Biafra: IPOB Faults Financial Times Of London

The Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, has dismissed as unprofessional and misleading, the report of Financial Times of London on the activities of the group and the forthcoming general elections.

The leadership of Nnamdi Kanu-led group said the Financial Times report went “contrary to the ethics of investigative professional journalism expected of them” especially “the current misleading headline on IPOB, entitled: “Echoes of Biafra war as Nigeria looks to polls.” It said:

‘’This unprofessional conduct calls for holistic review on the part of the proprietors of the Financial Times. It is our position that had a reputable media organisation like Financial Times embarked on investigating their sources of information before hand, they would have been well-informed of the fact that IPOB is non-violent in their quest for restoration of Biafra.

“Does it mean that the editors of Financial Times did not see and, in fact, know that Nnamdi Kanu is not in hiding but instead was taken away by the army when they stormed his home and killed 28 people?

“Did they not see the bullet riddled house and damage done to his family home? Are they not aware of the existence of a video taped interview clearly showing the Defence Minister of Nigeria, Mansur Dan Ali, admitting that they sent soldiers to Kanu’s home?

“Where went the conscience of the highly revered editors of this reputable publishing giant before they authorised this misleading report?

“Although, we are aware that Financial Times is under intense and sustained pressure from powerful UK-based lobbyists, laundering Nigeria’s image to distort and twist every news on Biafra to their advantage, we call on the editors of Financial Times to act responsibly now by retracting their wholly misleading and unprofessional report of the status of IPOB and its leader.

“We remind them that all these information that we have pointed out to them are publicly available and as a consequence, demand that they rectify the monumental errors of omission and misrepresentations in their report. Otherwise, we can only firmly conclude that they have joined the league of ‘fake news’ club.”