I'm getting tired of alarmist news. (remember the conversation we had about CNN re. their alarmist 'civil war cry' post Abacha's death on Sunday?)
Of course Obasanjo is going to step down! Clearly, there are concerns in the run up to April, but I am of the opinion that this article is quite misleading, especially in the way it implies that Obasanjo's moves indicate that he still wants to be there post April. That is certainly not the case! We all know Obasanjo is going. We just don't know who will replace him.
What kind of statement is this?!: 'He also should beef up the elections agency. If he doesn't, and voids the elections to maintain power, a bloody civil war is almost certain to follow'.
1) lazy reporting - can't be bothered to find out the name of 'the elections agency' when it was ok to state in full what the EFCC was. Perhaps if they said what INEC stood for as opposed to saying 'the elections agency', ignorant Americans would at least be aware that there are (supposed to be) independent bodies in our democratic system and Obasanjo does not wield as much 'despotic power' as this article insinuates.
2) 'a bloody civil war' is likely to follow - call me an optimist but puleeze - classic Americanism -Africans are 'the other - uncivilised and always fighting'. If anyone has any iota of grace to rescue this article, please feel free not to share it with me. There are a lot of better places to gain more thoughtful analysis of the challenges which face our nation in the coming months. Newspapers need to be more informed, ah beg!
Nkem (my journalist friend) please read.
Hope that was not too vitriolic. Sorry, this kind of 4th rate reporting is not good for me at this time of day.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Disgusted of London
Got the email below in my inbox yesterday. You can read the offending LA Times November 11 piece here.