SACRIFICING OUR ENVIRONMENT FOR THE LAW!: Burning Of Confiscated Items By JTF, NAFDAC, NDLEA and Nigerian Customs

It is now common practice for officers of the JTF (Joint Task Force), NAFDAC (National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control), NDLEA (National Drug Law Enforcement Agency) and Nigerian Customs to set fire to items confiscated on suspicion of having been obtained through pipeline vandalisation/bunkering, uncertified/substandard production, prohibited trafficking or smuggling. Probably, for the sake of transparency, the burning of those items is done in public, with wide media coverage. Many regard the officers involved as gallant patriots (which they ordinarily are), in view of their seeming resolve to “follow orders” in ensuring that the Law is obeyed. However, it behoves of the enlightened mind to attempt a critical analysis of the situation. 

Indiscriminate burning of diesel and petrol, which constitute much of the items seized from suspected oil thieves, releases carbon gases into the atmosphere, causing Environmental Pollution. Smoke from burning pharmaceutical and other complex chemicals which are the active ingredients in suspected substandard products seized by NAFDAC and psychotropic materials like Indian hemp or Marijuana, impounded by NDLEA, tyres, electronics, poultry and other goods seized by Nigerian Customs, releases hazardous substances into the Nigerian Atmosphere. Scientific Research shows that CFC’s (Chlorofluorocarbons), Carbon-IV-oxide, lead and other Green-House Gases that make up those hazardous substances are responsible for the depletion of the Earth’s Ozone Layer. The results, which are not farfetched, include irregular rainfall patterns, flooding, heat waves, devastating increasing weather temperatures, pandemics, acid rain. Nigeria has received its fair share of those Environmental Hazards in recent times.

Spokesperson for the JTF was heard on National TV stressing that they have received express order from relevant authority to promptly burn illegal refinery plants, vehicles, drums,, barges and other items suspected to have  been used by oil thieves. In other words, government has indirectly ordered this “official onslaught” on the Nigerian Environment. This, with the greatest respect, is unconstitutional and unreasonable, against the background of modern trends in both the international arena and scientific development.

Section 20 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended)   , admonishes the government to protect the country’s Environment. Similar obligation exists under several international documents to which Nigeria is a signatory like the African Charter 1979, Vienna Convention 1985, Montreal Protocol 1987 and Kyoto Protocol 1997. Indiscriminate burning of confiscated items obviously contravenes the provisions of the Constitution, International Law and Nigerian Environmental Laws e.g. NESREA Act and Guidelines. Besides, the validity of any purported order as above given to the JTF and others is in question, because under section 1(3) of the Constitution, any Law which is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution is void (assuming such order was Law). The big question therefore is SHOULD WE SACRIFICE OUR ENVIRONMENT AT THE ALTER OF ENFORCEMENT OF LAW AND ORDER? The ready answer is No, because, our existence, both as individuals and as a nation, depends on the Sustenance of our Environment.

Proper methods for disposing of confiscated items abound. It must be noted that confiscated items or goods do not automatically become waste. “Waste”, according to Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary is “something that is not or no longer useful and is to be thrown away or disposed of”. Confiscated diesel and petrol should be tested by appropriate authority and if found okay, used by the government or auctioned to members of the public, while money realized is credited into public account. This will also discourage scampering for such fuel by residents of areas close to seized illegal refineries and fuel laden trucks, especially as memories of Jesse fire incident and similar incidents are still fresh. Seized poultry certified fit for human consumption and used clothing or tyres likewise certified could be auctioned or used for charity. Unfit poultry and Indian hemp should be sterilized and used for making organic or Compost manure. Seized vehicles should be auctioned or converted to use by the government. This will stop the growing size of dumpsites where seized vehicles and other items are burnt by the JTF and others in the prosecution of the war against oil theft, smuggling and drug trafficking. Whatever cannot be disposed of in the methods described above, becomes waste, items like chemicals and non-degradable plastics, should be incinerated. Incineration is a controlled burning process used in advanced countries like the UK and Germany. Metallic wastes can be recycled to improve our local steel industry.

Meanwhile, government should send a bill to the National Assembly for the enactment of a law to provide for the proper procedure for disposing of confiscated goods , incorporating the foregoing suggestions and other Best Available Practices. The call is hereby made for Environmental Interest Groups, NGO’s and other public-spirited individuals to intensify efforts aimed at ensuring that the Sustenance of our Environment is not sacrificed on that alter of enforcement of Law and Order. Let us not forget that NO ENVIRONMENT, NO LAW!

The premature "I Love You"

It's your third date with Alex and things are going great. You're amazed at how many things you have in common: food, music, even your favorite cartoon as a kid. You've only known each other for five weeks, but you find yourself thinking about him a lot, almost as much as he texts you (a little annoying, but you're sure he'll calm down). Unlike some of the other guys you've dated lately, you can really see a future with Alex, as long as this "living with his parents" thing is just a phase. After seeing a movie at the galleria, he pulls out a paper rose and says, "Baby, I know it's crazy, but I think I love you."

Crazy? Perhaps. Too soon? Absolutely. Dating experts agree that a premature profession of love, while not necessarily a dealbreaker, is definitely a red flag. If someone is capable of falling in love that easily, they're just as capable of falling out. Or worse, the love-struck party might just be faking it in order to win his or her way into the heart (and bedroom) of a new love.
Of course, the way you react to an early "I love you" depends a lot on your own feelings. If you really like the other person and enjoy spending time with him or her, then you should be more forgiving of an early blurt. In this case, the offender probably confused the giddy infatuation of "falling in love" for "being in love". If you want to salvage the relationship, the best way to react is to be honest. "I really like you, too," you might say. "But I think we still need to get to know each other better before we can talk about 'love.'"

Unfortunately, an early "I love you" can do irreparable damage to the natural balance of a young relationship. If you've barely entered the "really like" phase and your partner is already picking out your wedding colors, it's going to put a lot of pressure on you to figure out -- quickly -- if you feel the same way. The L-word is now the elephant in the room. If you think there's a future in the relationship, address the issue sensitively and do your best to restore the balance. If not, "2th Pick Art" makes some lovely "you're dumped" cards.

Moral decadence in our society

Who is responsible for the moral decadence in the society today, most especially the youths, is indeed very difficult to say. A lot of people believe parents are to blame while others apportion blame to teachers. I have every to believe that moral decadence among the youths has its roots in parents.

Parents have failed in their duties to bring up the child the way he should in utter disregard of both Quranic and Biblical injunctions which says that parents should train a child the way he should go, so that when he is old he won't depart from it.

Parents are the child's first teachers. They therefore have a lot to do in the training of the child before he joins the formal school. Contrary, the economic situation in the country today has made most parents to abandon their duties in pursuit of material wealth.

Furthermore, house-helps and maids have now assumed the role of parents as far as domestic chores are concerned. Very early in the morning both parents leave for work, leaving the child to the care of the house-helps. By the time they return in the night, the child would have been in bed. Come next day, the child would still be asleep while parents would have gone out in the morning. When then do parents stay with the child to train, correct and make him happy?

Some parents are known to support the child when he goes wrong. Some parents go to the extent of harassing teachers for flogging the child at school, these encouragess the child to do even worse things. At home, the child does bad things while the parents support him so that he would no take offence. Some do not care to flog or punish the child who has done something wrong so that he won't "die", thereby sparing the rod to spoil the child.

Some parents are known to have perpetrated so many immoral things to the glare of the child... Forgetting that the child sees his parents as a mirror and emulates virtually all they do. When immoral acts such as embezzlement of funds (which of course is a form of stealing), fornication, bribery and others are done in the presence of the child, how then can anyone, especially the parents turn round to punish him as far as he copies these acts?

Though teachers cannot be totally absolved from the blame of the youths' decadent behaviour, parents should not forget that the child spends 6hrs out of every 24hrs that make a day at school and that is about 30hrs out of 168hrs in a week on the average, which is almost 0.2%. The remaining 99.8% hours a week are spent at home.

Sometimes, teachers fear to punish the child when they remember that his parents may organise an offensive charge against them. These days teachers do their best to train the child negative is the result because the child has already imbibed so much immortality from home, which teachers find difficult to change.

Parents encourage immortality among their wards by not querying them of their late night, for instance, and being in possession of expensive material gifts. Most mothers descend so low to make use of these gifts with their daughters which is not peculiar to girls alone. Boys also do this... Riding expensive vehicles their father never owned with an illegal source of income. Some parents fail to look into the company their children keep. Some maladjusted parents go many miles to over-pamper their children... An act which later boomerang both on the parents and the society. All these are sure roads leading to immortality.

The child's mind is blank at birth and if the mind is filled with immorality and the child grows with it, then it will be very difficult to correct afterwards. Indiscipline must be jettisoned by our youths and all hands must be on deck to save the youths. It is dangerous and highly calamitous for youths to destroy themselves before the mantles of leadership are handed over to them in the near future.

Parents and teachers must buckle up and intensify moral re-armament and disciplinary measures as they deem fit to shape and mould our young citizens into better citizens.

"Discipline conducts; practices exalt and prosper a nation".

Infatuation and Love

It can sometimes be difficult to tell the difference between infatuation and love. This is especially true at the beginning of a relationship. I'm no relationship expert though. It is easy to think that you have found true love as the intensity of infatuation takes over your life. Love, however, rarely comes on suddenly. It is a slow, gradual process that can only happen after the rush of infatuation starts to ebb.

Infatuation describes the intense range of feelings present at the beginning of most relationships; sweaty palms, rapidly beating heart, butterflies in the stomach. The world is a better, more beautiful place because object of your affection is with you. Every time you touch is thrilling, you remember every conversation, and your thoughts revolve around them. In more common terms, this is a crush. Crushes are a very real, normal part of human life. Everyone experiences at least one crush at some point or another in their lives.

Infatuation is caused by a chemical reaction in the body. The hormones released accounts for some of the feelings of elation. In truth, you are "high" on *oxytocin*. This is an important evolutionary response to meeting a potential future mate. These hormones assure that two people will spend enough time together to possibly produce children, thus ensuring the survival of the species. Oxytocin also stimulates contractions during labour/labor, and then the production of milk.

Love, on the other hand, is a calmer, more mature feeling. It is a sense of stability. Love is still exciting, at times. It can change day-to-day. Love takes work. The feelings are not supported by the highs of hormones, but by a shared love and respect for each other. Love is what exists after infatuation fades, if you are lucky.

Infatuation and love are different in many ways. While both result in pleasant feelings, the feeling of infatuation is more intense than the feeling of love. Love may not be as intense, but it is usually a much deeper emotion. Relationships that start as infatuation can mature into love.

One of the biggest differences between infatuation and love is how long each can last for. Infatuation can last, at most, several months before it starts to fade. Love, on the other hand, is capable of lasting fifty years or more, if both people in the relationship work for it. Infatuation is almost effortless. Anything put into the relationship is because you want to. Everything you do for the other person brings great pleasure for you, too. This isn’t always the case in love. You do things that you don’t want to do, things that you will get no pleasure from, because it is the fair thing to do. Love is about compromise.

Infatuation and love are both different in the amount of unpleasant tension that is part of the relationship some days. Infatuation discourages any real disagreements from taking place. You both are on your best behavior during all the time you spend together. Anything that could cause a discrepancy to the idea of a perfect relationship is avoided. Everything is perfect, and no one wants to mess that up.

Love allows people to be who they really are. While arguments aren’t encouraged, they happen. Sometimes they happen a lot, especially in times of stress. Love is admitting that your partner has faults, and so do you, but that is okay. You have realistic expectations of each other. Love is accepting.

Infatuation and love are two separate emotions, and there are many differences between them. They are, however, similar in some ways. Infatuation is like a shiny new pair of dress shoes, where as love is the comfy old sneakers you’ve had for years. Infatuation is fun, while it lasts. Eventually, though, the night out ends, and you slip into the sneakers that fit perfectly, even if they are starting to give at the seams and the tread is worn out. This is what happens in relationships. As the brilliance of infatuation fades, couples move into a contented place where, even if there are problems, they know they can depend on one another to provide the love and support they need. That is the difference between infatuation and love.

Emotional Intelligence

The distinction between intelligence and knowledge in the area of cognition (ie IQ) is very clear, where generally, psychological research demonstrates that IQ is a reliable measure of cognitive capacity, and is stable over time. In the area of emotion (i.e. EQ) that distinction between intelligence and knowledge is murky. Current definitions of EQ are inconsistent about what it measures: some (such as bradberry and Greaves 2005) say that EQ is dynamic, it can be learned or increased; whereas others (such as Mayers) say that EQ is stable, and cannot be increased. Mayer's (2005) is consistent with cognition-based definitions of intelligence and knowledge, stating that " emotional intelligence is unlikely to be any more easily raised than general intelligence", but "emotional knowledge can be increased. . . fairly easily." Under Mayer's definition, emotional knowledge would be the level of perception and assessment that an individual has of their emotions at any given moment in time.

Emotional intelligence, or EI is the ability to understand your own emotions and those of people around you. EI is often measured as an Emotional Intelligence Quotient or EQ, describes an ability, capacity, or skill to perceive, assess, and manage the emotions of one's self, of others, and of groups.

The term "emotional intelligence" appears to have originated with Wayne Payne (1985), but was popularized by Daniel Goleman (1995). The leading research on the concept originated with Peter Salovey and John "Jack" Mayer starting in the late 1980s. In 1990, their seminal paper defined the concept as an intelligence. Mayer and Salovey continue to research the concept. The term "emotional quotient" seems to have originated in an article by Keith Beasley (1987). There are numerous other assessments of emotional intelligence each advocating different models and measures.

The concept of emotional intelligence, developed by Daniel Goleman, means you have a self-awareness that enables you to recognise feelings and helps you manage your emotions.

On a personal level, it involves motivation and being able to focus on a goal rather than demanding instant gratification. A person with a high emotional intelligence is also capable of understanding the feelings of others. Culturally, they are better at handling relationships of every kind.

Just because someone is deemed 'intellectually' intelligent, it does not necessarily follow they are emotionally intelligent. Having a good memory, or good problem solving abilities, does not mean you are capable of dealing with emotions or motivating yourself.

Highly intelligent people may lack the social skills that are associated with high emotional intelligence. Savants, who show incredible intellectual abilities in narrow fields, are an extreme example of this: a mathematical genius may be unable to relate to people socially. However, high intellectual intelligence, combined with low emotional intelligence, is relatively rare and a person can be both intellectually and emotionally intelligent.

Does socialising make you clever?
Both emotional and intellectual problems are more easily resolved when in a good mood, which to some extent depends on emotional intelligence. Self-motivated students tend to do better in school exams.

The ability to interact well with others and having a good group of friends, means students are more likely to remain in education, whereas those with emotional difficulties tend to drop out.

On the negative side, low emotional intelligence can affect intellectual capabilities. Depression interferes with memory and concentration. Psychological tests show feelings of rejection can dramatically reduce IQ by about 25%. Rejection increased feelings of aggressiveness and reduced self-control.

It is this quality of self-control, rather than being impulsive, which is regarded as necessary to perform well in IQ tests. So a low emotional intelligence may limit intellectual performance.

Stop fixing people

Helping people can actually serve to stunt their development. Not only do you take away their ability to think for themselves, when your goal is to help people do things "the correct way," you are functioning from a position of greater power. 

You are stronger than the person you are helping who has lesser capability, knowledge and strength. Others sense this unequal relationship. If they came to you as unequal--that you are the one with the knowledge in this situation--they may eagerly listen and do what you suggest. This relationship can work when people are starting new ventures and clearly lack skills, experience and knowledge. They want your help. 

On the other hand, if the people you are trying to help do not see you as the great one with all the knowledge, they won't hear you. Their resentment speaks louder than your words. They may even retaliate by doing something stupid or nothing at all. Then you judge them even more harshly. 

In contrast to helping, being of service is a relationship between equals. It is mutual. Serving is responding to a problem and collaborating with others to find the solution. You honour the perspective and knowledge of the people you are serving and then seek to open their eyes to new possibilities and ideas. You give information they are lacking and ask questions to make them think more fully about the situation. You explore possible consequences of their ideas. When they come up with plans for action, you ask them what particular support they need from you to be successful.

My question is "Do you serve or fix people?"

The Dearth To Reading Culture in Nigeria

"If you want to hide something from a black man, place it inside a book”, so goes the saying 

In functional societies, reading should be done in order to increase knowledge and awareness. It seems that our society is yet to achieve that level of functionality, or we simply do not care. Why has it been this difficult for the youths to cultivate the reading habit? What is it that seems to scare them from books? Have we considered the potential long-term effects of our poor reading culture on our society and the overall literacy level?

The complacent attitude towards books seems to form at very early ages – children in nursery and primary schools are hardly encouraged in schools and at home to pick up a book and read. Even in our secondary schools, students are being spoon-fed and not allowed to read and find information for themselves. There are books that have summaries of literary works, including the subject matters and themes as well as literary works. The import of this is that these students do not think it necessary to read the actual books and find out information for themselves. The invariable consequence is that our school system and society is producing people that are functionally literate, but effectively ignorant.

Since the advent of electronic revolution in all aspects of life, the reading and learning culture in Nigeria gradually declined thereby affecting the quality of graduates churned out from schools across the country.

Having established that the reading culture in Nigeria is very poor, and frankly, largely absent in large parts of the country, the question comes up: What can be done to improve this situation? What can individuals, parents, teachers and the wider community do to improve Nigeria’s reading culture?  Perhaps, it may be time to move away from the traditional and explore the unconventional. It may be time to ask: What exactly are we doing to improve the reading culture in Nigeria?