₦airaland Forum

bayelsaowei:
You’re a bigot, I am not.. that’s established.

But my job here is to remind you that while you think Muslims as a group are rapists, the god you worship daily alongside with the Epstein class are PDFs, sex offenders and criminals.

Another reminder again..

Saying there are Muslim rape gangs and being called a bigot for it is a badge of honour 😂

It does not change the fact of what I said. Go and call the Australian government a bigot or teach them how to deflect to issue into Trump is a Pdf.

bayelsaowei:
You’re classifying “Muslims” as rapists..

I had to correct your head that the very person you worship is the king of all rapists..

I had to let it sink in..

Trump is your albatross..

Trump is a pdf, sex offender and felon..

I will always remind you..

No, you yourself don't like Muslims; you see them as I do, and I have verifiable evidence of hanging out with Muslim guys and even dating Muslim women, or participating in Sallah celebrations with my Muslim friends. Those Muslims drink alcohol and go to parties. So they themselves will be considered infidels by some Muslims.

I am not here to sugarcoat things to sound virtuous, I speak the truth. I said there are Muslim rape gangs; I did not say Muslims are rapists. I say a Muslim rape; I do not say Muslims are rapists.

Let's not act like you are so different. You will not live in the north. we know it's because you don't feel safe and no one will accuse you that you think all Muslims are rapists.

As a group I don't like Muslims, the ones I know personally, I don't have issues with.

IjeBos:
You're almost 60 man.
And homosexuality is always on your mouth.
Read the ish you just wrote again.
I can't even imagine the life lessons you impart on your children.
Imagine them logging in to Nairaland and seeing what their father does with his time everyday.

We see how well you mentor Bemeruca here.
I bet you'll be in Seattle to see Chris Brown too. (who tells a lie that can be easily checked)
Bottom of the Barrell people.

The guy who is an expert in dildos is here 😂😂

bayelsaowei:
Keep asking me... go and ask him.

You call Muslims rapists on this group, meanwhile you serve a thin god that is the lord of sexual harassment, a pdf and a felon.

Sounds like you don't care that a particular group of men rape young girls as a gang, spanning from the UK to Australia, to Germany, Sweden, etc.

Trump is your problem. Again, who did Trump rape, and which rape gang does he belong to?

This is how you can support Hamas and the IRGC because you don't like Trump.

This is irrational.

bayelsaowei:
It seems this culture is the culture of your god Trump.. to rape!!!.. it seems you’ve forgotten..

Maybe you have amnesia..

Who him rape?

bemeruca:
You know that woman I am seeing in Seattle who is making IjeBos go crazy? Yesterday, we discussed politics. It started with her wanting us to go see Chris Brown when he is close by, then Mack Lemor and Ed Sheeran to Gaza and Israel.

She quickly realized I am on Israel's side, she listened and understands Israel's predicament.

I hope cococandy will go and talk to her about seeing and dating a conservative 😂

IjeBos I am expecting you to cry, come and rant

You know that woman I am seeing in Seattle who is making IjeBos go crazy? Yesterday, we discussed politics. It started with her wanting us to go see Chris Brown when he is close by, then Mack Lemor and Ed Sheeran to Gaza and Israel.

She quickly realized I am on Israel's side, she listened and understands Israel's predicament.

I hope cococandy will go and talk to her about seeing and dating a conservative 😂

basilico:
I don't create any news.
I just post here for my future reference.i draw my conclusions based on evidence I readiky provide.

Raids across Australia going after Muslim rape gangs.

Everywhere they go, the same.

Remigration and de-islamisation is the answer. pic.twitter.com/6PWPsV6ZtH

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) September 21, 2026

Its the culture.

raumdeuter:
She immediately identifies as Blue people or Black

Or she is a non-practicing white.

Obama was a Conservative/Republican

Obama pic.twitter.com/U7fEJCZee4

— Ms. Jackson🇺🇸 (@PaytonKJackson) September 21, 2026

Raumdeuter, a conservative vs a liberal.

https://x.com/Patriot_187/status/2102080606754554218

budaatum:
Stop right there please!

It was you who posted here what many others told you they saw whether you agree or not, so don't start lying that others don't see something you don't want to see.

You are free to see KKK with your imagination. What you haven’t established is that you saw it because you were more diligent than everyone who didn’t.

People see faces in clouds too. That doesn’t mean there is actually a face in the cloud, and drawing eyes and a mouth over it doesn’t prove there was one there to begin with.

That is exactly my point: once you have to add the features that make your interpretation obvious, you’re illustrating what you imagined, not demonstrating what was actually in the original image.

I posted a controversy engineered by race-baiters calling for DEI... Converse already has diversity and inclusion.

bayelsaowei:
CNN isn’t the president of the United States. So what CNN likes is inconsequential..

Can you for once think?

No one said cnn is the president or like the president of the country, it was never my point. Maybe you should be the one doing the thinking here.

My point is about the principle you are suddenly presenting as sacred.

CNN was perfectly willing to entertain the question of whether Fox News should even remain part of the White House press pool.

So yes, CNN didn't have the governmental power to remove Fox. I never claimed they did. The point is the same CNN is now treating exclusion from White House access as an intolerable attack on press freedom, but was quite comfortable discussing whether a rival outlet should lose that access.

It's why I bring the drowning-child analogy.
When Obama did it to Fox, you said CNN stood with fox. Good. That's the principle you are appealing to.

But years later, CNN itself was airing discussions about whether Fox deserved to remain in the White House press pool.

So “CNN is not the president” doesn't answer the contradiction here. Obviously CNN couldn't carry out the restriction itself.

I am only saying I don't care; after all, they BELIEVED a rival media house should be exiled.

budaatum:
Your point was valid. People were bringing KKK for what you saw as "an ordinary ad", and the evidence I posted supported and proved what you said that, "people are bringing the KKK for an ordinary ad".

What you can not seem to understand is that some people have eyes that see different to what you see. That is why you always insist that what you see is what everyone else must see without realising that some might be more diligent than you are, so look much better than you do and may see more than you see especially since not everyone is here to just "cruise" as you have claimed you are here to. But what I find interestingly amusing is how you so easily seem to forget yourself. So let me attempt to remind you with expectation of failure because I know you will attempt to block this out so you do not need to see and consider it at all as you often don't.

Remember your 'Maths is racist'? That was you doing exactly what you are accusing these people of doing here. You took an "ordinary ad" and brought "racist".

(And do not miss that I am doing it too, taking the symbols which ben has advertised yourself here with and made KKK.)

Why are people not free to do what you yourself did with your 'Maths is racist', pray tell?

Seeing something others don't isn't evidence of looking harder, because the disputed interpretation can't prove the interpreter's diligence. Also, I did not insist anything on others, what you saw is what I saw, it became different when you added features to it to make it appeal to your bias.

If the original has: a triangular patch of light,
shoes being held by the woman,
and your add: eye holes to make a hood,
apparent legs to make the shoes look like a hanging body,

Then your addition is what is doing the work here not the actual image.

If you miss the KKK just say you want them back. All these fake juicy smoye is old and dead.

When socialists post a book that implies math is racist, I will say that's what they are doing.

bayelsaowei:
And that is it.. solidarity..!!!!

Because if the media doesn’t find this together, they’ll get to bear the brunt later on.

Good, indie will love this.

You had nothing to say other than excuses when cnn was calling for Fox news to be banned.

They were angry when Obama did it. It's like saving a kid from drowning, then proceeding to strangle the kid.

budaatum:
I think you forget that you were the one who posted this "very specific symbolism" here and into our awareness. And it sounds like you do not know that symbolism is subjective and not objective at all, which is why you can nut see it I guess. That and the fact you are impervious to what it symbolises since it never affected you and you lack empathy for those affected.

I said people are bringing the KKK for an ordinary ad, you proved my point by posting this

bayelsaowei:
The courts would overturn the ban and CNN will come back to hold your orange god accountable..

You and Trump can keep throwing tantrums, acting like infants.

The constitution would prevail over the feelings of your tiny god.

Nonsense!!!

Where you dey when cnn was calling for Fox news to be banned from the White House?

I get green arrow. Lol I hope when jao Pedro subs enter e no go displace me

Wait, I am still at number one after this week from hell 🤣😂

bayelsaowei:
🤣🤣😅😅😂😂

How did this woman turn into a TDS sufferer baffles me.

But guess what? The likes of basilico and Bemeruca are more republican than her..

When you are in the same frequency with her, you know you are on the wrong side of things.

You are seeing a bitter woman, and you think she is rational. This is cult-like behavior

bayelsaowei:
Denial of a reporter from a specific event and the banning of an established media outlet in its entirety from the White House are two different things.

It’s exactly what I have been explaining to you from previous posts.

One is discretionary (though from my ethical point of view I have condemned it), while the other is a direct violation of the constitution (1st and 5th amendment)

🤦🏾🤦🏾.

Trump is overreaching.. your duty, if your head is/was correct is to condemn his actions.

I still won't give you the condemnation you're demanding from me simply because you believe I'm morally required to share your reaction.

I don't care CNN lose their White House access. Considering the relationship between Trump and these outlets and the way they cover him, I have very little sympathy for them.

They should go to court and rightly so. I cannot condemn someone for asking people who treat him or her badly at every turn for not coming to their office.

CNN behave themselves and treat IRGC officers with respect.

your insistence of me to condemn Trump's decision or I support totalitarianism is balderdash. Those proposition are different and does not apply.

I can think CNN deserved to lose White House access because of how it has conducted itself toward Trump while simultaneously accepting that the Constitution may limit Trump's ability to impose that consequence. Which is precisely why I said they should go to court.

I haven't said court she ignore their right too, and I still won't care if that happens.

bayelsaowei:
Biden didn’t impose a blanket ban. The article you posted proved that. Abi you no read your post?

Trumps current ban is a total ban on the mentioned news outlets from the white house..

Open your eyes and read the news..

Gosh!!

Why did his admin ban Steven Nelson then?
Response to him:
“We are unable to accommodate your credential request.”

bayelsaowei:
The personal reason from the reporter is his personal opinion and not an established fact..

But then because of the first amendment he is entitled to his opinion.

And let me make this clear.. in terms of legal standing and precedence:

1. Presidents are not legally mandated to grant every outlet access to every interview. So access denial of some reporters by Presidents to specific events is still yet to be challenged legally. The next question would be is it the right thing to do by a president? Personal ethics and optics. Even at that I have condemned Obamas incident I sighted.

2. However there is a legal precedence for a president to impose a blanket ban on any established media outlet, as it directly violates Fifth Amendment due process and First Amendment protections.

Did Biden admin give you any reason?

Did Trump ban CNN's opinion?

How many media house will conduct one interview? If your answers are many why is he singled out?

Why can't you make the argument that Trump is not granting CNN interview as well?

Biden imposes a blanket ban, you are making excuses. Trump imposes a ban or blanket ban; you are complaining.

bayelsaowei:
Your assertion that it was because of Hunter Bidens reporting that the reporter was denied access is baseless.. there’s no fact to that..this means the conclusion from both parties were wrong.

You are the hypocrite here..

You find it hard to condemn Trumps direct infringement on the first amendment..

You’re a Trump worshipper.. you should be ashamed of your adult self..

Did they tell you why he was denied access? Other than that what could be the reason?

I don't go about posting everything Obama do and force you to share the same moral reaction with me.

I post it and leave it if I ever post.

Na you they always look for Republicans while ignoring the people (democrats) who did the thing first.
Or make excuses for them.

bayelsaowei:
What we are dealing with is unprecedented for a president.. for the lovers of totalitarianism in this group (especially Bemeruca) let me establish my argument and also drag you further.. let me outline the difference between the newyork post incident and Trumps recent blanket ban on news houses.


1. In the Biden/NY Post incident, the New York Post was denied a single-event pass – a discretionary credential for a specific room or event. However, the Post’s journalists maintained their permanent White House hard passes and entered the grounds daily. They used the press briefing room and continued asking questions at press briefings.

2. Conversely, for the Trump CNN, MS NOW and Politico Action incidents, the Secret Service deactivated and confiscated hard passes at security gates. As a result journalists from these organizations are physically barred from entering White House grounds or the press complex altogether.

1. Is event discretionary
2. Is a direct infringement on the first amendment.

If you guys can’t see the difference and come out to condemn what is wrong then you are free to continuously be the Trump worshippers you are.

Those distinctions you are comparing don't make the Biden-era restrictions disappear.

You started this conversation essentially arguing, “Did Biden did not ban the press”

Once examples appeared, your argument progressively became: it wasn't the entire organization, it wasn't the hard pass, it was only one event, therefore it doesn't count.

Now you are making excuses, and none of it changes what I told you from the beginning:

I don't share your outrage over these organizations losing White House access.

If they challenge it and a court orders their access restored, fine. I won't be outraged about that either.

You keep demanding that I have the same moral reaction you have and then calling disagreement Trump worship. That's rhetoric, not an answer to what I've actually said.

bayelsaowei:
This assertion is debatable.. the said NewYork post reporter was rather denied a credential pass to attend a specific event because of room capacity issues as addressed by the Bidens administration.

However, the newyork post as an organization wasn’t issued an organizational ban from covering campus wide whitehouse press.. The Post's journalists retained their permanent White House hard passes, entered the grounds daily, used the press briefing room, and continued asking questions at press briefings.

There were empty seats. Do your research before your blind worship of the democrat party.

There were at least 20 empty seats.

Nelson had previously complained that he had been repeatedly denied access to registration-required Biden events.

When Trump banned Jim Acoster, no one was saying he didn't ban the whole CNN, they were saying the same thing and the same crying for this latest one.

Continue the double standards. You should have acknowledged Biden mess up since when you see something "bad" you criticize it than worship the actions of democrats.

Hypocrisy, double standards packed in your explanation

bayelsaowei:
The bolded shows there was no campus wide organizational White House ban.. It seems you’ve been a bat through out this discussion..

But I leave you to your break dancing and mischief.

Enjoy your dictator.

When the next democratic government comes, don’t scream when full bans are meted to right wing media organizations..

They were not completely banned. You have to find the breadcrumbs, eh...

Why did he restrict them?

And notice how you did not touch the New York Post.

I have not said you are making excuses for a totalitarian president.

Your default position is Democrats good, Republicans bad, which is why you started making remarks like "did Biden or Obama ban the press" before any research.

raumdeuter:
I enjoy it when Trump points out their bias to their faces. I say those are some of the best moments when a CNN MSDNC reporter tries to act smart and Trump or Rubio bodies them

The ban or no ban wont make them.change but it will continue to shine the light on them as biased outlets for the public

One CNN reporter was on camera admitting they did everything to paint Trump in a bad light and elevate Biden in the 2020 election

Nothing will make them change. Also, you cannot change the minds of people like bayelsaowei who only see bad when it's Republican, but turn a blind eye when it is on the other side.

Then you have gullible people who will think Trump attacking them or fighting back at the press is rude and unpresidential. The media will frame those moments like that, trump being mean etc. They will still play the victim and the gullible will swallow how they framed the encounter. There is not way for him to win. So if he does not have to deal with them it is fine for me.

Biden ban New York post because of they aggressively covered the Hunter laptop and Biden's corrupt business dealings.

The fact that bayelsaowei was asking if Biden restricted the press shows that he does not really care.

bayelsaowei:
So it’s established..

When a democratic president comes in he or she can go ahead to ban right wing media houses from covering the White House even when it is ethically and constitutionally wrong.

Thank you and have a good day..

Maybe it was established by Obama or Biden or Trump or all of the above?

You are the last person that will care. You only care because it is Trump. Then you will jump to your moral superiority contest.

In May 2023, the Biden White House denied a New York Post reporter access to a Biden event. The White House said it could not accommodate the credential request; the Post questioned why because there were reportedly empty seats. The administration denied that it was retaliating against the outlet.

In 2023, Biden’s White House changed the rules for permanent “hard passes.” The number of journalists holding them fell from 1,417 to 975, a reduction of 442. Importantly, those journalists were not completely banned from the White House; reporters without hard passes could still seek temporary/day passes.

The administration threatened reporter Simon Ateba (a black conservative journalist) with loss of his hard pass over repeated interruptions at briefings, and he subsequently lost his hard-pass credential under the new rules. He challenged the policy in federal court on First Amendment grounds.

Reporters also criticized Biden's White House for tightly controlling access to the president. Axios described longstanding frustration among the White House press corps over Biden avoiding interviews and limiting opportunities for questioning.




Don't come here and act like you care, you don't. It's how you did not care about redistricting till Republicans started using it.

Raumdeuter, bayelsaowei another reason why I don't care

Well, well, well, what do we have here @CNN?

This wouldn't be you actually censoring a sitting President of the United States and calling him a liar for all of the public to see, now would it?

You deserve everything you're getting. I hope you never step foot in our White… pic.twitter.com/88BvVBF4Dx

— SheepDog Society LLC (@SDSLLC_USA) September 19, 2026

The same people(bayelsaowei) who cry about cnn are like this:

Here's how Jimmy Kimmel responded when Twitter suspended the the account of the president of the United States of America.

Don't ever let leftists lecture you about censorship. 👇

pic.twitter.com/IO7KSLJ2Zj

— Radical Left Exposed (@radleftexposed) September 19, 2026

bayelsaowei:
You don’t care or you lack the ability to condemn what is bad when it is done by Trump? You’re just a typical Trump worshiper..

You can’t on one hand say you don’t care, but on the other hand say the likes of CNN deserves the ban because they talk bad about Trump. Who the hell is Trump that people can’t talk bad about ? Is he God?

Mind you Obama didn’t ban Fox News. He only briefly excluded the news network from specific events. Which was also wrong for him to have done in direct conflict with the first amendment.

I don't share your emotional investment in CNN's access.

I don't care means I don't care. You keep asking the same question hoping I'll eventually give you the answer you want.

Yes, they were banned.
Yes, I think they brought a lot of the hostility on themselves.
No, I'm not outraged about it, personally or not.

If CNN challenges the ban in court and wins, okay.

If Trump decide to reverses it tomorrow, fine.

You won't see me complaining that the courts or Trump allowed them back.

That's what I don't care means.

No sympathy for these particular organizations, Yes.

“Trump worship” and “support for totalitarianism.” That's your argument, not mine, not reality.

I could say trying to sugarcoat Obama is worship but what's the point?

Trump restrict access, Obama did. Different scale? Okay, dispute was still about an administration deciding that a hostile news organization shouldn't receive the same access. So Obama did it regardless of your sugarcoating.

budaatum:
Projecting symbolism on things is a human nature thing, but I do understand your lack of it.

In Buddhism we describe your sort as finger observers.

Projection is human nature, hmmm, so why did your mind specifically project the KKK onto the ad instead of any of the countless other things that image could resemble?

You're not merely observing symbolism-you're choosing a very specific symbolism and then acting as though the image itself objectively contains it.