Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs, NSCIA) of the National Inter-Religious Council (NIREC). Among other things, he had located the cause of the violent uprising in the zoning controversy within ruling party, Peoples Democratic Party preceding the election. His words: “I believe we are experiencing violence in parts of the North because certain highly placed persons in this country magnified the PDP problem of zoning offices and gave the impression to the electorate and the generality of Northerners, especially the gullible illiterates that it was their turn to rule. Basically, what we are seeing today is the fact that they feel that it is their turn to rule…”

This obviously agrees with my thesis above that the credibility or otherwise of the elections has little to do with the violence. It was the perception that, what was due to the north had been taken to the south. And while the pre-election zoning controversy did play a major role, I am fully persuaded that a people, who habitually stay glued to BBC Hausa service cannot but remember how it all started. Their man who could have been in office for eight years died in office and, his place was taken by somebody from the "other side", supposedly for a season, but then used the power of that supposed short stay to seize power! No, such people require very little push to “fight for their right.”

That is why I am unable to agree with the CAN President that General Buhari was a major factor in the crisis. With all due respect, the respected man of God did not put the appropriate weight upon his own prognosis that the noise made by proponents of the zoning/rotational policy of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) that the north was yet to serve out its eight-year term had something to do with it. The people felt cheated at the PDP level, invested their hope in Buhari and, irrespective of the integrity or otherwise of the election process, felt they had lost all. This should explain why some of their own leaders, perceived to have sold out, were not left out of the mayhem.

In concluding last time, I quoted from a statement recently issued by former military president, Ibrahim Babangida, commenting on what he described as “a 360-degree U-turn on zoning.”  Permit me to quote a bit more because in my opinion, it speaks to the root of our national malaise. Wrote the General: “…those who aspire to lead the country at different levels of government must come out with certain qualities that would portray them as patriotic and nationalistic…If those who shouted hoax over the issue of zoning in the PDP yesterday, [saying as it were, that the Party’s Constitution could be jettisoned], are now made to be beneficiaries of zoning in the Party today, then we all are doomed as a nation. What manner of supposed leaders are we nurturing? What character of leaders are we building?”

The issue here is character, even if you might wonder about the preacher! It’s about not changing the rules in the middle of the game. Irrespective of arguments to the contrary,   it is true that there’s a consensus among the Nigerian political class that the way out of   marginalization of the minorities within the country was rotation of the presidency and equitable sharing of other offices among the geo-political zones. The PDP wrote it into its constitution and it was operating fine until Yar’Adua died and Jonathan, against both the letters and the spirit of that agreement, decided to run. He used the power of incumbency, including access to facilities provided and run by public funds; massive funds from patronage seekers, and “policy-bribes” to muscle his way through.  He simply threw out the rule book, because he had the power to do so. That is not character, and certainly not Christian.  Make no mistake about it: those who kill and maim and destroy properties, including houses of worship, must be made to pay the price; and they sure will, whether human governments do their duty or not.  But we must reduce to the barest minimum those incentives to violent behaviour by enthroning justice and fairplay in all that we do.  Jonathan said, correctly, during his campaign that his ambition was not worth the blood of any body. But I wonder, would those 10 youth corpers and the thousands of other Nigerians have died, if he had stuck to that zoning agreement and not run? It’s food for thought – for all of us.

ELECTION 2011: A “POLITICALLY INCORRECT” VIEWPOINT (3)

There are obvious substantial linkages between “the faith and region of origin of the winner/loser and those of the perpetrators/victims of the violence.” The winner is Christian and southern and so are majority of the victims of the violence and vice versa. I know that many who agree with this are too politically correct to mention it!

We have said that it is a sad, very sad, irony of our contemporary history that the general elections of April/May 2011 widely adjudged as “free, fair and credible” led to post-election violence resulting in fatalities including National youth Service members on election duties as part of their service to fatherland. Properties, including places of worship, predominantly churches were also torched and/or vandalized.

We have also pointed out that, reactions to that violence, are sending dangerous signs of division between the leaders of the two major faith groups in our nation, Christians and Moslems.

As we saw in the first two parts of this serial, Rev Ayo Oritsejafor, national president of Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) kind of fired the first shot with his call for the arrest and prosecution of  Muhammadu Buhari, who was one of the presidential candidates for allegedly being the instigator of the violence. Oritsejafor also alleged that there was an Islamic agenda to rule the country perpetually.

Predictably, candidate Buhari’s reacted swiftly, denying culpability and dismissing the cleric as a “villa priest” being used as a “sounding board” by those who want to move against their candidate. But the more significant response came from Alhaji Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar, Sultan of Sokoto and President-General, Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA),    He dismissed “the insinuation by Pastor Oritsejafor that the post-election violence was a plot hatched by Muslims as part of their ‘religious agenda’, which merely took ‘advantage of the political situation’” as both “preposterous and unfounded.”

In a temperate, but innuendo-laden statement, the sultan said: “religious leaders, were expected to preach tolerance and mutual understanding especially during times of crisis, and not to promote dissension and discord...” He declared: “It is of paramount importance to remind Pastor Oritsejafor that a genuine search for peace should never be regarded as a tactical engagement, to be pursued only when it suits our immediate interests. It is a life-long commitment which we must all take seriously…”

It was also stated, in closing last time, that the fact that the CAN president and his NSCIA counterpart are “co-chairmen of the National Inter-Religious Council (NIREC) and have to date spoken with one voice, this public disagreement is symptomatic of something deep…”  One might also add in this respect, that both men had publicly described themselves as “good friends.”

Two questions appear appropriate at this juncture. Why should a “free, fair and credible election” lead to violence? What linkages are there, if any between the faith and region of origin of the winner/loser and those of the perpetrators/victims of the violence? These are obviously difficult questions. They are difficult because they will lead us to inconvenient answers; answers which should lead us to do some fundamental reexamination of the so called Nigerian project. Yet, answer them we must.

Permit me therefore to attempt to answer these questions. First, I wish to state that the so-called post-election violence was not caused by how free or fair the elections were. They are the result of frustration arising from the fact that a northern Moslem candidate lost to southern Christian, in circumstances that were seen as brazen use of state power. I shall spend a bit of time on this because it is at the core of the problem. But, before that, let me also proffer an answer to the second question. The honest answer is indeed implied in the first answer. There are obvious substantial linkages between “the faith and region of origin of the winner/loser and those of the perpetrators/victims of the violence.” The winner is Christian and southern and so are majority of the victims of the violence and vice versa. I know that many who agree with this are too politically correct to mention it! Yet it is in looking this uncomfortable fact in the face that we can engage it meaningfully.

This is where Pastor Oritsejafor’s statement comes in. First, let me state that, as a Christian, I empathise with my president. I understand his frustrations concerning the too frequent loss of Christian lives and properties in several parts of northern Nigeria over the years. I have heard him ask rhetorically, sometimes in tears, if these issues are political, why are churches burnt and Christians killed?  And he was spot on when he identified as one of the reasons for the violence, the noise that had been made by proponents of the zoning/rotational policy of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) that the north was yet to serve out its eight-year term. In the event, the people felt cheated, irrespective of the integrity or otherwise of the election. There can’t be a better understanding of the problem.

With all due respect, however, I do not agree with the dismissal of this fundamental issue with a wave of the hand. It must be stated upfront that there can be no defence for crime, of any kind; and certainly none for murder or arson, under any guise. I am therefore absolutely supportive of every legal effort to bring the culprits to justice. However, I think we need to look deeper into this remote cause, so that we can march forward with a reasonable level of certainty that such incidences can be avoided in the future.

A recent statement by former military President, Ibrahim Babangida on the on-going debate about geo-political sharing of office, post-election is very instructive here. It reads in part: “

 

“Following the heated debate that has enveloped the nation in the last one month on which zone to produce what position, and vice-versa, I am wondering about some Nigerians’ ingenuous capacity to make a 360-degree U-turn on zoning…when the Northern Political Leaders’ Forum (NPLF) raised concerns over the zoning formula of the PDP and the deliberate disobedience of the party’s constitutional provision, some Nigerians called the NPLF all manner of names. At the time, some argued that zoning should be discarded and merit should be the criterion, and the voice of those who stressed the importance of zoning was lost in the maddening crowd. After the elections, the music has suddenly changed and the chorus is now zoning, zoning, zoning, and zoning…” (CONTINUES NEXT WEEK).

WHAT IF CAMPING IS RIGHT?

"Now to the question I know you are itching to ask me: do you believe Harold camping? My answer is “NO”. It’s “no” because I am of the firm belief that while God has said we are capable of knowing the signs, the date of the end-times remain His to determine. Now to my own question to you: SUPPOSE, JUST SUPPOSE CAMPING IS RIGHT; ARE YOU READY FOR THE RAPTURE? That’s a question for us all to ponder - now!"

If Harold Camping is correct, this would be the last edition of Kingdom Perspective you’ll ever read. According to the controversial Bible scholar, the Rapture will happen on Saturday May 21, 2011 and the world, as we know it, will end five months later on October 21!


Harold Camping, 89, is host of a daily nationwide "live" television and radio "phone in" talk program, called the "Open Forum." He has been on the air since 1961, and is heard on about 150 radio stations, in parts of the United States and globally on short wave radio, a network of AM/FM stations and on the internet.

He is President and co-founder of Family Radio, which he founded with two others in 1958, as the non-profit ministry of Family Stations, Inc., and which he serves as a full-time volunteer. The author of about 30 books and booklets most of which are available free from Family Radio, his fame or notoriety, depending on your viewpoint, derives mainly from his end-time predictions. He had earlier predicted that the world was to end on September 6, 1994, but of course, you already know how accurate that was!

I have tried to read two of his books, “Time Has an End” and “We Are Almost There.” I went quite far with the latter, which is a much slimmer volume, but didn’t quite succeed with the former. They both read more like a course in numerology, than biblical expositions. And from many of the comments I have read about the man and his doom-saying predilections, there are so many like me out there. But with less than a week to Camping’s Rapture Day, I decided to try to make some sense out of his very elaborate thesis, for whatever it is worth.

Camping’s big idea is that there are what he describes as spiritual numbers, which reveal hidden truths, or mysteries. Each of these numbers, he says, represents certain phenomenon or historical events in the Bible which, put together, somehow reveal timelines that can help decipher the ultimate deadline.

Among Camping’s numbers are:

3 - God’s purpose

5 - The atonement, which emphasizes both judgment and salvation

7 - The perfect fulfilment of God’s purpose

10 - The completeness of whatever is in view

11 - The first coming of Christ, 11,000 years after creation

12 - The fullness of whatever is in view

13 - The end of the world, the details of which began exactly 13,000 years after creation

17 - Heaven

Space will not allow detail explanation of the interplays of numbers and figures as he applied them, but the following may probably allow us in glimpse into his complex calculations and conclusions.

Camping says there are exactly 722,500 Days between the Atonement, the date of the Lord Jesus’ crucifixion and the Rapture. His words: “God gives us another piece of interesting and significant time information that further demonstrates the accuracy of May 21, 2011, as the date of the rapture. On April 1, 33 A.D., the Lord Jesus was crucified for the sins of those He came to save. Exactly 722,500 days (inclusively) later, the rapture (May 21, 2011) will occur. This number breaks down into the very significant numbers: (5 x 10 x 17) x (5 x 10 x 17) = 722,500.

Explaining how he arrived at this, he refers us to his numbers dictionary (above): “We have learned the spiritual meaning of these numbers. The work of the atonement (5) is completed (10) when all of the elect are safely in heaven (17). This wonderful fact is doubled by a repetition of the three numbers, 10 x 5 x 17. This emphasis is, according to Genesis 41:32, “because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.”

Can we see how God has tied the time of the rapture on May 21, 2011, to the time when heaven was made possible (the atonement), because when Christ was crucified, He made the full payment for the sins of those who are to be caught up to heaven to live eternally with Jesus?

Camping’s other mathematical route to May 21 2011 goes like this in his own words: “According to the Biblical ceremonial calendar, May 21, 2011, is the 17th day of the second month. Precisely 7,000 years earlier, on the 17th day of the seventh month, according to the calendar used by Noah, God shut the door of the ark…

“The calendar of Noah’s day was slightly different from the later Biblical calendar in that it had 30 days in a month, whereas the later Biblical calendar had 29 ½ days in a month, as it followed the moon phases. But God, in a remarkable way, tied the time of the shutting of the door of the ark, on the 17th day of the second month, to the shutting of the door on May 21, 2011, which, according to the Biblical ceremonial calendar is the 17th day of the second month. This forever separated the true believers in the ark from all the unsaved who perished outside of the ark. This foreshadowed the fact that on the date in which all the true believers are to be raptured, there never again would be any possibility of salvation for those left behind.

“Thus, we can know that it is as if there are exactly 7,000 years, to the very day, from the shutting of the door on any further possibility of salvation, both during the worldwide destruction of Noah’s day and the worldwide destruction of our day. Can this be coincidental?”

Now to the question I know you are itching to ask me: do you believe Harold camping? My answer is “NO”. It’s “no” because I am of the firm belief that while God has said we are capable of knowing the signs, the date of the end-times remain His to determine. Now to my own question to you: WHAT IF CAMPING IS RIGHT; ARE YOU READY FOR THE RAPTURE? That’s a question for us all to ponder - now!

ELECTION 2011: A “POLITICALLY INCORRECT” VIEWPOINT (2)

"When it is remembered that the Sultan and CAN president are co-chairmen of the National Inter-Religious Council (NIREC) and have to date spoken with one voice, this public disagreement is symptomatic of something deep" 

The 2011 general election, which, finally came to a close on Friday May 7, with the so-called supplementary governorship election in Imo state has left a sizeable section of us euphoric. The elections were adjudged as free, fair and credible, in spite of several allegations of ballot snatching and illegal thumb-printing of ballots and other fraudulent activities. This is understandable because of abyss to which we fell in the conduct of elections in 2007, and the general transparency with which the new leadership of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) conducted their affairs.

Another reason for the general euphoria is the apparent results, particularly, of the parliamentary and the presidential elections.  The reduction in the dominance of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party at both houses of the National Assembly tended to lend credibility to the process and reflect our national plurality like never before since  the 1980s. And then the election of a minority from the oil-rich Niger-Delta through votes garnered from both the southern and parts of northern Nigeria, is also widely seen as indicative of an emerging national consensus.  

These all are truly concrete reasons for hope and rejoicing, or are they? I ask because, as I pointed out last time, it is already part of the sad irony of our contemporary history that a “free, fair and credible,” was followed by riots in a number of states in the North, leading to death in the hundreds, including those many young Nigerian patriots on national service away from their states of origin. The rhetoric that has accompanied our mourning of these heroes has, unfortunately laid wide open the tenuous nature of our claim to nationhood.

This was why I warned that “the of Unfolding events…must jar us from any smug assumption that all is well; that once we succeed in shouting down those we disagree with; or use state power, whether brazenly or subtly, to have our way, it’s all good.”

I referred specifically to the statement by Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor of the Christian Association of Nigeria, and the reactions to it by both the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and the Sultan of Sokoto over what is now known and called post-presidential election violence.

The CAN President had asked that the presidential candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), Alhaji Muhammadu Buhari be arrested and prosecuted for complicity in the riots. He had also pointed out that the attack, during those riots, of Christians and Christian facilities betray a religious agenda, which needs to be firmly dealt with.

Yinka Odumakin, who spoke on behalf of CPC candidate Buhari, pointed out that his principal had already “distanced himself and the CPC from the mayhem severally and strongly condemned the burning of worship places and alleged killings of National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members,” and that “nobody has brought out any contrary facts”, beyond what he described as, “false innuendos and character assassination which Oritsejafor has also been recruited into…” He went personal: “While we concede to the Villa Priest, who is widely believed to be a beneficiary of the rot that presently defines governance in Nigeria, the right to defend the tainted victory of the PDP, we frown at the use of the CAN mask to prosecute his Aso Rock brief…Our collective memory is not so short as not to know that unlike other revered men of God who have been on that exalted seat and spoke truth to power in the order of Samuel who put God’s command above the fat of oxen, we don’t have a quote of Oritsejafor on the unbridled corruption and open banditry that has been the defining rule of governance in the country….” 

The Sultan of Sokoto and President-General, Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA), Alhaji Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar, who reacted through Secretary, Sultanate Council, Sokoto, Alhaji Bello Usman Dange, was more temperate.  He dismissed “the insinuation by Pastor Oritsejafor that the post-election violence was a plot hatched by Muslims as part of their ‘religious agenda’, which merely took ‘advantage of the political situation’” as both preposterous and unfounded.”

He said religious leaders, were expected to preach tolerance and mutual understanding especially during times of crisis, and not to promote dissension and discord, calling on stakeholders, including leaders of thought from all parts of the country and representatives of the media to “exercise utmost caution and restraint in both their utterances and actions”. He stated that “we must not do anything that is capable of aggravating the situation. We must strive, at all times, to re-enforce the sanctity and inviolability of human life and work together to engender greater peace and understanding among our people”.

The statement continued: “The whole crisis was unfortunate. It was equally a great tragedy that the crisis took the turn it did, leading to the burning of both mosques and churches and to the unfortunate loss of life on both sides of the religious divide…But how can a Muslim Religious Agenda make human life easily expendable, including that of its sons and daughters? What have we got to gain as leaders by ordering the destruction of life and property of our co-religionists and disrupting the peace and mutual co-existence which we have all worked so hard to achieve?

“It is of paramount importance to remind Pastor Oritsejafor that a genuine search for peace should never be regarded as a tactical engagement, to be pursued only when it suits our immediate interests. It is a life-long commitment which we must all take seriously.

“We must extend our condolences to all those who have lost their loved ones in this mayhem and to commiserate with each and everyone who has been affected by the crisis. Gratuitous violence has never served any useful societal purpose. We can only exercise it at the detriment of ourselves and our society.”

When it is remembered that the Sultan and CAN president are co-chairmen of the National Inter-Religious Council (NIREC) and have to date spoken with one voice, this public disagreement is symptomatic of something deep., the implications of which we will try to examine next.

ELECTION 2011: A “POLITICALLY INCORRECT” VIEWPOINT (1)

"Unfolding events however must jar us from any smug assumption that all is well; that once we succeed in shouting down those we disagree with; or use state power, whether brazenly or subtly, to have our way, it’s all good."

In “Good Luck, Dr Jonathan, You’ll Need It", published last week, I made the point that our nation was currently deeply divided. I placed the responsibility for the division upon the shoulders of the so-called political class, which made an agreement on power rotation, otherwise known as zoning, and could not keep it. Of course, in my book, the most important single culprit, and I have said it times without number, is the president and president-elect himself.

I was under no illusions that it would be a popular reading of the situation, which was why I described it as a ‘politically incorrect” position that would be seen as retrogressive. I was right. I got mails and sms where I was called all kinds of names, many of which will make my mother uncomfortable in the great beyond. I thank everyone who even bothered to react at all! It’s the stuff that democracy is made of.

Unfolding events however must jar us from any smug assumption that all is well; that once we succeed in shouting down those we disagree with; or use state power, whether brazenly or subtly, to have our way, it’s all good.

Without commenting directly on the rights or wrongs of the individual’s (or group’s) position, at this stage, please read or reread the statements credited to Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor of the Christian association of Nigeria, and the reactions to it by both the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and even the Sultan of Sokoto over what is now known and called post-presidential election violence.

A Daily Independent newspaper report by Mrs Aramide Oikelome quoted the cleric as follows:

“I believe in one indivisible Nigeria, but I also believe that if Nigeria is ever going to remain one nation, which I believe it could, then certain persons must be sanctioned because of this continued violence we are experiencing in the Northern part of Nigeria…Let us not pretend by always saying the violence is taking place in some parts of the country. Muhammadu Buhari and others like him should not be allowed to roam the streets of this country because they are part of the confusion that has enveloped the nation today…government has already blamed Buhari for the post-election mayhem in the North, which has also claimed the lives of National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members…

 "I don’t know how the Federal Government should sanction sponsors of such mayhem that has left hundreds of innocent Nigerians dead, but I think the government should do something to keep this nation one indivisible entity for the benefit of every citizen…I believe we are experiencing violence in parts of the North because certain highly placed persons in this country magnified the PDP problem of zoning offices and gave the impression to the electorate and the generality of Northerners, especially the gullible illiterates, that it was their turn to rule…Basically, what we are seeing today is the fact that they feel that it is their turn to rule. Those people who are perpetrating the mayhem do not know who won election and in what place…

"We will never arrive at a solid, united, indivisible, and powerful Nigeria unless we are prepared to tell the truth to each other and face the truth. There are those who already have a religious agenda and they have been promoting it and working very hard to implement it…If the problem is purely political, why are churches being burnt? Why are Southern NYSC members being targeted? Why are pastors being killed? Why are Christians generally being hunted in different parts of the North to be killed?...It is because the religious agenda is real and there is a religious undertone to all the crises in the North…These are facts that the security agencies should dispassionately look at and treat with dispatch with a view to arresting the perpetrators and prosecuting same for the sake of peace of the nation…These people must not be allowed to go on like this. The government must wield the big stick at this time and do whatever it has to do to put to a permanent stop to all this madness and bring peace to this country…We cannot continue to allow this thing to go on like this. Enough is enough.”

The CPC’s reaction  signed by Buhari’s spokesman, Yinka Odumakin, came fast and strong. It reads in part: “ It is on record that (Buhari) has distanced himself and the CPC from the mayhem severally, and strongly condemned the burning of worship places and alleged killings of National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members. To date, nobody has brought out any contrary facts beyond false innuendos and character assassination which Oritsejafor has also been recruited into…while we concede to the Villa Priest, who is widely believed to be a beneficiary of the rot that presently defines governance in Nigeria, the right to defend the tainted victory of the PDP, we frown at the use of the CAN mask to prosecute his Aso Rock brief…Our collective memory is not so short as not to know that unlike other revered men of God who have been on that exalted seat and spoke truth to power in the order of Samuel who put God’s command above the fat of oxen, we don’t have a quote of Oritsejafor on the unbridled corruption and open banditry that has been the defining rule of governance in the country…If Oritsejafor happens to be a sounding board for President Goodluck Jonathan’s crackdown, we strongly suspect he is, we can only say: good luck.”  

Space does not allow me quote from the statement by the Sultan of Sokoto; so I guess I’ll just begin from that next time. But one thing is clear, the division is deepening and it will take thinking out the box to handle what’s coming. Let’s not get so carried away by the euphoria of the moment and go to sleep. God bless and keep Nigeria.CONTINUES