₦airaland Forum

donjazet:
O come on!!!! You guys should stop this rubbish already! Snap out of this Stockholm syndrome already.

Just try to imagine women and children corpse's on the streets of Ukraine. Imagine families uprooted, forever to live with trauma, displaced from their homeland and unsure of the future, fleeing into a bleak future.

Imagine this criminal sanctioning the death of rivals. Being complicit in the murder of Putin's enemies. Being the right hand man of a dictator.
This is a criminal for God's sake.
Don't be like the foolish Escobar's supporters who supported a criminal to death and fell for his fake philanthropy.
Roman's deeds is not enough to pay off the blood of his victims.
Join your fellow fans below and celebrate this moment.

Despite his shortcomings and crimes, he's definitely the best thing that happened to Chelsea.

Stop overreacting. What makes you so sure the next owner won't even be worse?

drisham:
World best owner

Yea, definitely the best.

BlueMann:
Nice gestures; not asking for the loan to be repaid and the donation to the war victims.

Criminal or not, he's the reason we are what we are today so I'm very much grateful.

I just hope we find an owner who's just as passionate.

As Abrahamovic's ownership of Chelsea nears its twilight, I passionately hope we find an Arab billionaire to buy the club.

Only the wealthy Arabs have a high chance of offering us the financial capacity and strength needed to compete at the top level as we've been doing under Roman.

raumdeuter:
Now that Roman is selling Chelsea, just ensure that the next buyer is a clean sinless businessman, who is not involved with Oligarchs, not used slave labor, not evaded taxes not abused women/children and minorities

Lols. Such a billionaire doesn't simply exist.

Statement from Roman Abramovich

I would like to address the speculation in media over the past few days in relation to my ownership of Chelsea FC.

As I have stated before, I have always taken decisions with the Club’s best interest at heart.

In the current situation, I have therefore taken the decision to sell the Club, as I believe this is in the best interest of the Club, the fans, the employees, as well as the Club’s sponsors and partners.

The sale of the Club will not be fast-tracked but will follow due process. I will not be asking for any loans to be repaid.

This has never been about business nor money for me, but about pure passion for the game and Club.

Moreover, I have instructed my team to set up a charitable foundation where all net proceeds from the sale will be donated.

The foundation will be for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine.

This includes providing critical funds towards the urgent and immediate needs of victims, as well as supporting the long-term work of recovery.

Please know that this has been an incredibly difficult decision to make, and it pains me to part with the Club in this manner.

However, I do believe this is in the best interest of the Club.

I hope that I will be able to visit Stamford Bridge one last time to say goodbye to all of you in person.

It has been a privilege of a lifetime to be part of Chelsea FC and I am proud of all our joint achievements. Chelsea Football Club and its supporters will always be in my heart.

Thank you,

Roman

https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2022/03/02/statement-from-roman-abramovich

donjazet:
Any Chelsea fan who sees the criminal's picture sees a generous and benevolent owner who created something beautiful we love and looks lovingly at him, when in essence he is a criminal mastermind who murdered people and propped up a regime responsible for massive loss of lives today and should be looked upon with rage and scorn. He should be in jail. I want to break that mass delusion.

You're not being fair in your criticism of the Russian oligarch and the Putin-led government.

While I don't support the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, I feel Putin's fears and concerns are legitimate.

I think your assessment of the crisis is flawed.

Before you would blame Putin and Abrahamovic for the conflict, I think you should have cast aspersion on the West, especially the US and NATO.

This comment by naptu explains the background of the Russia-Ukraine crisis clearly, especially the YouTube video:

"Bernie Sanders' speech is the best speech that I've heard since this crisis began.

This crisis has been reminding me of a lot of things that I read about in the 1980s. The short clip of Senator Sanders' speech that I initially saw reminded me of one of those things that I read about in the 1980s. It is the Monroe Doctrine.

The Monroe Doctrine, which was formulated by US President James Monroe, states that the Western Hemisphere (that is, North and South America) is the United States' backyard and the US will not allow any foreign power to gain control of any of the countries in the region.

The US basically said that it would not allow any European power to colonise any country in the Americas because it viewed the area as its sphere of control.

The US fought wars against Spain and other countries because of this doctrine.

It said that it viewed any attempt by any other country to gain control of any country in the Americas as a hostile act against the US.

Senator Sanders says that it is hypocritical of the US not to realise or accept that Russia also has its sphere of influence, just the US does.

I have since found the full speech and it is even more brilliant.

Bernie Sanders began by saying that war never goes the way that its planners think it will. He gave examples of the Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

He highlighted the errors that officials made during those wars (for example, when George W. Bush said that they had removed the Taliban forever).

He said that anyone who thinks that those wars went well should ask the families of US soldiers that died in them, the soldiers that were injured both bodily and in spirit and the families of the thousands of civilians that were killed in those countries.

He said that the US and its allies will impose severe sanctions on Russia if there is a war, but it's not only Russia that will suffer the effects of those sanctions.

He said that gas and oil prices, disruptions to banking systems, etc will also affect people in Europe, the United States and probably around the world.

That's why he was calling for a diplomatic approach to de-escalate the crisis.

He said that in formulating a diplomatic approach, people need to have the right policies.

He said that it's true that Putin is a liar, demagogue and dictator and that it's true that he did a lot of things that has caused this crisis, but that it's also true that the United States and its allies have much of the blame for the earlier things that were done that led to this crisis.

He said that the main concern of the Russians immediately after the Cold War, was their safety and security and that the Russians were worried about the expansion of NATO.

He said that the US Government recognised these concerns and provided assurances to Russia that NATO would not expand to Russia's doorstep. However, the opposite was done.

He then cited a lot of US civil servants (who later became senior officials and politicians) who warned way back in the 1990s and early 2000s that the expansion of NATO was causing serious concern in Russia and that the US needed to take action to assuage those concerns.


I will post the video of Senator Sanders' full speech on the floor of the US Senate, but before that I am going to ask my own question.

There were these three related organisations that I knew about when I was growing up. They were NATO (the Western alliance), the Warsaw Pact (the Eastern alliance) and the Non-Aligned Nations.

NATO was created to protect Western nations from the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact was created to protect Eastern nations from the US and the Non-Aligned States was created to prevent the East and the West from destroying the world. Nigeria was a member of the Non-Aligned States.

The Warsaw Pact and the Non-Aligned States ceased to exist after the end of the Cold War, but NATO still exists. Why?

Here is Senator Sanders' speech."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8BJ4FajZzg

donjazet:
It took me a while to snap out of my own Abrahmovic delusions and brainwashing. I just keep asking myself, how I let someone like myself with an ever curious mind never care about learning about this man I have cherished for years or even feel concern about never hearing from him?

Everyone who loved him just decided to not care about who he really was or how he came to be so far as the money just kept rolling in. That's high class propaganda right there. Like does anybody here even knows what his voice sounds like? Is it soft? Is it hoarse? Is it deep bass? Like you know someone for close to 20 years and you don't even know the sound of the person's voice. I want everyone to open their eyes too.

How you know if you're brainwashed is how you feel and react to the image or thought of that person. Any Chelsea fan who sees the criminal's picture sees a generous and benevolent owner who created something beautiful we love and looks lovingly at him, when in essence he is a criminal mastermind who murdered people and propped up a regime responsible for massive loss of lives today and should be looked upon with rage and scorn. He should be in jail. I want to break that mass delusion.

Many billionaires around the world should be in jail for accumulating wealth in questionable ways.

But that's mere wishful thinking. While I understand your grouse with Abrahamovic, I think the issue is getting belabored.

I thought you would know that many of the wealthy people in society have shady, dark sides.

In fact, if you get to know many multi-millionaires and billionaires on a personal level and find out how they made their money, you would shudder at the dirty deals you would discover.

It's just the way the world is.

donjazet:
True. It's never too late to change or evolve in our opinions. One must never be dogmatic in his belief. You act according to new information processed.

We chose to be willfully blind and negligent to the criminals dark history and now we are seeing some of the fruits of his past actions. Innocent lives right now are being slain because he was a vital cog of an autocratic authoritarian regime.
We cannot continue to shower him with encomiums and platitudes knowing now how much of a criminal he was.
Anybody who continues to look upon Roman Abrahmovic with good feelings has a rotten moral compass. It shows how willing you are to bend your moral compass for criminals in as much as you're the beneficiary of the criminal.

True.

donjazet:
when it comes to criminals. I'm uncompromising.
Nonetheless I understand the phase you are in right now. I was there and it took me awhile to get to my senses.

When you see yourself vehemently defending a politician or a billionaire, you know you have most likely been brainwashed.
These are people who have gamed the system and done all sorts of nasty things to get to the top.

For many years here, when Roman Abrahmovic's picture was posted here, it was showered with platitudes and praises; Omo baba olowo, our sugar daddy, our rock upon which we stood and others.
We could only be eternally grateful for all he had done for us.

We chose to be blind to his faults. We never asked ourselves why we never heard from him in all our years of supporting the club or showering him with praise. We chose to be willfully blind to his very dark history. We fall for his scheme to whitewash his image.

Well, I'M NO LONGER BRAINWASHED. I hope you don't continue to bend your moral compass for this criminal. You can definitely separate Chelsea form the man. The club will always be bigger than any individual.

SAY NO TO SPORTSWASHING.

But without this criminal's deep pockets, you, including most (if not all) Chelsea fans that started following the club in the 2000s, won't be supporting the Blues.

Most would have been Manchester City's (because of Pep's brilliance) or Manchester United's fans as Chelsea would have been a mid-table club or a top 10 club in the EPL at best.

Amoto94, see the level of orderliness of these Ukrainians trying to flee from their cities due to the crisis with their more powerful neighbor.

Ukraine has much less churches and mosques Nigeria has; yet, any slight issue, Nigerians would scatter everywhere.

If you think it's religion that makes people law-abiding and productive, then you're clearly wrong.

Some of the most religious societies in the world are the most corrupt and disorganized, e.g. Nigeria, India.

Amoto94:
Insults upon insults

Just rest with your agenda to force everyone into belonging to a belief system against their will.

There are many things more important in life than religion and the worship of an imaginary entity.

Amoto94:
My problem with you "free thinkers" is that you claimed to uphold logic and reason as the basis to accept or reject something but when the same is applied to your beliefs you will reject it and resort to insults and whatever else you can find to obfuscate the truth. You people should have some shame and decency to admit that you hold a belief system.

Lols, this is a simple issue. Someone says he doesn't have a religion, but you want to force the person to have one.

Everyone — except delusional and mischievous people — knows the world's religions and the irreligious.

Just rest with this your mischievous agenda; it's an effort in futility.

Amoto94:
Whatever you say is irrelevant. Whether you like to admit it or not you ascribe to a philosophical position and you defend it with your supposed proofs and you claim that is not your faith?

You're simply saying nonsense. If I say I don't have a religion, you're not the one to tell me I do.

Everyone must not share in your delusions about reality or slam their head on the floor being the slaves of the Arabs.

To ignorant and delusional people like you, anything and everything is a religion and a belief system even when it's clear agnostics don't have shared religious faith.

Amoto94:
By definition agnostic goes thus, a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God. Therefore agnosticism is a belief system thus a religion practised by agnostics.

That's your parochial opinion. Agnosticism isn't a belief system, but a philosophical position or viewpoint.

But then, I know everything is a belief system to delusional people.

Agnostics are unbelievers, skeptics, and heretics.

Amoto94:
Android22 you made your points and expose the inconveniences in the claim of irreligiousness by many who are quick to say we are not religious, religion is about creed/belief followed by acts of devotion. Whatever you believed in and uphold as your creed definitely can be said to be a religion for you anyone trying to distort this fact is only attempting to reverse reality.

What's the creed of an agnostic?

It's obvious you don't know what a creed is like your delusional friend who sees anything and everything as a religion and devotion.

Agnostics are faithless people because they've no god, no creed, and no religious faith.

Android22:
Ok Mister Intelleshual.

Okay, Android 2.2 (Froyo), oyinbo le gan

Android22:
A non-deluded person said devoted people do devotions. So a devoted wife...never mind. Same people who call themselves rationalist and free thinking.
You gave me a good laugh today I tell you. I'll do well to look out for your posts henceforth.

It's obvious you type before you think. If not, you would know devout is primarily used for religious people.

Its secondary meaning, committed, isn't what you meant in those posts, which is why I said you don't describe an agnostic as devout in that context.

I don't blame you anyway; oyinbo le, especially for a typical religionist who doesn't read books on philosophy.

Android22:
I hope you can see that you are clearly out of your depth. The term devout Christian refers to what some Nigerians call spirikoko. People who are absolutely and inflexibly committed to their faith. They are different from nominal Christians who might fill out a form to state that they are Christians, but do not hold tenaciously to the Christian tenets. For e.g, a nominal Christian might go to church on Sundays or maybe only during Christmas, Lent, Easter, New Year etc but a devout Christian will most likely be in church midweek, for choir practice, every other day etc. Just the way you hear people say "radical muslim" "extremists" etc for certain types of Muslims. And then you have those who pick and choose what to believe about Islam even though they also claim to be muslim. If you still don't see how it applies to you and your version of agnosticism, then free the issue.

You're delusional. Agnosticism isn't a religion, and that's not debatable.

You don't understand the meaning of these words you use.

Agnostics don't do devotions like religious people, and that's why they can't be described as devout in that context.

Stop saying nonsense. In most societies, there are religious people (Christians, Muslims, and the likes) and irreligious people (agnostics, atheists, secular humanists called freethinkers as a whole).

Snap out of delusion. Your calling agnostics religious is tantamount to describing secular humanists as religious.

Where's the sense in all this?

Android22:
. Have you heard the term "devout christian"? I can't believe what an intelleshual is saying here. By the way, I spelled the word to mimic how you are coming off to me. No disrespect...please.

Lols, devout is commonly used to describe religious people.

You're very confused.

Android22:
Have you heard the phrase "religious Christian"? This is all shades of funny and then some.

Isn't a Christian religious before? This man na clown

Android22:
Is "devout" by any chance a synonym of the word religious? Will it be colloquially acceptable to say "devout agnostic"? I am looking for ways to simplify it for you here, man.

That's why I said you don't understand the meaning of these words you're using.

Devout can mean different things in different contexts. It can mean religious or committed.

But there's nothing like a devout agnostic the way you used it.

It's simply a misnomer.

Android22:
Can you type "religious agnostic" into your Google search bar to see if anything pops up? Let me even slow it down for you. What is the meaning of the word "religious"?

And Google told you agnosticism is a religion?

Is it a religion in the world of irreligion?

Are you even sure Nairaland isn't also a religion?

Lols.

It's clear you don't know what agnosticism is all about.

Android22:
Can the word 'religious' act as an adjective? Can the word 'agnostic' act as a noun? If I am asking you questions above your education let me know. Things I have to spell out to a "rationalist".

Lols, you're very confused.

When an agnostic or atheist says he doesn't have a religion or believe in God and other imaginary entities of religion, there's no need to mischievously form a new religion for them which doesn't exist in reality, but only in your mind.

Whether people choose to have a religion or not is solely their own decision to make.

Everyone must not share in your delusions.

Android22:
Religious people are devoted, passionate, dogmatic and parochial about a deity or belief or philosophy or ideology. But trust a religious agnostic to strike out the belief, philosophy or ideology part and focus only on the deity aspect.

I don't need to waste my time replying this simply because you said religious agnostic. What does that mean

You don't obviously understand the meaning of the words you used here. It's just like someone calling another person religiously irreligious.

Lols

Beyond the Standard Model

The Standard Model is one of the most well-tested theories in particle physics. But scientists are searching for new physics beyond it.

Humans have always sought to understand the essence of the world around them.

Ancient civilizations believed everything was composed of basic constituents like earth, air, water and fire; in the 1800s, these classical elements gave way to a meticulous record of over a hundred chemical elements, known today as the modern periodic table.

The discovery of the electron in 1897 ushered in a new era, as scientists realized that the true building blocks of nature were even smaller than they had thought.

Since then, a slew of subatomic particles has been discovered and organized into a theory called the Standard Model, which impressively describes the properties and behavior of the matter surrounding us in a single, albeit hefty, mathematical equation.

We have a precise model of only a small sliver of reality

“The Standard Model is scientists’ best guess at explaining the universe,” says Don Lincoln, a physicist at the US Department of Energy’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory.

Since its formulation in the early 1970s, the Standard Model has predicted the outcome of countless experiments in particle physics with remarkable accuracy.

Its most recent addition, the Higgs boson in 2012, rounded out the model by shedding light on how subatomic particles gain their mass.

“It’s simply the most successful theory we have for explaining the behavior of the matter we see,” Lincoln says.

Why, then, are scientists so intent on discovering physics beyond the Standard Model?

“We have a precise model of only a small sliver of reality,” Lincoln says.

“And there are a lot of unexplained mysteries,” ones that can’t be understood within the Standard Model’s tried-and-true mathematical framework.

Perhaps the most intriguing puzzle is the relative lack of antimatter found in the universe.

Antimatter is composed of particles with certain properties, like charge and spin, flipped from their ordinary matter counterparts.

According to the interactions of the Standard Model, the birth of our universe should have produced matter and antimatter in equal amounts—but somehow, that balance was tipped to create the matter-dominated world we live in today.

Another hint that there is physics beyond the Standard Model is that the theory does not account for dark matter, which physicists believe to be five times more prevalent than visible matter in the universe.

While dark matter has never been directly observed, ample evidence of its presence exists.

For example, scientists think the gravitational pull of dark matter causes galaxies to rotate at speeds unexplainable by the influence of the matter we can see.

“It’s what holds the universe together,” says Marcela Carena, a theoretical particle physicist at Fermilab.

“But we have no clue what it’s made of, or why it is there at all.”

Attempts to decipher these mysteries require deep collaboration between the theoretical and experimental sides of particle physics, says Flip Tanedo, a physicist at the University of California, Riverside who works on understanding the nature of dark matter.

Many physicists think that new additions to the Standard Model will be part of a hidden “dark sector” of particles that interact only rarely, if at all, with the matter we are familiar with.

But proving this hypothesis will take concrete experimental evidence. Any observation that doesn’t agree with Standard Model predictions is a clue.

But only after scientists make rigorous checks—to confirm that it cannot be explained away by a fluke in the data or an error in theoretical calculations—is it a smoking gun.

Once both of those paths have been ruled out, Carena says, “then the explanation for the discrepancy must be something new.”

“We are at an amazing time in history,” Carena says, because of the sophisticated technology available to explore past the limits of current understanding.

“We have such amazing tools, and very powerful mathematical methods, to learn about our universe and about ourselves.”

Nonetheless, it’s improbable that physics will ever reach a point so far beyond the Standard Model that the theory gets replaced entirely by something new.

“There are pieces missing in the puzzle,” she says. “But we’re not going to throw away all the pieces that already fit so well together.”

Tanedo agrees: “A theory is a model of nature, not a definition of what nature is,” he says.

What’s more likely is that the Standard Model will be regarded as effective at only certain scales and energies, similar to how chemistry describes atomic structure without much need for the mathematics of particle physics.

“I wouldn’t pick up a subatomic particle physics textbook to understand the periodic table of elements,” Tanedo says.

With so much of the matter and energy in our universe left to unravel, the search for physics beyond the Standard Model is a journey ripe for discovery.

“The ocean of what we don’t understand is far more vast than the little pond in which we’ve explored,” Lincoln says.

“Anyone who wishes to explore this sea of knowledge can get on a boat and sail away.”

Source: https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/beyond-the-standard-model

Amoto94:
A001 I understand perfectly what you are trying to explain but let me answer you that religion is not to be blamed when people choose to ignore means while seeking for a cure; I don't know about Christianity to offer an opinion on the subject being discuss but I can say little to what Islam says about this.
Prophet Muhammad said, Tie your camel but put your trust in Allah. He also said, don't go close to the leper or something like that. In a passage of Devil's Deception by Ibn Jawzi the author narrated a story that transpired between Imam Ahmad and a Sufi who went to inform the Imam about his planned pilgrimage; the shaykh asked him that had he taken any provision the Sufi said no that he puts his trust in Allah, then the Imam asked him whether he is going alone or in the company of people? The Sufi said he's going with other people, then the Imam said that he's a liar that he's relying on the provisions of others.

I understand your position as a Muslim.

Android22:
Your argument is tedious and cyclical. According to you, your interpretation of religion is truth even if to a religious person, that is just a reality distorted view. I called you dogmatic and you refused but here you are proving me right.

I'm dogmatic because I said prayers are mere wishes? Lols. You don't even understand the meaning of the word you use.

Android22:
That shows again that your thinking about religion is binary - religious people either pray or they get to "thinking". I have again demonstrated that your position on religious devotion is convoluted when not flat out wrong because some religious people pray and think paripassu.
In actuality, most students who pray before exams do not pray and walk out of the venue hoping they would have passed. They stay there answering the questions hoping that together with their prayers they would come out successful.

Some students engage in hours of prayers and devotion, which affect their academic performance in school.

When they're supposed to be reading, they spend a long time praying and engaging in religious devotion, and consequently, their grades in courses become poor.

That's different from the type of students that only prays for a few minutes before an exam.

Android22:
You are the one who claims the prayer was insignificant when they succeeded but then turn around to blame their religious devotion when they were not. If I have to point this illogic out to you again, you might want to admit that the matter at hand might be above your pay grade.

What I pointed out is a simple issue that's easy to understand. Time is the major factor.

Another example of such folly is when some religious zealots waste time praying to god when they're sick instead of seeking medical care in a hospital.

A good example is the pastor conman that died recently due to his negligence and delusional beliefs: https://www.nairaland.com/7002557/pastor-ezekiel-atang-dies-after

Android22:
Your last point gave me a good laugh. In your opinion, agnosticism is not regarded as a religion therefore it is not. But agnosticism (at least your own version of it) accommodates dogma, devotion, parochialism and zeal towards your idea about religious people. In other words, your religion is in the belief in the insignificance of other people's religion.

This is just one of your many delusions as a religious person. You can twist the definition of religion anyhow you like to suit your parochial agenda.

But it's a fact that agnosticism isn't regarded by sane people anywhere as a religion.

Android22:
You are posturing. I can take your own argument, replace 'being religious' with 'free thinkers' and the statement will also be true.

It's a fact that for you to solve any life's problem, whether simple or complex, you need to think rationally and apply the brain.

Thus, Reason is the number one requirement needed to proffer solutions to any problem one faces in life, not devotion, not prayers.

That's just reality.

Android22:
But I posit you will disagree with it because it goes against your own preconceptions and biases about "religion".

I don't have any bias against religion. Being a rationalist and realist, what I said about religion and prayers is a simple truth.

Nigeria, which consists of over 180 million religious people, can't solve basic problems of life, namely power supply, food sufficiency, good hospitals.

Yet they're very religious, reciting millions of prayers daily. Even so, they're very corrupt and wicked.

Of what use are the prayers and religious devotion when a country of 200 million people can't enjoy basic amenities of life such as uninterrupted power supply, good roads, good education, quality health care?

Whether you like it or not, prayers are mere wishes that mostly don't get granted and only come to pass sparsely by coincidence being a natural phenomenon.

That's reality.

Android22:
What that proves is, you are dogmatic, insular, passionate and stalwart about your beliefs even if others disagree with it.

No, I'm not dogmatic because I don't have fixed beliefs, and generally, I don't do beliefs but knowledge.

My approach to life is to reason things out first before taking or accepting anything as true, apply the scientific method in solving life's issues, and deal with the generally accepted beliefs sceptically.

Also, I'm not insular because while I'm an agnostic, I highly value the local cultures.

Android22:
Which leads me to my next food for thought for you: if prayers and religious devotion did not make any country great, should logic not let you know that it cannot therefore be responsible for any country's failures?

Where's the logic in this your assertion?

If a student relies on prayers and religious devotion to pass exams like some undergraduates do instead of reading, isn't it obvious that if they fail, such beliefs are responsible for their failure in the exams?

And once the student reduces the time spent praying and worshipping or even stops it
altogether and reads more, their performance in the exam will most likely improve.

Android22:
In fact, what makes you think that some thieving politicians and their cronies are not irreligious free thinkers?

Give me examples of such irreligious Nigerian politicians.

Even there are such people in Nigeria's political class, the fact is, "religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful," as Seneca said.

Android22:
You are in a religion of your own construct but you just don't know it yet. Stop the virtue signaling.

That's one of your delusions as a religionist calling an agnostic a religious person.

The last time I checked agnosticism isn't regarded anywhere as one of the world's religions since an agnostic doesn't have dogmas, fixed beliefs, and doesn't follow strict rules.

Android22:
There are rationalists and free thinkers homeless in California and New York. Denigrating religion is not the hallmark of an intellectual or a rational being. Your arguments come off as half baked and reductive when you toe that line. But some people need to put others down to feel good about themselves.

Being a rationalist or a freethinker doesn't automatically make one a millionaire; but it gives one a better chance of solving myriads of problems life throws at one.

But don't worry; just keep on praying daily to Jesus or Allah for a better Nigeria while the leaders steal Nigeria's resources with reckless abandon.

I'm sure all the great countries Nigerians run to now and then were developed with fervent prayers and religious devotion.

The witches and wizards and demons are the thieving politicians and their cronies, not imaginary entities that only exist in the head of believers, not in reality.

raumdeuter:
Who tell you say we cant pray our way to it? You will see the results of our prayers soon. We will enter toilet in Nigeria come out in Ukraine and stop the war

https://cdn.punchng.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/25104236/Russian-invasion-Well-command-war-in-Ukraine-to-cease-says-Apostle-Suleman.jpg

Lols

BlueRayDick:
That is why u see brilliant young minds nowadays will do at most 3-4 years stint at dem KPMG, EY, Access bank etc, gather funds and press "ctrl + Japa" commot the country.

Nigeria doesn't value talented people, is a dream killer.

When you've the majority of the citizens believing in God/god, juju, miracles, prayers (mere wishes), when you've rationalists and freethinkers as the minority who must live in fear of ignorance, of being branded witches and wizards by religious zealots, what you get is a country that can't solve the simplest of its problems.

No country can ever pray its way to greatness.

Sadly, Nigeria is on a path of destruction, and no amount of prayers can change things dramatically.

It's a sorry case, and things will only keep getting worse until there are much less religious and superstitious people in the country.

BlueRayDick:


U think they will ever give anything that will give accurate data/information a chance in this country? Country wey people dey delibrately sabotage national census,manipulate figures to the extent that the whole exercise that we spent billions end up getting discredited?

No.