Welcome To Rising Sun TV Blog

The Church of England is poised to consider the baptism of animals for the first time, it was announced today.

The ruling General Synod, which is next scheduled to meet in July, will consider an advisory report compiled by a panel of bishops and others entitled
All of God's Creation.

Synod members will be asked to consider the
implications of introducing a liturgy for pets 'in the
light of an emerging consensus about the value of the environment and an increasing consciousness of animal sentience and awareness', the report says.

Charles Deluvio/Unsplash
Could the Church of England baptise animals?

Speaking at a press conference to highlight the report's main findings, Rt Revd James Graham, the committee chair, said: 'The kingdom of God is
about renewing all of creation, including the created order. It would be possible, therefore, to envisage a situation where dogs and cats and other
pets could be ceremonially sprinkled with water to symbolise their full inclusion in the renewal of all
things.'

Pressed on whether this could be described as 'animal baptism', the Bishop said: 'In a manner of speaking, it might be seen that way by some.'


He added: 'In the past we have seen humankind as
in some way distinctive, special and set apart. Now science advises us that many characteristics we once believed to be limited to men and women are
shared with other species, including kindness and empathy. The Christian god is surely one who will welcome any created being with these characteristics fully into his kingdom.'

'After all, look at what I have in common with monkeys and chimpanzees – we're all primates,' the bishop joked, as an unamused press corps sat
stony-faced in front of him.

Asked how animals would be able to make
baptismal vows, Bishop James said: 'It's amazing what animals can do. I've trained my dog to play Widor's Toccata at weddings, and if you weren't
looking, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference in quality from that of many regular human organists. It's just a bit tricky cleaning between the
pedals afterwards.'

The report was attached by conservative Anglicans
as being 'Anglicanism at its most wishy-washy'.

A spokesman for a group which claims to be more conservative than anyone else said: 'What is it again? Whatever it is, we're against it. We're always against. Now look, I've got to go as this probably means I am out of communion with you.'


But a spokesperson for a liberal group said: 'How lovely! What a nice idea. Actually, between you and me, we've been doing this in our parish for years.

We use milk for cats though, otherwise they tend to scratch. And we had terrible trouble when someone's pet spider escaped down the font overflow hole.'

Nelson Mandela with Winnie Madikizela-
Mandela after his release from a South
Africa prison in 1990. She often acted as a
conduit to his followers during his
imprisonment. They divorced in 1996.

Greg English/Associated Press
By Alan Cowell April 2, 2018
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, whose hallowed
place in the pantheon of South Africa’s
liberators was eroded by scandal over
corruption, kidnapping, murder and the
adulterous implosion of her fabled marriage
to Nelson Mandela , died early Monday in
Johannesburg. She was 81.


Her death, at the Netcare Milpark Hospital,
was announced by her spokesman, Victor
Dlamini. He said in a statement that she died
“after a long illness, for which she had been
in and out of hospital since the start of the
year.”

The South African Broadcasting Corporation
said she was admitted to the hospital over
the weekend complaining of the flu after she
attended a church service on Friday. She had
been treated for diabetes and underwent
major surgeries as her health began failing
over the last several years.
Charming, intelligent, complex, fiery and
eloquent, Ms. Madikizela-Mandela
(Madikizela was her surname at birth) was
inevitably known to most of the world
through her marriage to the revered Mr.


Mandela. It was a bond that endured
ambiguously: She derived a vaunted status
from their shared struggle, yet she chafed at
being defined by him.
Ms. Madikizela-Mandela was cheered by
supporters after appearing in court in
Krugersdorp, South Africa, in 1986. She
commanded a natural constituency of her
own among South Africa’s poor and
dispossessed.

Associated Press
Ms. Madikizela-Mandela commanded a
natural constituency of her own among
South Africa’s poor and dispossessed, and
the post-apartheid leaders who followed Mr.
Mandela could never ignore her appeal to a
broad segment of society. In April 2016, the
government of President Jacob G. Zuma gave
Ms. Madikizela-Mandela one of the country’s
highest honors: the Order of Luthuli, given,
in part, for contributions to the struggle for
democracy.


Ms. Madikizela-Mandela retained a political
presence as a member of Parliament,
representing the dominant African National
Congress, and she insisted on a kind of
primacy in Mr. Mandela’s life, no matter
their estrangement.


“Nobody knows him better than I do,” she
told a British interviewer in 2013.
Increasingly, though, Ms. Madikizela-
Mandela resented the notion that her anti-
apartheid credentials had been eclipsed by
her husband’s global stature and celebrity,
and she struggled in vain in later years to be
regarded again as the “mother of the
nation,” a sobriquet acquired during the
long years of Mr. Mandela’s imprisonment.


She insisted that her contribution had been
wrongly depicted as a pale shadow of his.
“I am not Mandela’s product,” she told an
interviewer. “I am the product of the masses
of my country and the product of my
enemy” — references to South Africa’s white
rulers under apartheid and to her burning
hatred of them, rooted in her own years of
mistreatment, incarceration and banishment.


Conduit to Her Husband
While Mr. Mandela was held at the Robben
Island penal settlement, off Cape Town,
where he spent most of his 27 years in jail,
Ms. Madikizela-Mandela acted as the main
conduit to his followers, who hungered for
every clue to his thinking and well-being.


The flow of information was meager,
however: Her visits there were rare, and she
was never allowed physical contact with him.


Ms. Madikizela-Mandela attended her
husband’s trial in Pretoria, South Africa, in
1962. Associated Press
In time, her reputation became scarred by
accusations of extreme brutality toward
suspected turncoats, misbehavior and
indiscretion in her private life, and a
radicalism that seemed at odds with Mr.
Mandela’s quest for racial inclusiveness.
She nevertheless sought to remain in his
orbit. She was at his side, brandishing a
victor’s clenched fist salute, when he was
finally released from prison in February
1990.


At his funeral, in December 2013, she
appeared by his coffin in mourning black —
positioning herself almost as if she were the
grieving first lady — even though Mr.
Mandela had married Graça Machel, the
widow of the former Mozambican president
Samora Machel, in 1998, on his 80th
birthday, six years after separating from Ms.

Madikizela-Mandela and two years after
their divorce. It was Mr. Mandela’s third
marriage.

In 2016, Ms. Madikizela-Mandela began legal
efforts to secure the ownership of Mr.
Mandela’s home in his ancestral village of
Qunu. She contended that their marriage had
never been lawfully dissolved and that she
was therefore entitled to the house, which
Mr. Mandela had bequeathed to his
descendants. High Court judges rejected that
argument in April. After learning that she
had lost the case, she was hospitalized.
Her lawyers said she would appeal the High
Court judgment.


‘She Who Must Endure’
Nomzamo Winifred Zanyiwe Madikizela was
born to a noble family of the Xhosa-speaking
Pondo tribe in Transkei. Her first name,
Nomzamo, means “she who must endure
trials.”


Her birth date was Sept. 26, 1936, according
to the Nelson Mandela Foundation and many
other sources, although earlier accounts gave
the year as 1934.

Her father, Columbus, was a senior official in
the so-called homeland of Transkei,
according to South African History Online ,
an unofficial archive, which described her as
the fourth of eight children. (Other accounts
say her family was larger.) Her mother,
Gertrude, was a teacher who died when
Winnie was 8, the archive said.


As a barefoot child she tended cattle and
learned to make do with very little, in
marked contrast to her later years of free-
spending ostentation. She attended a
Methodist mission school and then the
Hofmeyr School of Social Work in
Johannesburg, where she befriended
Adelaide Tsukudu, the future wife of Oliver
Tambo, a law partner of Mr. Mandela’s who
went on to lead the A.N.C. in exile. She
turned down a scholarship in the United
States, preferring to remain in South Africa
as the first black social worker at the
Baragwanath hospital in Soweto.


The Mandelas were married in June 1958.
Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
One day in 1957, when she was waiting at a
bus stop, Nelson Mandela drove past. “I was
struck by her beauty,” he wrote in his
autobiography, “Long Walk to Freedom.”
Some weeks later, he recalled, “I was at the
office when I popped in to see Oliver and
there was this same young woman.”
Mr. Mandela, approaching 40 and the father
of three, declared on their first date that he
would marry her. Soon he separated from
his first wife, Evelyn Ntoko Mase, a nurse, to
marry Ms. Madikizela-Mandela on June 14,
1958.


Ms. Madikizela-Mandela was thrust into the
limelight in 1964 when her husband was
sentenced to life in prison on charges of
treason. She was officially “banned” under
draconian restrictions intended to make her
a nonperson, unable to work, socialize, move
freely or be quoted in the South African
news media, even as she raised their two
daughters, Zenani and Zindziswa.
In a crackdown in May 1969, five years after
her husband was sent to prison, she was
arrested and held for 17 months, 13 in
solitary confinement. She was beaten and
tortured. The experience, she wrote, was
“what changed me, what brutalized me so
much that I knew what it is to hate.”


After blacks rioted in the segregated
Johannesburg township of Soweto in 1976,
Ms. Madikizela-Mandela was again
imprisoned without trial, this time for five
months. She was then banished to a bleak
township outside the profoundly
conservative white town of Brandfort, in the
Orange Free State.


“I am a living symbol of whatever is
happening in the country,” she wrote in
“Part of My Soul Went With Him,” a memoir
published in 1984 and printed around the
world. “I am a living symbol of the white
man’s fear. I never realized how deeply
embedded this fear is until I came to
Brandfort.”


Contrary to the authorities’ intentions, her
cramped home became a place of pilgrimage
for diplomats and prominent sympathizers,
as well as foreign journalists seeking
interviews.


Ms. Madikizela-Mandela cherished
conversation with outsiders and word of the
world beyond her confines. She scorned
many of her restrictions, using whites-only
public phones and ignoring the segregated
counters at the local liquor store when she
ordered Champagne — gestures that stunned
the area’s whites.


Banishment Took Toll
Still, Ms. Madikizela-Mandela’s exclusion
from what passed as a normal life in South
Africa took a toll, and she began to drink
heavily. During her banishment, moreover,
her land changed. Beginning in late 1984,
young protesters challenged the authorities
with increasing audacity.


The unrest spread,
prompting the white rulers to acknowledge
what they called a “revolutionary climate”
and declare a state of emergency.
When Ms. Madikizela-Mandela returned to
her home in Soweto in 1985, breaking her
banning orders, it was as a far more
bellicose figure, determined to assume
leadership of what became the decisive and
most violent phase of the struggle. As she
saw it, her role was to stiffen the
confrontation with the authorities.


The tactics were harsh.
“Together, hand in hand, with our boxes of
matches and our necklaces, we will liberate
this country,” she told a rally in April 1986.
She was referring to “necklacing,” a form of
sometimes arbitrary execution by fire using
a gas-soaked tire around a supposed traitor’s
neck, and it shocked an older generation of
anti-apartheid campaigners. But her severity
aligned her with the young township radicals
who enforced commitment to the struggle.


Ms. Madikizela-Mandela was surrounded by
supporters in the black township of Kagiso
in 1986. Associated Press
In the late 1980s, Ms. Madikizela-Mandela
allowed the outbuildings around her
residence in Soweto to be used by the so-
called Mandela United Football Club, a
vigilante gang that claimed to be her
bodyguard. It terrorized Soweto, inviting
infamy and prosecution.
In 1991 she was convicted of ordering the
1988 kidnapping of four youths in Soweto.


The body of one, a 14-year-old named James
Moeketsi Seipei — nicknamed Stompie, a
slang word for a cigarette butt, reflecting his
diminutive stature — was found with his
throat cut.


Ms. Madikizela-Mandela’s chief bodyguard
was convicted of murder. She was sentenced
to six years for kidnapping , but South
Africa’s highest appeals court reduced her
punishment to fines and a suspended one-
year term.


By then her life had begun to unravel. The
United Democratic Front, an umbrella group
of organizations fighting apartheid and
linked to the A.N.C., expelled her. In April
1992, Mr. Mandela, midway through
settlement talks with President F. W. de
Klerk of South Africa, announced that he and
his wife were separating. (She dismissed
suggestions that she had wanted to be known
by the title “first lady.” “I am not the sort of
person to carry beautiful flowers and be an
ornament to everyone,” she said.)


Two years later, Mr. Mandela was elected
president and offered her a minor job as the
deputy minister of arts, culture, science and
technology. But after allegations of influence
peddling, bribetaking and misuse of
government funds, she was forced from
office. In 1996, Mr. Mandela ended their 38-
year marriage, testifying in court that his
wife was having an affair with a colleague.
Only in 1997, at the behest of Archbishop
Desmond M. Tutu at South Africa’s Truth
and Reconciliation Commission , did Ms.
Madikizela-Mandela offer an apology for the
events of the late 1980s. “Things went
horribly wrong,” she said, adding, “For that I
am deeply sorry.”

Ms. Madikizela-Mandela at a 2009 gathering
to honor her former husband, who died four
years later.


Yet the catalog of missteps continued, cast
into sharp relief by her haughty
dismissiveness toward her accusers. In 2003
she was convicted of using her position as
president of the A.N.C. Women’s League to
obtain fraudulent loans; she was sentenced
to five years in prison. But her sentence was
again suspended on appeal, with a judge
finding that she had not gained personally
from the transactions.

To the end, Ms. Madikizela-Mandela
remained a polarizing figure in South Africa,
admired by loyalists who were prepared to
focus on her contribution to ending
apartheid, vilified by critics who foremost
saw her flaws. Few could ignore her
unsettling contradictions, however.


“While there is something of a historical
revisionism happening in some quarters of
our nation these days that brands Nelson
Mandela’s second wife a revolutionary and
heroic figure,” the columnist Verashni Pillay
wrote in the South African newspaper The
Mail and Guardian, “it doesn’t take that
much digging to remember the truly awful
things she has been responsible for.”
Joseph R. Gregory contributed reporting.
Related Coverage

There is no use waiting for new P-Square music, as the group has broken up for good.

If you want to know what happened between the two brothers, then check out this article, where we will tell you
the real facts about the P-Square split.

The truth It is not like the Okoye brothers have never fought before.


The two have threatened two
break up several times before (at least three
times, but who is counting?), but each time they made up and continued with their career.

So what could have happened this past September?


It has been more than half a year since the
conflict between the two brothers. There have been no major developments on the story until about a week ago, when Paul decided to give an interview to Showtime Celebrity, in which he explained what happened from his point of
view.

You can find the full interview on
Vanguard.

From what we have been able to gather, Paul does not like talking about what happened. He shared that he did not appreciate the questions
about his personal life, particularly about the relationship with his brother.


That said, Paul admitted that he took his
brother’s exit from their group to heart. For
months, he could not do anything, as he felt
really low. Nevertheless, Paul has since bounced back and returned to his normal state.


When asked about whether P-Square will ever get back together, the musician said that it was not him who left the group, and he has waited long enough for his brother to return.

Alas,
Peter did no such thing, which means that there
is probably no future for P-Square.


Now that we have talked about Paul's side of the story, let's consider Peter's for a moment.


Why did he decide to leave the group that has brought him immense popularity?


Well, the short answer is that Peter decided that he no longer wanted to be in a group with his brother, so he quit. The long answer is that Peter had a very solid reason for leaving the group.


According to various reports, both his twin
brother Paul and their older brother Jude have behaved extremely inappropriately towards Peter and his family.

Apparently, they were
stirring up all kinds of drama and even
threatening the safety of Peter’s wife and kids.


All three brothers were seen fighting in public, as well as on their social media, which only heated the public’s attention. Later, when the anger died down, the family lawyer had to come out and say that nobody was at fault for what happened, and that all that happened was
because of too much emotion and passion.


Other than that, there is little else known about the conflict and its causes. Even though quite some time has passed, it is evident that P-
Square is not very likely to exist ever.

How P-Square story started
P-Square started out as a young brother duo of Peter and Paul Okoye, when the two of them were in school, however, back then, they were not yet known as P-Square.

For some time, the brothers even were a part of a quartet that sang a cappella (can you imagine that?), but, as you
can see, it did not last long.


At the dawn of the twenty first century, Peter and Paul finally realized that they did not need anyone else to become successful musicians and decided become a duet.


Before they settled on
P-Square, they tried the names P&P, Double P
and Da Pees.


After winning Grab Da Mic in 2001 and
releasing their debut album in 2003, P-Square
began gaining immense popularity. Over the next decade, the dynamic twin duo managed to become one of the most successful Nigerian musicians, with fans all over the world.

For many years, the two were the richest musicians in the country, raking money from their tours
and music sales.

Where is P-Square now?

If you have stopped following the duo after
their breakup, then you might be surprised that two brothers are still doing very well, even on their own. Of course, they are not quite as popular separately as they were together.


As we have mentioned previously, it took a long time for Paul Okoye to return to the studio and create music on his own.

However, time has passed, wounds have healed (or at least scabbed
over), and Paul is back again. These days, the man performs under the name RudeBoy or King Rudy.

Even without his brother, he manages to
gather large crowds for his concerts, and his songs get thousands of hits. Paul also enjoys spending time with his wife and children.


If you want to follow the life of King Rudy, you can find him on Twitter and Instagram
@rudeboypsquare and on Facebook and
Snapchat @rudeboyfire. It is interesting to see
that he still has not dropped the P-Square part
from his socials.


As for Peter Okoye, he wasted no time on
building his solo career. Despite the fact that he was the one who initiated the breakup, Peter, or
Mr. P, as he is now known, often uses the name P-Square, as can be seen on his concert posters.


Just like his brother, he is making his own
music, touring different countries and
seemingly enjoying the luxurious life of a solo
artist. You can find him @peterpsquare on
Twitter and Instagram. Nevertheless, he is far
from being as popular as P-Square once was.
Overall, it seems like this breakup has been a
long time coming.


Tensions between the
brothers have been building up over the years, and 2017 just became the year when everything
fell apart. Neither of the brothers feel like
talking about this anymore, so it would be best if we leave it alone as well. Whether P-Square ever gets back together or not, we hope that both Peter and Paul have a bright future.

MILLIONS of Christians across the world had their faith shaken to its foundations after reports the Pope admitted

HELL DOES NOT EXIST and that bad people simply cease to be.

The devil is REAL: Pope says Satan
MORE INTELLIGENT than mortals
Furious Pope Francis hits out at Vatican
in scathing Christmas message
Pope Francis likens modern migrants to
Saint Joseph and Mary
Popular In the Community
In a jaw-dropping Good Friday ‘revelation’ Pope Francis
reportedly told an Italian journalist that at the moment of death the souls of “sinners” would “disappear”.


Furious Catholics have suggested the claim sounds more akin to atheism than Christianity.

Eugenio Scalfari, 93, said Pope Francis told him: “Hell doesn’t exist, the disappearance of the souls of sinners exists.”

The quotes appeared in Italian newspaper La Republica, a
newspaper co-founded by Mr Scalfari.
Polish priest wishes
Pope early death over
Muslim speech
Pope tells priests not
to preach holy laws at
adulterers

The shock revelation from the spiritual leader of the Roman
Catholic faith overturns more than 2,000 years of orthodoxy.


Conservative Roman Catholics have raged at the Pope for
changing fundamental aspects of the faith set out in the
Bible.


Antonio Socci, a Catholic author, accused the Pope of
heresy and called for his abdication.
Another Vatican spoke on the condition of anonymity: “He’s
a very strange theologian, assuming Scalfari properly
understood what he was saying.


Pope Francis says there's no hell
“He increases confusion among ordinary Catholics, who no
longer know what to believe.”

The expert believes Mr Scalfari over the Vatican because “if
someone traduces your thoughts, you don’t keep inviting
him back.

Mr Scalfari said that the Pope made the explosive remarks in response to a question asking what happened to wicked
souls after death.


The Pope claimed that unrepentant sinners are not punished after death - instead, they just disappear.

Francis and Mr Scalfari, an atheist philosopher, have met
four times before.



On other occasions too, the Vatican has had to issue
clarifications after meetings with Mr Scalfari - who
reportedly reconstructs dialogue from memory without
taking notes or using a recorder.


The Vatican has confirmed that the meeting took place this
time, but insisted it was not an interview.
It said: “No words in quotation marks should be considered
as a faithful transcription of the Holy Father’s words.”


The Times welcomed the Pope’s alleged comments, however: “The Pope’s clarification that there is no such
thing as eternal fire and brimstone even for those who eschew faith should be a reassurance to everyone.”


Pope Francis has previously been criticised for replying,
“Who am I to judge?” - when asked what he thought of
homosexual Christians.

March 28, 2018, A Federal High
Court Overruled The Federal Government On The Matter Of
Nnamdi Kanu, The Biafran Leader Who Has Been Missing Since September, 2017 When The Nigerian Army Carried
Out Lethal Operations At His Home At Umuahia In Abia
State.

Since Kanu’s Trial Resumed In October Last Year After
The Military Attack, Kanu Has Neither Be Seen Nor Heard
From.


Relying On Army’s Denials Of Holding Kanu, The Federal
Government Has Since Then Claimed That His
Nonappearance At His Trial Was Enough To Revoke His
Bail And Compel His Three Sureties To Forfeit Their
Bonds.


Conversely, The Lawyers To The Sureties Had
Consistently Advanced The Argument That The Issue Of
The Military Invasion Had To Be Considered First Before
The Issue Of Breach Of Bond Or Kanu’s Trial Can Ever
Arise. But Till This Last Hearing, Counsels Have Never
Had Sufficient Opportunity To Fully Present Their
Arguments.


On February 20, 2018 When The Matter Came Up For
Further Mention, Justice Binta Nyako Of Federal High
Court Abuja Agreed To Severe Kanu’s Case From That Of
His Co-defendants, Which Then Set The Stage For
Treating Kanu’s Case Separately And Perhaps Properly.
On March 28, When The Case Came Up For A Resumed
Hearing, The Attorney General Of The Federation Yet
Again Strongly Argued For Revocation Of Mazi Kanu’s
Bond And Issuance Of Bench Warrant Against Him.
The AGF, Who Was Represented By Bar.
Shuaibu Lanaran,
Further Argued That Kanu’s Sureties ‘did Not Deserve Any
Hearing On The Matter, But Must Produce Kanu Or Face
Sanctions’.


In Opposition, Counsels For The Three Sureties Jointly
Argued That A Forfeiture Proceeding First Requires An
“enrolled” Show Cause Order Before Any Issue Of
Revocation Or Bench Warrant Can Arise.

The Lawyers Told The Court That Their Clients Are Yet To
Be Served With Such Order And Thus The Matter Cannot
Be Said To Be Properly Before The Court. Counsels Cited
Pertinent Statutory And Judicial Authorities.


In A Counter-argument, The AGF Alleged That The
Lawyers Have “conspired” To Raise Technical Defenses
To The Matter, Whereupon The Court Immediately Took
Exception To The Remark And Ordered Labaran To
Apologize To The Lawyers, Which He Did Promptly And
Profusely.


In The End, Justice Nyako Agreed With The Submissions
Of The Lawyers For The Sureties And Ordered The AGF To
Properly And Timely Serve The Sureties With An Order To
Show Cause In Compliance With The Rules Of Procedure.


The Next Hearing Is Scheduled For June 26, 2018, When
Lawyers For The Sureties Will Have The First Opportunity
To Introduce Direct Evidence Of The Army Invasion Of
Kanu’s House, Which Has Been Said To Be The Proximate
Cause Of His Disappearance. If The Court Upholds Their
Argument, Nigerian Army May Be Cited For Contempt And
That Alone Is Likely To Affect The Course Of The Trial In
Kanu’s Favor.


It Will Be Recalled That Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Was Taken On
Bail Last Year On The Bond Of N100 Million Each Provided
By Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, Jewish Rabbi Immanu El
Ben Madu And Tochukwu Uchendu, An Accountant.

The Sureties Were Represented In Court By Barristers Aloy
Ejimakor, Chukwuma Machukwu Umeh (SAN), And FC
Chude.
–
NAN

The Yoruba Council of Elders, YCE, has called on
President Muhammadu Buhari to immediately sack all the
service chiefs.

The council hinged their reason on the service chiefs’
alleged inability to effectively curtail killings in different
parts of the country.


According to them, the recurrent massacre in Benue,
Taraba and Nasarawa states have lent credence to the
accusation by a former Minister of Defence, Theophilus
Danjuma, that the military was colluding with killer
herdsmen to embark on ethnic cleansing.


The YCE stated this in a communique issued after their
Expanded National Executive meeting held in Ado Ekiti on
Thursday in honour of its late President, Chief Idowu
Sofola (SAN), who died last Friday.


The communique was signed by the YCE Secretary-
General, Dr. Kunle Olajide and the chairman of the Ekiti
Council of Elders, Prof. J. O. Oluwasanmi.


It partly read, “The Yoruba Council of Elders calls on Mr.
President to relieve the present security chiefs, some of
whom are already overdue for retirement of their position
and immediately reconfigure the security architecture of
the country to reflect the federal character clause in our
constitution.


“Most Nigerians have lost confidence in the security chiefs
especially the Inspector-General of Police, Ibrahim Idris,
whom the President has publicly acknowledged as
disobeying his instructions.

“The President must shed and toga of Baba go-slow and
act promptly on this matter to once again inspire the
confidence of Nigerians in his administration.


“A military which publicly claimed to be neutral where the
law of the land is being violated and innocent citizens are
mindlessly murdered by armed herdsmen is definitely
partisan and can no longer be trusted to protect all
Nigerians.”

THE King Center has denied that it gave an award to
President Muhammadu Buhari which was much
publicised on Tuesday, March 27. The centre also said
that Late Martin Luther King’s children were also not
involved in the award ceremony.


The denial came on the heels of an award by visitors
purportedly from the family of late African American
civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., gave to
Buhari in Abuja.


In a tweet late Wednesday night, the official Twitter
handle of The King Center said: “The award given to
President Buhari of Nigeria was not given by The King
Center, at the request of The King Center or by the
children of #MLK and #CorettaScottKing.
@MrFixNigeria”


Those who gave the award are related to the late civil
rights activists, but they are not his direct descendants.


Kings' Family completely distanced themselves from
the said award.
In a tweet from AsoVilla shortly after the award was
given, The Presidency tweeted: “President @MBuhari
today at the State House received Martin Luther King
Jnr’s family.

He was also conferred with the 1st Black
History Month National Black Excellence and
Exceptional African Leadership Award 2018.

#AsoVillaToday”
NIGERIA: Family of Martin Luther King deny giving
Award to Buhari