Sunday, August 5, 2012

ROYAL DUTCH SHELL AND ADOLF HITLER: EVIDENCE OF HOW SHELL SAVED HITLER

This is an updated article about the role of Royal Dutch Shell as a collaborator and financial supporter of Hitler and the Nazi Party via its founder, Sir Henri Deterding.




Further research has revealed evidence that a huge injection of Royal Dutch Shell funds by Sir Henri, saved the Nazi Party from collapse and in so doing, indirectly caused millions of deaths in World War II.

I have provided extensive verification evidence from reputable independent sources of the Royal Dutch Shell connection with Hitler and the Nazi. This includes evidence of a four-day meeting between Sir Henri and Adolf Hitler at his Mountain top retreat, The Eagles Nest in Berchtesgaden.

Declassified US intelligence records show Royal Dutch Shell was viewed as “a Nazi collaborator that used Hitler’s slave laborers”.

A ruthless thirst for access to new oil fields was a driving force by Sir Henri (right) for his support for the most evil man in history. Sir Henri was himself described at one time as “The Most Powerful Man in the World”. The oil baron, able at the height of his powers, to bind the Board of Shell without their knowledge and consent, became an embarrassment to Shell because of his infatuation with Hitler and the Nazi.

These historical events provide a lesson in what can happen if a dominant person becomes too all powerful in any County, or for that matter, any multinational company.

It was perhaps a lesson not learned the first time round by Shell given the reserves securities fraud revealed in 2004 that resulted from another dominant Shell leader, the fraudster Sir Phillip Watts. He also ended up causing huge long-term damage to Shell’s reputation.

Sir Phillip was escorted from Shell premises. He left with a severance package worth a reported $18.5 million despite bringing an end to the Anglo-Dutch twin company structure, which had lasted for 100 years. The unified company – Royal Dutch Shell Plc – rose from the ashes.

Shell has itself recognised the potential danger of having a dominant leader. The following is an extract from an article published by Fortune magazine on 4 August, 1997:
What kind of company chooses a Herkstroter? One with a long history in Europe, where men with too much power have caused world wars. Shell executives say that archive films showing the birthday celebrations of Henri Deterding, Shell’s last strong, single master, are eerily reminiscent of Hitler’s rallies. Indeed, Deterding harbored Nazi sympathies; had he not retired from Shell in 1936, the company’s subsequent history might have been different. “We in Europe have always had a fear of the strong man,” says Shell managing director van den Bergh.

While Royal Dutch Shell support for the Nazi all those years ago has no link to current Shell management, there is a link to current activities, with Shell supporting *yet another evil dictator. Oil and gas is the reason why Shell (and BP) has signed contracts with the Libyan mass murderer, Gaddafi.

So basically, nothing has changed; Shell is still willing to deal with the devil to fuel its unquenchable thirst for oil, irrespective of moral considerations and the potential deadly consequences of handing over billions of dollars to a regime which may well end up funding future terrorist atrocities, as it has in the past. In addition to the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Gaddafi was also responsible for arming the IRA, another terrorist organisation.

In 1984 police constable Yvonne Fletcher was shot dead outside the Libyan Embassy in London while policing an anti-Gaddafi demonstration. A burst of machine-gun fire from within the building was suspected of killing her, but Libyan diplomats asserted diplomatic immunity and were repatriated. (This paragraph contains extracts from Wikipedia)

*It is not long ago that Shell was funding the corrupt Nigerian dictator, General Sani Abacha, during Shell’s plunder and pollution of the Niger Delta.
As I said, nothing has changed.

Detailed Historical Evidence of how Royal Dutch Shell saved Hitler and the Nazi Party
More than 60 years after the demise of Nazi Germany, people apparently remain fascinated by the evil deeds of Adolf Hitler and his equally evil henchmen.

The recent movie ‘Valkyrie‘ tells the story of the well-documented bomb plot against Hitler. Tom Cruise is in the lead role of Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, the patriotic aristocrat who unsuccessfully attempted to carry out the assassination. An article published in The Sunday Times on 4 January 2009 reviews a related book release: Valkyrie, by Philipp von Boeselager.

Another example of the resurgent interest is the video clips on YouTube said to glorify Nazi troops. A Daily Telegraph article reports that the controversial clips have received “million of hits”.

The same newspaper published an article on 3 January 2009 reporting the extraordinary news that “the Fuehrer has been given centre stage by the next European City of Culture.” The article said that the Austrian city of Linz has decided to showcase the works of the architect of the Third Reich.

What is less well known is the Royal Dutch Shell connection with Hitler and the Nazi. It is one of those episodes in Shell’s history, such as the recent multibillion-dollar reserves fraud, which the oil giant would prefer to forget.

The unfortunate association stemmed from the actions of a colossal figure in the history of the Royal Dutch Shell Group, Sir Henri Deterding, the ruthless Dutchman described as “THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD“, the title of a book written about the oil baron by Glyn Roberts. Deterding was the man responsible for founding the Royal Dutch Shell Group and was at the helm of the oil giant for 30 years. He was known as the “Napoleon of Oil”.

A Time Magazine article about the launch of the Glyn Roberts book said: “Roberts thinks his backing for Hitler and his admiration for Mussolini are based on his hatred of communism…”

An article published by The Times on 23 April 2004 said: “When the British Shell company merged with Royal Dutch in 1906 it was soon dominated by a single despot, Henri Deterding, a brilliant trader who became increasingly autocratic and ended up a fervent admirer of Hitler.”

The association between Deterding and the Nazi was such that Hitler and Goering both sent wreaths to his funeral when Deterding died just before the outbreak of the 2nd World War. The Nazis propaganda machine exploited his funeral and also intended to exploit the circumstances of his death to gain control over the entire Royal Dutch Shell Group.

A New York Times article reported that as earlier as 1929, the Nazi had begun to try and make friends in Britain and a firmer bond had been established with “Sir Henri Deterding, the oil magnate, and his associates.”

In 1933, Sir Henri was said to be “currying favor with Adolf Hitler in the hope of winning oil contracts for Royal Dutch Shell.”

He was openly described as being “pro-Nazi” and “a Nazi supporter.“
The New York Times published an article on 26 October 1934 under the headline:
“REICH OIL MONOPOLY SOUGHT BY DETERDING”.

The article with the sub-headline: “Hitler’s Terms for Control of Distribution Unsatisfactory to Royal Dutch and Shell” reported the content and outcome of a four day meeting between Hitler and his guest, Sir “Henry” Deterding, held at Berchtesgaden – Hitler’s mountain top retreat known as the Eagles Nest.

“LONDON, Oct. 25.-It is reported confidentially from Berlin that the object of Sir Henry Deterding’s recent visit to Chancellor Hitler at Berchtesgaden, where he stayed for four days, was to discuss the conditions for granting a monopoly to the Royal Dutch and Shell Companies of petrol distribution in Germany for a long period of years. Chancellor Hitler’s terms were unsatisfactory and the negotiations have broken down temporarily. Three conditions advanced by the Germans were”

First-The companies were to supply oil on credit for the first year.

Second-The companies were to build a network of distributing stations along strategic motor roads, these buildings to be protected against air attacks.
Third-The companies were to invest their money, frozen in Germany, locally.
On 13 February 1939, Time Magazine published an article about the death of Sir Henri. It said that he “backed Hitler in Germany” and had “added a German residence to his English, Dutch and Swiss homes.”

On 25 October 1942, The Los Angeles Times published a review of a book authored by reporter Marquis Child’s, titled: “I WRITE FROM WASHINGTON”. Child’s is described in the review as “trying to be eminently fair” in his appraisal of public figures. During his research, he had discovered “startling facts”, some relating to Shell and Sir Henri.

Child’s said in his book:
“…Sir Henri Deterding of Royal Dutch Shell was not himself innocent of working with Hitler. Sir Henri backed him with a huge sum when the Nazi party was about to fall; and it was the oil man’s objective to get Hitler to attack Russia so that Sir Henri might take over the Baku oil fields.”

Printed below are extracts from three books, which included extensive coverage of the Royal Dutch Shell connection with Hitler and the Nazi.

EXTRACTS FROM “THE SEVEN SISTERS” BY ANTHONY SAMPSON: PUBLISHED IN 1975

His influence on the company was erratic and as one Shell veteran recalls: ‘Deterding’s interventions were like thunderstorms; suddenly flattening a field of wheat, while leaving other fields un-scathed.’ The stately managers of Shell began to have the worrying impression that their Director-General was going mad, and still worse, going pro-Nazi.

His anti-Communism, spurred on by his Russian second wife, had already made him sympathetic to the Nazis. But in 1936, just after he had celebrated his seventieth birthday and his fortieth year with Shell, he married a third time, to a German girl, Charlotte Knaack, who had been his secretary. He was now convinced that the Nazis were the only solution to the Communist menace.

He died six months before the outbreak of war: memorial services were held in all Shell offices in Germany and Hitler and Goering both sent wreaths to the funeral on his estate.

EXTRACTS FROM “THE PRIZE” BY DANIEL YERGIN PUBLISHED IN 1992

The outlook was grim and disheartening. Norway and Denmark were in German hands,
France would surrender the following month, and Britain would stand alone, bearing the brunt of the war. No one was better suited than Churchill to lead his country through its “darkest hour.” No one better understood the critical role that oil would play, first in Britain’s very survival, and then in the prolonged conflict ahead.

The government also had to cope with a different kind of problem-the future of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group. The current management of the Group was no less concerned and apprehensive. For there was a risk that the Group could pass under the Nazi sway. The heart of the problem was Henri Deterding, the grand master of the company. He had continued to dominate the Group through the 192os. “Sir Henri’s word is law,” observed a British official in 1927.

“He can bind the Board of the Shell without their knowledge and consent.” But by the 1930s, Deterding’s grip on the company was slipping, and he was becoming an embarrassment to the management and a source of anxiety to the British government. His behavior was increasingly erratic, disruptive, megalomaniacal.

In the mid-1930s, as he entered his seventies, Deterding had developed two infatuations. One was for his secretary, a young German woman. The other was for Adolf Hitler. The determined Dutchman-who had gravitated to Britain before World War I, had been courted by Admiral Fisher and Winston Churchill, and had become a firm and fervent ally during that war-was now, in his old age, entranced with the Nazis.
On his own, Deterding initiated discussions in 1935 with the German government about Shell’s providing a year’s supply of oil-in effect, a military reserve-to Germany on credit.

Rumors of these talks so greatly alarmed the Shell management in London that one of the senior directors, Andrew Agnew, asked the government to have the British embassy in Berlin investigate so that Agnew “could take suitable actions with his colleagues on the Board here in good time.”

Finally, retiring from Shell at the end of 1936, Deterding acted on both of his new infatuations. He divorced his second wife, married his German secretary, and went to live on an estate in Germany.

Deterding died in Germany in early 1939, six months before the war began. Strange and deeply disturbing rumors immediately reached London. Not only had the Nazis made much of his funeral, but they were also trying to take advantage of the circumstances of his death to gain control of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group. That, of course, would have been a disaster for Great Britain. The company had virtually been Britain’s quartermaster general for oil during World War 1. Should it now pass under Nazi domination, Britain’s entire system of petroleum supply would be undermined. But it was discovered that the key “preference” shares, which embodied control, could only be held by directors, and at his demise, Deterding’s shares had been swiftly distributed to the other directors.

At best, the Germans could only get their hands on a tiny fraction of the common shares, which would do them no good at all, either before or after the outbreak of war.

EXTRACTS FROM “A CENTURY OF OIL” BY STEPHEN HOWARTH PUBLISHED IN 1997

The 1930s had proved a difficult and unpredictable decade for Shell Transport and Trading – the Depression, the successful move into chemicals, the increasing politicization of oil as governments of both extremes came to power. Yet even if none of that had occurred, it would still have been a climactic time, for on l7 November 1936 Sir Henri Deterding retired. He was then a few months over 70 years old. His forty years in the oil business included twenty-nine as an executive director of Shell Transport and Trading (in modern terminology, a Group Managing Director) and thirty-six as General Manager (that is, president) of Royal Dutch.

He had been a decisive, governing influence in Shell Transport, and in almost complete charge of Royal Dutch, for more than half his life: he had become a dominant force throughout the world-wide industry, earning the respect of almost everyone who knew him, and often their affection too.

Naturally, therefore, his departure engendered a considerable sense of loss; and yet it was not entirely unwelcome, for as he had grown older he had become rather an embarrassment to his colleagues.

Given all his achievements, this is an unhappy story, and one which has caused lasting distress within Shell Transport and Royal Dutch; but it is as much a part of the history as the more glorious days, and enough time has passed for it to be seen in some perspective.

Briefly, Deterding had become increasingly right-wing, bordering, some said, on the megalomaniac. His memoirs, published in 1934, were a masterpiece of vanity and egocentricity, reading as the self-portrait of an autocrat. For example, there was his talk with Mussolini – ‘a man who, regard him as you may, has shown a driving force almost unparalleled in running a country’. Deterding decided that this conversation:proved that there were several points on which we saw eye to eye. We both agreed that the coping-stone of Education is a sense of discipline and a respect for prestige, lacking which no youth can be considered to have been properly educated at all… To people unacquainted with the Italian character his manner in public may seem at times to be a trifle theatrical, but what chiefly interested me at our meeting was that he seemed so direct.

One felt that, if faced with a difficulty, he would get out his sledge-hammer and strike straight at its root.

So too would the ageing Sir Henri. When he wrote that, he was 68. Many people, as they grow older and see the world changing around them, become more conservative, with a hankering for ‘the good old days’ and a growing belief that things are not what they were. With Sir Henri the process was becoming somewhat marked. In the same text, he wrote this memorable sentence:
If I were dictator of the world – and please, Mr. Printer, set this in larger type – I WOULD SHOOT ALL IDLERS AT SIGHT.

But in a world where millions of working men and women were idle through no fault or desire of their own, Deterding’s colleagues (particularly in The Hague) were very sensitive to the public display of such sentiments, and still more so to his open admiration of what he perceived as the firm government which had recently been elected in Germany.

Back in 19l4, just before the outbreak of the Great War, Britain’s Admiral Fisher had written to Winston Churchill: ‘I have just received a most patriotic letter from Deterding to say he means you shan’t want for oil or tankers in case of war – Good Old Deterding! How these Dutchmen do hate the Germans!’

The new Lady Deterding was German. In a striking lack of imagination on Sir Henri’s part, she was also his former secretary; and because the Nazi regime was visibly restoring order to her country’s chaotic economy, she was very much in favour of it. So was Sir Henri, who saw the disciplined economic aspects of Nazism as the world’s most powerful weapon against Communism. The Nazis, eager even after his death to exploit the publicly-avowed support of this world-famous individual, virtually hijacked his funeral: Field Marshal Goering, chief of the German air force, sent a wreath; so did Hitler himself; and, even Germanizing his name, the functionary who represented them said as he laid the wreaths: ‘In the name and on the instructions of the Fuhrer, I greet thee, Heinrich Deterding, the great friend of the Germans.’
To his former colleagues both in Shell Transport and Royal Dutch, these events were intensely painful and hard to come to terms with.

Recalling his irrational and damaging price war in 1927 against buyers of Soviet oil, and his high-handed ‘colonial’ treatment of the left-wing Mexican government in 1934, some wondered privately if he might have been going mad. Probably he had not; rather, traits that he had always possessed – simplicity of outlook, clarity of goals, strength of character and forcefulness of speech – had become accentuated by old age. By then, their expression was crude and humiliating. In his youth and middle age, though, the same traits had been priceless business assets. Using them, he had rescued Shell Transport from virtually certain extinction, and had built its fortunes, together with those of Royal Dutch, to an level which simply would not have been credible when he began; so both as a friend and an inspiring leader, his passing was genuinely mourned.

EXTRACTS END

Deterding apparently felt very strongly on the subject of “idlers”. According to an article published on 18 February 1940, “Sir Henri Deterding had told Hitler that Mexico had the laziest population in the world, and rich prizes for Germany to grasp.”

On 19 November 2001, TheBoston Globe published an article entitled “Cloaked Business”.

The second paragraph said:

Newly declassified United States intelligence records reveal in unprecedented detail how US and Allied firms systematically used backwater countries to conduct backroom business with Axis enterprises. The files peel away a whole new layer of collaboration, describing scores of so-called “shadow agreements” in which corporations disguised their ties with the enemy through the cover of other companies in neutral countries, from Spain to Sweden to much of Latin America.
The article also contained the following reference to Shell:
The report said the two men also ran a steamship company that chartered tankers for Royal Dutch Shell, a Nazi collaborator that used Hitler’s slave laborers.
Ironically, the driven ruthless man most responsible for the great enterprise which is Royal Dutch Shell Plc today, was also responsible for one of the darkest periods in its long history.


Environmental degradation in Ogoniland:TESTIMONY OF ANSLEM DORNUBARI JOHN-MILLER

TESTIMONY OF ANSLEM DORNUBARI JOHN-MILLER
TO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FOREIGN AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON
AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS
JULY 10, 2012.

Mr. Chairman and all respected members of this committee, I thank you for giving me the
opportunity to address you. I will be discussing some of the troubles with Nigeria and its Niger
Delta region, particularly Ogoni-land and the Ogoni people.



My name is Anslem DornuBari John-Miller, Chairman, Caretaker Committee of the Council of
Ogoni Professionals (COP International, USA), an umbrella body of Ogoni professionals in the
United States of America. I also Chair the Advocacy & Fundraising Committee of the Movement
for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP) Chicago Chapter. I was resettled in Chicago on
September 17, 1996 after spending seven months in the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees (UNHCR) Refugee Camp in Benin Republic, West Africa as a result of persecution in
Nigeria for my role as the leader of the students' wing of MOSOP - the National Union of Ogoni
Students (NUOS). I and the entire Ogoni people remain grateful to the United States for coming
to our aid when we needed help.

OVERVIEW AND CURRENT SITUATION IN NIGERIA

Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa with abundant human and natural resources,
especially oil and gas. As such, Nigeria’s strategic importance to regional stability and global
energy supply cannot be overemphasized. It is this realization that instability in Nigeria will not only affect the country's over 130 million people and its large immigrant community in the
United States, but will have far-reaching security implications on the West African sub-region
and beyond, that led to the establishment of the US/Nigeria Bi-National Commission.


That concern about the security situation in Nigeria is currently heightened by Islamic
fundamentalism in Northern Nigeria, Suppression of minority rights to self-determination in the
Niger-Delta and the lack of political will on the part of the Federal Government of Nigeria to
seek genuine resolutions to these pertinent issues. It is common knowledge that despite the
abundant natural resources, Nigeria continues to increasingly slide into miserable economic
and social turmoil.



It is an open secret that the culture of corruption is prevalent in every sphere of government,
without due regard for rule of law, rather successive political regimes preoccupy themselves
with ethnic and or personal interests. The effects are: a regressive pace of development, high
youth unemployment, brain-drain due to emigration, massive poverty and a dangerously
trending insecurity situation in the country.

The root cause of the problems in Nigeria is not far-fetched; it is mismanagement and
corruption by those at the helm of affairs. As long as these problems are not adequately
addressed, any expectation of development and stability in Nigeria will remain elusive. The
solution is not a handout of food supplies, medical supplies, or material needs. The solution is
the United States’ and international community’s resolute demand on the leadership of Nigeria
to implement a clear roadmap to drastically clean-up its government of corrupt practices and
looting of public resources within a specific time frame. The problem is not lack of resources, it a problem of mismanagement of resources.


These wanton public corruption and mismanagement of public resources as well as
suppression of minority rights to self-determination has an adverse effect on the overall
development and stability of Nigeria. The most affected areas are the oil-bearing ethnic
minority communities of the Niger-Delta region, particularly Ogoni.


CURRENT SITUATION IN THE NIGER DELTA



The oil-rich Niger Delta is situated in Southern Nigeria. Oil was discovered in the area in 1956,
and since then, the area had remained the main foreign exchange earner for Nigeria. The
region had since the last three decades, account for 95 percent of Nigeria's export earnings and
over 80 percent of the Federal Government's revenue. Despite the indisputable enormous
contributions to national coffers, the area remains the least developed and the most
environmentally destroyed region of Nigeria.

The Ogoni is an ethnic minority of about one-million people in the Niger-Delta. The Ogoni
situation had been, and remains, the worst of all the other ethnic groups in the region. After
many years of negotiations and dialogue failed to address the political, economic and
environmental challenges facing the people resulting from oil exploration in Ogoniland, Ken
Saro-Wiwa mobilized the Ogoni people in 1990 under the auspices of the Movement for the
Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP).

*Ken Saro Wiwwa

He internationalized the campaign to save the people and
their environment from further ruins by Shell Oil and the Nigerian government. The grievances
and demands of the people were articulated in the historic Ogoni Bill of Rights (OBR). The bill
calls for, among other core demands, the Right to control and use a fair share of Ogoni
economic resources for Ogoni development and the Right to protect the Ogoni environment
and ecology from further degradation.

Instead of addressing the concerns of the Ogoni people articulated in the OBR, the government
resorted to suppression, repression and persecution. The height of it was on November 10,
1995 when against all international appeals, the government of Nigeria hung Ken Saro-Wiwa
and eight other Ogoni activists after being convicted by a military tribunal that was adjudged by
international organizations such as the Commonwealth to be a kangaroo court.
The steps and processes implemented by the Federal Government of Nigeria in an attempt to
address the Ogoni crisis were to create the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) and
the Niger Delta Ministry. The establishment of these two entities runs contrary to the core
demands of the Ogoni people namely the devolution of power from the center. In effect, the
establishment of these two agencies further concentrate power at the federal level of
government.



On August 4, 2011, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) released a comprehensive
report indicting the Nigerian Government and Shell for environmental devastation in Ogoniland
and recommended immediate clean-up. It is sad to note that President Goodluck Jonathan has
refused to implement the report - see article published in the Punch Newspaper of February 1,
2012, titled "Ogoni clean up not in 2012 budget - Minister. The President's insistence that he
would prefer a clean-up of the entire Niger Delta instead of Ogoni is nothing but a convenient
excuse to sweep the report under the carpet in the same manner that the 1996 United Nations
Fact-Finding Mission Report and other reports on Ogoni and the Niger-Delta had been treated
over the years.

While the Amnesty Program could be credited for the reduced level of violence in the restive
Niger-Delta, especially in the Ijaw areas, it is important to note that any peace recorded is
temporary because the underlining problems of environmental devastation and economic
marginalization that led to the crisis are yet to be resolved. Granting Amnesty to militants who
engaged in violence and other illegal activities on one hand and, ignoring the genuine demands
of the Ogonis who are peaceful and non-violent in their agitations on the other hand is wrong,
immoral and unjust. It is an encouragement for violence and a recipe for further disaster in the
country. It is at a point where the Ogoni people are beginning to feel that nonviolence
campaign may not work in Nigeria where morality or world opinion means nothing to the
powers that be, especially now that the Ogoni people are beginning to feel abandoned by the
international community because of the interest in the Nigerian oil supply.




RECOMMENDATIONS

* This Committee and the Congress should adopt the concurrent resolution - H. CON. RES. 121
submitted by Rep. Rush and Fortenberry on April 27, 2012.
* Political Autonomy: A practical way of addressing the self-determination yearnings of the
Ogoni people is the creation of Bori State that guarantees political autonomy within Nigeria, at
the minimum. Creation of a separate State for the Ogoni people and their neighboring
minorities will ensure adequate and equal representation in Nigerian institutions of
governance, and also ensure equitable resource allocation. The manpower to run the affairs of
the state is in abundance and the economic viability of a ‘Bori State’ is unquestionable. I
earnestly appeal to the United States Government to impress on the Nigerian Government to
take this issue very seriously in the upcoming Nigerian Constitutional Amendment exercise -
(see attached Memorandum On The Creation Of Bori State), as this may be a lasting solution to
the over a decade long problem in the Niger Delta and a pathway to true reconciliation
between the Ogoni People, Nigeria Government and Shell Oil. The proposed Bori State will
liaise with the Federal and Shell in the implementation of the UNEP Report.
*The Nigerian Government should be encouraged to immediately implement the United
Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) Report on Ogoni because continued delay imposes
eminent threats to the existence of the Ogoni people.
The US Congress is requested to prevail on the Nigerian authorities to stop Rivers state
government from further attacks and killings of innocent villagers in Sogho community in
Ogoni, where Rivers state security police is presently 'shooting aside' in a government's raid for
a forceful expropriation of land in the already overcrowded Ogoni area.
* The United States Government should continue with its strategic engagement with Nigeria
but such engagement should include a carrot and stick approach.
* To tackle corruption, the Congress should mandate the Justice Department to henceforth
investigate and prosecute all Nigerian government officials who engage in corruption. Any loot
recovered should be re-directed towards various poverty alleviation programs being
undertaken by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in
impoverished communities in Nigeria.
* U.S. Visas should not be issued to corrupt Nigerian officials and their immediate and extended
families who benefit from such corrupt practices.
* The U.S. should mobilize the G8 Countries and other powerful financial institutions to freeze
accounts of corrupt Nigerian officials.
* The remaining Ogoni refugees left behind in the UNHCR Camp in Benin Republic during the
U.S. Resettlement exercise from 1996 to 2001 should be considered for resettlement, especially
now that they are facing forced repatriation to Nigeria, while the government of Nigeria is yet
to address the demands of the Ogoni people enshrined in the Ogoni Bill of Rights or have a
rehabilitation plan.
* The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has not embarked on any
developmental projects in Ogoni. I therefore appeal to the House to bring this concern to the
attention of the USAID.
* The Nigerian Government should be encouraged to dialogue with true representatives of
Ogoni people over the various other demands enshrined in the Ogoni Bill of Rights (OBR). The
government to date has not addressed any aspect of the Ogoni Bill of Rights.
Thank you all very much for your time. I must add that the hopes of the Ogoni people recline on
the continue support of the United States of America

Courtesy:http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/112/HHRG-112-FA16-WState-MillerJ-20120710.pdf

Saturday, August 4, 2012

FROM A TORTUOUS NATION: OGONI DECLARES SELF-GOVERNMENT


“We are acting with legitimacy to reclaim all of our rights, without exception, says Goodluck Diigbo

Jubilations are continuing throughout Ogoniland after the Ogoni people in southern Nigeria, today, Thursday, 2nd of August declared political autonomy.

In a live broadcast on a newly established radio station: Voice of Ogoni, MOSOP President/Spokesman, Dr. Goodluck Diigbo vowed that:“By this declaration of political autonomy, we, the Ogoni people are determined to enforce the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples, without fear or retreat, Diigbo said.

Diigbo affirmed that self-government within Nigeria will secure for the Ogoni people, their indigenous rights, enable them to meet their needs and interests and finally end internal colonialism.

Diigbo said self-government became urgent recognizing the need to arrive at a consensus to collectively review the disputed UNEP Ogoniland Oil Assessment report, because any dialogue must be with the genuinely elected representatives of the people expected to enforce indigenous rights without dictation.

In the broadcast, Diigbo further underscored the reason for the urgency of self-government for Ogoni: “Concerned that in the absence of a responsive government that the indigenous people of Ogoni will continue to suffer from historic injustices.”

Diigbo stated: “In order to make indigenous rights practicable in Ogoni, we have through a very transparent electoral college process, beginning with community by community elections, set up 272 village councils, while the village councils in turn elected representatives for 33 district councils and the district representatives went on to elect representatives to serve at the center as custodians of customs and traditions, otherwise called lawmakers.”

“The law makers in turn elected the executive arm of the Ogoni Central Indigenous Authority (OCIA) with checks and balances inbuilt to ensure corruption-free, effective, efficient and answerable system of grassroots self-government instead of the old, corrupt and mismanaged local government system endured by the Ogoni for decades,” Diigbo explained.

“In taking these measures, we are quite aware of the discomfort to about 56 local politicians that control local government politics in Ogoni, however, we care more about the 1.2 million people that have for too long been excluded,” he stated.

He announced that a Transitional Committee was already set up to facilitate dialogue to ensure peaceful transition, within 30 days, while consultation with the national government and international community begins without delay.

Diigbo emphasized the need for Ogonis to remain law-abiding and act nonviolently; saying “we are acting with legitimacy to reclaim all of our rights, without exception, and for the sake of peace and security; let no one test the collective will of the Ogoni people, because we will not surrender our indigenous rights anymore.”

Excerpts:
In 1990, we the people of Ogoni presented the Ogoni Bill of Rights to the Government and people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in which the Ogoni nonviolently demanded among other indigenous rights:

· Political autonomy to participate in the affairs of the Republic as a distinct and separate indigenous unit (by whatever name called), provided that this autonomy guarantees political control of Ogoni affairs by Ogoni people; The right to control and use a fair proportion of Ogoni economic resources for Ogoni development; adequate representations, as of right, in all Nigerian national institutions, and the right to protect the Ogoni environment and ecology from further degradation as recognized under international law to which Nigeria is obligated.

Nigeria, a multi-ethnic nation state, a legacy of the British colonial administration, granted political independence October 1, 1960, after the British violated Ogoni independence in 1901, did not respond to the Ogoni, inhabiting their ancestral land in southern Nigeria.

When in the struggle for indigenous political autonomy; especially, in matters concerning confiscation of sacred ancestral lands for oil production without prior informed consent, there comes a moment to assert powers derived from the consent of the people and Nature's blessings in order to protect, preserve and pass on inherited sacred ancestral heritage to succeeding indigenous generations. On behalf of the entire Ogoni people, I am highly honored to present these issues surrounding the proposed Ogoni Declaration of Political Autonomy.

Part of Full Text
30. That despite the fact that the “Nigerian Constitution” and other laws and policies provide for a local government system, in reality, the local government constitutional provisions meant to extend the principle of Federalism to its logical conclusion, by bringing the government to the grassroots level, do not apply in Ogoniland as a result of corruption and public deception by local and state political actors and the lack of enforcement of the shaky “Nigerian constitution” by the federal government;

31. That, this is because quite often local governments are frequently dissolved in Ogoniland without any explanation rendered to the Ogoni people;

32. That, essential appointments into local government service are often suspended for several years without information to the Ogoni people about the reason for such suspension, when the local authorities still operate budgetary provisions for needed manpower;

33. That the elected representatives who have supported this proposed declaration of political autonomy for the Ogoni people as they have bitterly complained that the present system of local government in Nigeria does not allow them the freedom to govern according to the wishes of the people;

34. That individual local government chairman has to remit monthly allowances in substantial amounts to those politicians at the state and national levels that put them into office;

35. That since local government operators are often imposed on the people, they, the local operators are required to compensate for the way they are often put into office through massive and violent rigging of elections;

36. That in the circumstance, the local operators, expected to respond to yearnings of their grassroots constituencies have become perpetually vulnerable to threats of illegal removal from office without reference to the electorate;

37. That, we the Ogoni people take very serious, the complaint by the Ogoni local officials that have confessed that they still hold office because they are able to settle their political godfathers, meaning political stalwarts that planted them as conduit pipe for siphoning funds meant to help in the development of Ogoni villages and wellbeing of Ogonis;

38. That the application indigenous rights will end this manner of abuse of power and mismanagement of public resources as the representatives of the people have been duly elected by the people in Ogoni, and controlled by the people and to end the system whereby politicians handpicked by political operators at the national and state levels, remain in office without accountability to the people as long as they satisfy those who put them into office.

39. That the local government employees, some in service for over 30 years cannot even afford a good meal with their families, but have seen politicians that come into the local councils buying houses in Port Harcourt and Abuja, even in overseas countries within six months in office.

40. That we believe that the Ogoni people are equal to all other Nigerians that now lord it over the Ogoni by means of indirect internal colonial rule through the corrupt local government system, which violates indigenous rights of the Ogoni people.

Concluding Declaration:

“Now, therefore, acting on the General Assembly mandate on the questions relating to the Political Autonomy of Ogoni in southern Nigeria, and in the spirit of the General Assembly motion DPA/001/2012, and its resolutions DPA/002/2012 and DPA/003/2012 adopted and approved on July 31, 2012; in accordance with the wishes of the Ogoni people contained in the Ogoni Bill of Rights of 26 August, 1990 as revised on the 26th of August 1991; expressing the collective will of the good people of Ogoni in the referendum of 2010 and the second referendum of 2011, obeying the command by the Ogoni people and their elected representatives from 33 district councils, comprising over 272 village councils, living in the six kingdoms of Ogoni, namely: Babbe, Eleme, Gokana, Kenkhana, Nyokhana and Tai and two administrative units: Ban Goi and the Bori National Territory; conducting this solemn affair in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted by United Nations General Assembly in New York on September 13, 2007, guided by the purposes and principles of international law in accordance with the United Nations Charter, I, Dr. Goodluck Diigbo, hereby make this historic statement, to announce the proclamation of this General Assembly Declaration of Political Autonomy for the Self-determination or Self-government of the Ogoni people within Nigeria, today, the 2ndDay of August, 2012. So declared, and so be it; for the advancement of liberty in freedom and the preservation of the ancestral heritage of the Ogoni people.”

CLAUS VON STAUFFENBERG AND JULY 20, 1944 ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT AGAINST HITLER

July Plot, unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Nazi leader Adolf Hitler on July 20, 1944. A group of German military officers and civilians led by Count Claus von Stauffenberg planned the assassination. Their goal was to bring down the Third Reich, the Nazi government led by Hitler, and to end the war, which they believed Germany was going to lose.

*Claus von Stauffenberg-On July 20, 1944, German army officer Claus von Stauffenberg placed and detonated a concealed bomb inside the military headquarters of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler. He initially believed the assassination attempt had been successful and flew to Berlin to complete an attempted coup, but Hitler had survived the explosion. Stauffenberg and his fellow conspirators were captured, and Stauffenberg was executed later that day.

From the beginning of World War II in 1939, a small core in opposition to Hitler had managed to survive within the German military. Among them was General Henning von Tresckow, who failed to kill Hitler in March 1943 when a bomb placed on the dictator’s plane did not go off. After this unsuccessful effort, Stauffenberg became involved in planning a fresh attempt on Hitler’s life.
In October 1943 Stauffenberg was promoted to colonel and appointed to the supply section of the Reserve Army under General Friedrich Olbricht. The Reserve Army already had a plan, Operation Valkyrie, to be used to restore order in the event of a national emergency. Led by Olbricht they decided to use the plan against the Nazi regime. Stauffenberg’s job was to kill Hitler. Others who worked closely with Olbricht and Stauffenberg were generals Friedrich Fromm and Ludwig Beck. Stauffenberg developed an elaborate plan to kill Hitler and, if possible, Gestapo chief Heinrich Himmler and Field Marshall Hermann Göring, head of the Luftwaffe (air force) as well. Stauffenberg was well placed to do so: He was a disabled war hero beyond suspicion and he had access to Hitler’s war conferences.



*Hitler in July 1944-On July 20, 1944, a group of conspirators led by Claus von Stauffenberg attempted to assassinate Hitler during a meeting in Hitler’s military headquarters, the Wolf’s Lair, in East Prussia. Their goal was to bring about the collapse of the Nazi regime and enable a new German leadership to make peace with the Allies. However, Hitler survived the bomb blast with only light wounds, and the conspiracy rapidly unraveled. Stauffenberg was shot dead in Berlin that night, and the other conspirators arrested and later executed. The photograph shows Hitler, second from the right, shortly after the assassination attempt had failed. He is accompanied by, left to right, Wilhelm Keitel, chief of the supreme high command of German armed forces; Hermann Göring, commander of the German air force; and Martin Bormann, Hitler’s secretary.

As time passed and no opportunity presented itself to kill all three at once, the conspirators decided to make Hitler their sole target. On July 20, 1944, Stauffenberg smuggled a bomb into a meeting at Hitler’s military headquarters, Wolf’s Lair, at Rastenburg in East Prussia (now part of Poland). He had concealed the bomb in his briefcase, which he placed under a map table around which Hitler and others were standing. By chance, however, the briefcase was moved after Stauffenberg left the room. Although several people in the room were killed by the bomb’s explosion, Hitler escaped with only a few cuts. Stauffenberg was later arrested and executed, along with his fellow conspirators and many others suspected of dissatisfaction with Hitler. Beck and Tresckow committed suicide. The resistance










Wednesday, August 1, 2012

THE PHENOMENON OF YORUBA’S WAIST BEAD


It has been noted that beads are made in many different regions throughout the African continent. They are made by independent bead makers. African beads made by indigenous tribes and ethnic groups are most commonly referred to as African tribal beads.

However, the Yorubas of West Africa has evolved a more exotic culture of bead making, that spans centuries and intricately designed in such a way and manner that speak equivocally alot about the ceremony or activities it portend to depict.



There is no doubt that the Yorubas have developed the most varying and peculiar uses for the waist beads. The Yorubas have developed a culture of bead usage that cuts across both material and spiritual aspects of the life of the people. In addition, they have also the capacity to produce the beads for varying purposes ranging from royalty, body adornment, deification and decoration.

The Yoruba tribe is one of the largest tribes in Africa. Recent estimate has it that the Yoruba number more than fifty million, primarily prevalent in Nigeria, as well as Ghana, Togo, Benin ,Brazil and others. The most common Yoruba beads are Yoruba brass beads, Keta Awuazi Beads, and Yoruba mock coral beads.


The Piece below is courtesy of Beautiful Yoruba

Yorubas have developed a culture of bead usage that cuts across both material and spiritual aspects of the life of the people. In addition, we have also the capacity to produce the beads for varying purposes ranging from royalty, body adornment, deification and decoration.


Beads of the waist is said to posses the power to attract and evoke deep emotional responses, they are a sign of success and affluence as well as spiritual well being.

The common users of the waist beads are mostly the women folk, only in exceptional theatrical perform as will a man adorn a waist bead to symbolize feminism. The waist bead is synonymous with feminism.

Yorubas have esteemed usage attached to the waist beads. We refer to the waist bead as Ileke, “Lagidigba” the term lagidigba means something big, thick or massive. The Lagidigba is made of palm nut shells string together, while the bebe is made of glass.


Yorubas have a belief that the waist beads posses some erotic appeal, they have the power to provoke desire or deep emotional response on the opposite sex.

Waist beads in Yoruba are also used for birth control; the beads are laced with charms and worn by the women to prevent conception.

Beads are a precious ornaments to Yorubas, hence when adorned by a woman, accentuates her feminism or beauty. Beads also help to portray the chastity of a maiden or women sensuality. Parent show their love for their girl child through gifts of waist beads that are colourful and expensive.


The lagidigba or palm nut shell beads are used for fecundity purposes. The nuts signify multiple births as they are in clusters, thus one can infer the high incidence of multiple births in Yoruba land to the usage of the lagidigba bead.

Brides seduce their spouses with the beads they adorn, some women are said to lace their beads with charm to make them irresistible to the male folks. Yoruba can easily comment on a women’s moral standing in those days by interpretation of the movement of the waist bead adorned by a woman. The way she moves her buttocks can depict her morals either seductive or reserve.


Other users of the waist beads in Yorubaland are the Orisas or devotes of water deities and other priestesses, they adorn the waist beads for protection against spiritual attacks as well as part of their dress regalia.

*Yoruba Beaded Crown as dis plays in WLA Brooklyn museum .

The waist bead is also used to adorn the Ere-Ibeji figurine on the death of a twin, there is the belief that when treated well the spirit of the spirit of the dead twin will not harm the living twin and will return to the family to stay.


Waist beads are also adorned and laced with charms to ward away the Abiku spirit (mermaid Spirit) from a woman.


Yoruba royal sword and beaded sheath in WLA Brooklyn Museum


Waist bead in today’s fashion is relegated; ladies have a preference for costumes such as belts, chains, g-strings to the waist beads. The culture of waist bead is going down rapidly to extinction. Religion and other spiritual reasons have been adduced for the neglect, however it must be pointed out that waist bead usage as practiced in the past is an essential element of Yoruba body adornment that is harmless and meaningful a pride and precious item which should be encourage today.


Adapted from Beautiful Yoruba-http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=473915275953821&set=a.199210420090976.52876.199101673435184&type=1&comment_id=1463777
Addition from: http://blog.thebeadchest.com/african-tribal-beads/.
http://www.africainfinite.com/catalog.php?act=view_prod_info&id_prod=56843&i=&l=&sid=bc14f26dc373ad94cf32056893926aa1.