Brief Verifiable Facts about Colonialism and Nigeria/Black Africa.

Brief Verifiable Facts about Colonialism and Nigeria/Black Africa. First, it is necessary not to mix up colonialism with Slavery. We must strive to pursue the truth about our past, despite the numerous distortions and false historical narratives being promoted by the mainstream media. Slavery and colonialism are two separate events. The colonialists first banned slavery, went out of their way to enforce the ban, began a period of legitimate trade with African kingdoms and traders and later decided out of greed of course, to conquere us because we were largely spectacularly backward, weak and incapable of defending ourselves and to make it much easier, savagely fighting ourselves. If Europeans had not come to colonise us when they did, the various Islamic Jihads raging across Black Africa would have taken all of us without much resistance as the Arabs/Islamic empires and states were the most civilised and militarily organised groups. When the British formerly conquered Lagos in 1861, they met and quelled not only the very ferocious Yoruba civil war which was selling people to slavery with reckless abandon, but also quelled the equally ferocious Sokoto Jihad of Uthman Dan Fodio which had already exploited the civil war in Yoruba land and was set to reach deeper into today’s Southern Nigeria. Similar Islamic Jihads were also spreading across West Africa. The Christian Missionaries were operating independently from the colonialists. If the fallacies such as “the White man forcing us to become Christians” or “ the White man holding a gun with one had and a bible with the other” had any iota of truth, North Africa would have been all or mainly catholic and Nigeria would not have had much Islam or more Catholic than Anglican as it is today. Slavery and other barbaric practices such as killing of twins were in full operation in Black Africa (example present day, Eastern Nigeria where I come from) when the Colonialists and the missionaries came to Black Africa. I must state here that I have recently learnt about something very disturbing about my own ancestors in relation to slavery. I learnt from an uncle that when my great- great grandfather died, his slaves had their legs broken and buried alive with him. I wish it did not happen but sadly, it appears it did happen as people know every detail of it and have actually done some ceremonies to recognise that something very bad happened. And who did my people enslave? Mainly fellow Igbos and others. There was even a Slave market not far away, according to my uncle and this was happening just about 120 years ago. Britain abolished slavery over 200 years ago Christian Missionaries campaigned to ban slavery and the killing of twins in Nigeria. When the Europeans arrived, most people in Igbo land, Eastern Nigeria were half naked and we lived largely in chiefdoms and had not evolved to the level of kingdoms or to the level of developing any solid civilisation. Hence, we did not even know ourselves and had no way of defending ourselves against any external aggression. It may be plausible to argue that we would have evolved to great Nations if the Europeans had not arrived, but we must also note that if the Europeans had not arrived, our Islamic brothers would have taken us quite easily. Thus, we should really be arguing of whether we would have been better off under Islamic theocracy or not. Yes, our societies at the arrival of colonialism had not evolved to a reasonable level and as such too inferior and weak to withstand external aggressions, but our people were not totally primitive. They were in fact, smarter than us today despite the fact that millions of us are University professors and PhD holders. My discoveries from visiting over 25 European countries and some national museums show that all racial groups share the same human instincts and that precolonial Black African people where evolving just like the most successful European societies evolved, before the advent of colonialism. I first thought about this in Stockholm in December 2003 when I first saw in a European museum, historical artefacts that anyone in precolonial Eastern Nigeria would have easily identified with. And I later saw a UK TV History documentary that showed Blacksmiths doing exactly what my people developed on their own (and still do today) to produce steel. Every human society evolved from a small group to hamlets or villages or chiefdoms to become Nations and Countries. Black African societies where undergoing that natural process before the events of colonialism. I must also say that slavery, both the trans-Atlantic slave trade and the internal slave system was unfortunately, part of that process. For example, an Igbo sub-group Izhi (or Izzi) people in quest for their societal survival were aggressively conquering and grabbing lands from others. Only the arrival of British rule stopped my people from totally wiping out their non-Igbo neighbours. European Colonialism largely empowered ex slaves and other disadvantaged individuals and groups in places like Eastern Nigeria and Igboland in particular. European colonialism fast-forwarded our evolution and development and built successful organised societies and economies out of nothing. The Europeans particularly the British were genuine enough to build solid infrastructures and cities and in organising us just like their own societies. For example, Britain recognised the different groups that make up Nigeria and organised Nigeria in a structure that replicated the United Kingdom. It is grossly dishonest to claim that Britain set us up to fail. Further, contrary to the hogwash we have been long fed that Europeans gave people in the colonies inferior education, Britain and the missionaries actually offered Black people in their African colonies far better opportunities than ordinary White British people had in Britain. For example, many Black Africans attended the best Universities in Britain including Oxford and Cambridge even when ordinary White British people were systematically denied access to higher Education. Britain and the Missionaries also went to a great extent to take quality basic education to many places where there are no longer schools or anything worth calling a school today in Nigeria. For example, most people in Iseke (Ishieke), particularly, the part in Benue State and much of Izhi land stopped having access to quality basic education in the 1960s. Colonisation happened to us because we were weaker and if you like, inferior. What is disgusting and most disgraceful is the failure of people of Black African ancestry to manifest reasonable awareness of the critical need for us to build successful Black societies. It is ignorance and /or Laziness to cry racism over mere words or gestures in the White man’s land when Black Africans are taking ridiculous risks just to come to Europe. Those of us privileged to be adopted into the White man’s society have a huge moral and natural duty to talk more about building successful Black societies out of Black Africa and the Caribbean. John Alexander Nwenu Iteshi London. 21 December 2018

How do you define inferiority in your language?

How do you define inferiority in your language? Black Africa, my people, has fertile lands but we cannot feed ourselves. We also cannot process any cash crop or Natural resources we have and we have plentiful. We do not do well enough in any aspect of societal survival. We cannot construct good modern roads or edifices and have almost zero technological prowess. We depend on the White man to provide us with food, clean water, basic healthcare and even need Oxfam and other White Messianic charities to teach us how and where to poo. Though, we have produced global heroes (e.g. Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama and others), we have not a single society of people of our kind doing reasonably well today or likely to be as successful as any Western society in the next 100 years, even if handed all the monies in the world to do so. Black African countries, arguably, have the highest number of people with PhD in leadership and policy-making positions in the world but for some mysterious reasons, appear unable to think out smart ways to catch up with the rest of the world. Black individuals are incredibly smart, but most of our smartest PhD holders would accuse me of doing something very wrong for this write-up. Most of us will take this post about us as a personal attack on themselves. John Iteshi London, 15 Feb. 2019.

Nigeria's Ides of March Have Come: Serious Crisis in the Offing!

Today's presidential elections in Nigeria is supposed to mark a turning point in Nigeria's history in that, it will be the first time in Nigeria's history that the opposition has a clear upper hand and would inevitably win, but from all indications, the voting could be truncated by INEC's incompetence or sabotaged by the desperate President afraid of his imminent defeat! The current INEC might be headed by a credible man, but it is probably the most incompetent electoral body on earth because of its choice of voting methods and failure to prepare. It is hard to imagine how a Hi - tech electronic voting can be relied upon in the most sensitive presidential elections in Nigeria's history without proper prior testing and voter education. It is equally disgraceful that the largest Black Country in the world is proving to be unable to work out a smart way of conducting its elections without relying on foreign ideas and technology. What really can a country that cannot work out a feasible, acceptable and cost effective elections achieve to justify its existence? Which successful country do we know of that spends the staggering amount of money Nigeria budgets for each elections since recent times? Nigeria has spent at least £1.2 Billion on INEC since 2010 under President Jonathan. This is clearly a very conservative estimate because the 2011 elections alone cost at least N122.9 billion according to Punch Newspapers of May 8, 2013. This amounts to over £400 Million by today's rates. Which serious country anywhere on this planet spends such a staggering amount of money in conducting elections? Which other society of sane people, that has no roads, no modern railways (except the fake ones built by the propagandists of a desperate President), no world class hospitals and no quality educational infrastructures would spent such amount in trying to copy a technology they ought to know would fail, in the name of conducting elections that are bound to be disputed? Arguably, the fact that the man most likely to win represents a real hope and chance for the black race to prove itself, justifies whatever expense, but it is very hard to see a peaceful handover to General Buhari, if at all the elections succeed or are not sabotaged. From the available information about the operation of the card readers, which is central to the voting exercise today, it is both unfeasible in terms of speed and the fact that the system is dependent on mobile phone signals which is clearly not workable in some parts of Nigeria. It is further worrying to note that a country with more than 50% illiteracy but can boast of the most educated central government in the world ( The President holds a PhD and is surrounded by individuals with the highest educational qualifications) did not consider the feasibility of electronic voting in relation to illiterates. In any case, even if the Hi - tech voting were to work, presidential sabotage would be hard to rule out simply because of the desperate manners of those surrounding the presidency. Whatever happens, crisis is inevitable because the current Presidency appears so desperate, it will do anything to stop Buhari taking over as president. And of course, if the presidency unleashes violence and intimidation, Nigeria will boil. Military rule or a sort of caretaker government appears most likely. John Iteshi London March 28 2015.

Bizarre Electoral Logic in Kenya!

Uhuru Kenyatta is clearly running away with it! The only likely obstacle to his achieving the desired 50%+1 of the total vote cast and avoiding a run off, appears to be the bizarre decision to add rejected and invalid votes to the total vote cast. This to me is an entirely hopeless idea because an invalid or rejected vote is definitely not a vote as it cannot be attributed to any candidate. The legal test could be "to whom was it attributed". If a vote cannot by any means be attributed to any candidate in the relevant contest, such cannot possibly be regarded as a vote. To treat an invalid or rejected vote as a member of the total votes cast is to distort the integrity of an election because such votes have absolutely no value and are in fact, not votes at all! I would love to see how any court of law could possibly find that votes that are invalid or rejected are part of the total votes cast when in fact, they were never votes cast, for if they were cast at all they would have not been in valid or rejected. I think the smart thing for the Kenyan electoral body to do is to physically examine all the invalid and rejected votes with the view of finding the intention of the voter. This seems to me to be the only honest and intelligent way!

My Human Response to the Raging Anti-Catholic Sentiments in the Western Media

The Vatican is arguably one of the most influential states, despite being the smallest in the world. It is not surprising that it generates curiosity and / or conspiracies. It should also not be surprising that protestant Churches persist in finding faults on the Catholic Church as they should be, as humans, rightly envious about the continued vitality of the Catholic Church. Facts: The Catholic Church has passed through the worst trials imaginable and still standing very strong. The catholic Church remains not only the strongest Christian denomination ( non- of the old conventional churches - e.g. Church of England/ Anglican, Methodist, Lutheran etc is currently left with any real vigour). For the avoidance of any doubt, the Catholic Church is stronger even in England today than the Church of England. I challenge anybody at all to compare the number of catholic churches in the whole world that have been turned to a drinking joint or non-religious event venue compared with the number in England and Wales alone! Catholic Church leaders are human and can be fallible, just as the direct Apostles of Our Lord Jesus Christ were. There is no sane person linking His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI, to any sex scandal. If at all, some Italian media organisation’s information that the Pope’s resignation was as a result of a certain internal findings in the Vatican that some key members of the Vatican were in some ways complicit in sexual abuses/immorality, is correct, it does not represent a weakness, but strength of moral principles on the part of His Holiness. Arguing otherwise would be like the oft-raised hopeless argument that Christmas should not be celebrated on the 25 December because it used to be the day for the worshipping of a certain ancient Roman god, which basically negates one Christ‘s own numerous victories, as it could only have been victory for Christ that a day used for worshipping an idol was replaced with worshipping and celebrating Him! Mainstream western media organisations are news makers and news merchants. They create news by any means permissible e.g. by over producing and over-marketing human brands like Princess Diana, David Beckham etc. Catholic Church has the most plausible claims to Divinity! Even if you wish to discard the fact that Pope Benedict XVI is a successor of Saint Peter, the Apostle of Christ - meaning that the Church today originated from the very Apostles of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the fact the Catholic Church remains strong today despite what it has gone through is a clear testimony of its Godliness! Only something of God could have passed through what the Catholic Church has passed through in history and still be standing very strong!! A Word for those crying over celibacy. There is no evidence that the non-celibate protestant pastors are less likely to commit acts of sexual immorality than catholic priests. In fact, it appears to be the direct opposite. And I stand strong to be corrected! Being an Apostle of Christ, is best through celibacy as exemplified by Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles who completely abandoned their families to work for God. Christ knowingly avoided mixing marital life with the works of his Apostles. Our All knowing Lord of Lords, chose not to do this, meaning He approved celibacy for His Apostles. John Iteshi February 23 2013

London Riots: Talking Posh and Evasiveness Cannot Save Britain from a More Serious Race Relations Crisis!

Yes, Britain is undoubtedly a Broken Society, but Evasiveness will not mend Britain!!
The misdiagnosis has already begun with people playing politics by linking the unrests with cut in public sector. If we can be honest for once, the so-called cuts which some out-of-touch Liberal politicians would blame for every crisis has not significantly reduced the amount of income each person on dole receives. This is not difficult to find out as you can simply go to direct.gov.uk and check the welfare benefit entitlement the most worst off British resident.

The real underlying problem in Britain is Race Inequality which the government chooses to tackle by denial and false propaganda!
The government and the media of Britain are either populated by deeply ignorant people or have been dubiously perpetuating false race equality practices. The crisis that has engulfed London and other cities of Britain mainly led by clearly misguided “deprived” ethnic minorities in my view is a natural consequence of false democracy and false race equality in Britain.

The truth is that we live in a country that specialises in preaching (to its citizenry and the world), the kind of equality and openness it clearly does not practice and probably has no genuine intention of ever practicing.

If educated and or competent Black men cannot obtain befitting jobs due to fake race equality, they naturally would be far less likely to make stable homes. Tell me how many gainfully employed parents would have their children roaming the streets by 10pm?

If young Black males are not given equal access and opportunities to engage in apprenticeship/ work experience when they should, how do we expect that they gain entry into the labour market and become responsible members of the society?

Sorry, Simon Hughes, My MP, I Voted No to AV!

I almost came close to pledging a Yes Vote the day you hurriedly passed me at my slave labour at Bermondsey Underground Station ( where I am confined to an unskilled job not because I am unskilled, but because of all the wrong reasons). Many misguided ordinary people including ethnic minority naturally assume the Liberal Democrats (Lib Dems) and the Labour Party are pro-ordinary people and pro-fairness hence; the masses often get easily swayed by any cry for fairness by the Lib Dems or Labour.
I must confess that I was until the last minute slightly swayed by the Yes campaign’s argument for a fairer voting system which they claim is found in the AV system, but the cloud of sentiment cleared off my sight once I sat down to compel my mind to a proper dissection of the arguments of both sides. I was probably swayed by the Yes campaign's argument that the current First Pass the Post system encourages job for life for MPs, but on a clearer look,
I find no force in this argument. Although, I share the sentiment against your likes that are life MPs and the culture of hereditary MPs which your political party equally represent, I do not see any correlation between the current system and jobs-for-life-MPs.
The fact that some people must be MPs not because they are popular or competent or even appreciably intelligent (e.g. the Nadine Dorrises of Westminster), but simply because they are connected or anointed by the party leadership or need to be handpicked to creat some outlook of equality of opportunities is a very British undemocratic practice which cannot be remedied by AV. The only remedy lies in practicing democracy to the letter by way of allowing the members of the party and the masses to choose party candidates. Of course, you should know that due to our kind of parliamentary democracy and the role of our manipulative media that people are always going to vote for the party rather than the individuals. Hence, the reason why MPs like yourself and your boss Nick Clegg have jobs for life must be because favoured candidates are imposed rather than elected by member of the political parties.

It is therefore clear that your argument for Yes is as poor,unintelligent and ppintless as a typical Lib Dem's idea or policy( for example, Nick Clegg’s foolish idea and argument for paternity leave period to be extended to the level of maternity leave).
I must assure you that I was also attracted to the Yes vote because I wanted to vote against the band of nasty privileged one-eyed men in government, but at the last minute I decided against making the most hopeless and incompetent nepotism produced politicians in Britain (Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband) appear great by voting yes.

My general stand is simply that all the major parties are in it together when it comes to cheating or deceiving the people and as well as celebrating inequality . Nepotism and all the public service vices are found in all major political parties with none having the moral ground to accuse another of any unfairness.

I am not fooled to accept that any political party that practices nepotism and inequality can ever stand tall enough to preach fairness! In any case, there is no issue of fairness here. It is simply a case of choosing between commonsense and idiocy and I have rightly chosen commonsense!!

My Comments and Attacks on Law Society gazette article - You Must Speak Proper to Work in the City

You must speak proper to work in the City
Wednesday 22 December 2010 by James Dean



Clever, white, working-class men and women are being overlooked for top jobs in City law firms because they don’t quite ‘fit in’, according to research released yesterday.
‘Focusing on ethnicity enables law firms to boast excellent or, at the very least, improved diversity outcomes, despite the fact that they have continued to recruit using precisely the same types of class privilege that have always been in operation,’ says the author of the report, Dr Louise Ashley, in her most compelling soundbite.
It seems to be a uniquely British conundrum that, while ethnicity (and age, sex, religion, disability, and sexual orientation) should have no bearing on a law graduate’s ability to get a job, class should. Law firms, meanwhile, say that they recruit as they do to preserve their brands.
But this is class discrimination, and it begs the question: how many working-class law graduates have lost out on jobs to less talented middle- and upper-class law graduates?
I’m not a great watcher of TV show The Apprentice, but I did watch the last three episodes of the latest series. The winner? Stella English, a white working-class woman who left school with no qualifications. She was hired over second-placed Chris Bates, whose first-class undergraduate degree from Nottingham University and received pronunciation were not enough to land him the top job with Lord Sugar.
For those of you unfamiliar with the show’s format: 16 contestants take part in a series of business challenges over 14 episodes, amid an orgy of bitching, moaning, backstabbing, and sucking up to their prospective employer. One or two are eliminated every week, until the final episode, when Sugar (also white, also from a working-class background) picks his apprentice and hands them a fat six-figure salary.
If the firms surveyed by Dr Ashley had Apprentice-style recruitment processes, then, had she chosen to do a law degree in another life, English might have fared very well. But they don’t, and the research suggests that, sat opposite two senior partners in a dimly lit meeting room at a first interview, she’d be shown the door – despite her talent.
Visit the Gazette's blogs page for more news blogs
Related articles
Firms reject candidates on the basis of their accents, research suggests
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Why Did You Remove My Comment?
Submitted by John Iteshi on Thu, 23/12/2010 - 19:41.
I cannot believe that my comment would be pulled out just because I tried to offer a different view!
I thought this should be the least place to gag free speech.
I did not insult anyone or use any vulgar language. I raised very serious issues about my experiences of judicial fraud without any disguise of my identity because I am certain that I am right.
I find no good reason for removing my comments.
I think it is really disgraceful that a lawyers’ website should be afraid of the truth or at least probing an allegation that impugns the integrity of our legal system.
This action to me is a really very third-world.
Please, send me a copy of that comment as soon as possible to enable me retain a copy of the comment which apparently was somehow inappropriate.
Report abuse
reply
What Happened to Our Free and Fair Britain?
Submitted by John Iteshi on Fri, 24/12/2010 - 11:19.
I wrote a comment on this article yesterday to indicate that this so-called research may be part of some dubious schemes by some influential people to create a the public impression that Race discrimination problems have been overtaken by discrimination on the basis of social class or even discrimination on the ground of sex.
I provided an example of how Employment Tribunals and perhaps government officials or under the instructions of the government are consciously frustrating race discrimination claims. I provided a brief example of how Employment Judge Juliana Wade dubiously listed a Pre-hearing Review (PHR) in a plainly inappropriate case. I further explained how Employment Judge Snelson shamelessly swept aside both the facts and higher judicial authorities which were strongly against striking out my claim.
To buttress my point I highlighted the fact that in one of my complaint in that case, the Respondent- Venn Group ( one of the Recruitment Agencies that Public Authorities and government departments use to circumvent race discrimination laws) put forward a White candidate who had only “A” Level with neither legal qualification nor any legal experience whatsoever to its client which I think was Brent Council over a qualified lawyer with various legal experience for a job described as “Legal Researcher”.
I expected people to wonder how and why any honest adult could have held that a White person with “A” level and without any legal qualification or experience was in anyway more suitable for a Legal Researcher post that a qualified lawyer.
I expected that people should be enraged by my story as something really serious that should not be swept aside.
I challenged anyone including Employment Judges Wade and Snelson to challenge my assertions in this public forum.
I expected my comment to elicit curiosity and some activism towards cleansing our world class legal system of corruption, but what I got was a very third-world reaction. My comment was removed after few hours. However within the period it was on a response from a faceless person called me a loser to which I responded by accusing her/him of cowardice. I do not know why my comment was removed.
I am still waiting for answers.
Report abuse
reply
Wrong example, but good point
Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 24/12/2010 - 16:21.
John, I understand the point you are making, the only issue is that the example Is you use is a bit weak. Maybe Brent thought that the lawyer was over qualified for that role, and not really interested in it. You can't really blame them for wondering whether it was just a stop gap role for the lawyer, and whether if they gave the job to the A level graduate, the candidate might work up the ranks and then transition to ILEX. Government legal departments have great opportunties for people who wish to qualify that way.
I agree that the article does seem to suggest that somehow discrimination based on class has taken over, and of course that is just wrong. It's not news that some lawyers in the majic circle are operating a closed shop, but if White working class candidates are having a hard time, imagine how tough it must be for black working class candidates! Notwithstanding that fact, it's important that people work together towards removing discrimation/racism in all it's forms, and not bickering amongst it each other, because if we do it will enable those people who wish to exclude people from law to divide, conquer and rule!
Report abuse
reply
@Anonymous - Thanks, but Your Reason is a bit Weak
Submitted by John Iteshi on Fri, 24/12/2010 - 18:40.
The reason you gave is worryingly weak for a person that seems to believe in equal opportunities.
Suggesting that an employer is entitled to choose whom to offer the job especially in the public sector is plainly anti-equality of opportunities.
Suggesting that an example of a recruitment agency that forwarded the CV of a White male with A level and no known legal experience whatsoever for a post designated as Legal Researcher is a weak example is to me quite unreasonable.
I believe the example which is just a tip of the iceberg should enrage even lay people let alone those who are experienced in Employment Law litigation.
My advice is that you read the following cases: Anyanwu and Another v. South Bank Student Union and Another and Commission for Racial Equality [2001] UKHL 14; [2001] 2 All ER 353 and Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust [2007] EWCA Civ 330 and explain to me how possible that my case should have been struck out.
I wish to also add that what I believe is the problem is not Racism but Race Discrimination. People often moan about racism which cannot be eradicated by any legislation and should not even be worried about (because it is a private belief) rather the real issue which is race discrimination. Perhaps, this point would be clearer if we appreciate the fact that a racist may not necessarily discriminate on the grounds of race just as an anti-racism champion may still discriminate on the grounds of race especially in employment.
Report abuse
reply
merry crimbo one and all!
Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 25/12/2010 - 20:53.
merry crimbo one and all!
Report abuse
reply
You must speak proper to work in the City
Submitted by Peter Ryder on Thu, 30/12/2010 - 15:17.
Back to the subject of the article, is there any evidence that class is the root of the problem. No one (as far as I am aware) has suggested that we are class ridden because we insist on wearing smart clothes in our offices so why are we class ridden when we insist on people using the language properly
I have certainly spoken to lawyers working in the city who have strong regional accents but I accept that I have never spoken to one who's accent results in the incorrect use of English, not surprising in a profession the very purpose of which is the understanding and interpretation of that language. Inherent in many accents is an idiosyncratic use of English but is there any evidence that the correct use of English is the preserve of the middle and upper classes? I was born in Longsight, Manchester and went to state schools in Stockport, accumulating a colourful local accent on the way. Even after 29 years in Cornwall I remain recognisably northern in my voice and proud of it. I have never encountered any prejudice as a result of my accent.
I have been a solicitor since 1973 and I have employed a lot of people, lawyers and others. One of the qualities I looked for in an employee was the ability to speak English correctly. Accent is of no importance but grammar is. Clients come to us because they do not have our supposed understanding of the law, all of which is written. We are in the business of winning the confidence of those clients. Secretaries who spell 'rough' as 'ruff' or 'would have' as 'would of' send out a signal of sloppiness and incompetence which damages the reputation of the letter writer and undermines the confidence of the client. It is common sense, not class conciousness which dictates the appointment of the secretary who does not make those mistakes.
Lawyers who say 'you was the victim here' or who litter their spoken language with 'like' or 'innit' or some such may similarly damage their own image and undermine the confidence of the client. Thus a firm is entitled to and indeed should where possible select the correctly spoken candidate.
Report abuse
reply
Deleted posting
Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 06/01/2011 - 12:31.
Hopefully the original posting was deleted as it would appear to have sought not to comment on the article written above but on a personal case and vendetta, which is not appropriate in this particular circumstance.
However I was mildly curious as to how Mr Hitachi had managed to obtain confidential information about another candidate without breaching the law.
However I would not employ a researcher who made so many simple spelling and grammatical errors - sorry!
ps: who wrote "only a fool has hinmself for a client"?
Report abuse
reply
Are You Dreaming or Just Dubious?
Submitted by John Iteshi on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 11:27.
I must admit that I may not have had enough time to take a very detailed look at all the comments above, but I am certain that there is no comment here from anyone with the name “Hitachi” and certainly no grammatical error (against such a name or any similar sounding name) that bears any resemblance to what you copied - "only a fool has hinmself for a client".
It appears that you are the one who manufactured this grammatical error with the view to diverting the attention of readers from the issue. I am very familiar with your type in the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal. They would leave out the substance of your complain to dubiously pursue the weakest aspects. If you dare make a simple mistake, they would capitalise on that as an excuse to evade the substance of your complaints.
I am definitely not perfect in English and certainly make mistakes especially when I am commenting quickly in the middle of something else.
However, it is irresponsible of you to manufacture a grammatical error accusation all in your twisted bid to divert attention from a serious issue.
Report abuse
reply
Not the only one!
Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 19:24.
It is not only solicitors who are being overlooked -
Try to apply for a job on the BBC Radio. You have to write a 2 page dissertation of the 'Diverse community' in the radio's catchment area. And the job always always goes to the 'little girly' - very young, no experience, straight out of university and wants to 'go on the radio'.
Oh yes, and it helps if you are not white

God Bless Southern Sudan

Every right thinking enlightened Black African ( and those of Black African ancestry) in this world should support the Southern Sudanese quest for independence. It is a really pity that a great country like Sudan could not work out due to primitive racial divides, but it is a great thing to know that some Black Africans have bravely risen to the level of redefining themselves.

The ongoing referendum in South Sudan should inspire a more civilised approach to resolving crisis in Black Africa.
The United States of America must be congratulated for its leadership in resolving the Sudanese crisis. Presidents George W Bush and our Barack Obama deserve commendation.
God Bless Southern Sudanese for their bravery!

God Save the Black Race!!

Is This Vince Cable Really a Best of Britain?

I may not have been in Britain long enough to have known the antecedents Mr Vince Cable, but I am certain that his disgraceful comment to an undercover reporter that he has declared a war on Rupert Murdoch empire is as foolish and disgracefully incompetent as it is politically embarrassing. Since last night, I have been wondering how a man at the peak of wisdom age and yet so devoid of wisdom could have risen so highly in British political leadership. If indeed it is not some early signs of mental deterioration, one wonders what level of role merit really plays in ascending to political power positions in Britain. How do people get to the parliament of Great Britain, by merit or by birth or privilege or by connection?
It may sound crazy to most people, but I am not aware that any man or woman that speaks the level of wisdom Mr Cable spoke on Rupert Murdoch (a man who has committed no known crime) will hardly ever rise to be a Senior member of the Federal Executive Council of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Nigeria certainly is by all standards a backward and retarding country with open and unpretentious ethnic bigots in power positions, but we have never heard a Minister say ( even if he is actually doing it) something like, “I am going to use my power to frustrate the economy of Igbos”.

Mr Cable’s comment about resigning to bring down the coalition if pushed too far may be explained as a political tactic, but there can be no acceptable basis for his outburst on Rupert Murdoch. All that can be said on the basis that he is an adult of sound mind is that it was probably an overflow of long suppressed bigotry or just a calculated unintelligent outburst miscalculated as a popularity enhancing point. In the characteristically unintelligent Liberal Democrats worldview, he may have thought that people would like him more if he stops "that Murdoch business monster", but like his equally incompetent and desperate boss Nick Clegg (who foolishly thought that declaring he does not believe in God would make him the next Prime Minister, he got it very, very wrong.
In any case, it was most unwise for a person of his calibre to have made such comment to anyone not a cabinet colleague or closely associated and trusted person.
I am sure that even in Nigeria that it is very rare to find a minster that would make such a foolish comment to a person that was foreseeably a journalist or at least a kiss and tell even though in Nigeria what the media say does not really matter.

This Italy is Very Much Like Ali-Igbo!

This is my third visit to Gemona Del Friuli, the Northern Italian village of our in-laws and I can nolonger suppress my thoughts about how similar we are as a people yet so backward in comparison with the progress of our in-laws.

I see in Gemona civilised version of Ali-Izhi (Izhiland or Izzi Land)imagininging how my homeland could be only if we could pursue the goal of societal development beyond individual survival!

Who Brought This Woman Here?

I am watching Question Time now and have seen something that is really worth noting here. A female MP panellist called Nadine Dorries is the worst I have so far seen in Britain.
Unless, I have caught her on her worst day, I find it shocking that a woman so hollow, so shallow in reasoning and so representative of mediocrity is representing a community of highly intelligent people in England of all places.
This Woman’s contribution in the debate on the issue of University Tuition fees was most cringe-worthy and absolutely disgraceful!
She simply could not answer questions asked and went on rambling like an incompetent woman that got her position through an unholy means. She was transfixed with trying to invent a new defence for tuition fees that she simply scored zero in listening test.
I will be surprised if the mainstream media does not pick up MP Dorries’ shambolic performance tonight on the Question Time.

Perhaps, the climax of MP Dorries’ demonstration of mediocrity was when she claimed that most (or did she say all) people in her constituency are complaining about their taxes being used to subsidise university tuition fees when actually they have never benefited from University education. She was basically arguing that one reason for the hike was because those who have not ( and may never) benefit from University education are paying taxes to sustain universities. She foolishly could not notice the conspicuous mass cringing around her, from the floor and of course from across the country and continued to hammer that disgraceful point.
It would be a big shame if no media picks up this woman’s show of shame and ultimate embarrassment of the Conservative Party.
Lest I be accused of sexism, Ms Dorries was not the only personification of British mediocrity on the panel. Mr Danny Alexander was not much better. He was another shameful show of nastiness. John Sargent was spot on when he described him as pathetic!
I must confess that my views about these two have not been shaped by their nasty stand on the tuition fees debate, but purely on their performance. If they had been able to debate to the standard expected of their level, I would not have found anything noteworthy. My views have absolutely nothing to do with their support for the hike in tuition fees.

China 'urges Britain to boycott Nobel ceremony' - Yahoo! News UK

China 'urges Britain to boycott Nobel ceremony' - Yahoo! News UK

My View

The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!
How would British leaders and all of us as a people like to see China attend a Bin Laden’s Islamic defenders award ceremony in Afghanistan or Iran?
I fear that the contemporary Western leaders’ incompetence and idiocy would lead the world to another major global conflict.
Continually trying to deride China even now that show has proven to be unstoppable; to me is a show of tactlessness and incompetence probably based on a primitive notion of White superiority!
Western media and governments have no moral or legal rights whatsoever to teach China how to govern its own people. If there is any basis for the West or the White World to dictate the principles and practices of human rights for the rest of the world, the question then is what exactly has the West done in practical terms to protect the human rights of the most oppressed?
Africa has at least since around 1885 Berlin conference been largely under firm control or strong influence of the Western powers. How far has the West protected the human rights of the most vulnerable Africans since the past 50 years? How much did Britain and America protect Biafrans between 1967 and 1970; Black Africans of Sudan, people of DRC and generally the impoverished and abused people of all countries in Black Africa(excluding Zimbabwe which has always respected human rights more than Nigeria) where human rights are seen as luxury . It is on record that the West especially Britain, unfortunately, through our self destructive media organisations have always only seen human rights abuses in Black Africa only where a British person feels injured.
I do not agree that Black Africans and the Caribbeans should be blaming our White masters for our own failures as it contradicts any belief in equality of all humans to do so. However, if our White masters in the Western powers must arrogate themselves the divine responsibility for all humans on the planet, then they should be much quicker at protecting the rights those under their noses (e.g. Black Africans and the Caribbeans) than those very far away from their control (e.g. China and North Korea).
In any case, for those who are blinded by some fake human rights noise (especially some fanatical White Supremacists who hide under liberalism e.g. people in Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and dubious White Journalists who habitually fight selective fights), Western media publicity /criticisms of suspected human rights abuses in Countries like China, Myanmar (Burma), North Korea, Iran etc) have always rather than ameliorate, worsened the state of human rights in those societies. It is therefore very hard to see how Western fake obsession with human rights for others has ever really helped the supposed victims of human rights abuses. How has Western noise about human rights really helped Aung San Suu Kyi? If she had not been seen by the majority of Burmese elites as a Western puppet, would she not have been a free woman leading her country today? What benefit either to the people of Burma or Suu Kyi herself has western interference in the internal affairs of Burma been?
As an enlightened Black African, I make these comments with grave concern because I know the importance (to my vulnerable people) of the West remaining in good control and able to moderate the affairs of the world. I know that the rise of China, India and others would naturally leave Black Africa vulnerable to further slavery and colonialism, but I will never advocate for the fall of China for every nation is entitled to pursue development. In fact, pursuing development is pursuing own survival and as such impeding or interfering with Chinese development in any way (by unreasonably criticising her or by honouring her traitor) should be seen as an act of provocation by all sensible Chinese. Yes, I have never lost grip of the fact that when China and India reach their destinations, my people would suffer, but I will never ask others remain as backward and exploitable as Black Africa as it does not make the world a better place. All I ask for is that the West should be wiser by appreciating the fact that times have changed and is continually changing fast.
The West should be working towards maintaining its position as the conscience of the world rather than foolishly (through its media especially British media) trying to give other peoples of the world ideas or strong reasons to question Western divinity and or moral grounds or suitability as a Judge or master or police over others. The brazen practice of disparate measures for assessing human rights violation (according to Western economic interests rather than any objective parameters) as was all seen in the case of Zimbabwe against other Black Africa countries where no White man’s interest or right was infringed and remains in the case of North Korea and Burma etc will only lead to the demystification of West and possibly fall of Western leadership of the world.
The key to continued Western leadership of the world lies in genuine belief and practice of democracy and human rights principles within as well as equitable treatment and assessment of world affairs or internal affairs of others.

On the Education Secretary, Michael Gove's plan to let top schools expand

What really do English people understand as equality?
I voted the Conservatives hoping that the so-called nasty Party is now dominated by sensible young men determined to repair the country after 13 years of Labour disaster.
I hoped that in the “New Conservatives”, I would see more competent young men and Women determined to do things differently.
Disappointedly, what I have seen so far is the same bunch of "out of touch" privileged adolescents jumping around in service of the media instead of the people.
What does Britain stand to gain by entrenching segregation among schools and the culture of desperate scrambles for so-called best or better schools? Why does it seem harder for Britain to maintain the same high standard in all school rather continually encouraging discrimination and unhealthy competition for so-called best schools?

The duty of the government should be to set the same standard for all schools and pay special attention to those schools not performing as they should (not the other way) with the view of bringing them up to the acceptable standards!
Is it correct to say that Britain is a fundamentally unequal society and that our leaders are determined to maintain the class divides?
Would it not have been more intelligent for a government of "reformers" populated by supposedly intelligent privileged kids from the same select schools to be striving to promote equal opportunities in the sense of encouraging (even pretentiously) a new Britain where any person that works hard irrespective of socio-economic background should be able to achieve her/his ambition?

See public approval of my comment on the following link: http://uk.buzz.yahoo.com/article/1:yahoo_uk_irel306:1c166215a0e81b2fe5bcbf453727d538/Gove-plan-to-let-top-schools-expand

My Children will One day ask your Children about what you are doing to me today!

Who knows whether Employment Judge Pearl would twist my statement to him today against me in the most sinister way – for example alleging that I threatened him after all it would sound plausible to accuse a Black man of acting aggressively or otherwise threatening. Anyway, I can no longer be too shocked by anything in Britain because I have already experienced dozens of things that no sane minded person even in Osama Bin laden neighbourhood would believe could happen in Britain. I have experienced dozens of atrocities (in the hands of Judges in Britain), which I find difficult to tell people in Nigeria because nobody would believe me.
Today in particular Employment Judge Pearl once again made me feel ashamed of being a lawyer.
I had predicted what happened today in my letter to the Attorney General on 27 September 2010 which I also copied Employment Tribunals (ET) and Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). I thought that crying out about an impending abominable act would forestall it, but I was very wrong. The aspect of my letter to the Attorney General for England & Wales that dealt with what happened today is copied below. Please read to understand the issues:
“Impending Judicial farce in my second claim against Badenoch & Clark (a recruitment agency) and Others: This is a case that gives further credence to a suspicion of something really mysterious happening in the Employment Tribunal system.
B&C’s lawyers, Sheridans, incompetently and or negligently failed to respond within 28 days which elapsed at 23:59hrs on 30 December 2009. Instead of filing its response immediately it realised its failure, Sheridans wrote the Tribunal asking for my claim to be struck out for being an abuse of process. This was a laughable application because B&C had no grounds, to make any such application, even if the application had any merit whatsoever.
Helpfully, Employment Judge Pearl reminded the respondent’s Sheridans, as I had done that it had no basis for making any such application when it had not even responded. B&C then forwarded its response on 12 March 2010, more than 2 months out of time and Employment Judge Pearl rightly in line with the rules, rejected the response and ruled that B&C will not take active proceedings in the proceedings – meaning that I had effectively won my case against B&C.
B&C had 14 days to apply for a review if it did not like the decision and 42 days from 26 March when the decision was sent to the parties, to appeal in the EAT.
The time for appealing to the EAT elapsed on 7 May 2010 at 4.00pm, but B&C had done neither review application nor filed a Notice of Appeal.
On or around 27 May, 2010 during the part-hearing in my first claim against B&C and Others, EJ Wolffenden suggested that a CMD which had been scheduled for my claim against the Second Respondent in this claim was meant for discussing “…the First Respondent’s failure to respond”. This was never stated in the Notice of CMD that I received. In any case, B&C had indicated it was not opposing the decision of the ET and it is impossible to discuss such a matter in a CMD as failure to respond within the time limit could only be addressed by way of a review hearing if the Respondent applies for a review (B&C had not applied for any review). It was further baffling, how or where EJ Wolffenden got what she said from?
I promptly reminded the EJ that B& C had neither applied for review nor filed a Notice of Appeal.
However, on 1 July 2010, B&C applied for a review claiming that it had changed its mind against not challenging the ET’s decision to debar it from taking active part in the proceedings.
My concern here is that the ET is probably scheming to find a way of accepting B&C’s Response even though it would plainly constitute an abuse of process. Besides, even the response of B&C and disclosures it made lately show that it has no valid defence to my claim, in any case ( e.g. the CVs it purports to have forwarded do not meet the very criteria it claim that I did not meet to be forwarded). There are clear indications here that some Employment Judges are determined to ensure that I must never be successful in any claim”
For the avoidance of any doubt, the Employment had no legal or moral basis at all for allowing B&C’s late response today, not just because there is no judicial precedence , but most importantly because it is an unmitigated abuse of process. B&C’s Counsel apparently searched all law libraries in England and Wales and could not find a case where a Defendant or Respondent who was debarred from taking active part in a proceeding or had the alternative, a Default judgment against it because it was out of time, indicated it was not going to challenge the Court’s decision (missed the deadline for applying for review by 2 Months and missed deadline for appealing by more than a Month), but after 2 Months changed its mind, asked the Court to allow it to defend the claim and the Court agreed.
Some experienced may rightly imagine that the Respondent may have had a highly meritorious defence. Interestingly, there is nothing of that sort. In fact, the response of B&C to my claim is purely scandalous if not simply idiotic because it appears obvious that while desperately scouting for CVs that would dwarf mine and present its defence as strong; it foolishly forgot what it had stated in the past in respect of some of the jobs. For example, in the case of Freedom of Information (FOI) Lawyer it claimed in its response to my claim that I was not put forward for that job because I did not possess any experience. It produced an old version of my CV which did not show that I had any FOI experience. When I showed Counsel for B7C some correspondence back in September 2009 which showed that B&C confirmed to me in writing that it was going to put my CV forward for that role, the story, he changed the story to say that I was actually put forward for that role but that its clients did not accept my CV.
In the case of Part Time Employment Lawyer, I had received an email on October 8 2009 from one Paul Gledhill of B&C who stated that the reason he was not putting my CV forward to its client was because there were many high quality applications for the role and that they were only allowed to submit just 3 candidates. He equally indicated that all the candidates submitted were practicing Barristers and Solicitors.
Interestingly, in its response to my claim B&C maintained that it was highly competitive but forgetting what Mr Gledhill had initially represented claimed that it forwarded the two best CVs. Even more interesting is the fact that none of the two CVs showed any evidence of any practicing Barrister or solicitor. In fact one of the candidates actually possessed no legal qualifications at all.
Perhaps, the most incontestable evidence in my favour was the series of emails where the former lawyer of B&C named Ms Rabi who incompetently and or ignorantly, repeatedly wrote me very harsh emails stating that B&C would no longer act for me, falsely accusing me of being rude, and aggressive towards B&C’s staff. This was a prima facie evidence of Victimisation handed to me on the platter of gold as the false accusation only came about after I had brought a claim against B&C and most importantly, there is no single evidence that any staff of B&C that handled any of the jobs I applied for ever complained about me.
Despite my past experiences of judicial farce from Employment Judge Pearl and others I mounted my best advocacy against determination to allow B&C ‘s response by drawing his attention to apparent weakness in B&C’s response and equally highlighting several act of fraudulent conducts and misrepresentation by B&C including the fraudulent application it made on 4 January 2010.
I believed that Employment Judge would not be so conscience ridden to allow B&C’s application, but he proved me very wrong again. I even reminded him that in March 2009, he refused to exercise discretion in a discrimination claim which was only a few minutes out of time, but he feigned ignorance of it. I then reminded him of a sound judgment he passed in the case of Ahmed v Amnesty International which he excitedly recalled, but refused to be as astute in my own case.
I only hope Mr Pearl would seriously think of my last words to him since he apparently wrote them down. I told him what came to my mind “If you have children, please note that one day my children will ask your children about what you are doing to me today” I reminded him that my children are British and would almost certainly grow up one day and ask his children about what he is doing to me.
For my readers, I am not really desperate for your sympathy or didactic sayings and advice. I am only desperate for community leaders, religious leaders and the general public of Britain to hear my story and to rise and stop what is happening to me from happening again to any other person in Britain. I am not going to stop fighting because I have a stake in this country as my children are born here and could suffer the same ugly fate tomorrow if not challenged today. I am desperate to tell my story because I want to ensure that the accurate account of my life in Britain is maintained and that those who are hiding under the global acclaim of the English legal system to fraudulently destroy the life of an innocent man have the opportunity of proving to the world that I am actually a mad man. I am writing my story and will continue doing so as I fight on because if anything happens to me tomorrow, the same mainstream English media that “blacked me out” in my claim against the Bar Council and would not follow my story because I am not a celebrity or for some other unknown reasons, would concoct a false story about me. Further, my experiences so far confirm to me that it may be possible to hang a crime on me in order to jail me or even for a corrupt police man to be used to shoot me and brand me a terrorist caught in the act. I have therefore decided that my only choice while I am still alive is to fight the fight that has befallen me at all cost.
The only possible explanation I can deduce, why every judge in the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal seem to have sworn an oat to defeat any claim I may bring is because I had the guts to challenge the Bar Council of England and Wales’s obnoxious policy which makes it impossible for about 70 % of those who pass their bar exams and called to bar each year to be able to practice as barristers. In fact, since the policy came into place in 2003, it has been far more difficult than it was in the 1980s for Blacks and some other minority groups to be able to obtain practicing certificates as barristers. I believed (perhaps, foolishly) that I was in a free and democratic country where you can complain or challenge something you believe to be wrong. I am now paying a heavy price. Perhaps, I should have been wiser not to have challenged them, but I spent over £15,000 pounds to train as a Barrister and I come from the part of the world where it is an abomination to stop a man from legitimately earning a living. I cannot get a befitting legal job in any public sector organisation and or through the recruitment agencies which they often use as conduits for discrimination and if I complain of discrimination the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal judges would fight my claim even more ferociously than those I complain against. I am being put in a situation where I am bound to bring complaints in the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunals where Judges are waiting happily to frustrate my complaints at all cost.
My promise is that I will never give up as I know that my children and other people's children would suffer similar fate. I promise to fight on even at the risk of losing my life or at least inconveniencing my family. I have committed no offence and cannot accept to be treated like a subhuman in a country that holds itself out to the world as a beacon of freedom, fairness and equality.
I will keep readers updated with my story as it unfolds.
John Iteshi
Barrister (Non-Practicing)
18 October 2010

Ed Miliband

I must say that I have been since the inception of the Labour Leadership campaigns, disgusted with the manner the media (acting in the interest of the political establishment) brainwashed and imposed either Ed or David Milliband on the public.
The people never stood any chance of electing a labour leader whose name is not a Miliband. Diane Abott despite being far more recognisable and far more experienced was never given any publicity and was in fact only propped up by one of the Milibands.
My disgust actually turned to more fascination than anger (about British politics) after it took one of the Milibands to get Diane on the ballot. I became fascinated about how British politics works ( in gangs just like Nigeria or indeed based on individual convictions).
How did the Miliband brothers become heavyweights in the Parliament over Diane (an old soldier) and numerous others?
Now that a Miliband has won, but not the Miliband favoured by the media and the strongest gang in the parliament, I have no choice but to watch like everyone else. I am however happy not just that the better looking Miliband won, but that the main favourite did not win. It is interesting when both the media and political establishments are unable to have their way exactly. Much more interesting is what could happen before or in the next election.
I predict that Ed will either not last till next elections or will lose because he is not fully accepted!
It is up to the Unions to rally round their man and refuse to be pushed, but it is also up to the new leader and the unions to appeal to Middle England as it is called, in order to have any chance of smelling 10 Downing Street!

This Justice Minister Cannot Argue His Case!

I am watching a House of Commons debate on Defendant Anonymity being proposed by the Justice Minister Hon Crispin Blunt.

I find Mr Blunt's advocacy excruciating because he is simply unable to produce a sound commonsensical argument why Defendant anonymity is necessary.

I am wondering whether a square peg has been put in a round hole here.

He claimed that there is no significant number of false accusation in rape while accepting that about 10 percent of rape accusations have been false. He said it is not different from any other crime.

He further maintained desperately that the reason for the new law has nothing to do with the issue of false accusations.

He repeatedly failed to justify why rape defendants should be treated differently from other defendants despite virtually all the speakers asking this question.

I thought painfully that this man ought to have said one simple commonsensical point that rape is a unique kind of offence which normally attracts a special kind of stigma. It is without doubt more likely that a man of unblemished character would be falsely accused of rape than being falsely accused of theft or fraud. Moreover, due to the nature of rape (often involving just the victim and the accused), it is far easier to charge and prosecute an innocent person based on lies than in other crimes. In other crimes, it would be easier for the police to judge the credibility of the accusation before charges are brought!

I do not know why it did not seem a good argument to him or those who advised him to say that rape is a different kind of crime and that individuals falsely accused of rape are in a different league from those falsely accused of theft for instance.As stated above it is far more easier to accuse a decent man of rape than of other crimes. All it would take for a clean man to be falsely charged of rape is a conscience ridden female friend.

In my general view, the media and their over zealousness are the greatest obstacles to administration of criminal justice in the UK. I believe this Minister was scared of how his view may be interpreted. I would support defendant anonymity of defendants in rape cases because of the unique nature of the crime of rape!

In the case of rape, there seems to be political pressures here and there for more convictions. My fear is that undue hysteria about convicting people for rape could cause injustice!

All that is needed is a reliable legal system that does not allow itself to be swayed by media induced sentiments!

British Genuinely Blacks, Politically Blacks and Race Mongering

I should never have found time to write anything not particularly pressing now due to the many challenges I am currently facing , but I just felt I cannot go to bed without commenting on what I have just read on today’s London Evening Standard (07 July 2010).
At page 24 is a story with a title: “£100,000 appeal to stop portrait of freed slave going abroad”. Of course, this title caught my attention right away, but I soon noticed that the portrait which is pictured bedside the story appeared too civilised and too Arabic to have been a genuinely freed African slave as both the title and the first line of the story suggest.
Without reading further than the first few lines, my stomach was already turning as I found it hard to bear the pain of the falsehood. I took a closer look at the picture and wondered how an African slave (assuming the man was pure Black African (Negro)) could have been able to practice Islam to the extent that he wore a Koran on his neck. However, I encouraged myself to read on.
Before reading beyond the first few lines, I pondered in agony how gullible supposedly enlightened Black opinion leaders have become in Britain as Kwame Kwei-Armah, a prominent Black British man is pictured as one of the supporters of the portrait alongside one Arab African, Zeinab Badawi. The fact that the erudite Kwame who ought to know more than most others about the history of Trans-Atlantic slave Trade can be so easily swayed to dance at the image of an Arab African as the first portrait of a freed African slave worried me to revulsion.
I felt frustrated about how to immediately educate Kwame that the image he is worshiping could have been more of a slave master than a slave.
After calming down a bit, I continued reading the story and unsurprisingly it confirmed that the so-called freed African Slave was in fact a Slave dealer who incidentally was somehow paid back in his own coins. Probably he offended his European slave trading partners and they thought him a lesson or his fellow slave hunters/traders for some reasons conspired and sold him.
How could a person of Kwame’s intellectual standing be so naïve to celebrate a portrait of an Arab slave dealer as a portrait of a freed African slave? I can understand the case of some politically black British men and women queuing to moan black this black that as usual, for selfish ends( when it suits them), but cannot understand why a supposedly enlightened Black man like Kwame who ought to know his history, could be so gullible!
For the avoidance of any doubt, I do not have any grudge against Arab Africans and certainly do not say that the alleged freed slave, Suleiman Diallo of The Gambia was not a Black African. All I say is that he was not a pure Ne-gro Black African susceptible to trans-Atlantic slavery because he was a civilised Arab African who was naturally a slave trader (or middleman to European slave masters) rather than a victim. He never fell within the population of potential or actual slave subjects and as such could not have qualified as an African slave in the sense we know.
All I say is that Black people should be informed that our more civilized Arab brothers (including Arab Africans like this man) were principal actors in the transatlantic slave trade. It must also be noted some Black Africans also sold their flesh and blood into slavery and that the wickedness /primitiveness which caused Arab Africans and Black Africans to sell their own people into slavery are still with us!

BBC 3's Peckham Finishing School for Girls: The Worst TV Programme

The short programme info says: Four privileged girls taste life on the other side of the tracks...
This 3 part documentary featured the so-called privileged girls acting like White messiahs visiting a previously unknown primitive village in an Amazonian forest.

There are a few interesting things in the programme, fascinating Peckham individuals, but the so-called posh girls acted in the most depressing manners like people falling from another planet to find strange creatures in Peckham.

My beef about some girls falling from the countryside to posh up to some Peckham girls in a civilised man discovers a previously uncontacted primitive people in a jungle manner is that it is plainly fake.

If you are so posh that you are unfamiliar with rap music or Jamaican dance hall and most of what you would see in Peckham urban life, you may have excommunicated your self from the society.
Even members of the royal family, the poshest of the posh would not be as fake and what the hell is that towards Pekham as these frustrated, self obsessed so-called posh girls.
It is a shame that the BBC uses licence payers' money to sponsor pointless programmes like this.

BBC News - Diane Abbott enters Labour leadership contest

The BBC reports that Diane Abbott has joined the Leadership Race. Good luck to her.Lets see how far the media supports her bid!
She is certainly one the most (if not the only ) useful Black MP in Britain as she makes some efforts to address issues that affect her ethnic community. Even though, I am a Nigerian, I will rate her high as a Black leader!
However, the English media opinion leaders as the de facto rulers of Britain would determine who becomes the next Labour Leader.
In a genuinely free democracy, Ms Abbott should be among the top runners, but this is Britain were anyone could be promoted to any height any minute!
May be, if she was younger Black woman or man, the section of the media rooting for a British Obama would have gone for her! May be, if she was younger, White and attractive, she would have been an instant hit!!
I will not be surprised if David Lammy jumps in soon as I suspect he is definitely involved in the primitive scramble to be British Obama or London Obama.



BBC News - Diane Abbott enters Labour leadership contest