₦airaland Forum

.

indeed

Mimiko can point to a record 54 mega schools without any equal anywhere in the world, the UN Habitat Scroll of Honour-recognised urbanisation drive, three farm settlements, two housing estates, many state-of-the-art neighbourhood markets, the highest minimum wage in the country and many more. Does anyone know, with due respect, where the mega schools are in Lagos, Ekiti, Ondo, Ogun and the controversial State of Osun? Does anyone know where the Abiye, World-Bank and WHO-recognised hospitals or drivers’ airport are in any of the ACN states?

In every sector,This is a Mimiko who have made people the centre of the community's activities. for example, mimiko whose 54 mega school and still counting solves educational challenges facing the poor. The mega school is mega in concept, mega in size, mega in quality of learning and materials. In Ondo state now, people are forced to move their kids from private to public schools. Ondo state now has public schools that are accessible to the poor and the native man, the underprivileged of the society and what that means is the level of social integration where the child of a multi-millionaire or the chief executive of a bank or commissioner is sitting in the same classroom with the child of a messenger, by choice. In the health sector also,Mimiko's free healthcare project ABIYE is now a W.H>O model of international standard. The programmes, with all sense of modesty again, are carried out in accordance with the global health standards. In the 'Abiye' programme,Mimiko provided affordable and qualitative healthcare for pregnant women. Nothing can be more affordable than free services. Mimiko has developed a full grown model that ensures that every pregnant woman, from conception to delivery, which also involves both the normal vaginal delivery and caesarean session, has access to world class quality service, free of charge. THe urban renewal programme of Mimiko is centred on people. According to Mimiko, I tell my people that if you want to rebuild the city, it is easy to do it with the bulldozer and bring everything down. Although, there will be some wailing in the morning, you can manage this and within three to four days, you'll get over and you will justify in your mind that the people cannot co-exist with the development of a modern city. But, Mimiko have proved that we can do it the other way by relocating the people with better opportunities. So as the city is developing, they are also growing, you take people off the street, and relocate them into a world-class market environment, affordable but up notch. So as the city is growing, the poor and the underprivileged also grow. This is inclusive urban renewal. This was how we transformed Akure from a glorified village to a modern city. Unlike Fashola whose idea of mega cit is centered on destroying the means of livelihood of the poor..Mimiko has worked in more than 460 communities,he has delivered more than 644 projects. During the ongoing campaign for example, there is no community that Mimiko , that he didnt commission one project or the other. According to Mimiko himself,If I commission projects every day for one year, I won't be able to finish the commissioning of the projects that we have done. So, we has created a connection between the people and the government mand he has bridged the disconnect.

THE CHRISTIAN VS MUSLIM SYNDROME: - Religion is the most difficult topic to discus today in our society; It could easily lead to misunderstanding and crisis. It is also the greatest gift to lead human through a peaceful and fulfilled life and could also be the greatest tool to Molestation of human heart and cause violence. Religion at some point of understanding has created peace and at other times bring war for lack of understanding.



What do you understand by religion became the question in my mind? Some would claim to be defending their religion based on ignorance and lack of knowledge; they create chaos and condemned others who even understand God better than them. Many would come up with different position on religious matters, but one thing i know for sure is, no man can defend his or her religion. Religion would always be here with or without you, so it does not need you to protect or defend it.

Fear God, Be kind, Love and respect, say good words and never take life. This is what every religion preaches irrespective of yours, why violate this guidance in the name of protecting your religion? It’s obvious that you are wrong and practicing your religion in the wrong way if you abuse someone because he had different view from your religion, not to talk about killing him or her.



Dear Compatriots, in reality and fairness to our two most dominant religions, there is nothing like Christians vs. Muslims contest, until the introduction of faith politicism of our respective religion, if I may use that word, where the supposed religious leaders see their influence on the people as a tool to bargain with Government and politicians for personal gain.



It was in the course of this, that our religion which should ordinarily connect us with our creator now became a source of our disconnection with God. Many people today see their Imam and pastors as representative or guide to God, but that would have been the case, not until the religious leaders sold their heart to materialism, where life is their only goal. A situation was recently reported here in Nigeria,Taraba state were two religious leaders, One Christian Reverend John Simon Jatutu and the others are Muslim clerics Alhaji Inuwa Usman and Alhaji Chindo M. Bose, they collided to divert part of the funds approved to the Muslims and Christian council by the state government for the purpose of celebrating the 2010 independence anniversary and the country’s Golden Jubilee.. Both leaders united when it comes to a common evil to cheat, but we would hear them condemn each other’s religion in their individual capacities in public. We would hear the Reverend who collided with Islamic Cleric to steal claim Muslims want to Islamize Nigeria, why the cleric would also claim the Christians were conspiring against Islam. Yet, both were united to steal. But despite this clarity that our so called religious leaders are not what we see them to be, neither are the things they say worth any dime except for few exceptions.



My dear great people of Nigeria, I have said it before and I am still saying it again, God will not come down to educate us and free us from our ignorance, we have to search for for our own freedom from the bondage of self constrain and imprisonment of the mind, because a freedom given to man can never make him free, he may only be free from his previous worries and be re-enslaved by his new savior. If we allow any pastor, imam, and scholar or what so ever to mislead us into thinking we can justify our religious ignorance’s by accepting their position on our religion, we would no doubt be disappointed on the final day when God hold us accountable for our actions and inactions.



Let me make this clear once again, there is nothing like Christian vs Muslims in Nigeria or anywhere in the world, we only have sincere fools and the wise evil, the lazy to seek for knowledge and the hard working to mislead, the intelligent criminal and the educated illiterate. These are the kind of challenges we have, but unfortunately, the wise evil have handcuffed million of victims. The victims of this faith politicism of religion now perceived the other religion as opponent or rival, whereas; they are collaborator in the ways of the Lord. Both are preaching righteousness, love, unity and peace.

My teacher sent this to me and i feel the need to share it with you all.

Punishment for Blasphemy against the Prophet (sws)

by: Javed Ahmad Ghamidi


I
The law for punishing blasphemy against the Prophet (sws) that is invoked in Pakistan has no foundation in the Qur’ān or Ḥadīth. Therefore, a pertinent question is: What exactly is the justification for this law? Some scholars have proffered Q. 5: 33-34 as a possible basis. In their opinion, God, in these verses of Sūrah Mā’idah, has prescribed the punishment for muḥārabah (rebellion) and fasād fi al-arḍ(disorder), and they believe that blasphemy against the Prophet (sws) is also a form of this offence ofmuḥārabah:

The text of the verse with its translation is:

إِنَّمَا جَزَاءُ الَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَسَادًا أَنْ يُقَتَّلُوا أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوا أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُمْ مِنْ خِلَافٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْا مِنْ الْأَرْضِ ذَلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْيٌ فِي الدُّنيَا وَلَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ تَابُوا مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ تَقْدِرُوا عَلَيْهِمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ

The punishment of those who fight against God and His Prophet or create disorder in territory is that they be executed in an exemplary manner or be crucified or have their hands and feet cut off from opposite sides or be banished. This disgrace is theirs in the world, and in the Hereafter a severe retribution shall they have, except those who repent before you overpower them. So [do not exceed in severity with them and] know well that Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Ever-Merciful. (5:33-34)

As other viewpoints on foundations for blasphemy laws, this opinion too needs to be reviewed for the following reasons:

Firstly, the word used in the verse is yuḥāribūn (they fight/rebel against). This word entails that the sentences of punishment mentioned in the verse be given only if the offender persists in blasphemy defiantly, resorts to disruption or disorder, refuses to desist even after repeated exhortation and admonition and, in contrast to an attitude of consequent submission, actually takes a stance of retaliation. On the other hand, if the accused pleads that he’s not guilty or gives an excuse to explain his attitude and shows no volition for persistence, he cannot, in any sense of the word, be indicted for muḥārabah orfasād fi al-arḍ.



Secondly, the Qur’ān says that the sentence will not be applicable to those offenders who, despite their prior proclamation and persistence, submit and repent before the law apprehends them. Therefore, the directive is that those who have repented shall not be given these sentences. This aspect also entails that, before any action is taken against such offenders, they be called to repent and reform and be repeatedly warned that, if they are believers, they should not destroy their own future in the Hereafter by their wrong attitude or notions and, if they do not believe in God or the Prophet (sws), they should show regard for the feelings and sentiments of Muslims and abstain from this grave violation any further.

Thirdly, the verse does not make capital punishment obligatory. It gives the court room for a lenient sentence in consideration of the nature of offence and the state of the offender. The recommendation of banishment in the verse is for such offenders as deserve leniency.

In the present law, none of the aspects mentioned above has been considered. For sentencing, this law depends solely on testimony. There is no consideration whatsoever for confession or denial, which consideration the verse entails; there is no room for clemency on the repentance and reform shown in response to exhortation and admonition; and, as such, there is no other option except capital punishment. It would indeed be commendable even if the ‘ulamā were to accept muḥārabah verse as the foundation for blasphemy punishment and, consequently, show willingness to have amendments made to the existing law. Even that would end all criticisms on the present law. It is obvious from the Qur’ān that capital punishment can only be given in two cases: first, if a person murders another and, second, if he disrupts law and order in a country and, as such, becomes a threat to the life, property and honour of people. If the law is amended in accordance with the requirements of the muḥārabah verse, the requirement of confining capital punishment to these two cases will be fulfilled. Furthermore, the law will also be closer to the views of the highly venerated scholar of Islamic law, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah and to those of the great Ḥadīth compiler, Imām Bukhārī. In this regard, it is this opinion that seems more advisable. The Ḥanafīs have a majority in Pakistan, but, incongruously, their viewpoint has been completely ignored in enacting this law. Therefore, it is a fact that the blasphemy law in its present state is against not only the Qur’ān and Ḥadīth but also the opinion of Ḥanafī jurists. It should most certainly be changed for it has blemished the name of Islam and Muslims throughout the world.

II

Narratives related to punishment for blasphemy that are often cited also need to be understood correctly. Abū Rāfi‘ was one of those people who were guilty of bringing out the tribes against Madīnah in Ghazwah-e Khandaq (Battle of the Ditch). In Ibn Isḥāq’s words: فِيْمَنْ حَزَّبَ الأَحْزَابَ عَلَى رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَ سَلَّم. About Ka‘b ibn Ashraf, the historians write that after Ghazwah-e Badar (Battle of Badar), he went to Makkah and recited vengeance inspiring elegies for those of the Quraysh who had fallen in battle, wrote odes (tashbīb) that prefaced the names of some Muslim women and caused much distress to Muslims, and, while residing in the domain of the Prophet’s government, endeavoured to incite people against him. Some narratives describe that he even went to the extent of devising deception to assassinate the Prophet (sws). ‘Abd Allāh ibn Khaṭal was sent for zakāh (obligatory alms) collection by the Prophet (sws). He was accompanied by a person from amongst the Anṣār and a servant. On the way, Ibn Khaṭal killed the servant on the pretext of insubordination, became an apostate, and ran away to Makkah.[1] Not only this; all three people mentioned here persisted in their denial of the Prophet (sws) even after the truth of his message had become conclusively evident to them. And, God Almighty has mentioned repeatedly in the Qur’ān that, as a Divine principle, the direct addressees of a rasūl[2] are within the range of Divine punishment. For that reason, if they go on to the extent of hostility, they can also be killed.

These details show that the wrongdoers in question were not merely guilty of blasphemy but had also committed all the other crimes mentioned above. Therefore, they were killed in response to these offences. ‘Abd Allāh ibn Khaṭal was a murderous fugitive. It was decreed on these grounds that he be killed even if he was hiding behind the covers of the Ka‘bah.

It was indeed offenders of this kind to whom Sūrah Aḥzāb refers. In order to sow the seeds of doubt in Muslims, to turn them away from the Prophet (sws), and to damage their reputation and the moral credibility of their religion badly, these wrongdoers would engage in many activities as cooking up stories about personal lives of Muslims, slandering them and carrying on scandal-mongering, sometimes expressing desire to marry ladies from amongst the Prophet’s holy wives, and spreading rumours of all kinds to unnerve and demoralize Muslims. They would sometimes tease Muslim ladies who went out to the fields at night or before daylight to pay heed to the call of nature. When reprimanded for this behaviour, these evildoers would come up with lame excuses as having approached a woman only because they mistook her for the slave-girl of such and such person and because they needed to ask her about such and such matter. The Qur’ān alludes to these aspects of their mischief, and narratives in Muslim tradition record many of the related instances in quite some detail.[3] Muslim ladies, therefore, were told to put their cloaks over themselves to appear different from slave-girls so that the mischievous miscreants would not have pretexts to tease them. Furthermore, the troublemakers were also warned that if they would not stop and would persist in their evil, they would be executed in an exemplary manner:

لَمْ يَنْتَهِ الْمُنَافِقُونَ وَالَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ مَرَضٌ وَالْمُرْجِفُونَ فِي الْمَدِينَةِ لَنُغْرِيَنَّكَ بِهِمْ ثُمَّ لَا يُجَاوِرُونَكَ فِيهَا إِلَّا قَلِيلًامَلْعُونِينَ أَيْنَمَا ثُقِفُوا أُخِذُوا وَقُتِّلُوا تَقْتِيلًا

[Even after this measure] If these hypocrites do not desist and also those with a disease in their hearts and those too who spread lies in Medina, we shall make you rise against them; then they shall not be able to stay amongst you but with difficulty; cursed shall they be; wherever found, they shall be killed in an exemplary manner. (33: 60-61).

Other narratives of similar nature that are often related are usually not credible enough in terms of historical authenticity of the sanad (chain of narrators). However, even if they were to be assumed reliable enough, the nature of events described would still fall within the scope of same context: after full manifestation of hostility in their blasphemy and sacrilege, these people were within the purview of the same law that the Qur’an has described as a Divine custom pertaining to the denial of a rasūl by his people and direct addressees. Some murders were also vindicated on these grounds. لاَ يُقْتَلُ مُسْلِمٍ بِكَافِر is a description of the same principle.[4] The ‘ulamā are aware of these aspects, yet they insist on deriving the law for punishment of blasphemy from these narratives.

Here, someone might also refer to oft-related incident in which Sayyidunā ‘Umar (rta) is reported to have struck off the head of a man who refused to accept the Prophet’s legal verdict on a certain occasion. Our ‘ulamā relate this incident from the pulpits and directly encourage people to show the same attitude as reflected in the narrative towards those whom they perceive as blasphemers of the Prophet (sws). However, the fact is that not just the first and second degree of Ḥadīth collections (in terms of authenticity) but also the third degree works are devoid of this narrative. Even Ibn Jarīr Ṭabarī, who often relates narratives in all categories, has not regarded it worthy of consideration. This narrative comes from a gharīb (with isolated chain of narrators) and mursal (with omissions in the chain) Ḥadīth that has been cited by some exegetes in their commentaries; however, those acquainted to some extent with Ḥadīth sciences have clarified that, in the chain, its attribution to Ibn ‘Abbās is absolutely implausible. Moreover, in the sanads of Ibn Mardawayh and Ibn Abī Ḥātim, the narrator Ibn Lahī‘ah isḍaī‘if (“weak”).[5] The view that exegetes relate this very narrative also as shān-e nazūl (an occasion for the revelation) of Q. 4:65 is also ill-founded. Although this verse of Sūrah Nisā is not in want of description of any reason of revelation, yet, quite contrary to this one, the narrative that Imām Bukhārī and other leading scholars of Ḥadīth have related as the occasion of revelation for this verse and which narrative is often cited by exegetes is one that pertains to a water dispute between the Prophet’s paternal cousin, Zubayr, and a person from the Anṣār. When the matter was presented to the Prophet (sws), he told Zubayr to irrigate his field and leave the remaining water for the Anṣārī. The Anṣārī immediately retorted by saying: “O Prophet of Allāh, is this because Zubayr is your cousin?” This highly impudent remark was clearly an imputation of injustice and nepotism. Therefore, it is related that the Prophet’s face changed colour, but he did not say anything save repeating his statement with more clarity and decreed that the water be retained up to the edges of the field and the rest be left for the Anṣārī.[6] One must commend the ‘ulamā on their choice in selection for ignoring this highly credible narrative reported by Bukhārī and Muslim that reflects the Prophet’s forbearance, forgiveness, compassion and kindness and instead enthusiastically and zealously relate everywhere a weak and improbable narrative related to how Sayyidunā ‘Umar (rta) struck off someone’s neck.

III

On the issue of blasphemy against the Prophet (sws), is the opinion of majority of jurists based on any directive in the Qur’ān or Ḥadīth related specifically to this punishment? The answer to this question is clearly in the negative. The basis of jurists’ opinion on punishment to a Muslim is apostasy and, to adhimmī[7] it is violation of pact. The jurists say that a Muslim who blasphemes against the Prophet (sws) becomes an apostate, and the punishment for apostasy is death. Similarly, if a non-Muslim dhimmīis guilty of this offence, he loses protection of the pact with him, and, therefore, he too deserves capital punishment. According to the jurists, the reason for this inference is that the directive about non-MuslimAhl al-Kitāb (People of the Book[8]) in Verse 29 of Sūrah Tawbah (9th Sūrah of the Qur’ān) entails they be killed if they refuse to remain subjugated and subservient under Muslim rule. Therefore, infer the jurists, if a dhimmī shows an attitude of sacrilege and disrespect to the Prophet, it means that he has rebelled against Muslim sovereignty and does not accept his subjugation under Muslim rule.[9] In Islamic law, this argumentation probably began with this statement of ‘Abd Allāh bin ‘Abbās’[10]:

أيما مسلم سب الله ورسوله أو سب أحدا من الأنبياء فقد كذب برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهي ردة يستتاب فإن رجع وإلا قتل وأيما معاهد عاند فسب الله أو سب أحدا من الأنبياء أو جهر به فقد نقض العهد فاقتلوه

A Muslim who blasphemes against God or the Prophet or any of God’s messengers is guilty of denying the Prophet (sws). This is apostasy, which entails that repentance be demanded of the offender. If he repents, he shall be released; if not, he shall be killed. Similarly, if anyone from amongst non-Muslims protected under pact becomes hostile by openly blaspheming against God or the Prophet (sws) or any of God’s messengers, he is guilty of violating the pact; you shall kill him too.[11]

It is this argumentation which, according to the jurists, is the foundation of the punishment for blasphemy. However, deliberation on the Qur’ān and the Ḥadīth clearly shows that, after the age of the Prophet’s Companions, this basis has become ineffective forever. In my works, Mīzān and Burhān, I have argued at length that the punishment for apostasy was specific to the peoples who had been afforded conclusive evidence of truth by the Prophet (sws) himself but reverted to their denial after having accepted faith. The Prophet’s statement: مَنْ بَدَّلَ دِيْنَهُ فَاقْتُلُوْهُ (Kill the one who changes his religion[12]) relates to the same peoples. The decree of the punishment for them was in accordance with the sunnat-e ilāhī (the Divine way and principle) that has been described in the Qur’ān in relation to the direct addresses of the rusul. It has no relation to Muslims in times after the Prophetic age.

The issue of violation of pact is also similar in nature. No one now is dhimmī in the world and no one can be subjugated as such now. Verse 29 of Sūrah Tawbah is an offshoot of the same Divine principle mentioned above. Therefore, the right to wage war against any peoples perceived as deniers of the truth has ended forever the right to keep them subjugated and subservient by imposing jizyah (tribute) on them. Until the end of the world, no one now has any right whatsoever to wage a war against any people for this particular purpose or any right to impose jizyah to keep the vanquished subjugated.[13] Non-Muslim citizens of Muslim States are not dhimmīs or condemned to death in any principle or living under any grant of “protection” lifting which would entail their death. This diction and these notions belong to the past. They cannot, in any way, form the foundation for argumentation now.

Now, therefore, only two possibilities remain: First, that, in consideration of Islam and the interests of Muslims, laws [based without foundational religious texts] be enacted and a punishment be prescribed asta‘zīr.[14] Second, Verses 33-34 of Sūrah Mā’idah be used as foundation for the enactment. It is this second possibility about which this article has already emphasized that, if these verses of Sūrah Mā’idah are used as a foundation, three aspects must be kept in mind as the words of the Qur’ān necessitate their inclusion:

1. A person regarded as guilty of blasphemy be invited to repent and reform and be repeatedly warned that, if he is a believer, he should not destroy his own fate in the Hereafter and should submit to God and the Prophet (sws), and, if he does not believe in God or the Prophet (sws), he should show regard for the feelings and sentiments of Muslims and abstain from persisting in this grave offence.

2. His case be filed in the court only if he refuses to change or repent, persists in his blasphemy with defiance, causes disruption, pushes away all efforts to convince him and, instead of showing remorse, actually resorts to belligerence and hostility.

3. Instead of having the option of capital punishment only, room for lighter sentences be left in consideration of any extenuating circumstances related to the actual nature and circumstance of offence and the capacity and state of the offender.

(Translated into English by Asif Iftikhar)

I AM MY COUNTRY AND MY COUNTRY IS ME

I pledge to myself to serve Nigeria, i didn't pledge to Nigeria to serve my country neither did i pledge to my country to serve my people. I didn't pledge to Nigeria to serve my country because if i do,some of the things i see in my country may discourage me. I didn't pledge to my people to serve my country because the actions of some of my people may betray m
y trust,which may make me to loss hope,i instead pledge to myself,so that if i fail which i know i would not,i would have failed myself and blame nobody but myself for the situation of my country.

I came up with this principle to tell myself that, you do not have any reason to fail, quit or give up on your country except you are willing to give up on yourself. My country is me and i am my country. So, If i am betrayed by others in my quest to salvage my country from my pledge to myself,provided i didn't betray myself,the determination and strength would never be lost.

AN- HE-11
Award
Lagos, Sept. 25, 2012 (NAN) Mr Imeh Usuah, a taxi driver, at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International, Abuja, on Tuesday emerged the winner of the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) maiden Integrity Award.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Usuah was awarded a plaque and N2.5 million for his honesty.

Usua, accompanied by his wife Mercy was celebrated by the capital market community for returning N18 million forgotten in his taxi cab in 2007 by a customer.

Usuah a former workshop foreman with Julius Berger Plc had earlier been acknowledged and commended by four different groups in the country.

Earlier, Ms Arunma Oteh, the Director- General of SEC said that the award was the commission’s contributions toward the promotion, recognition and reward for integrity.

“Usuah's exemplary act of honesty and integrity had sprinkled a burst of refreshing dew upon the national consciousness,” Oteh said.

She said that “the integrity award is a careful response to a critical need of the Nigerian society, as it is through it that trust is built and sustained.”

In his response, Usuah, a native of Ubokudom in Akwa Ibom, commended the commission for the gesture and devoted the award to the ``unsung honest and committed Nigerians across the country.'' (NAN)

JNC/POE/MZA
http://www.nannewsngr.com/section/economy/abuja-taxi-driver-wins-sec%E2%80%99s-n25-m-integrity-award

am on now typing

HAPPY SLAVES IN MEANINGLESS FREEDOM



The reality i have seen in some people made me to conclude that,some people are more happy being a slave than wish for freedom,even when it is so obvious that slavery can never make them achieve what ever they felt they can achieve,they still insist on rather being enslaved in their hunger and pain than being free in their hunger and freedom. For example, We have people who are happy and proud to be the Slaves of Tinubu, Some are happy slaves of PDP,Some slaves of ACN, Some happy slaves of CPC and Slaves of Buhari. We also have the happy slaves of Jonathan,Slaves of Obasanjo and many other slaves. We have the Slaves of Yoruba,Hausa and Igbo,Slaves of the South and North, we even have the Slaves of Christianity and Islam. Either way, slavery is slavery,it would never benefit you and your generation. It is this slavery that has hold our people down since a long time ago,many of us have lost reasoning out of the slave context. We support mostly the language in the slavery chain and that of our slave masters,any other opinion outside this tune in our hears is hate,critics etc. The most worrying part of the issue is that,majority of the people are inline with the slavery tune,they attack the none slaves,they project their slavery as progressiveness,they refer to the none slaves as the none progressives,we are tired in the bondage,both old and young,male and female,educated and none educated. We even have the Campaign for joining a slavery camp,where one part of slave masters would recruit their slaves to go out and campaign for others to join their slavery camp,some other slave camps also hijack others slaves from another camp in a contest, It is so worrying that even the educated elites are slaves.



Though, we all are free,even the slaves are free like the masters,but we intentionally ask some people from within and outside of us to form an enslaving camp to enslave us,we just want them to be our slave masters. They don't need to capture us,chain us or attack us,we go to them by ourselves and request to be slaves. Some people are not even aware of such situation,we designate them with the title and honor of slave masters,give them the role,tell them how we want them to treat us,give them the guide so they could develop their own tactics.



Most people are Happy Slaves in meaningless freedom.

religion and culture can be seperated. Coming soon.

they still worship idol till date. Am on phone

why cant the mod take this to the front page so we can hear the opinion of others?

lol.. why are u contradicting yourself? in one statement u seem to think 'idol' worshiping and associating anything about your ethnic background with God is bad (which i guess is the christian God, Jesus) then you go ahead to blame clerics for labelling same thing as bad? and now, you are seeking a way of how to separate religion from your culture?



It seems you read from the other side of the page. lol...


How is my statement contradictory?


How is idol worshiping relate with your ethnic background? they are two different thing my brother...that is what i want us to separate..if you assume that idol worshiping is the same as your ethnic background,then, you are on the same page with the clerics who misplaced our tradition to mean the same with the traditional religion....


even the whites who brought Christianity also worshiped idol,the same with the Arabs...so,worshiping idol is not synonymous with Africans,but the world.. but we must separate idol from culture....

hi, i feel the need to discus this issue because am worried that we are fast loosing most of our beautiful cultural heritage to religion due to ignorance. I am very sure that religion doesnt prevent one from observing their culture,provided it is not worshiping idol and associating anything with God. But Some clerics have label most of our cultures as bad even though it is not in the holy books,this has lead many people to abandone our culture to adopt foreign cultures in the name of religion. We have to seperate the traditional religion from our cultural heritage. Lets list out culture and seperate it from religion. Thanks

hum

someone just made a good note up there. We already have one nigeria,why call for 6 autonomous region? What good can a six autonomous region give us that a 36 autonomous states can't!

i dnt get it

?

i have been a little busy since yesterday,but will comment on some of the points raised as soon as i can. Point of note: there is nothing,i mean absolute nothing that a regional governt can add to nigeria that we can not achieve now,those calling for regionary autonomy are only doing so to hold unto regional power since the central power seems impossible for them to capture. I stand to be correctd. In my opinion,the only visible acheivement of the first republic that we can see and feel the effect today is the civil war and ethnicity.

?

noted

CAn anyone show me any physical achievement of the regional government today apart from civil war and ethnicity?

hum

THE SICK MUSLIMS MOCKING JESUS

I saw a picture circulated on the social media and various internet forums,where a cat was crucified in form of the supposed crucification of Prophet Isa (Jesus Christ),May the peace and Blessing of the almighty continue to be with him.

According to the report,The Cat was crucified by some sick Muslims who did so to mock prophet Isa (JESUS) and provoke the Christians,but it is a shame on them.

Only a sick and crazy Muslim would mock Jesus,in fact, a Muslim can not mock Jesus,because what it takes to be a true Muslim is respect for Jesus Christ like every other prophet of God mentioned in the holy Quran. Prophets like Mohammed,Moses,Yusuf,Solomon,Abraham, Nuhu and others. Any Muslim who mock Jesus or any other prophet has broken the covenant of God and any Muslim whom for any reason do mock any prophet has denounce Islam directly or indirectly.

Prophets according to Islamic teachings are human beings chosen by God who have the honor of conveying God's message to other men and women. Being such a Messenger is not a position that one attains by any consciously designed effort. It is a grace from Allah, but Allah grants this grace to those who are deserving of it. Messengers are not then, like the rank and file of us. True, they are men but they are men of an extremely high moral, spiritual and intelleaual standard that qualifies them--in the eyes of Allah--to be the bearers of His light to the world. When Allah chooses any of them, He supports the messenger with a clear 'sign' (Surah al-Hadeed 57:25) that proves the truth of his claim, and distinguishes him from false prophets, sorcerers and soothsayers (Surah at-Taghabun 64:41-42), Surah Taha 20:69). None of them betrays the message or falls short of being exemplary in practicing what he preaches. (Surah Hud 11:88) A Prophet whose humanity is specially emphasized is Jesus and the Qur'an has warned Muslims never to make distinction between any prophet. A mockery of Abraham is a the Mockery of Mohammed,Mockery of Moses is the Mockery of Muhammad and Mockery of Jesus is a Mockery of Mohammed.

"And those who believe in Allah and His messengers and make no distinction between any of them (in belief), to them He will grant their rewards." (4:152)

So, if some supposed Muslims rise today and mock Jesus, It is obvious that they are very sick in the head for they are against Islam. Allah saidVerily, those who disbelieve in Allah and His Messengers...) Thus, Allah describes these people as disbelievers in Allah and His Messengers;(and wish to make distinction between Allah and His Messengers) in faith,(saying, "We believe in some but reject others,'' and wish to adopt a way in between.) Allah then describes them;They are in truth disbelievers.) meaning, their disbelief in the Prophet they claim to believe in is clear. This is because their claimed faith in a certain Messenger is not true, for had they truly believed in him, they would have believed in other Messengers. If a Muslim claim to be against a blasphemy against prophet Mohammed,he must be against a blasphemy against other prophets of Islam. That is what makes him a Muslims.

Allah said,(And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating torment.) This is just punishment for belittling the Prophets whom they disbelieved in, by ignoring what the Prophet brought to them from Allah, and because they are interested in the insignificant possessions of this world. Or, their behavior could be the result of their disbelief in the Prophet .

What if another christian groups decided to mock prophet Mohammed, how many Muslims would go out protesting and how many people would be killed?

If some Muslims are protesting a blasphemy on the prophet which directly or indirectly claimed the lives of several people,yet another set of Muslims could blaspheme Jesus. This signifies that we have sick and crazy Christians and Muslims,but their sickness is not just an illness, but an evil sickness hiding under religion to promote and perpetrate violence.

I totally and completely condemn without reservation,this stupidity of mockery of the beloved Jesus Christ and i encourage anyone who may directly or indirectly align with it to go back to the holy Qur'an and retrace their steps.

Though,the blasphemy against prophet Muhammad may be painful,disheartening and worrisome,but an evil reciprocity is not an option or solution. Paying Evil with Evil is not a message from the Qur'an, only language understood by Islam is patience and peace. The Qur'an said: “You (Muslims) shall certainly be tried and tested in (the loss of) your wealth and lives and you certainly receive from the People of the Book and the polytheists a lot of insults. But if you are patient and God-fearing, that will be the most determining factor (for your success).” (3:186)

I wish the Muslims could learn from the conduct of the Christians,that despite the provocative nature of the picture of mockery of the beloved Jesus Christ,no one came out to protest,cause havoc or violence which other evil people may follow to do their evil.

gbam

hum

it is on religion section already

lol

you are very funny