WHO DIDN'T MOVE MY CHEESE?

In writing this piece,I would first of foremost give credit to the flamer of the 'who moved my cheese.Trying to find an interesting factor to suit the eyes of writers and readers who politically are totally oriented,I have concurred to one of the pronouncement of one of Ghana's past Authorotarian Presidents,General Ignatuis Kutu Acheampong,that:Whatever you do do,wherever you go,there will come a day that someone will look you up,either to thank you or to kill you",with the Muslim leader also,Malcom X,he has with it that:we are non-violent with those who are non-violent with us.In our normal political discourse,politicians do practice the old but sham principle that the winner takes all.If you are not for me you are against me for you were not in favour of my success.You did not help to push what could have helped to moved me into success.Now that the ball is in my court I dfare not say or ask that who did not move my cheese.This question indeed calls for an argument in the faces of people with the same mental vaculty.I shall return.

When Cobblers bake the bread...

In writing this piece I have concurred to a dictum of one of Ghana's past and gone authoritative presidents,that,"Whatever you do,wherever you go,there will be oneday that someone will look you up either to kill you or to thank you."This was a real and crucial challenge which sort to undermine the great respect of the security apparatus of the Americans.On the fateful day of christmas Umaru Faruk,a devout to the religion of Muslim,a citizen of Nigeria tried to bomb a detroit plan carrying holiday makers but with the intervention of the almighty Lord it failed.
Umaru as popularly known in his hometown was a devoted and committed Islam who never took the teachings of his religion for granted yet was subverged to perform task with was a great threat to human instinct.
Is Nigeria to be blame?This question need to be analysed before answered lest a thought provoking and an unending heated debate may arise.Instead Bakers baking the bread,should it be blame when cobblers bake it?I certainly think that would not be in the rightful direction should that happen.This is a gentleman who was trained by Yemenis,raised and alarmed by the nature of their own enemies,and yet we do blame the Nigerians for not being in the position to avoid such an incident.Umaru's act was one in the many kind which has happened in the very few and past years underpined by the acts of Al-Qaedas in all the very breaths of our continent spearheaded by Osama bn Laden.There are so many rebel groups some in the form of guerrillas from the Abu Talibs in Philippines,FD-ALLA. Al-Shabba insyrgents and the rest.For now as to whether the baker is to blame when the cobbler bakes the bread will be left for time to tell.It is up to the world to decide cos I strongly oppose to the view that the baker is to blame.Here the situation whereby Nigeria is the baker and Yemen is the Cobbler,whether Umaru had his basic education iin Nigeria or where that is not the key issue.Why should Nigeria be one of the targetted Terrorists listed on the screens of the Americans.It is brutally unfair if this is to go on.Bluntly speaking I am not supporting the act of Umaru that it was in the rightful direction,indeed this is one of the most callous and cowardice acts ever happened subverging trying to subverge the innocent people of one's enemy,Who is t he enemy here,A merica is the enemy here.Again,the question as to whether Umaru's Nigeria is to blame still goes out to the world and the very people with whom I am in the same mental vaculty with mostly found on Social networking sites.

Politics and Economics,can they really merge to attain Economic growth and development?

Are Guerrilla wars really necesary?

"We are being discriminated,we are facing racialism,we are not trated fairly,our rights are being trampled upon,we want to be autonomous,"these are some of the few criesof the people engaged i guerrilla wars.In writing this piece I have concurred to one of the dictums of J.F.Kennedy that"the highest duty of the writer is to remain true to himself and let the chips fall where they may."Guerrilla wars are normally organised people few indeed in their numbers with little or no support from the majority of the populace.It is poltically-oriented,a very militants or paramilitary occupying the enemy's territorial borders.Due to their number they find it very difficult to conquer the state military instead sought to different ways which are in the best form of harrasment.Hiding in caves,ambushing,disconnecting power and telephone lines of their enemies from their hiding places in the bushes and what have you.They do receive support from different militants,others in the form of food,shelter,clothing and so on.However,the argument here is whether the guerrilla wars are really necessary and the best alternative method for the aggressive and violent people to have their voices heard,and also are the past and current government in support of this act?
Guerrilla wars started time immemorial,in the centuries,as far back as in the 17 through to the 19th century.It was seen in the Vietnam war(Indochina war),Persian War,Spanish war,the great war,second world war,and the rest.It has being backed by some leaders like the first president of the republic of Ghana andI quote"African guerrilla are necessary if socialist aims are to be achieved.",Malcom X also said that"we are non-violent with those who are non-violent with us".In this our politically-oriented world where politicians control the natural resources,ever little thing they do sort to subvert the lives of their opposers since they all do practice the act,winner takes all.In rendering the rules of the winner takes all,the policies enacted are negatively skewed causing very much people to be marginalised.They enact policies which do not attain the highest good for the highest number of people.The question still rolls.To add an addendum or not the question goes to folks with whom I have the same mental vaculty with to help debate this motion.