Thursday, February 13, 2025 BSA is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Topic: Topic: BSA ID Card Application Process Time: Feb 14, 2025 08:00 PM America/Toronto Join Zoom Meeting Meeting ID: 899 9024 0504 Passcode: 236989 --- One tap mobile +19292056099,,89990240504#,,,,*236989# US (New York) +12532050468,,89990240504#,,,,*236989# US --- Dial by your location • +1 929 205 6099 US (New York) • +1 253 205 0468 US • +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) • +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) • +1 305 224 1968 US • +1 309 205 3325 US • +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) • +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) • +1 360 209 5623 US • +1 386 347 5053 US • +1 507 473 4847 US • +1 564 217 2000 US • +1 646 931 3860 US • +1 669 444 9171 US • +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) • +1 689 278 1000 US • +1 719 359 4580 US Meeting ID: 899 9024 0504 Passcode: 236989 Find your local number: @DpIhss

Thursday, February 13, 2025 Part 2 of 2 THE EUROPEAN UNION'S DOUBLE STANDARDS: A TALE OF SELECTIVE ADVOCACY By Mazi Obinna Victor Uzoaganaobi USB-Information Telecommunications and Postal Services The European Union is urged to reflect on its actions and provide clarity to the world. Is their commitment to human rights and international law conditional based on religious or ethnic affiliations? The EU must unambiguously address these questions and reconsider its approach to human rights advocacy, ensuring that all lives, regardless of faith or geography, are treated with equal urgency and respect. May I end this article by making it crystal clear, while the EU might choose to ignore the cries from Biafra, the world watches, and history records. Biafra's journey towards independence will continue, supported by the moral and just support from those who understand that freedom and justice are not privileges but rights, irrespective of where one stands on the global map. END @MaziVictor_U

Thursday, February 13, 2025 Part 1 of 2 THE EUROPEAN UNION'S DOUBLE STANDARDS: A TALE OF SELECTIVE ADVOCACY By Mazi Obinna Victor Uzoaganaobi USB-Information Telecommunications and Postal Services In the annals of global diplomacy, the European Parliament has long positioned itself as a beacon of human rights, democracy, and ethical governance. Yet, the events of October 2023 have cast a long shadow over this esteemed institution, revealing a troubling narrative of inconsistency and selective humanitarianism. In October 2023, the Prime Minister of the Biafra Republic Government in Exile, Simon Ekpa, sent a poignant appeal to the European Union Parliament with a petition number 0521/2023 highlighting the dire situation of Biafrans in Nigeria. His petition detailed the harrowing tales of extra-judicial executions, the suppression of self-determination rights, and the systematic ethnic cleansing of Biafrans, predominantly Christians in the South-East region. This appeal was not merely a cry for help but a call to uphold the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter on Self Determination. Shockingly, the EU dismissed this plea, claiming it fell "outside the purview" of their activities. This decision was not just a refusal to intervene; it was an explicit statement of disengagement from a situation where human lives were at stake, particularly those advocating for their basic rights under international law. Contrastingly, the same European Parliament, which turned a blind eye to the Biafran genocide courtesy of the Nigerian government through the HQ Nigerian Army, swiftly engaged when it came to the case of a Muslim singer from Kano, demanding his unconditional release and condemning blasphemous laws in Nigeria. This rapid response and active advocacy for one individual raised eyebrows and questions about the EU's true motives and priorities. One must ask, what rationalizes this stark discrepancy in response? Is the EU's ideal to foster an Islamic dominance in Nigeria while allowing Christian communities to face annihilation without a word? The selective advocacy here suggests a troubling bias where the sanctity of a Christian life, particularly in the context of Biafra, seems to hold less value in the eyes of European policy. The EU's silence on the Biafran issue, juxtaposed with their vocal intervention in Islamic affairs, undermines their proclaimed commitment to unity, democracy, and sustainable development. It is a slap to the very principles they claim to uphold, revealing a pattern of selective humanitarianism that questions their role as a neutral arbiter on the global stage. Moreover, the EU's actions, like sending letters of credence to President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu Nigerian government over the detention of Simon Ekpa by Finnish authorities under Alexander Stubb further muddy their stance. If the EU can show concern for an individual's rights when it suits their narrative, why not for a collective seeking justice? Despite this apparent indifference or selective engagement, the spirit of Biafra remains unbroken. The quest for independence, fueled by a noble cause and an indomitable will, continues to gain global recognition. The EU's actions or inactions will not deter the inevitable march towards Biafran sovereignty. @MaziVictor_U Continues..on page 2 of 2

Thursday, February 13, 2025 Breaking: The BRGIE/Defacto official Cabinet meeting that dissolved the BRGIE Conflict Resolution Committee (CRC) Any election done using the BRGIE CRC is not only null and void but also illegal. This has become necessary based on the lies being peddled by some ex BRGIE cabinet members to confuse unsuspecting innocent Biafrans Thanks Dr. Ngozi Orabueze COS/DPM United States of Biafra

February 13, 2025 MAZI NNAMDI KANU: Detention and trial have time limits - By ALOY EJIMAKOR It is no longer news that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s case was improperly off the Abuja court docket for almost five months from 24th September 2024 until 10th February 2025 when the infamous hearing-without-jurisdiction was conducted in the case, triggering an impasse that has prompted a lot of people to ask: What is the way forward? Well, below are some of the answers. Given the present scenario that every Judge (other than the recused Judge) in the Abuja division of the Federal High Court is reluctant to handle the case, the next lawful thing to do is to transfer the case, willy-nilly, to any of the Federal High Court divisions in the Southeast, especially since the charges levied against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu are alleged to have either occurred in (or had impact) in Southeast as contrasted with Abuja. To be sure, this very fact alone endows a far superior (and arguably exclusive) jurisdiction on the Federal High Court divisions located in the Southeast in line with Order 49, Rule 3 of Federal High Court Rules, Section 45 of the Federal High Court Act and the celebrated case of James Ibori vs. Federal Republic of Nigeria. Thus, transferring the case to Southeast will cure the questionable institution of the case in Abuja which was done on the wrong purport that the Terrorism Prevention and Amendment Act (an inferior legislation to the Federal High Court Act) conferred universal jurisdiction on the Abuja division of the Federal High Court. So, now that the famed Abuja division has failed to rise to the occasion, it is time to abandon this fallacy, once and for all. Conversely, if there is some sort of an official reluctance to do the lawful thing by having the case conducted in Southeast, then it should be discontinued forthwith because you cannot keep Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in an endless limbo while he endures a horrendous detention, awaiting a trial that has become a mirage and a subterfuge for incarcerating him without conviction. In other words, considering that the trial has stalled to the extent that diligent and timely prosecution has hit a logjam, it will offend the Constitution to keep Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in detention awaiting a trial that will not happen in the interim and even in the foreseeable future. For avoidance of doubt, the best practices of the common law adversarial system of criminal justice mandates that when a State has an insurmountable difficulty in putting a detainee on trial within a reasonable time, the next responsible and lawful option is to free such a detainee on bail until such a time his trial can be conducted, properly and lawfully. To do otherwise will amount to turning such a detainee to a hapless victim of a false or an extrajudicial imprisonment by the State. Under the Constitution, every criminal suspect, especially a detainee, deserves to be tried within a reasonable time, not an indefinite time, and certainly not to be subjected to detention for almost four years awaiting a trial that never happens for no fault of the detainee but of the State. In particular, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act prescribed a speedy trial for every criminal suspect and it becomes much more urgent and compelling when such suspect is in detention, and a lengthy one to boot. There is no gainsaying that from the very inception of this case, the ball has been exclusively in the court of the Federal Government. Mazi Nnamdi Kanu does not possess any legal duty or the capacity whatsoever to schedule his own trial. It is those that accuse him that are constitutionally burdened with that duty and they must discharge it without inordinate delay and in strict adherence to the dictates of the Constitution. Thus, since the Government has proved unable to bring Mazi Kanu to trial within a reasonable time and in line with the Constitution, then he should be freed forthwith through restoration of his bail or by discontinuance of the case.

@jamesmarvel4 Mazi, yes. At this time, it is Only for Diasporans

@Njiles3 Good morning, Mazi. I have another X handle showing my current USB government position. It is unverified, so I can not make long posts with it. @drfagie

RT @DrakeOfficial06:

UPDATE/Press Release During our visitation today, ONYENDU Mazi Nnamdi Kanu instructed us to convey to the civilised world his resolve to take his trial in so far as it comports with the tenets of the law. He made it clear that the era of institutional bias against him by Abuja courts is over in his case. He stands to challenge any court that fails to align its decisions with RULE OF LAW. He maintains that, with the obvious exception of one, the rest of the decisions taken in his cases in Abuja have been riddled with blatant unconstitutionality in contravention of Section 36 of the Nigerian Constitution that mandated courts be “independent” and “impartial”. It’s particularly noteworthy that the finding made by the Supreme Court to the effect that Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako is biased by revoking Mazi Kanu’s is sufficient reason to oust her jurisdiction, especially as she also dishonored the Supreme Court by her inexplicable refusal to reinstate the bail. In the circumstance therefore, especially consequent upon her recusal, Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako should no longer have any business with Mazi Kanu’s case. Thus, it is an egregious breach of the law for the Chief Judge of Federal High Court (Justice John Tsoho) to reassign Mazi Kanu’s case to a judge whose jurisdiction is forever barred by an extant order of recusal. For the foregoing reasons, the entire proceedings conducted on 10th February 2025 before Justice Binta Nyako's court has no foundation in law and reason and the same goes for any ruling that was purportedly made that day. Therefore, those peddling the narrative that Mazi Kanu’s case has been adjourned indefinitely do not understand the basic law and that’s is: Once a judge is recused, she has lost the jurisdiction to convene, sit or deliver any ruling on the same case from which she has been recused. That’s what the black letter law says and it shall abide, now and forever. Signed: Aloy Ejimakor, Esq. f/Mazi Nnamdi Kanu legal team. @amnesty @amnestyusa @CapitaineIb226

Breaking: Today February 12th, 2025, I made a formal report to the FBI Atlanta Georgia on the suppression, oppression , killing of unarmed innocent Biafrans by Nigeria President Tinubu , Christopher Musa and people like Bianca Onoh I informed them about our independence in Lahti Finland on November 29th, 2024, our PM Simon Ekpa, our leader Nnamdi Kanu and how Nigerian is truncating our independence All information was well received and docunented. For those calling my number or any innocent Biafrans number using fake phone numbers and pretending to be FBI, the radar is on you USB is a sovereign state and must be protected. Self defence is our right. Thanks Dr. Orabueze COS/DPM United States of Biafra

Wednesday, February 12, 2025 BARRISTER MAXWELL ỌPARA'S SHOCKING BREACH OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE IN MAZI NNAMDI KANU'S CASE By Mazi Obinna Victor Uzoaganaobi USB-Information Telecommunications and Postal Services In an unprecedented move that has sent shockwaves through the legal community, Barr. Maxwell Opara has publicly disclosed details of his interactions with his client Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), on national television. Opara revealed that Kanu frequently orders him to sit down and cease representation, raising serious concerns about the sanctity of attorney-client privilege. The principle of attorney-client privilege is foundational in the legal system, ensuring that communications between lawyers and their clients remain confidential. This confidentiality is not merely a legal obligation but a cornerstone of professional ethics, fostering an environment where clients can speak freely without fear of their words being used against them. The question then arises: Why would Barrister Maxwell Opara feel emboldened to share such details with the public? Why using Mazi Nnamdi Kanu's words against him in the public? This disclosure could be seen as a direct violation of lawyer-to-client privacy. One might speculate whether Barrister Maxwell Opara is laying groundwork to distance himself from potential fallout should Kanu face an unfavorable judgment in court. Is this an attempt at self-exoneration, or does it serve another, more sinister purpose? Moreover, this revelation casts a shadow over the competence of Kanu's legal team. Kanu himself has been vocal about the systemic issues within Nigeria's judicial system, which indirectly suggested that even his legal counsel might be lacking in necessary legal acumen. His critique, "poor knowledge of the law is what's killing Nigeria," implies a broader dissatisfaction with how his case has been handled, possibly including by Opara. It's also noteworthy that onye ndú Mazi Nnamdi Kanu might be attempting to rectify past damages inflicted by his previous lawyers ! Barr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor and Mike Ozekhome (SAN), whose strategies were perceived as detrimental or ethically questionable. Kanu's public statements could be seen as an effort to prevent a recurrence of such missteps, ensuring his legal innocence is not compromised by internal team biases or inefficiencies. However, Opara's bold statement about being rebuffed by Kanu raises questions about his continued involvement in the case. If Kanu indeed expressed such a desire to remove him, why would Opara still be part of the legal representation? This scenario hints at deeper motives or perhaps a strategy to manipulate public perception or the judicial outcome. The implications of these revelations are profound, not only for Kanu's trial but for the integrity of legal practice in Nigeria. It forces one to ponder who Opara might truly be serving and what his endgame could be. As this case unfolds, it will be crucial to monitor how these breaches of confidentiality and the apparent discord within the legal team affect the proceedings and, ultimately, the quest for justice in Mazi Nnamdi Kanu's case. Time will indeed reveal the full extent of this legal drama, but for now, the breach of attorney-client privilege by Barrister Maxwell Opara stands as a stark reminder of the fragile balance between legal strategy, ethics, and the pursuit of justice. @MaziVictor_U

RT @DrakeOfficial06:

Tuesday, February 11, 2025 Attention! Attention!Attention The Dissolution of the Biafra Republic Government In-Exile

Tuesday, February 11, 2025 BIANCA OJUKWU'S PATHETIC COSMETICS-INDUCED DECEPTIVE PROMISE. By Mazi Obinna Victor Uzoaganaobi USB-Information Telecommunications and Postal Services Bianca Ojukwu's appointment as Nigeria's Foreign Affairs Minister was a masterstroke of deception, masquerading as a promise of progress. This was a calculated, cosmetic ploy to delude some Igbos into believing that her role would significantly benefit their race. However, it was nothing but a ruse, designed to sully the venerated legacy of her husband, our eternal hero, Dim Chukwuemeka Odimegwu Ojukwu. It is confounding how some of you were persuaded that Bianca Ojukwu's tenure would somehow alleviate the government-sponsored genocide in Biafraland. Would it not be the height of naivety to assume that, under the stewardship of President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the Nigerian government would entrust an Igbo individual—particularly one whose late husband was instrumental in Nigeria's fragmentation—with the critical task of managing international diplomacy, relations, and foreign policy? Comprehend this: the elevation of Bianca Ojukwu to Foreign Affairs Minister by Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu was a strategic gambit. The intent was to ensnare the noble aspirations of Biafran agitation in the mire of political machinations, to deride those championing Biafra's restoration. Regrettably, Bianca Ojukwu became a willing instrument in this scheme, culminating in the detention of Simon Ekpa in Finland. Reflect upon this: since her public pledge to secure the release of Nnamdi Kanu from Tinubu, what concrete steps has she taken? Has there been any further public advocacy from her regarding Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s release? If her commitment to freeing Mazi Nnamdi Kanu were sincere, would Kanu still be in court, elucidating the corruption and bias within the judicial and governmental structures? Would she not, in her capacity as Foreign Affairs Minister, have leveraged her influence to ensure his liberation? I applaud the silencing of Uchechigeme Anyanwụụtụtụ Okwu-Kanu, who has ceased her once vociferous protests, perhaps realizing the extent to which she was manipulated by the Nigerian government. She initially believed that aiding in the arrest and extradition of Simon Ekpa would secure her husband's freedom. Yet, after their petition against Simon was successful, the assertion from the Governor of Anambra Charles Chukwuma Soludo that freeing Nnamdi Kanu would not quell the Southeast's unrest brought her to the harsh realization of her exploitation. She no longer lectures us on "ectoparasites" and the "frontal lobe." As for Bianca Ojukwu, she has, by her actions, positioned herself as an adversary to the Igbo cause, and her name will resonate through history with infamy. @MaziVictor_U

RT @DrakeOfficial06:

Monday, February 10, 2025 Breaking: There is only one government - United States of Biafra, and I did not declare any 2 day sit at home - Igwe Butuzo The Commander General of the United States of Biafra Igwe Butuzo has warned anyone using his name in the past or present to manipulate innocent Biafrans to cease and desist from doing so (listen to voice) He noted that he has not declared any 2 day sit at home and asked those putting his name in any announcement and creating confusion to Biafrans to STOP doing that. Commander Butuzo who is a member of the United States of Biafra Cabinet since December 6, 2024 noted that there is only one leadership - the United States of Biafra I hereby encourage all Biafrans to support General Butuzo as we continue to build a decentralized USB army that will be the envy of the world. Thanks Dr. Ngozi Orabueze COS/DPM United States of Biafra @ngoziora

@uzuk37265 @TruthfullEra People who contributed to MNK's rendition to the contraption terrorists government will lose all they have labored in life, Iseee Iseee Iseee.