Of late, there has been a rise in crime rate, especially armed robbery and assassinations along the Rivers and Abia states border. James Ume writes on the efforts by functionaries of the two states to curb the menace.

On Monday, January 25, 2010, Abia State Governor, Chief Theodore Ahamefule Orji was in Port Harcourt to meet his Rivers State counterpart, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi. A closed-door meeting between the duo at Government House, Port Harcourt was not unconnected to the state of insecurity in the border communities between the two states. The communities in question are Owaza and Obehie, both in Ukwa West Local Government Area of Abia state.

The Abia State governor's visit was in response to several appeals Governor Amaechi had made to him to partner with him in fighting the rising crime rate in Owaza and Obehie communities.

Before the visit, Governor Orji had said that he was not aware of any effort made by Governor Amaechi to combat crime in border communities and was said to have refused to cooperate.

Speaking through his Press Secretary, Mr. Pius Emeruwa, the governor said, Abia State Government has done so much to stop crime, especially kidnapping, which he claimed started from Rivers State.

He insisted that most of those who engage in kidnappings in the border communities were from Rivers State, adding that Governor Amaechi was unfair in his statement about Orji.

He said: "We have intensified security patrols within the border areas. The criminals, who are operating, are not from Abia. They come in from Rivers State and do what they want to do and get back. We have identified the black spots and our government is aware.

"We don't like this issue of buck passing. We know the history of kidnapping in this area. It was when kidnappers from other Niger Delta areas were chased away that they came into Abia. Some of them settled here to perpetrate crimes.

"It is not right for the Rivers State Government to engage in buck passing. It should rather find ways of settling its political thugs. We are doing our best to secure border communities.

"We know what happened in Port Harcourt during Dr. Peter Odili's administration. There was so much crime that the criminals gradually came into Abia State," he alleged.

Emeruwa drew attention to the killing of a former Nigerian envoy in Obehie, saying that Abia people could not have been involved in the act because there was no reason for it. He argued further that Amaechi has never solicited the partnership of Orji towards crime fighting and the request was turned down. "I disagree with the Rivers State Governor that my governor has not been collaborating with him to fight crime. It is very unfair to say that," he concluded.

But briefing newsmen at the end of a closed-door meeting with his Rivers State counterpart in Port Harcourt , Governor Orji said the governments of both states have agreed to partner in the task of providing security for people of both states.

Chief Orji described security as a critical component of existence which cannot be overlooked, noting that "we want our people to sleep with both eyes closed," and expressed the commitment of the Abia State Government towards partnership in security in all fronts.

"You know that security is paramount in governance and especially now that kidnapping has brought bad name to governments of both Abia and Rivers State," he said.

Also speaking, Rivers State Governor, Rt. Hon Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi said the main thrust of the discussion was the current security situation on the Port Harcourt/Aba Expressway.

The governor, who expressed optimism that a solution would be found, said the decision of both state governments to work towards improved security at the border areas, was a welcome development.

Though Owaza and Obehie communities are in Abia State , they are like the 'next village to most communities in Rivers State , especially those on the bank of Imo River.

However, the level of violent crimes that are being committed in these two border communities has left their neigbouring communities, both in Rivers and Abia States to be in perpetual fear.

Owaza is an oil-bearing community that has had its own fair share of violence during the insurgency in the Niger Delta, but since after the cessation of hostilities and granting of amnesty to militants in the region, the community, which is on the bank of Imo River, seem to have become a 'transit point' for criminal elements.

Few weeks ago, some gunmen killed a riot policeman and kidnapped three expatriates at Owaza. The men, two Britons and one Colombian, who are contractors to oil giant, Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC), were attacked at the Abia community on their way from Port Harcourt to a project site.

The project site is actually an integrated electricity project, which the Rivers State government is partnering the Federal Government to actaulise.

For Obehie, a community lying along the ever-busy Aba-Port Harcourt Road, armed robbery and kidnappings seem to have been synonymous with the area.

On Sunday, December 20, 2009, a prominent indigene of Rivers State and former Nigeria 's Ambassador to Gabon and Ukraine , Ambassador Ignatius Ajuru and his driver, were gunned down by heavily armed men at Obehie community.

Apart from the killings and kidnappings that occur frequently around the Obehie axis, several high profile bullion van robberies have been recorded in the area.

It is in that light, that the Rivers State Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi recently appealed to his Abia State counterpart, to partner with him in the fight against criminality in the border communities.

Governor Amaechi, who spoke at a special court session to mark the commencement of the 2010 legal year in Port Harcourt, said cases of criminality perpetrated along the border communities with Rivers State, especially Owaza and Obehie required urgent attention.

He believes his administration worked assiduously to fight crime in the state and has achieved relative peace, and that the activities of miscreants from neigbouring Abia State, may affect the peace being enjoyed in the state, if not checked.

According to the governor, the state government was prepared to fight crime along the Port Harcourt-Aba Expressway up to Aba town to ensure that people go about their normal businesses unmolested.

Soliciting for the partnership of Governor Orji to stamp out crime in the area, Rt. Hon. Amaechi explained that efforts so far made to appeal to his Abia State counterpart to address the issue to curb crime at the border communities have not been successful.

It is on record that on hearing of the gruesome assassination of Ambassador Ajuru and his driver, Governor Amaechi enjoined the police in Abia State to step up efforts at checking the activities of armed bandits at the border town of Obehie .

He was deeply worried with reports of armed robbery operations at the border community, which he said, had claimed the lives of several residents of Port Harcourt , who for one reason or the other, ply the Aba -Port Harcourt Expressway, through Obehie.

According to the governor, no fewer than four prominent Rivers people have lost their lives in robbery operations on the Obehie axis of the Port Harcourt-Aba Expressway.

He pleaded with the police in Abia State to double its efforts in policing the area, assuring that the Rivers State Police Command would be willing to partner with its Abia State counterpart to ensure that Obehie, which has become a crime hotspot is safe.

Hence, it is now left to the governments of the two states to co-operate and see to the end of this ugly development, so as to allow their people live their lives without let or hindrance.

Kissing is simply described as a display of affection. Holding hands or kissing in public are generally not considered offensive in the western world. In the western world - depending on the kind of kiss, kissing is considered a normal way of showing love among couples, family and friends.  Although, there are some places where kissing in public is possible such as bars, nightclubs, and strip clubs. In this part of the world, people still raise eyebrows at the act.

It has now become a tradition in African cultures that at the conclusion of saying marriage vows at a church wedding, the couple  kiss. Kissing to an extent is allowed here in Nigeria, but the question is, should people kiss in public? Is it appropriate to display affection publicly?

LEADERSHIP WEEKEND asked a couple of people their opinion.

Miss Dooshima Dankaro, a professional photographer based here in Abuja, thinks kissing in public is a foreign culture, and that our Nigerian culture does not totally embrace it, even though she finds people doing. She thinks kissing should be done indoors and  she wouldn’t feel comfortable should her partner want to kiss her in public.

Musa Ibrahim, a civil servant, said kissing in public is not right especially not where children are, that it won’t be setting a good example for them. He said for people who are married, kissing should be done in secluded places, such as homes.

Mr. Terungwa Uvah, a civil servant, thinks in Nigeria, people do not like to show affection in public generally for the fear of being called promiscuous. He also said that our religious angle, has made Nigerians  seem unromantic. People see it as a big deal. “Some married couples don’t even, hold hands in public,  but are ‘talented’ in the bedroom”, he said. He thinks that public perception limits the open display of affection here in Nigeria.

Mr. Bassey Ekpeyong, a banker said Nigerians have embraced almost all the cultures of westerners, why should people frown at kissing in public which is part of it? He said Nigerians now wear tattoos, pierce their bodies, and wear crazy outfits and hairdos, so why shouldn’t they kiss in public just like the white people do? He sees nothing wrong with it and whoever so wishes should go ahead and do so.

Religiously, is kissing in public acceptable?

Gabriel Ewepu, a Christian  thinks kissing in public is not decent and is not something that is of our African culture. It is western, and therefore it is borrowed into our culture. “He thinks pecking is allowed because to some extent, it is a form of greeting, like in South Africa, where that is how people receive you. He also said that, kissing can be done by married people in public if they so wish, but it’s better if such is done behind closed doors”. The Bible says that, no man should pose as a stumbling block to another man”, he said..

Most Christians know and would testify that the Bible forbids sex before marriage. First of all, there are different degrees of kissing. Jesus kissed His disciples. We kiss our family members and our children. Even in Europe, kissing is a common form of greeting among friends. So kissing is not always a sin. Christians believe kissing can only become a sin depending on your state of mind. The Bible clearly tells us that lust is a sin. So, is lust in your heart when you’re kissing? Is the kiss making you want to do more with that person and leading you to temptation? If the answer to these questions is yes, then kissing can become sinful. It doesn’t mean all kisses with someone you love or are dating are sinful. It just means to be careful about what is your heart and to make sure you have enough self-control if you allow yourself to be in a kissing situation. As a Christian, you can choose not to kiss until you are married if you see it as leading to sin or believe romantic kissing is a sin, it’s a matter of choice. Others feel that as long as they can overcome the temptation and control their thoughts, kissing is okay,” Gabriel explained.

Mallam Bashir, a Muslim said that it is not in the character of a Nigerian to do so. In Islam, it is totally wrong. Kissing should be done indoors, at home where the children cannot see. He said that in Islam, it is believed that kissing in public can or will inflict negativity on others. For married couples, it is not allowed to exhibit some intimacy in front of the children, not  even by gestures or body language, until they reach a certain age, like 7, because it can put some wrong ideas into their heads.

Why Do People Kiss?

Sarah Stefansson, in her article on the 12th of June, 2009, Why do people Kiss, wrote that there are certain reasons behind the reason why people kiss. She said that people kiss when they are attracted to each other; they naturally feel drawn to put their mouths against each other. When caught up in the act of kissing, it’s not likely that a person will stop to think about why he or she is doing it, but the question of where kissing came from is one that intrigues many. Why is a kiss the first instinct of many people when it comes to expressing a certain kind of affection?

Historical Origins

The truth is, no one knows precisely how or where the practice of kissing originated. Many experts on kissing believe that kissing began in ancient times when mothers chewed up food and transferred it from their mouths to the mouths of their babies, a process called premastication. Since this method of feeding their infants was very comforting, mothers continued to press their lips against the faces of their children as they grew to express their affection for them.

Other early evidence of kissing includes how an ancient Roman emperor used various levels of kissing to greet each rank of nobility. The highest of nobility were allowed to kiss the emperor on the lips, lower levels on the hands and the lowest on the feet.

Long ago in India, people believed that the soul could escape through breath, so kissing allowed two people to mingle pieces of their souls together. Some believe that kissing is an excellent way to determine the suitability of a potential mate. The first kiss a couple shares can influence their sexual and romantic future. If the first kiss is a disaster, it’s not likely that there will be a second time. On the other hand, if the first kiss is spectacular, it can certainly lead to more.

Kissing in public

It could also send wrong messages to children and teenagers if this act is done in front of them, and that could possibly lead to rape and molestation. Therefore, should Nigerian be encouraged to indulge more in this act of kissing in public?

Mr. Chairman, my Muslim brothers and sisters, assalamu alaikum. Permit me to begin this lecture by giving thanks to the National Council of Muslim Youths Organisations (NACOMYO) for giving me an opportunity to express my opinion on the vexed issue of so-called Islamic terrorism which has put Muslims on the defensive world-wide including here in Nigeria, at least half of whose population are Muslims. Thank you.

Next, I'll like to define the key words in today's lecture. These are Terrorism, The Media, and Islamophobia.  To start with Terrorism, no two persons agree on the meaning of the word "terror" because the word, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder; to say that one man's terrorist is another's hero has since become almost like a cliché.

In the early 80's the American State Department defined terrorism as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets, by sub-national groups or clandestine agents usually intended to influence an audience".

The Oxford English Dictionary defines it simply as "The use of violence and intimidation to achieve political aims". Yet another definition of the word is that it is "the deliberate use or threat of violence, politically motivated and directed against non-military personnel".

The discerning listener would have noticed a major difference between the American definition of the word and the other two, namely the American narrow definition of its agents as "sub-national groups or clandestine agents". This is a highly significant difference as we shall see presently.

For now, I will like to point out that the difficulty in arriving at a universal definition of terrorism was underscored by the fact that in 2005, the 60th United Nations summit tried but failed to decide on a universal legal definition of the word. I should also point out that two years later a commission set up by the government of the United Kingdom concluded that "there is no single definition of terrorism that commands full international support".

Even then, there is a common denominator in all the innumerable definitions of the word. This is that it is the use of violence or intimation or their threat for political objectives. Opinions differ mainly on the scale of violence and who uses it. As we have seen from the US State Department's definition, the Americans regard only non-state actors as agents of terror. Obviously this is a highly problematic and subjective definition, to say the least, because States too can be, and have been, agents of terror, as the history of America itself in its many wars abroad testifies.

States have not merely sponsored terrorism. They have themselves perpetrated it and in so doing the harm they cause as a result of the weapons of violence and the organisation at their disposal dwarfs any that non-state actors can inflict as we shall see in due course. Meantime, let us return to the second key term in our lecture i.e. the media. The Oxford English dictionary defines it as "Television, radio and newspapers as the means of mass communication".  Useful as this is, it is obviously a highly restricted definition because it leaves out many other means of mass communication.

These include traditional means like the gong, the talking drum, the town crier, etc. The definition also leaves out the more modern means of mass communication. These include books, magazines, cinema, CDs, DVDs, cassettes and, not least of all, the internet, perhaps the most revolutionary of them all.

In defining media, it is important to talk not only about what they are. We should also talk about what they do, which, universally are acknowledged as informing, educating and entertaining the public and also shaping public opinion. As it is often said, perception is as important as reality, sometimes even more so.

As the famous American president, Abraham Lincoln, once put it, "Public sentiment is everything … he who moulds public sentiments goes deeper than he who executes statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes or decisions possible or impossible to execute."

The contemporary American historian Prof. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. was even more sweeping in his opinion of the importance of the media. "Karl Max", he once said "held that history is shaped by control of the means of production. In our times history is shaped by control of the means of communication"

The late Malcolm X, the famous Muslim black American, was somewhat more cynical in his opinion of the importance of the media but his insight was useful nonetheless. "If you are not careful," he once said, "the media will have you hating those who are oppressed and loving those who are doing the oppression."

Finally, the definition of Islamophobia. The word itself seems a post 9/11 creation even though the sentiments it seeks to capture have existed for centuries going back to the Crusades in the 15th century. A combination of the words Islam and phobia, it simply means an extreme or irrational fear of Islam.

Although this extreme or irrational fear of Islam has existed especially in the West for centuries, 9/11 seems to have raised it to higher level than at anytime in the history of relation of the two.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 as the greatest obstacle to the spread of Western values seemed to have led to the replacement of Communism, the Soviet creed, with Islam as the West's main bogeyman. In his 1994 book, Out of Control, for example, the American statesman, Zbigniew Brzezinski, raised an alarm about what he said was Islam's march northwards in to Europe from its Middle Eastern core through Central Asia with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Nature, he said, abhorred vacuum and unless the West, America in particular, did something about this threat,  the Islamic countries of Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan will make successful in-roads into Central Asia and hence into Europe.

Terrorist attacks of Americans abroad and of American iconic institutions at home like the 1993 bombing of the New York World Trade Centre served only to accentuate this Western phobia of Islam since those who carried out the bombings were either Muslims or claimed to have done so in the name of Islam.

Such was the fear of Islam created by such attacks that when one, Timothy McVeigh, bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City in April 1995 killing 167 people including children, many leading Americans and media organisations like the right acting Wall Street Journal at first attributed the bombing to Muslims.

And not surprisingly when the bomber turned out to be someone with strong Christian fundamentalist views not one media ever referred to him as a "Christian terrorist".

Mr. Chairman, from our various definitions of terrorism it is undeniable that Muslims have carried out terrorist attacks worldwide often in revenge, at times to protest what they perceive as blasphemy against Islam, but essentially to chase foreign forces out of their countries. The violence in the Middle East and other regions with majority or significant Muslim population, as a survey in The Economist of September 13, 2003, entitled "In the name of God" suggested, have had less to do with the faith itself than with Western support for the venal dictators in those regions. This means the picture created by the Western dominated media and their local echo-chambers around the world, that terrorism is essentially or even exclusively, an Islamic phenomenon is more propaganda than fact.

To begin with, Islam does not boast of the first organised campaign of violence by a non-State for political objectives. The credit for this belongs to the Jews whose Zealots  used suicide bombing to try and drive out their Roman conquerors in 73AD. And there was, of course, the even more famous mighty Samson whose capture in a bloody war with the Philistines and subsequent display in a temple in Gaza cost the Philistines dearly. This was when he brought down the temple killing himself and his enemies.

Like the Biblical Jews, modern  day  Zionists also showed the way in terrorism when they formed terror gangs that waged campaigns of violence against the British as the colonial masters of Palestine and also against the Palestinians themselves when they tried to resist the creation of Israel out of their land.

Historical antecedents apart, all other religions including Christianity, Judaism, Hindu and even Buddhism, arguably the most liberal of them all, have spawn terror groups. Perhaps the most notorious of these is the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda which for decades has fought the country's government with the declared aim of establishing a theocratic state governed by the Biblical Ten Commandments, but which itself has consistently violated those commandments by, among other things, the killing and maiming of children and women. Less well known is the Buddhist group, the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo (Supreme truth) which in 1995 released the poisonous gas, serin, in Tokyo's underground train killing about a dozen people and injuring over 5000.

• Being the text of a lecture on “Terrorism, the Media and the growing trend of Global Islamophobia” by  Haruna under the auspices of Gombe State branch of NACOMYO in Gombe on February 7, 2010