Fani-Kayode’s Goebbelsian tactics

Fani-Kayode has more than amply justified the appointment. Classified as a Rottweiler by Professor Wole Soyinka, Fani-Kayode has since been doing the exact job: visiting verbal violence on prominent opposition personalities, tarnishing their names and reputation and serially slandering them, with relish and abandon, unrestrained by notions of civility and decorum. He churns out one […]

Fani-Kayode has more than amply justified the appointment. Classified as a Rottweiler by Professor Wole Soyinka, Fani-Kayode has since been doing the exact job: visiting verbal violence on prominent opposition personalities, tarnishing their names and reputation and serially slandering them, with relish and abandon, unrestrained by notions of civility and decorum. He churns out one egregious claim after the other, in the manner of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda whose principal tools were repeating lies and falsehood until they became accepted in the absence of alternative narrative. Goebbels and Fani-Kayode both put their gift of the gab to sinister use.  
Clever fellow that he is, Fani-Kayode prefaces his injurious falsehood thus: “it is alleged” or “is it true?”The most baffling of all the fabrications must be the lengthy statement titled “Questions General Muhammadu Buhari Must Answer,” published in many of the country’s dailies. Issued as a fallout of his recent visit to Umuahia, the heart of Igboland as he described the town,  the statement purports to give vent to the feelings of the Igbo over (1) “the role General Muhammadu Buhari played in the very sad events of the night of January 29, 1966, (2) the role allegedly played by in the tragic events in the core North during the mid-60s and (3) one of the allegations against General Buhari that was to be put to him at the Oputa panel was that he was among the division that took part and that ordered the killings.”
It is a matter of extreme irony that Fani-Kayode would now pose as an interlocutor for the Igbo when just a year or so ago, he was maligning the ethnic group and denigrating Igbo womanhood. Back to “issues” raised by Fani-Kayode, the first being Buhari’s “role” in what history calls the counter-coup of July 29, 1966. His role, if any, was what circumstances of the time demanded: ensuring his personal safety and that of his colleagues.  It is emotional mischief to decry a coup d’état against “a sitting Head of State, General Aguiyi-Ironsi” and “a serving Governor, Colonel Fajuyi.”
Pray what were Tafawa Balewa,  Ahmadu Bello and Akintola if not “a sitting Prime Minister and serving Premiers” when they were cruelly murdered?  Coups d’état are executed, ab initio against constituted authorities. As regards the question “whether Buhari was among the division that took part and ordered the killings…” at Asaba, the straightforward answer is that Buhari was in 1 Division Nigerian Army which operated in the Northern front. The story of the sad events at Asaba after the town’s liberation is more than what Fani-Kayode so baldly put out; readers are referred to Brigadier-General Alabi-Isama’s tome The Tragedy of Victory (Chapter Three)
Then there’s the report that Buhari at his recent visit to the UK had agreed to consider the repeal of Nigeria’s anti same-sex marriage law in return for Western support. An absurdity if ever there’s one, a product of febrile minds in “the special operations and intelligence wing of my (Fani-Kayode’s) directorate” for Buhari has been consistently identified by the same outfit as a Muslim fundamentalist out to Islamise Nigeria.   Fani-Kayode has taken pole position in the sordid endeavour of creating “a national precedent,” in the words of Soyinka. Nigerians will remember the outcome of this election alongside his inglorious role.

Mohammed Tukur Usman, Kaduna