Philip Ikomi

Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 11:47:03 -0400
From: "Philip A. Ikomi" <pikomi@osf1.gmu.edu>
To: "Natufe, Igho" <inatufe@NRCan.gc.ca>
CC: "bawo_ayomike@freddiemac.com" <Bawo_Ayomike@freddiemac.com>, Bawo Ayomike <bawo_ayomike@yahoo.com>, maluko@scs.howard.edu, forrben@unity.ncsu.edu, Jebiware@mcla.mass.edu, jebiware@nasc.mass.edu, "'Andrew Edevbie'" <edevbie@dwsd.org>, "'Andrew Edevbie'" <kevtrics@juno.com>, "'Eyisan E. Omagbemi'" <eomagbemi@itsekiri.net>, "'Justus D. Wariya'" <Ogidi@aol.com>, "'Paul Ekadi'" <agbere@aol.com>, "'Aruegodore Oyiborhoro'" <Oyibo@aol.com>,        "'Ambassador Elizabeth Ogbon'" <POgbon@aol.com>, "'olaoye@monmouth.edu'" <olaoye@monmouth.edu>, "'Peter Ekeh'" <PPEkeh@acsu.buffalo.edu>,

Igho [Natufe],

I have no time for people like you who leave the truth and attack the person.  I made specific pleas to you and the other delegates.  I regret that we have to go into calling each other names.  I always like to call a spade a spade and not dress it up in borrowed plumes.  If you had agreed to put your individual differences aside for the common good, I would not have said that you prevented the continuation to the end that I desired.  I am not absolving the Itsekiri.  However, if both your group and the Ijaw group did not allow the discussion of the common issues, I find it hard to blame it on them.  They were ready to walk  out if the issues to which they were opposed was discussed.  They did not oppose the discussion of the common issues.  So, how do I blame them for not discussing what they were ready to discuss?  Your Urhobo delegation moved the motion for adjournment when those issues were to be discussed, and the individual issues discussed last.  Remember?  However, if you had given in to their demands which was irrelevant to the issue of discussion of what was affecting everybody on the ground in Warri, when you now start pursuing what is tantamount to the same issues that had been tabled at the meeting, we would not be having this discussion now.  Recall that the Itsekiri brought those same issues for discussion then, and were ready to discuss them.  So it is not true that they blocked the discussion of the issues relevant to the common weal.  I do not see what the title of the Olu or the issue of the creation of local govt. in Warri has to do with the issue of the pollution of our environment.  Those issues have no relevance to the discussion of a bill like the one proposed by the President.  Our people could have irreconcilable differences but would still be able to discuss the issue of the degradation of their environment, I believe.  However, you and the Ijaws made it appear as if without the issue of the Olu's title and the issue of the creation of additional local govt councils in Warri being discussed, then we could not talk about other things, like making  a joint statement that hostilities should cease!  As far as you were concerned the whole people in that enclave could perish!  It did not matter to you, so long as we have not yet discussed the title of the Olu and the creation of local govts in Warri,or the status of Warri!  Of course, I did not hide my sentiments.  I made several pleas to discuss cessation of hostilities and the degradation of our environment.  If I did not have strong sentiments about human lives I would not go on the internet to invite people to talk peace.  I do not really mind who is right or who is wrong in this matter. All am interested in is getting the blood letting stopped.  You all failed miserably in helping achieve that end in DC.  If you think I supported the Itsekiri or am supporting the Itsekiri because am Itsekiri, you should think again!



Return to Contents Page + + END OF DOCUMENT + + Return to Warri Page