₦airaland Forum

TopBanter:
Brethren, Kiss your truth below. Lie-Tasha is managing many smple-minded Nigerians very well indeed.

Good luck to the "gullible and hungry' Lie-Tasha is using in her losing game.

Funny how you call others “simple-minded” while worshipping corrupt relics like Akpabio. That’s not intellect—it’s cowardice in denial.

The only liar here is the one hiding from forensic scrutiny—and it’s not her. You’re just mad she won’t bow to your broken system.

Good luck clinging to your rotting heroes. When truth drops, we’ll see who’s being used—and who’s just too gullible to realize it.

TopBanter:
Indeed. She believed her own hype too much and thought herself invincible and unstoppable. She is just a power drunk blackmailer plus user/hater of men always keen to vindictively get any male that offends her into serious and life-destroying trouble.

This is why her fellow women, to include many who are always loud and opinionted in their defence of their fellow women and came for 2face over "mistreatment" of Annie, are today avoiding Lie-Tasha completely.

Does It not strike anyone as odd that prominent Nigerian women, bar Ezekwesili we now know was "induced", until She has the guts to prove otherwise, have all abandoned Lie-Tasha?

That sort of snub, especially from one's own gender, tends to happen when you are deemed the boy who falsely cried wolf too many times.

Oh look, the neighborhood misogynist has crawled out from under his rock to vomit another bitter, woman-hating screed—armed with zero facts and an inflated sense of relevance. You call Natasha “power drunk” and a “blackmailer,” yet everything you’ve typed reeks of projection. It’s always the most fragile men screaming the loudest when a woman doesn’t bow to their imagined superiority.

You paint her as a “man-hater” like that’s your final Trump card—how original. Maybe, just maybe, some men deserve consequences for their vile actions. But no, in your warped little worldview, any woman who fights back is automatically vindictive. Pathetic. You don’t want accountability—you want submission.

And now you're dragging other women into your circus, suggesting they’ve “abandoned” her. Based on what? Your overactive imagination and some make-believe WhatsApp group of “prominent Nigerian women”? Please. The only thing that’s been abandoned here is your grip on reality.

You’re so desperate to be heard you’ve started building conspiracy theories—Ezekwesili was “induced”? That’s not an argument, that’s delusion wrapped in bitterness. When you can’t disprove a woman, you just accuse her of being bought. How convenient.

No, this isn’t a “boy who cried wolf” situation—it’s a classic case of men like you panicking when a woman refuses to play the victim, shuts down your ego trip, and hits where it hurts. Your rage is not rooted in truth—it’s rooted in the fear of losing the unearned privilege you’ve always mistaken for power.

So go ahead, keep hissing from the sidelines. Real people see through your thin-skinned bitterness and outdated thinking. This isn’t 1965. Women no longer need your permission—or your approval—to raise hell and demand justice.

TopBanter:
Lol. Nigerians talk too much. Additionally and disgracefully, showing the world we lag behind intellectually, Nigerians go back and forth shamelessly far too much also.

Are you going to tell me you cannot see the quick and logical end to this saga that would have been done and dusted in sane nation within two days?

Lie-Tasha claims Sandra Duru recording are AI-doctored. You call Duru a scam artist.

What is better, easiest and quickest to bring closure for all involved than for Lie-Tasha and Madam "Undue process" sueing Duru for defamation and fraud?

That will then lead to a formal and thorough forensic investigation on the audio recording being conducted once and for all so we know whether it is 'Saint' Natasha who is lying or "scam artist" Duru.

Duru has dared them countless times to sue her and get the ball rolling, perhaps because she is confident of her evidence, so why won't Lie-Tasha and co do the obvious to clear their names? It is simple to prove those speaking in the audio recording and whether the recording have been digitally altered or not.

Why this senseless back and fourth even you ordinary Nigerians are supporting instead of demanding Lie-Tasha sue so Duru is compelled to submit her evidence for formal forensic investigation?

You’ve clearly mistaken your keyboard for a podium and your ignorance for insight. You call Nigerians disgraceful, yet here you are vomiting the same recycled nonsense, like some self-appointed messiah of logic when you're barely scraping the surface of common sense.

Your arrogant tirade is a pathetic mix of pseudo-intellect and personal bias. You bark about “sanity” and “logic” like you invented the concepts, yet your entire argument is a dumpster fire of contradictions and shallow thinking. You obsess over Natasha with the desperation of a bitter troll, spewing venom while pretending to care about truth. If Sandra Duru is so confident, let her go to court. Let her force the issue. Or do you only find logic when it fits your little hero narrative?

You bleat about “undue process” like you even remotely understand how legal systems work. You think lawsuits are some magic button you press for the truth to fall from the sky? That’s not how due process functions. But of course, nuance isn’t your strong suit—you prefer cheap shots and sweeping insults over informed critique.

You’re not calling for justice; you’re begging for drama. You’re not helping any situation; you’re just another noise merchant, frothing at the mouth with secondhand outrage. If anyone is disgracing Nigerians, it’s mouthy, self-important clowns like you who weaponize their ignorance and parade it like a virtue.

So take your smugness, your one-sided rants, and your fake moral compass, and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. This isn't a debate—it's a demolition. You're not equipped to discuss justice when all you're really doing is slandering with style.

TopBanter:
Lol. I'll be here when your precious Lie-Tasha, as she thoroughly deserves, goes down. Only a question of time buddy.😎

Keep dreaming, clown. The only one going down is Akpabio — and it won’t be long before he crumbles under the weight of his own filth.

Lie all you want, but the truth’s not on your side, and neither is time. Stay tuned, because when karma hits, it’ll be loud enough for even a blind follower like you to hear it.

Basicend:
Your entire write-up is the similar wirring process your camps' Nathasha was explosively deploying to bark at the SP.

So, it's a turn around scenario. Just relax and take it easy.

More so, it's only a gullible fool that doesn't know yet that all the politicians involved here are the same in acts.

Perhaps, you may try harder too.

Your desperate attempt to dismiss my write-up with incoherent babble and weak comparisons only proves you have no substance. If you think dragging in ‘Nathasha’ somehow shields you from accountability or debate, you’re worse off than I thought.

Let’s be clear: I’m not here to ‘relax’ or take empty nonsense lightly. You don’t get to act like a loud fool, then tell others to stay calm while you spew baseless trash.

And if you think calling everyone ‘the same’ makes you sound wise, you’re either too lazy to think critically or too cowardly to stand for anything. Gullible fools are those who pretend neutrality just to stay conveniently ignorant. Spare me the empty lectures and come back when you’ve got more than recycled slogans.

Basicend:
Firstly, it's "She" and not "He".

Be aware that Nathasha was also deployed as a shameless and lieing attack dog by a camp. But she could not bark anymore coz she has been ambushed by a more brutal dog.

Her records are there for all to see as a serial blackmailer and evil woman.

So, what's your point?

Spare me the hypocritical theatrics. If Natasha’s record is so ‘visible,’ then yours—or your camp’s—must be rotting in a landfill of lies and cowardice. Only a desperate, guilt-ridden hack resorts to slinging mud about ‘blackmail’ while hiding behind vague accusations. Where’s your proof? Or is barking baseless slander the only skill your ‘brutal dog’ has?

Pathetic. If you’re going to attack someone, at least have the spine to present facts instead of vomiting up weak, recycled smears. Until then, your words reek of projection—the trademark stench of a camp that can’t win without fabricating villains. Try harder.

Basicend:
Nathasha don go hide for her cave quietly since this lady came out.

This Dr Duru na chief tormentor. She dey para abeg.

Akpabio just handled her case to a woman. Simple.

It’s laughable how you think political intimidation equals strength. Natasha isn’t hiding—she’s simply too seasoned to dignify every circus act with a response.

As for your so-called 'Dr. Duru,' he’s nothing but a political attack dog on a short leash, deployed by Akpabio to distract from the rot under his feet.

Calling him a 'chief tormentor' doesn’t make him powerful; it just shows how deep your camp is drowning in fear of strong, unbought voices.

Keep parroting propaganda—some of us are busy exposing the puppeteers and their clowns.

TopBanter:
Bro, be very afraid for Lie-Tasha. If I were a betting man, I would put my entire fortune on Sandra Duru delivering a mortal combat-style ending to Natasha.

Be very afraid of the bolded below even as I know unexposed Nigerians, who have never set foot outside Nigeria or watched the discovery channel, have no concept of it.

Forensic and expert evidence analysis capacity of the US investigative machinery will finish Lie-Tasha for good.

Duru already has Lie-Tasha in her hand like a small egg she can break anytime she wants.

You sound like a wannabe villain in a B-grade movie—loud, delusional, and painfully overconfident. If your idea of ‘forensic capacity’ is based on Sandra Duru’s Instagram tantrums, then you’ve already lost the plot. Nobody with real exposure or intelligence makes sweeping statements like 'Lie-Tasha' while drooling over unverified drama. You don’t even know what real forensic evidence looks like—you just heard the term and ran with it like a toddler with scissors.

As for your fantasy about 'mortal combat-style endings'—this isn’t a video game, bro. It’s real life. And in real life, Senator Natasha has earned more credibility and international respect than you could ever dream of. So take your shaky fortune, your Discovery Channel obsession, and your broken logic, and sit this one out. Because when truth stands up, propaganda like yours evaporates.

casualobserver:
Anybody with a modicum of intelligence can now see that Natasha is a liar!

This Sandra woman is overdoing it and trying to force herself into the story.


E don do! two of you go and rest!

Oh, look—another self-appointed intellectual confusing loud opinions for facts. You throw around 'modicum of intelligence' like you own one, yet you can’t back a single claim.

Senator Natasha’s track record threatens the same corrupt system you probably benefit from, and that’s why her truth scares you.

As for Sandra, she’s amplifying a cause you clearly don’t have the depth to understand. 'E don do?' No, what needs to stop is clowns like you pretending to be gatekeepers of truth. Sit down and let those with actual integrity lead

TopBanter:
Bro shift abeg. I have no time for folks like you with no basic decency or uprightness.

Oh please, spare us the fake moral high ground. You say you don’t have time, but somehow you have enough to spew garbage about someone who’s ten times the human you pretend to be.

If basic decency is too much for you, then yeah—shift, vanish, log off—whatever it takes to stop embarrassing yourself.

Keep Natasha’s name out of your mouth unless you're ready to speak with facts and an ounce of sense.

TopBanter:
The Lie-Tasha saga has been an eye-opener because it confirms vividly what some of us have always known which is that a lot Nigerians are warped and suffering from Stockholm syndrome and therefore deserving of whatever misrule befalls them.

There is no developed nation of the World Lie-Tasha would not have become a person all society avoids, as if she has leprosy, for the fact she has been proven 100% to have made a false sexual harassment allegation against a man in the past (Reno Omokri) and is now doing same.against another man without producing any evidence whatsoever to support her allegation.

That Lie-Tasha even has Nigerians speaking passionately in her defence speaks volumes about how troubled Nigerians are.

This pompous tirade is a masterclass in arrogance, hypocrisy, and a warped sense of moral superiority. The idea that Nigerians are “warped” and “deserve misrule” because some won’t join your hysterical witch-hunt against a woman you clearly despise isn’t just shallow—it’s despicable.

You throw around “Lie-Tasha” like a gossipy teenager trying to earn clout in a WhatsApp group, not realizing how pathetic and intellectually lazy it makes you sound. You scream “100% proven” without providing a shred of evidence—yet you cry about lack of proof from her side. That’s not justice. That’s cowardice masquerading as conviction.

Your delusion that “developed nations” would ostracize her shows how embarrassingly ignorant you are of how due process and real justice systems function. In sane societies, allegations are investigated—not ridiculed by bitter men foaming at the mouth online.

What actually speaks volumes is that Nigerians like you are far more outraged by the possibility of a woman speaking out than by the long, documented history of abuse, silence, and systemic injustice victims endure.

You’re not defending truth—you’re defending your fragile ego and the broken patriarchy you desperately need to feel powerful. This isn’t courage. It’s projection wrapped in self-righteous rage. And frankly, the fact you think this kind of nonsense makes you enlightened is laughable.

Clean your lens. Your bias is showing, and it stinks.

alobright17:
Funny when you jumped in to type nonsense, so Natasha accusing people without evidence isn’t slandering but the one she confided in coming to expose her is the one that is slandering, that shows how bias minded people like you are .

He called the lady jobless , even you know that she get better job than you if you don’t reason with your anus you would’ve known this fact .


Your cry won’t stop her from exposing Natasha and there’s nothing you can do about it .

The only thing funny here is how confidently you spew brain-dead takes like they’re profound. If Natasha made baseless accusations, take her to court—simple. But no, you'd rather twist logic like a clown in a circus just to defend a glorified gossip merchant parading as a “whistleblower.”

And LOL at “she get better job than you.” What are you, her HR rep? Your grammar is as broken as your reasoning. You clearly don’t process thoughts with your brain—only whatever fumes are leaking out of your backside.

Keep crying in comment sections all you want. It won’t change the fact that you’re just another loud, bitter spectator desperate for relevance. You and your idol can keep ranting—power doesn’t answer to noise.

TopBanter:
Rubbish. Babalola sued Farotimi, rightly, for defamation. Why can't Natasha do same so we are sparen your long-winded and sanctimonious drivel?

Could it be because Natasha knows Duru is itching for things to go legal so she can get US police to move formally and publicly on evidence she has submitted to them, meaning game over for Lie-Tasha, as the NPF clowns in Nigeria never will once compromised like Abba Kyari?

Truth is that Natasha is the typical agbero Nigerian politician who knows she can successfully throw money at anything so far as such is within Nigeria.

She is simply failing to respond, and even hiding like a coward, in this instance because she knows reputable foreign police force, that she cannot buy or compromise, are now involved. We are daring Natasha and Ezekwesili to sue Duru for defamation, even in Nigeria, if dem born both of them well.

Abeg how hard is it to do since Lie-Tasha claims Duru's recording are AI doctored. Abeg how difficult is it for Lie-Tasha to hire an audio analysis expert to verify her claim and clear her name?

Obvious Lie-Tasha is hiding because she knows Duru will simply introduce evidence from the relevant US police force to fight any case in Nigeria. Let us see how even the most compromised Nigeria judge can dismiss the submission of a US police department. No long thing.

You shameless apologists of Natasha forget she is someone recently and unnecessarily goading a whole Senate President of Nigeria with a mocking satirical apologies letter she put in public to humiliate Akpabio.

Yet when it comes to deploying same energy to fight very injurious claims, backed by recorded audio, against her person then Lie-Tasha is graveyard silent.

Guy, I did not even read your drivel because I have long conclude your kind are emotional and biased beyond objectivity and redemption.

You really think barking louder makes your nonsense sound smarter? Your whole rant is an unhinged mess of bad logic, conspiracy theories, and a sick obsession with a woman who clearly lives rent-free in your head.

Let’s break your rubbish down. Babalola sued Farotimi? Great. Different context, different facts, different legal standing. But simple-minded loudmouths like you think every case is a copy-paste situation. Newsflash: law doesn’t run on your emotional tantrums.

You keep invoking “US police” like it’s a magic wand. If they’ve got anything, let them act. But until then, all you're doing is masturbating to fantasies of Natasha getting dragged in cuffs because it satisfies your political hard-on. Grow up.

You dare Natasha and Ezekwesili to sue? Who the hell are you—some broke internet warrior trying to goad people with actual reputations into dancing to your circus? If they don’t respond on your terms, it doesn’t make them cowards. It makes you a clown begging for attention.

As for this weak "AI doctored audio" bait—you clearly have no clue how evidence works in court, but you're busy screaming “analysis expert” like that’s all it takes to make garbage audio credible. Nobody owes you a public demonstration to satisfy your thirst for scandal.

And your final line—“I didn’t read your drivel”—sums you up perfectly: proudly ignorant, intellectually bankrupt, and too cowardly to engage with anything that bursts your fragile little bubble. You’ve reduced yourself to a keyboard warrior shouting into the void.

Stay mad, stay bitter, and keep hiding behind fake bravado—because the only person looking scared here is the guy screaming for a fight no one’s paying attention to.

TopBanter:
Lol. You said similar to what I did above in response to another poster also of childish disposition. Where is there room, for a well-calibrated adult, to be focused on the messenger in this development with Duru's introduction into the game?

If a policeman is in your house to foil an armed robbery, do you begin asking if he walked, flew or deove to your house?

Should Natasha, Ezekwesili etal not be heading to court, with immediate alacrity, to clear their name and get Duru docked for malicious defamation, if innocent of allegations Duru made that they can instantly discredit by providing proof of their innocence?

Why does Natasha, for example, not deploy a respected voice analysis professional of unimpeachable reputation to establish she is not the one in the Duru recordings or that any part of the recording has been doctored or tampered with?

Natasha and co can only play with the minds of the G & H ( gullible and hungry) I'm Nigeria.

Your analogy is laughably poor and your reasoning is steeped in self-righteous ignorance. Comparing a whistleblower's entrance into a complex political scandal to a policeman walking into a robbery is the kind of intellectually lazy metaphor people use when they're more interested in sounding clever than being accurate.

This isn't a movie scene. It's a high-stakes situation involving reputation, politics, digital manipulation, and layered allegations. The idea that Natasha, Ezekwesili, or anyone else must leap into court "with immediate alacrity" to prove their innocence is a crude distortion of how real-world litigation works. Courtrooms are not Twitter spaces where you ‘clap back’ on impulse. Legal strategy demands timing, evidence, and discretion—not knee-jerk theatrics to appease spectators like you.

And your attempt to sound legally astute—“why doesn’t Natasha get a voice expert…”—is equally thin. Do you know the legal process for authenticating audio? Do you understand chain of custody, admissibility, and how easily doctored material can be used to spin narratives? Of course not—you’re too busy posturing as if truth must perform like a circus act to be valid.

You're obsessed with why people aren't reacting loudly enough for your liking, instead of questioning why the accuser, Duru, is releasing edited, suspiciously-timed clips to drive public outrage rather than evidence to proper legal authorities.

Your cheap shot about the "G & H"—gullible and hungry—says more about your contempt for ordinary Nigerians than it does about Natasha or anyone else. It reeks of elitist disdain, not insight.

Try engaging with facts, legal realities, and critical scrutiny—not this juvenile performance masquerading as analysis.

TopBanter:
You people making these claim don't appear capable of logical thinking. However she has come to be deployed should not matter to any critical-thinking adult.

What should worry upright people is why Natasha, Ezekwesili and co are not driving at 200 miles an hour to the nearest court to lodge defamation cases against Duru for the countless allegations and negative revelations she has made against them.

Tell me how you, as an adult, will be dragging the motivation of an accuser who has made serious and damaging claims against you instead of immediately heading to Court to clear your name, save your reputation and get the accused sanctioned if indeed you can prove they made up thing about about you that are not true.

See, in the end, the outlook of all of us show who we are in life and even our standing. I.e whether winners or losers. Whether fair or unfair by nature.

Whether committed to justice or not. Whether devoted to backing what/who is right always or not.. Whether leaders or followers.

Whether solutions providers or indolent-minded folks waiting for others to solve their problems. Etc,etc,etc.

Your argument is not only flawed, it demonstrates a dangerous misunderstanding of both legal procedure and the strategic considerations involved in litigation. Going to court is not the immediate or automatic response to defamation—especially in jurisdictions where the burden of proof, costs, and systemic inefficiencies can make such action impractical or even counterproductive.

To claim that “upright people” must rush to court to prove their innocence is not only simplistic, it betrays a shallow grasp of how legal systems actually work. Defamation suits require time, resources, and careful evaluation—not impulsive reactions driven by emotion or public pressure. A person’s choice not to litigate does not equate to guilt or absence of truth.

Furthermore, questioning the motivation of an accuser is a fundamental aspect of both legal defense and critical inquiry. Motive is central to assessing credibility. To pretend otherwise is to deny basic tenets of justice. When accusations are made in bad faith, with an agenda or lacking substantiation, calling that out is not only fair—it’s necessary.

Your sweeping generalizations about who is a “winner or loser,” “committed to justice or not,” amount to moral grandstanding with no bearing on law or logic. Legal standing isn’t determined by who shouts loudest or postures most righteously online—it is determined by evidence, intent, and due process.

If you're genuinely interested in justice, start by respecting the principles that uphold it—instead of demanding performative litigation to satisfy personal bias.

raumdeuter:
So Natasha is not willing or able to prove her case in court, then how do we know Akpabio is guilty of the crime she alleged?

She was willing to go on BBC, CNN AriseTv Facebook live, OAP podcast but when it comes to presenting in the place that matter which is court, She began to drag feet

Your statement reflects a concerning disregard for the structural challenges embedded in our legal system.

The notion that a victim's credibility hinges solely on immediate court action ignores the reality that our judiciary often fails to protect whistleblowers—especially when the accused wields political power like Akpabio.

Natasha's decision to speak out publicly through international and local media was not a sign of reluctance but a strategic necessity in a country where justice is frequently delayed, obstructed, or denied.

If you're genuinely concerned about the truth, focus on why powerful figures so rarely face fair prosecution, rather than casting suspicion on those courageous enough to expose them

alobright17:
when you carried Natasha false accusation for head like gala were you jobless ? The lady exposing her get better job than your entire family .

You’ve got a lot of nerve talking about jobs when your entire argument is built on bitterness and delusion.

We stood by what was right while you licked the boots of a smear agent like it was your career.

If clout-chasing and slandering people is your definition of ‘a better job,’ then no wonder your standards—and your sense—are in the gutter.

Worry less about his family and more about your obsession with defending trash.

TopBanter:
People like you make me laugh. Natasha, the evil and wicked blackmailer, insisted, without supplying any proof whatsoever, that Akpabio instructed Yaya Bello to assasinate her.

Na beans to accuse the third citizen of Nigeria of that without proof whatsoever?

Some of you just have no sense of fairness and equity towards others and this the one of the main reason Nigeria is a mess.

You support the misbehaviour of your own but scream childishly when they come for them for the misdeeds you once praises them for as is the case with Natasha and Nnamdi Kanu.

Did you condemn Natasha when she accused Apkpabio, the third most important Nigeria, of ordering her assasination without providing any proof whatsoever?

If Akpabio hired Susan Duru then so what? Which of us will not do same against someone determined to destroy our lives with wicked, malicious and life-destroying lies and accusations?

Has Natasha not done and said enough wicked and evil things against our SP for him to want to deal with her? Because you hate Akpabio, you must support Lie-Tasha blindly, and never be fair to our SP when he deserves such as a human being?

As long as Sarah Duru has exposed Natasha truthfully and verifiably, with Lie-Tasha failing/refusing to go to court, then anything Akpabio does to clear his name and expose Natasha real character is 100% justified.

Especially in the eyes of fair-minded folks who strongly feel wicked human being like Natasha must be stopped by all means and not allowed to get away with their madness against others as Natahsa has been getting away with for a long time.

Spare us the noise.

You're frothing at the mouth defending a politician like he's your godfather—embarrassing. You shout “no proof” like your loyalty badge exempts him from scrutiny. But where was your outrage when baseless propaganda was spread about others you don’t support? Hypocrisy must be your daily bread.

You think calling Natasha names makes your argument stronger? It only shows how desperate and intellectually bankrupt you are. If she’s lying, let the law prove it. But your hero Akpabio doesn't want courts—he prefers shadow games and smear puppets like Sandra Duru. That’s not strength. That’s cowardice hiding behind proxies.

And how dare you say “so what?” to hiring someone to attack a critic? That right there exposes your entire mindset—corrupt, dangerous, and utterly sick. You’re the reason Nigeria bleeds: blind loyalty, no principle, no spine.

Don’t talk about fairness when your definition of “justice” only applies to those you worship. And don’t cry about “lies” when your own hands are drenched in double standards. Until you hold everyone to the same fire—including your precious SP—your opinion is trash. Loud trash.

frankson1:
Yes, Dr. Duru should tell us how much she was paid since lietasha had already revealed how she was promised either the governorship or Petroleum minister position to bring down the "Yoruba government".

Besides, defending lietasha is getting your head messed up because of your incoherent write up

If you had the mental range to grasp a coherent argument, maybe you'd recognize one.

His support for Natasha isn’t the problem—your inability to process basic reasoning is.

Don’t confuse your intellectual laziness with someone else's incoherence.

emkz:
Until Natasha supplies evidence, you are disturbing Nairaland with your puerility.

Keep my name out of your ignorant mouth unless you're ready to match facts with intellect. Your attempt to sound superior reeks of desperation and irrelevance.

I don't need Natasha's 'evidence' to expose your shallow thinking—your arrogance already does that.

If you’re so rattled by what I post, scroll past or stay silent. Don’t mistake your noise for logic—this is Nairaland, not your echo chamber.

emkz:
Fallacy or ad hominem. A tactic used by gaslightersSince you can't attack the substance, attack the person.

You asked me for evidence, I supplied evidence. You could not debunk the evidence.

You cannot refute Professor Mgbeke's evidence, so you attack her.

The person who brought this matter to the public and even went on a fruitless international media tour is now saying she is tired of the public court because they are defeating her in the public court. That is cowardice.

Neither you nor Natasha can shift the arena to avoid scrutiny.

Your self-righteous tantrum is laughable. You throw around "fallacy" and "gaslighting" like buzzwords hoping they’ll stick, but all you’ve proven is that you can’t handle pushback. You didn’t present evidence—you paraded biased drivel wrapped in self-delusion and expected it to pass unchallenged. And no, questioning the credibility of your so-called “Professor Mgbeke” isn’t ad hominem when her entire narrative is built on conjecture and shaky credentials. If you put a clown in a lab coat, it’s still a clown.

You’re desperate to keep this circus in the "public court" because that’s where gossip thrives and facts die. When people start asking for real proof, you panic and scream “cowardice.” But the truth is, your sideshow only survives in echo chambers.

Nobody’s avoiding scrutiny—we’re demanding real scrutiny, not the kangaroo court of your imagination. You don’t want facts, you want drama. And when the spotlight shifts to expose your weak foundations, suddenly everyone else is “shifting arenas”? Pathetic.

Righteousness2:
You don’t want ISRAEL to BOMB your country?

Maybe, just maybe, don’t fire missiles at ISRAEL then!



This is the airport in Sana’a, Yemen.

The countdown to its COMPLETE DESTRUCTION has just begun!

You cheerlead the destruction of a civilian airport in Sana’a like it's some heroic act—congratulations, you're glorifying terrorism under the flag of self-defense. Let’s be clear: bombing another sovereign nation isn't defense, it’s state-sponsored aggression.


You glorify destruction, but you whine when the tables even slightly turn. You don’t get to bomb the world and cry victim when someone fights back.