DanaRama

"The federal government has lifted the suspension of the Operating Licence of Dana Airlines," Joe Obi, spokesman for the aviation ministry said in a statement.

"This follows government's satisfaction with the air-worthiness of the airline after a rigorous technical, operational and financial audit."

On the 3rd of June 2012, at least 159 of God's most precious creation lost their lives in an untimely and gruesome manner.  Multiply that number by an infinite exponential factor and you can begin to get a picture of the number of lives that were really affected, the number of families that were thrown into grieving, mourning, disarray, despondence, hopelessness, truncation, stagnation- you get the drift- on account of this one incidence.
Exactly 94 days after that ill-fated journey, on the 5th of September 2012, we hear the above announcement over various news media.
After the crash, people were understandably hurt and angry and the authorities did the right thing by opening an investigation into the cause of the plane crash, and suspending Dana from flying.  The black box from the aircraft was sent abroad to be decoded, in aid of said investigation. 

Forgive me for repeating information that we all got from the news media, I'm just testing to see that indeed that information was not available to only me, who had access to it by some special priviledge or connection with the powers that be.  If indeed it is true that this information was openly available to us all, am I over-reaching in thinking that through the same news media, we should also have gotten the information on the results of the investigation, and at least a layman's account of the details of the 'rigorous technical, operational and financial audit?'
As far as I know, at the end of every audit there is an audit report. So I am not wrong in assuming that such a report must exist and must be in the possession of our highly esteemed officials, right? 
Would it be too much to ask that they share that report with us, seeing as we are still grieving for our dearly beloved departed friends and family, and we would like to feel that we are doing something to ensure that their lives have not just been wasted, and that at the very least our authorities have done something to mitigate against a repetition of the same factors causing a future accident even though they are not God and cannot mitigate against other, as yet unknown factors?
Would it be presumptuous of me to expect to hear the news of the results of that investigation, and a report on a review of Dana's, and indeed all the other airlines' processes and procedures, before the news of the lift on the ban on Dana airlines?

It's 94 days after.  Each victim didn't even get one day of respect?
Don't get it twisted, 94 days is sufficient to do all that's required, so I'm not advocating that Dana continue to be punished even after all that's required has been done.  I'm saying let's show a little respect for the citizens of this nation.  Let's begin to put their lives and welfare ahead of other interests, personal and commercial.  Show us that due diligence has been done and I would gladly go out and fly Dana or any other airline that's expedient in the moment. It's simply not enough to announce that he ban has been lifted.  All is not uhuru.

If, again, I am the only one who does not have this information on account of my reclusive lifestyle and lack of basic infrastructure, and indeed all this information has been made publicly available, then I apologise for my tirade, but today, I just don't feel like turning the other cheek!

Ibiye and His Goat

There's an adage in my local language that I've probably heard a handful of times but never really thought much of.  Seemingly out of nowhere, I started to think about it and I think I finally understand it.  Picture this: There's a blind man named Ibiye.  Ibiye owns a goat, which also happens to be blind.  The adage describes Ibiye's goat as being the cause of much abuse or insult to its owner on account of the fact that it's blind, just like it's owner.
Doesn't seem to make much sense at first perusal, right?
Well if you consider that in the same language, the exact same sentence could mean 'you blind goat' or 'you blind man's goat', then it begins to make a bit more sense.
So, if there was a son of an alcoholic dad who got drunk one day at a family meal and someone said 'what a drunkard'!  Who would you reckon they're referring to?  
As with most Yoruba proverbs, the meaning of this one is multi pronged.
On the surface, it may mean something akin to 'those who live in glass houses should not throw stones'.  It could translate roughly into: If there is already a propensity towards some negativity in your life, do not do anything to perpetuate that notion.  I know! I know!  That last sentence goes against everything I know about writing and speaking but I'm going to let it stand.
On another level it says to Ibiye: because you're blind, to most people, your goat is never going to be anything more than the goat of the blind man, no matter what great feats it accomplishes.
To the goat it says: were you not also blind, at least your blind master would have one good thing in his life, one thing to be proud of or happy about.
Essentially, it's saying to fathers, mentors, and all people in the superior position in any relationship to set worthy examples and to keep their image untarnished so that their misdeeds do not reflect negatively on their protegees; and it's saying to all children, protegees or all people in the 'junior' role in such relationships to ensure that they do not repeat the mistakes of their superiors.  Chances are that they may have been able to make said mistake on their own without anyone making to much of it, but given their superior's record, the conclusion , justifiable or not, would be that 'the apple doesn't fall far from the tree'.
So there's the lesson, whoever you are, watch what you do lest it reflect poorly on your loved ones.  Afterall, the evil that men do does live after them.

The writer in me

There's a writer in me.  This I know for sure.  Sometimes I think the writer is right there on the surface, it's who I am; sometimes I think that writer is so deeply buried that I don't know if she'll ever see the light of day.  But of this I'm sure, there IS a writer in me.
I find that writing, as with everything in life is a discipline.  Whether it comes easy to you or its hard for you, it makes no difference. So far, I've waited for the inspiration to hit, and it has hit, but if my livelihood was dependent on those hits, I'd probably be homeless and hungry right now.
So here's what I'm saying: no matter how much talent you have, you've got to cultivate the discipline to practice and improve on your act.
It's the reason why some people will never work at a job that does not pay a fixed salary at the end of the month- because if it was all up to them they would get up some mornings, and some mornings not.  They would show up some days, and some days not.

Talent is a hard taskmaster- it requires you work harder than the next guy who does not have that talent because you know and the people around you know how much more you could accomplish on account of that talent; and everyday you're not exploiting that talent something dies within you, whether you acknowledge it or not.
I'm not necessarily talking here about how much money you can make from exploiting your talent.  I do admit that it would be fantastic to be financially successful at something that comes naturally to you, but excelling at something you're naturally gifted for provides a satisfaction that trascends that.  It gives almost a sense of destiny fulfilled.

The other thing that I know about myself is that I'm a bit of a perfectionist.  I would rather not submit a report than submit one that's imperfect.  However I'm beginning to realise more and more everyday that that report was only imperfect in my own perfectionist eyes!  To most other people it was lacking nothing.
Talented people tend to be the worst self-critics in their area of talent.
I recently heard that 'perfectionism is a form of mediocrity'.  I don't know who the original author of that was, and I spent quite a few days grappling with it.  It irked me to no end, but I think I finally understand what it's saying.  If in trying to get the report to be perfect you end up not submitting the report, what conclusion is the person needing the report to draw?  The most logical one is that you're a charlatan who has no clue, you're lazy, you're inconsistent, you're......  Supposing you had submitted the report it might have played out in two ways: the report might have been perfect just the way it is, which is the more likely option; or it might have needed a bit more work to get it to meet the user's needs- note that this does not necessarily mean that there was anything wrong with the work that was done before.  Either way, you would have received some feedback upon which you can then base the improvements you need to make on your work, rather than relying entirely on your own, dare I say, flawed view.
So here's what I've decided to do- I'm going to dig deep and exhume that writer within me, and I'm going to keep her on the surface by writing as much as I can.  More importantly I'm going to put my stuff out there and grit my teeth while I wait for the critism, which even now the 10% of me that allows for anything short of perfection, realises will probably never come.
So, here I come world...