Opinion
Shola Fasure’s Response To Mayor Akinpelu: Deploying Lies To Attack Truths
By Kola Odepeju
I doubt if Shola Fasure will ever cease to amuse the people in his blind defense of his paymaster, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola who was recently described as “Asín ti kò mò pé òhun n rùn” (the shrew that doesn’t know that it smells) by governor Adeleke of Osun for verbally attacking his benefactor, PBAT. But little can one be surprised about Fasure’s blind defense of his boss because he must justify his earnings and secondly, since he himself lacks integrity, it’s easy for him to always come out to come up with drivels in the name of defending his boss.
Fasure’s continued attempts to distort history only shows that he’s either a poor student of history or he’s simply being mischievous. But I like to believe more in the latter being in his DNA. Just like the leopard that doesn’t change its spots, so will a person given to mischief comes out regularly to ply his/her trade. This is the case with Fasure who himself doesn’t believe his own stories with respect to Tinubu/Aregbesola political relationship. Fasure has been trying so hard to distort history though; misinforming the public that Aregbesola is the one that made Tinubu but not vice-versa, he subjects himself to ridicule each time he comes out to turn history upside down and to do surgery to the already battered image of his boss.
One of Nigeria’s veteran journalists, Mayor Akinpelu came out recently to call a spade a spade by telling the public the truths about Aregbesola/Tinubu political relationship. Of course his narration wasn’t in any way different from what the general public had already known before about Aregbesola and his relationship with Tinubu. There was no addition or subtraction in what Mayor Akinpelu said about Aregbesola. All what he said about him are nothing but the truth. No attempt did he make – in the least – either to blackmail Aregbesola or tarnish his image. So my question is; when has saying the truth become an offense under the sky for Fasure to now come out again from his shell and be attacking Akinpelu, an apolitical person who was just doing his job as a social commentator?
Like Akinpelu said in his article, was Aregbesola not scruffy looking prior to his being catapulted by Tinubu? Wasn’t he a pauper before his path crossed with that of Tinubu? Was his usual and regular wear then not Jalamia? Wasn’t his car rickety and smoky like a locomotive? The point is that Aregbesola was a complete pauper before he met Tinubu, a fact known to so many people – except only Fasure – and a fact Aregbesola himself testified to in some occasions; that it was Tinubu that God used to uplift him. I recall here that Aregbesola said in one of our media meetings with him at the State House in Osogbo when he was governor that “if l had not met Tinubu, l would have also still be struggling like you people by now”.
Ogbeni Aregbesola had also said in a video which is in public domain that after God, he owes whatever he’s today to Tinubu. So only God knows where Fasure conjures his own side of the story from which l see as only tales by moonlight different from reality. His story can only be believed by fools and accepted by idiots.
Comparing Aregbesola’s case with that of Yemi Osibajo, Babafemi Ojudu and other names he mentioned in his write-up is preposterous and doesn’t align with common sense in the least. One, these are people who had recorded appreciable successes in their chosen careers and living comfortably before their paths crossed with Tinubu. They were accomplished professionals on their own as at the time their political relationships with Tinubu started; unlike Aregbesola who was a nobody by the time he met Tinubu. I say this without any fear of contradiction because l was on ground at Cresta Laurel where these people served on the transition committees set up by Tinubu then as the governor-elect.
Two, even though these people may have at one time or the other had disagreements with Tinubu, did they ever insult Tinubu as Aregbesola did? Did they display insolence to Tinubu like Rauf? Disagreements are normal in politics but attacking your God-sent benefactor is the most unwise and stupid thing to do by anybody. This is where Shola Fasure’s boss disappointed many of his admirers including this writer.
In conclusion, Shola Fasure in his warped thinking opined that “Batists have slavery in their DNA”. This, to me, is a fallacious opinion of a mind filled with ingratitude. Rather than proving Mayor Akinpelu wrong with evidence about what he (Akinpelu) said about Aregbesola, Fasure was busy attacking him and calling Batists names.
This is a fallacy of ad hominem. Of course Fasure cannot pretend not to know that politics is about hundred percent loyalty. It’s either you’re completely loyal or you take the exit door. Batists are loyal to Tinubu because he deserves it as he has proven to be a reliable and dependable leader. But if Fasure in his wrong perception of Batists as having slavish mentality in their DNA still holds on to this fallacy, then they’re by far better than Aregbesola’s followers who have ingratitude in their DNA just like their leader.
● Odepeju, newspaper columnist and political activist writes from Lagos.
Opinion
“Let President Muhammadu Buhari Rest in Peace” – By Nasir El-Rufai
The recent launch of a book on the life and legacy of our late leader, President Muhammadu Buhari, has stirred deep emotions and renewed divisions among those who once formed his inner circle. Having followed the headlines and images from the event, I felt compelled to make a simple but urgent appeal: let us allow President Buhari to rest in peace.
A careful look at those who dominated the book launch revealed the same factional lines that existed during Buhari’s lifetime. One camp was prominently represented, while others—equally close to the late president—were excluded. This selective engagement compounded by the choice of location of the event were red flags, and raises concerns about whether Buhari’s legacy is now being shaped to serve narrow interests rather than historical truth.
More troubling was the presence of long-time critics of Buhari, some of whom now hold high office, delivering glowing, but clearly faked tributes. These are individuals who once blamed his administration for nearly every challenge facing Nigeria, but who now appear eager to revise history—perhaps to deflect responsibility for present failures.
It was also unsettling to see individuals celebrating Buhari in death who had neither his trust nor his respect in life. President Buhari was a principled man who did not easily forget personal or political disrespect, and he made his preferences clear to those around him.
I have not yet read the book, Soldier to Statesman: The Legacy of Muhammadu Buhari, and it is possible that some media reports lack context. However, many of the so-called revelations attributed to the late president appear one-sided and unfair, especially as he is no longer alive to respond. Explaining the thoughts and motivations of a complex leader through selective anecdotes risks distorting, rather than preserving, his legacy.
President Buhari was far from perfect. Many of us who supported him expected much more from his civilian presidency. However, as someone who worked closely with him in opposition political, and governance roles for over a decade, I believe much of his administration’s shortcomings stemmed from the actions and failures of a powerful inner circle—relatives, advisers, and officials who did not always share his commitment to integrity and public service.
Buhari himself remained, to the end, a man of deep faith, personal discipline, and unquestioned patriotism. Those now invoking his name for self-justification should reflect on whether they can claim the same standards.
My appeal here is simple: to all Nigerians: admirers and critics alike—let President Muhammadu Buhari rest in peace. Let history judge him fairly, without opportunism or revisionism. The truest way to honour him is not through selective storytelling, or attempting to exhibit new-found love, but by upholding the values he embodied: simplicity, integrity, humility, and service to Nigeria with all he had.
May Allah grant him eternal rest.
Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai
Cairo, Egypt
17th December, 2025
Opinion
Ogun 2027: Kings Have Spoken, Yayi Belongs, Let the Campaign Begin
Opinion
Has the South-East Traded Kanu and Obi for Political Access? By Mohammed Bello Doka
When Nnamdi Kanu was handed a life sentence, expectations were clear and historic. Across Nigeria, many anticipated a decisive political reaction from the South-East: emergency meetings, coordinated resistance, forceful statements from governors, and a re-assertion of the region’s long-held grievance narrative.
What followed instead was something far more revealing — a loud, deliberate silence.
No collective pushback by South-East governors.
No political reprisal.
No price imposed on the centre.
And in that silence lies a deeper story — one that goes beyond Nnamdi Kanu alone.
For the first time in Nigeria’s political history, all five South-East governors are aligned — directly or indirectly — with President Bola Tinubu and his re-election project. This is not speculation. Public statements and political signaling from the zone confirm that the governors have closed ranks around Abuja. Some openly endorse Tinubu; others maintain strategic silence while cooperating fully with the centre. Either way, the outcome is the same: regional power has moved away from confrontation to accommodation.
This alignment explains much more than the silence after Kanu’s sentence. It also explains the quiet abandonment of Peter Obi’s presidential ambition by the same elite class that once benefited from his momentum.
For years, the South-East sustained a dual political narrative:
Nnamdi Kanu represented resistance — a symbolic struggle against marginalisation.
Peter Obi represented reform — a constitutional path back to relevance at the centre.
Today, both pillars have been set aside.
Unlike previous moments in history when South-East elites distanced themselves from regional causes out of weakness or isolation, this time is different. This retreat did not happen in defeat. It happened from a position of leverage:
The region had unprecedented national sympathy after 2023.
It commanded a powerful youth-driven political movement.
It had emotional capital across Nigeria and the diaspora.
Yet, despite this strength, the elite chose survival.
South-East governors — the true controllers of the political system — have clearly decided that confrontation carries higher costs than alignment. Federal access, security cooperation, budgetary relevance, and political protection now outweigh symbolic struggles. In plain terms, Kanu became a political risk, Obi an electoral uncertainty.
This raises unavoidable rhetorical questions.
If the South-East remains as marginalised as long argued, why was Kanu’s life sentence not treated as a regional emergency?
If injustice still defines the regional condition, why has no political consequence followed?
Or has political access softened the meaning of marginalisation itself?
Even more unsettling is what this silence suggests about the future.
Will there be consequences from the people?
Governors may control the machinery, but history shows that South-East grassroots sentiment does not always move in sync with elite calculations. Suppressed anger, when ignored, rarely disappears — it mutates.
Has the South-East finally been subdued?
Or is this only a strategic pause — a recalibration before another political rupture?
And perhaps the most dangerous question of all:
What becomes of the Biafra agitation in a post-elite world?
If the political class no longer carries the banner — and the state believes resistance has been neutralised — the struggle may not end. It may simply lose its intermediaries and become harder to predict, harder to control, and more radical in form.
For now, the facts are clear.
South-East elites have chosen power over protest.
Access over agitation.
Survival over symbolism.
Whether the people follow — or resist — that choice will define the region’s political future far more than any endorsement ever could.
And until then, the silence after Kanu’s sentence remains the loudest statement the South-East political class has ever made.
-
Business3 hours agoBREAKING: Petrol Depot Owners Crash Prices To Cheapest; Details Emerge
-
News2 days agoIs It True That Court Is Set To Revisit Kanu’s Case After Pressure From Israel, US? Facts Emerge
-
News1 day agoBuhari’s Ex-Minister Pantami Breaks Silence Over Alleged Wedding Plan With Aisha Buhari
-
News14 hours ago“Do Not Test Trump’s Resolve”: US Issues Fresh Threat To Nigeria
-
Entertainment8 hours agoSO SAD: Actress and Content Creator Sunshine D!es After Surgery; Details of Last Moment Trends
-
Sports1 day agoAFCON: Nigerian Billionaire Splashes Dollars On Super Eagles
-
Lifestyle1 day agoChimamanda: Heartbreaking Details About What Killed Author’s Late Son Emerge
-
News2 hours agoBREAKING: KWAM 1 Writes Ogun Govt, Accuses Fusengbuwa Ruling House of Plot to Exclude Him From Awujale Selection
