Opinion
The Oracle: Different People, Different Forms of Government (Pt. 13)
Published
4 years agoon
By
Eric
By Chief Mike Ozekhome
INTRODUCTION
Today, we shall conclude our discourse on Theocracy. Thereafter, we shall discuss Capitalism, a system of government practised in the free world. Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of production and their operation solely for profit. It is characterized by private ownership of property, capital accumulation, wage labour, a price system, competitive markets and voluntary exchange. Private individuals or businesses own and control capital and goods. In capitalist countries, a free market economy operates, rather than a planned or command economy. There is minimal government involvement. The motive is profit. Free enterprise dominates. Technological advancement reigns. It includes the ability to pass on wealth to future generations. Capitalists believe theirs is a fair society.
THEOCRACY (continues and concluded)
In the first century of our Common Era, the Jewish nation ceased to be a theocratic organisation. This occurred even before Jerusalem’s destruction in the year 70. Historically, recorded events point to this solemn indisputable fact. On the Passover day of the year 33, when the surging crowd was massed before the Roman Governor, Pontius Pilate, and cried out for the criminal Barnabas to be released to them, instead of the man (Jesus Christ) whom Pilate personally wanted to release as innocent, what did that crowd there in Jerusalem cry out for? This: “If you release this man, you are not a friend of Caesar. Every man making himself a king speaks against Caesar… We have no king, but Caesar.” (John 19:12-15) This outcry stood out, in shocking contrast to what their ancient prophet, Isaiah, had long previously said: “The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Statutegiver, the Lord is our King.”— Isa. 33:22.
Two months or more later, another scene was enacted in that same Jerusalem. It was in the courtroom of the national tribunal called the “Sánhedrin”, composed of seventy-one members. The high priest presided at this particular trial, and twelve native Jews were to be tried for proclaiming certain religious teachings that were offensive to this Sánhedrin or Supreme Court. On this, we read:
“So, they brought them and stood them in the Sánhedrin hall. And the high priest questioned them and said: ‘We positively ordered you not to keep teaching upon the basis of this name, and yet, look!
You have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you are determined to bring the blood of this man upon us.’ In answer Peter and the other apostles said: ‘We must obey God as ruler, rather than men. The God of our forefathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew, hanging him upon a stake. God exalted this one as Chief Agent and Saviour to his right hand, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these matters, and so is the Holy Spirit, which God has given to those obeying him as ruler.’”—Acts of the Apostles 5:2732.
This testimony before this court trial, revealed who were the ones acting theocratically, recognising God as ruler or as Theocrat. According to that testimony, with whom was the theocratic organisation? Was it with the Sánhedrin, the representatives of the Jewish nation, or with those twelve Apostles of the Jesus whose death that Sánhedrin had recently brought about? Beyond all denial, God’s theocracy was with those twelve apostles of Jesus Christ.
The fact that the divine Theocracy had ceased to be with the nation of Israel, and was now with these twelve Apostles and other Disciples of Jesus Christ, had been substantiated by a powerful proof. This, that God had poured out his Holy Spirit upon these disciples of Christ who were recognising God as ruler, rather than men who opposed God as ruler. It was with the help of that outpoured spirit, that Peter and the other eleven Apostles gave their courageous testimony to the Jewish Sánhedrin. That the Jewish nation was no longer acting theocratically, the Jewish Law teacher named Gamaliel hinted at, when he said to the Sánhedrin concerning the twelve apostles on the witness stand before them:
“Men of Israel, pay attention to yourselves, as to what you intend to do respecting these men. . . . I say to you, Do not meddle with these men, but let them alone; (because, if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown; but if it is from God, you will not be able to overthrow them;) otherwise, you may perhaps, be found fighters actually against God.”— Acts 5:34-39.
What this Jewish Pharisee Gamaliel called “this scheme or this work” did prove to be “from God”, for the Sánhedrin and all the Jewish people inside and outside the Roman Empire were unable to overthrow it, even though they persecuted the spirit-anointed followers of Jesus Christ. But, in the year 70 C.E., the Jewish capital of Jerusalem was destroyed, and the national Jewish Sánhedrin was put out of business. And, three years later, in 73 C.E., the last Jewish stronghold in the province of Judea, namely, Masada, on the west side of the Dead Sea, fell to the Roman legions. But, before all this, the faithful Jewish Christians had fled from Jerusalem and all other parts of the province of Judea, because Jesus Christ had told them to do so, when he was prophetically describing the coming destruction of Jerusalem. (Matt. 24:15-22; Mark 13:1420; Luke 21:20-24).
Very manifestly, then, I hold the view that, God’s theocracy had been transferred from the nation of natural circumcised Israel to the spirit-filled organisation of the disciples of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Any true church that preaches the kingdom of God, and which does not preach the Republic of Israel or any other human government, is practicing theocracy.
Indeed, impetus for wider use of the model, Theocracy, came from Hegel’s “Philosophy of History”, where he used the term to describe the early phase of ancient oriental civilisation, in which there was no distinction between religion and the State.
Another Christian example of Theocracy, can be found in the early years of the Latter Day Saints, or Mormons, in the United States of America. During this period, the prophetic leaders (Joseph Smith and Brigham Young) exercised religious and temporal authority over their communities, in both their earlier settlements and Salt Lake City. People also cite Tibetan Buddism, as an example of Theocracy. Others were the Taiping Rebellion government in China (1858); the seizure of Khartoum in the Sudan by a claimant to the role of the Mahdi (1885); the people’s Jim Jones Temple in Guyana (1977), which ended in mass suicide. Religion, says Karl Marx, is the opium of the people.
CAPITALISM
Capitalism is virtually the opposite of socialism, where individuals are to have access to what they need, but are rewarded based on their contribution to society. In socialist systems, large scale industries and public services are communally owned and managed to ensure that the benefits flow to the society as a whole. In capitalism, government plays a secondary role. All firms, factories, industries and other means of production are properties of private individuals and firms. A capitalist economy works through the price system. When demand is high, prices rise up accordingly. When demand is low, prices also fall.
ORIGIN OF CAPITALISM
The pursuit of happiness by means of material prosperity is not a new idea. It was the way of life of many ancient Greeks and Romans. But it fell into disrepute throughout the entire middle Ages. Why? Mainly for religious reasons.
Medieval society was dominated by religion in every field of human activity. For the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, poverty was a virtue. It was a “test” that had to be accepted by the poor. The rich were rich and the poor were poor by what was labeled a God-ordained arrangement. Voluntary poverty was considered “holy” and “usury” (lending for gain) was condemned by Canon law.
Yet, while anathematizing Jewish moneylenders, Catholic cathedral chapters lent money at high interest rates. The papacy itself became “the greatest financial institution of the Middle Ages.” This was the setup during much of the period of the feudal-ecclesiastical order.
THE BIRTH OF CAPITALISM
With the breakup of the feudal system, town and intercity trade grew and blossomed. So did trade between nations. And ideas circulated more freely, particularly after the invention of the printing press. The influence of the Catholic Church began to wane.
Medieval Catholicism had been the greatest obstacle to the development of a new economic order. Yet, pockets of capitalistic trading, manufacturing and banking, had been growing toward the end of the middle Ages right within Catholic Christendom. This was true in such Catholic cities as Venice in Italy, Augsburg in Germany and Antwerp in Belgium.
CATHOLICISM, CAPITALISM AND PROTESTANTS’ INFLUENCE
Then, the Protestant Reformation broke out in the 16th century. While it would be an exaggeration to say that the Reformation fathered capitalism, it did release certain unaccustomed ideas that gave a decided boost to it. For one thing, Calvinism relieved legitimate business profit of the stigma of “usury.” Moreover, certain Protestant beliefs provided people with the incentive to work hard so as to succeed in life and thus prove they were among the “elect.” Success in business was considered to be a sign of God’s blessing. The resulting wealth became available “capital” for investment in one’s own business venture or some other one. Thus, the Protestant ethic of hard work and thrift contributed to the expansion of capitalism.
Not surprisingly, the capitalist economy developed faster in Protestant countries than in Catholic states. But the Catholic Church quickly made up for lost time. She allowed capitalism to develop in lands where she was powerful, and became an extremely rich capitalist organization in her own right.
Capitalism undoubtedly provided an improvement over the feudal system, if only for the greater freedom it brought to the working classes. But it also brought many forms of injustice. The gap between the rich and the poor tended to widen. At its worst, it brought about exploitation and class warfare. At its best, it produced an affluent consumer society in some lands, with material fullness. But it has also produced spiritual emptiness, and has failed to bring true and lasting happiness to its practitioners.
CLASSIFICATION OF CAPITALISIM
The Marxists had periodised capitalism into different stages- agricultural capitalism, merchant capitalism, industrial capitalism, finance capitalism and global capitalism. It is generally believed that capitalism may go on forever because it creates new needs, new possibilities for the market and new innovation.
However, automation and advances in new information technology are believed to be capable of ending capitalism because it makes production costs to tend towards zero.(To be continued).
FUN TIMES
There are two sides to every coin. Life itself contains not only the good, but also the bad and the ugly. Let us now explore these.
“Late one night Jack takes a short cut through the cemetery. Hearing a tapping sound he becomes scared and quickens his pace. The tapping gets louder and Jack is now scared out of his wits. Then he notices a man chiseling a tombstone. Thanks goodness! Jack says to the man. You gave me a fright of my life. Why are you working so late?
Man: They spelt my name wrongly.
Jack faints….”
THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK
“I find capitalism repugnant. It is filthy, it is gross, it is alienating… because it causes war, hypocrisy and competition.” (Fidel Castro).
Related
You may like
Opinion
Give What, to Gain What? Reflections on the 2026 International Women’s Day Theme
Published
24 hours agoon
March 5, 2026By
Eric
By Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya
At first glance, the theme of this year’s International Women’s Day celebration sounded a little odd to me.
Last year’s theme, Accelerate Action, was clear enough. You read it and immediately understood it as a call to move faster, push harder, do more, close the gaps. It was energetic, direct and unambiguous.
But “Give To Gain”? Give what? To whom? And to gain what, precisely? How is giving a pathway to gender equity? In the legal profession, and in leadership generally, we are trained to think in terms of advantage. What do I gain? What do I secure? What do I protect? But the more I reflected, the more I realised that perhaps that reflection was the point. Because my reflection took me to some of the most defining moments in my professional journey, and they did not come from what I took. They came from what someone chose to give.
A colleague who gave me insights instead of indifference, a leader who gave me visibility in a room where my voice would have been overlooked, a mentor who gave me honest feedback when flattery or a comfortable silence would have been easier.
None of those acts diminished them. They did not lose relevance, influence, or authority. If anything, their giving expanded their impact. Sometimes, some of us act as though giving someone else room to rise somehow shrinks our own space. But leadership does not weaken when it is shared wisely. It deepens.
That is the quiet power behind “Give To Gain”, and the paradox at the heart of this year’s theme. “Give To Gain” is not a call to diminish ourselves. It is a call to invest in one another because when we give from strength, we gain strength. So give respect.
give access. Give honest evaluation. Give opportunity without prejudice. And you will gain trust, loyalty and potential. Give mentorship and gain contunuity, give equal footing and gain the full measure of talent available. That kind of giving multiplies gain.
So perhaps the theme is not so odd after all. In a world that often asks, “What do I stand to lose?” this year’s International Women’s Day asks instead, “What could we stand to gain, if we were all willing to give?”
In the context of gender equity, the theme becomes even more compelling. Giving equal footing is not about doing women a favour; it is about acknowledging merit. When barriers fall, capacity rises to the surface. When access expands, talent flourishes. When women thrive professionally, institutions gain.
Against this backdrop, I began to think about the remarkable women who embodied this principle long before it became a theme. Women who gave intellectual rigour to complex situations and gained distinction. Women who gave courage and resilience in the face of resistance or in rooms where they were the only one, and gained respect. Women who gave mentorship to younger women and gained a legacy that cannot be erased.
Women who gave integrity to public service and the private sector and gained trust and admiration that cannot be manufactured.
Women whose boldness did not ask for permission to contribute. They did not lower their standards to fit expectations.
They gave of their intellect, their discipline, their time and their resilience, and in doing so they expanded the space for others. That is the spirit I want to honour this IWD month.
Beginning tomorrow, on International Women’s Day and continuing through all the remaining days of March, I will be celebrating a female icon who exemplifies this principle. Women who have given and gained. Each day, one story. One journey.
One example of boldness in action. Not to romanticise their journeys or suggest that their paths were easy, but to illuminate them and show what is possible when you dare to try.
Each profile will tell a story of contribution and consequence, of how giving strengthens, and how excellence, when sustained with integrity, inevitably earns its place.
My hope is that other women will read these stories and recognise themselves in them. That men also will read them and see leadership, not limitation. And that we will all be reminded that progress is rarely accidental. It is built, often quietly, by those willing to give more than is required.
If this year’s theme “Give To Gain” means anything to me, it means that we must intentionally amplify the inspiring examples that prove what is possible when women are bold.
Because inspiration and visibility are forms of giving. And sometimes, the simple act of telling a story is the spark that lights ambition in someone who was unsure where or whether she belonged.
This March, I choose to give inspiration and visibility and honour where it is so richly deserved.
And I trust that in doing so, we will gain a stronger world, a clearer sense of direction and possibility and another generation of women bold enough to step forward without apology.
Now the theme no longer seems strange. Now I understand that when we give boldly, we gain collectively. And that is a theme worth celebrating.
Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN FCIArb
Related
Opinion
Beyond the Vision: The Alchemy of Turning Ideas into Execution
Published
6 days agoon
February 28, 2026By
Eric
By Tolulope A. Adegoke PhD
History is littered with the skeletons of great ideas that never saw the light of day. In boardrooms and basements across the world, concepts with the power to reshape industries lie dormant, suffocated not by a lack of merit, but by a lack of execution. We live in an era that venerates the “light bulb moment,” yet the painful truth, as articulated by venture capitalists and historians alike, is that ideas are a dime a dozen; it is execution that is richly rewarded . The journey from the spark of imagination to the tangible reality of a finished product, a profitable corporation, or a thriving nation is an alchemical process. It requires the transformation of abstract thought into concrete action—a discipline that separates the dreamer from the builder. This evolution of an idea into reality is not a mystical event but a replicable process, best understood through the distinct exemplars of visionary individuals, resilient corporations, and transformative nations.
The Individual: The “Thinker-Doer” Synthesis
The romantic notion of the genius lost in thought, sketching blueprints while others do the heavy lifting, is a seductive myth. The reality, as demonstrated by history’s most impactful figures, is that the major thinkers are almost always the doers. Steve Jobs, a figure synonymous with innovation, famously articulated this principle by invoking the ultimate Renaissance man, Leonardo da Vinci. Jobs argued that the greatest innovators are “both the thinker and doer in one person,” pointing out that da Vinci did not have a separate artisan mixing his paints or executing his canvases; he was the artist and the craftsman, immersing himself in the physicality of his work . For Jobs, this synthesis was the guiding doctrine of Apple. He understood that abstract ideation is sterile without the feedback loop of hands-on mastery. The refinement of the Mac’s typography, the feel of a perfectly weighted mouse, the intuitive interface of the iPhone—these were not born from pure theory but from an obsessive, tactile engagement with the building process. The “doer” digs into the hard intellectual problems precisely because they are engaged in the act of creation.
This principle is further illuminated by the career of Elon Musk. While often perceived as a master inventor, Musk’s greatest genius may lie in his ability to execute existing ideas at a scale and speed previously thought impossible. He was not a founder of Tesla on day one, but he stepped in to spearhead its execution, transforming an electric vehicle concept into a global automotive powerhouse. At SpaceX, he inherited the age-old idea of space travel but revolutionized its execution by challenging fundamental cost structures and vertically integrating manufacturing. Musk embodies the “thinker-doer” by immersing himself in the engineering details, sleeping on the factory floor, and distilling complex challenges down to their fundamental physics. Both Jobs and Musk validate the venture capital adage that investment is placed not in ideas, but in the people capable of navigating the treacherous path from Point B to Point Z—the messy, unglamorous grind where visions are either realized or abandoned.
“In the architecture of achievement, ideas are merely the blueprints; execution is the foundation, the steel, and the mortar. A blueprint without a builder is just a dream drawn on paper” – Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD
The Corporation: Engineering the Culture of Execution
For corporations, the evolution of an idea into reality is not a one-time event but a cultural imperative. It demands a structure and a philosophy that bridges the notorious gap between strategy and outcome. Procter & Gamble (P&G), a consumer goods giant, provides a master-class in adapting its execution model to survive and thrive. Despite investing billions in internal research and development, P&G recognized that its traditional closed-door approach was failing to meet innovation targets. The company evolved its idea-generation process by embracing “Connect + Develop,” opening its innovation pipeline to external inventors, suppliers, and even competitors. This shift in mindset was merely the idea; the reality was the rigorous, internal execution that vetted, integrated, and scaled those external concepts—like the Mr. Clean Magic Eraser, which was discovered as a prototype in Japan and flawlessly executed by P&G’s operational machine. The company’s success hinges on what researchers call “imaginative integrity”—the ability to make an imagined future so tangible that the entire organization can build toward it.
Similarly, UPS stands as a testament to the power of “creative dissatisfaction.” For over a century, UPS has operated not on bursts of pure invention, but on the relentless engineering and re-engineering of its systems. Founder Jim Casey instilled a culture where the status quo was perpetually questioned—from testing monorail-based sort systems to optimizing delivery routes with algorithmic precision. The idea was not merely to deliver packages, but to create the pinnacle of logistical efficiency. The execution involved tens of thousands of employees “pulling together” to transform the organization repeatedly, embracing changes that ranged from entering the common carrier business in the 1950s to mastering e-commerce logistics in the 1990s. These companies succeed because they build what management experts call the “five bridges” to execution: the ability to manage change, a supportive structure, employee involvement, aligned leadership, and cross-company cooperation. At Costco, this is embodied by CEO James Sinegal, whose Spartan office and relentless focus on in-store details align leadership behavior with the company’s razor-thin margin strategy, proving that execution is modeled from the top down.
The Nation: The Political Economy of Progress
The evolution of ideas into reality scales beyond individuals and firms to the very level of nations. The economic trajectories of countries are determined by their ability to adapt foreign concepts and execute them within local contexts. The post-war rise of Japan is perhaps the most powerful example of this phenomenon. In the early 20th century, Japan was exposed to American ideas of scientific management, but the devastation of World War II left its industrial base in ruins. The idea that saved Japan was quality control, imported through lectures from American scholars W. Edwards Deming and Joseph Juran. The genius of Japan, however, was not in the adoption of the idea, but in its adaptation. Private organizations like the Union of Japanese Scientists and Engineers (JUSE) took the lead, transforming foreign theories into the uniquely Japanese practice of Total Quality Management (TQM) and the grassroots phenomenon of Quality Control circles. This was not government-mandated execution; it was a national movement of “thinker-doers” on the factory floor, relentlessly refining processes. The evolution of this idea rebuilt a nation, turning “Made in Japan” from a byword for cheap goods into a global standard for reliability.
In contrast, Singapore represents a different model of national execution: the state as a strategic architect. Upon independence, Singapore possessed few natural resources and a uncertain future. The government, however, possessed a clear-eyed vision of industrial development. It actively sought external assistance from the United Nations and Japan, but crucially, the Singaporean authorities acted as the “agent of adaptation” . They did not passively accept advice; they made decisive judgments about what was relevant to their unique circumstances and demanded specific adaptations. This disciplined, top-down execution of economic strategy—from building world-class infrastructure to enforcing rigorous education standards—evolved the idea of a “sovereign nation” into the reality of a first-world entrepôt. The contrast with nations like Tunisia, where external donors took the lead due to a lack of domestic policy clarity, highlights a fundamental truth: ideas flow freely across borders, but the ability to execute them is a domestic condition, cultivated through leadership and institutional will.
Conclusion: The Integrity of the Build
Ultimately, the evolution of an idea into reality demands what can be termed “imaginative integrity”—the unwavering commitment to binding the vision to the execution. It is a concept that applies equally to the Renaissance painter mixing his own pigments, the CEO sleeping on the factory floor, and the nation-state meticulously adapting foreign technology. The world is full of “crude ideas” that lack the refinement of execution; even a brilliantly designed structure like MIT’s Stata Center can falter if the craftsmanship of its realization is flawed.
The journey from “A to Z” is long, and the gap between strategy and outcome is the graveyard of potential. To traverse it, one must recognize that thinking and doing are not sequential acts but concurrent disciplines. The doers are the major thinkers, for they are the ones who test hypotheses against reality, who adapt to feedback, and who possess the grit to push through the inevitable obstacles. Whether it is a nation reshaping its economy, a corporation reinventing its logistics, or an individual defying the limits of technology, the lesson remains constant: the future belongs not just to those who can dream it, but to those who can build it.
Vision sees the path; execution walks it, blisters and all. The distance between a dream and a legacy is measured only by the courage to begin the work.
History does not remember the whisper of a thought, but the echo of its impact. To think is human, but to execute is to leave a mark on time.
Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke, AMBP-UN is a globally recognized scholar-practitioner and thought leader at the nexus of security, governance, and strategic leadership. His mission is dedicated to advancing ethical governance, strategic human capital development, and resilient nation-building, and global peace. He can be reached via: tolulopeadegoke01@gmail.com, globalstageimpacts@gmail.com
Related
Opinion
How an Organist Can Live a More Fulfilling Life
Published
2 weeks agoon
February 23, 2026By
Eric
By Tunde Shosanya
It is essential for an Organist to live a fulfilling life, as organ playing has the capacity to profoundly and uniquely impact individuals. There is nothing inappropriate about an Organist building their own home, nor is it unlawful for an Organist to have a personal vehicle. As Organists, we must take control of our own futures; once again, while our certificates hold value, organ playing requires our expertise. We should not limit ourselves to what we think we can accomplish; rather, we should chase our dreams as far as our minds permit. Always keep in mind, if you have faith in yourself, you can achieve success.
There are numerous ways for Organists to live a more fulfilling and joyful life; here are several suggestions:
Focus on your passion. Set an example, and aim for daily improvement.
Be self-reliant and cultivate harmony with your vicar.
Speak less and commit to thinking and acting more.
Make choices that bring you happiness, and maintain discipline in your professional endeavors.
Help others and establish achievable goals for yourself.
Chase your dreams and persist without giving up.
“Playing as an Organist in a Church is a gratifying experience; while a good Organist possesses a certificate, it is the skills in organ playing that truly matter” -Shosanya 2020
Here are 10 essential practices for dedicated Organists…
1) Listen to and analyze organ scores.
2) Achieve proficiency in sight reading.
3) Explore the biographies of renowned Organists and Composers.
4) Attend live concerts.
5) Record your performances and be open to feedback.
6) Improve your time management skills.
7) Focus on overcoming your weaknesses.
8) Engage in discussions about music with fellow musicians.
9) Study the history of music and the various styles of organ playing from different Organists.
10) Take breaks when you feel fatigued. Your well-being is vital and takes precedence over organ playing.
In conclusion, as an Organist, if you aspire to live towards a more fulfilling life in service and during retirement, consider the following suggestions.
1) Plan for the future that remains unseen by investing wisely.
2) Prioritize your health and well-being.
3) Aim to save a minimum of 20 percent of your monthly salary.
4) Maintain your documents in an organized manner for future reference.
5) Contribute to your pension account on a monthly basis.
6) Join a cooperative at your workplace.
7) Ensure your life while you are in service.
8) If feasible, purchase at least one plot of land.
9) Steer clear of accumulating debt as you approach retirement.
10) Foster connections among your peers.
Related


Akinwumi Adesina Celebrates Obasanjo at 89
IGP Disu Removes Benjamin Hundeyin As FPRO
Assets Declaration: Court Dismisses NDLEA’s Case Against Abba Kyari
I Dey kampe, Not Dying Anytime Soon, Obasanjo Declares at 89
Give What, to Gain What? Reflections on the 2026 International Women’s Day Theme
140 Missing As US Submarine Sinks Iran’s Warship in Indian Ocean
NDLEA Nabs UK-wanted Drug Lord after 15-Year Hunt
Prof Jide Owoeye: When a Distinguished Academic Turns 70
Beyond the Vision: The Alchemy of Turning Ideas into Execution
Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei Cut Off from Contact, Fate Unknown
NELFund Extends Deadline for Student Loan Applications Nationwide
Federal Government Issues Travel, Safety Warning for Nigerians in Iran, Gulf States
Iran Confirms Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei Dead after US-Israeli Attacks
Ag. IGP Olatunji Disu: The Rise of a Diligent Officer
Trending
-
Boss Of The Week5 days agoProf Jide Owoeye: When a Distinguished Academic Turns 70
-
Opinion6 days agoBeyond the Vision: The Alchemy of Turning Ideas into Execution
-
Middle East6 days agoIran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei Cut Off from Contact, Fate Unknown
-
News3 days agoNELFund Extends Deadline for Student Loan Applications Nationwide
-
National5 days agoFederal Government Issues Travel, Safety Warning for Nigerians in Iran, Gulf States
-
Middle East5 days agoIran Confirms Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei Dead after US-Israeli Attacks
-
Boss Picks6 days agoAg. IGP Olatunji Disu: The Rise of a Diligent Officer
-
Headline6 days agoWhy Nigerians Must Reject INEC’s Revised Timetable – ADC

