₦airaland Forum

Lithiumite:
There is no way you can blame wike in isolation without all the other party leadership.......they are all culpable, they only ended up playing themselves into the hands of tinubu.

+
True.
But i really just mean he is the one who has carried the dagger to the throat of the party.

Thundafireseun:
I have said this before ,and I will gladly say it over and over again….

Emperor Wike has never lost any battle

Makinde has set up reconciliatory team …why is he begging?

+
What about the battle with Captain Yerima/ Nigerian Armed Forces Occult Incorporated

bentenny:
Omor PDP don finally kpai
Too bad that this happened to PDP due to the selfish ambition of Atiku in 2022!

+
Forget. Wike is the single handed killer of PDP.

Osiris12:
This interview, I’m sure bwala still Dey take meds

+
It is the end of his career.

benalvino3:
None of what he said is racist. I am not joking. Pick your best one, let's discuss the topic or context behind it. We already did the Pilot topic. There was no racism there.

+
Not interested Uncle Rukus.

benalvino3:
"If I see a Black pilot, I'm going to be like, boy, I hope he's qualified." (The Charlie Kirk Show, ~23 January 2024)
Kirk said this (often prefaced with "I'm sorry" or "I am sorry" while criticizing DEI hiring in aviation and other high-stakes fields. He argued racial quotas/affirmative action lower standards and create safety risks, using the phrase to illustrate public doubt about competence under such policies.

"If I'm dealing with somebody in customer service who's a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?" (The Charlie Kirk Show, ~3 January 2024; some reports link similar remarks to May 2023)
Part of broader commentary on DEI in workplaces. Kirk claimed policies prioritize race over merit, leading to unqualified hires and public skepticism

Regarding Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Ketanji Brown Jackson: "You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot..." (suggesting affirmative action picks; The Charlie Kirk Show, 13 July 2023)
Kirk named these four prominent liberal Black women while attacking affirmative action. He said critics would have been called racist for pointing it out earlier, but now "they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us." Fact-checks note he targeted these specific individuals (all highly credentialed via elite schools), not Black women broadly. He tied it to his view that DEI "steals" slots from more qualified (often White/Asian) candidates.

"Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that's a fact. It's happening more and more." (The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023)
In a segment on urban crime and interracial violence. Kirk cited FBI stats and viral incidents (e.g., "knockout game" or flash-mob attacks) to argue certain patterns of Black-on-White crime are underreported or downplayed for political reasons. He framed it as entertainment/targeted rather than random.

Called George Floyd a "scumbag." (2020–2021 speeches).
Kirk highlighted Floyd's criminal record and drug involvement, arguing his death was exploited for "racial reckoning" and riots rather than reflecting systemic police racism. He said the man didn't deserve martyrdom

"Just because you're a white person does not mean you have to begin apologizing simply for how God made you" (to a virtually all-White crowd) (e.g., 2021 Mankato speech).
Responding to post-George Floyd "White privilege" and "anti-racism" rhetoric. Kirk told audiences they shouldn't feel collective guilt for their race or history.

"The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white." (20 March 2024)

"The great replacement strategy, which is well underway every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different." (1 March 2024)
Kirk endorsed the "Great Replacement" as deliberate Democratic policy via open borders and mass immigration, shifting demographics away from traditional (White, rural) America.

America at its peak when immigration halted for 40 years (foreign-born % lowest ever; "We should be unafraid to do that." 22 August 2025)
Kirk praised 1924–1965 immigration restrictions as a model for assimilation and cultural preservation.

"Incredibly, like, non-negotiating hawk" on immigration + parents of "illegal" young woman should "go back... with her" (consistent across episodes).
Hardline stance: no amnesty, deportation emphasis, family unity in removal. He opposed "Dreamer"-style exceptions.

Dismantling DEI ("enforcement arm of critical race theory"; "DEI is about trying to destroy the excellence of the country and elevating racial tribal politics"
Kirk called DEI forced quotas that replace merit with race, harming institutions (aviation, military, corporations).

Criticized Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s"; created "permanent DEI-type bureaucracy" and "anti-white weapon"
He argued the Act's anti-discrimination provisions birthed endless lawsuits, quotas, and federal overreach that now discriminate against Whites/Asians.

Criticized MLK Jr. ("awful" and "not a good person" (2023 America Fest remarks).
Kirk attacked King's personal character (e.g., alleged infidelity, plagiarism) and some radical views, while downplaying the "I Have a Dream" legacy as not reflective of the full man. He linked this to his Civil Rights Act critique.

"Large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America" and "Islam is not compatible with western civilization" (30 April 2025 and 24 June 2025)
Kirk warned of no-go zones, Sharia incompatibility with free speech/equality/Christian values, and left-Islam alliances.

Jewish donors as "No. 1 funding mechanism of radical, open border neoliberal quasi-Marxist policies"; "beast created by secular Jews... is now coming for Jews"; Jews as "largest funders of cultural Marxist ideas" (2023–2024 episodes).
Kirk criticized secular Jewish philanthropists (e.g., Soros-linked groups) for bankrolling progressive causes, universities, and open-border nonprofits. He was simultaneously pro-Israel and warned this "beast" was boomeranging on Jews. He distinguished from religious/Orthodox Jews or Israel support.

"If you're a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?" (8 December 2022)
Referring to the Brittany Griner prisoner swap (Griner for Russian arms dealer). Kirk argued identity politics (race, sexuality, WNBA status) got preferential treatment over military service.

"Constant comments about Black Americans" → Accurate summary. Race, crime, affirmative action, and Black leadership were frequent topics on his show.

None of these quotes indicates he is a racist. Some are controversial at best.
You should focus on the democrats who think you are d mb as a black person and cannot figure out a computer.

+
You must be joking.

As I have said anyway. When you add them all together. It's absurd to deny the obvious.

Needless to say, I know your type. You would not think him a racist even if he called your family apes.

benalvino3:
It was homophobic and controversial to say there are only two genders. Tweeter used to ban people citing hate speech.
So I don't buy your perspective on this matter. Post the racist things he said.

+
I did sometime ago -

https://www.nairaland.com/8532869/racist-views-charlie-kirk

In addition to the OP. see specifically also this post by steadygo -

https://www.nairaland.com/8532869/racist-views-charlie-kirk/1#137106024

benalvino3:
I can't view your link. Check it.

+
Anyway what I saw was him saying that people didnt think Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews and establish a master race, they miscalculated Hitler (because he actually wanted to) and in the same way people are miscalculating the Ayatollas because they also have genocidal intentions.

If thats the context you are referring to, I get.

benalvino3:
Just today, LordReed took Lindsey Graham's words out of context and accused him of supporting Hitler. Despite showing him the full context, he refused to accept reality.

+
Is this the statement concerned -

https://web.facebook.com/reel/974725901552713

If it is, I see the context.

benalvino3:
Just today, LordReed took Lindsey Graham's words out of context and accused him of supporting Hitler. Despite showing him the full context, he refused to accept reality.

+
Show me the context.

Some things people say can be controversial, yet still hold truth. It’s not about hate or prejudice, but it is about having conversations that need to happen, and some folks prefer to be straightforward and call things as they see them.

Charles Kirk was a deeply raycist man and many of the things he said clearly bore that out. As I said, if it was one or two odd remarks its different and you could spin it as you like. But when you have a whole career catalogue, you cant deny it. The only people that deny it are raycists and slaves of raycists, Uncle Rukus' and Uncle Toms, many of which are here sadly!

benalvino3:
Sorry, when Corporations are talking about meeting diversity quotas, it begs the question.

FAA mandate: Airlines must prove they don’t hire based on race or gender
The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Transportation announced that all airlines must formally certify that pilot hiring is merit‑based only, after allegations that some carriers were using DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) criteria in pilot selection.

Airlines must sign statements confirming they do not consider race or sex in hiring.
Failure to comply can trigger federal investigation.
Delta publicly stated it has always hired based on qualifications and merit.

Southwest Airlines case: Accused of discriminatory DEI practices
Southwest was the subject of a federal civil‑rights complaint alleging unlawful DEI‑based hiring. The company later agreed to abandon the practices identified in the complaint.

All he was saying is, if merit is not the criterion they are following, then it is safe to wonder if the pilot is the best pilot they picked based on merit, or they picked him to meet their diversity quota.

+
The truth is that if that was the only raycisst thing he ever said, people would shrug and forget it. But he said many such things, very terrible things and therefore each adds up and makes the case against him firm.

benalvino3:
How is it racists if their main criteria is to hire based on skin color. It is a legitimate question.

+
Only lunatics will think that a pilot will ever be hired with the main consideration being his race, or that any person not FULLY AND ABSOLUTELY QUALIFIED to fly a plane in all respects will ever be hired as a pilot regardless of race.

tctrills:
Actually, it is not a bad philosopher and theologian. It has the records and knowledge of all theology and philosophy. And what else would you say when it doesn't favour you?

Below is from Gemini. You know they say in the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses will every word be established.

The Core Meaning
Paul is arguing for Divine Immanence—the idea that God is not a distant, cold clockmaker, but the very "atmosphere" of existence.

Live: Our biological life comes from Him.

Move: Our ability to act and progress is sustained by Him.

Are (Being): Our fundamental identity and existence are rooted in His will.

+
Don't you know what an atmosphere is?

immortalcrown:
Keep upgrading.

This forum is great.

But, when will Edit History feature be added?

+
Edit history?
That will be fraudulent.

tctrills:
So just to have a second opinion, I ask chatgpt to give contextual meaning to that verse.

This was the result
Meaning of the Phrase “In Him We Live and Move and Exist”

In context Paul is saying:

1. God is the source of all life

Everything depends on God for existence.

Humans:

live because of God

move because of God’s sustaining power

exist because God created and sustains them

This echoes ideas similar to passages like Colossians 1:17 (God sustaining creation).

It's as if AI was reading my argument.
You clearly do not understand that verse.

Let me try Grok

In summary, Acts 17:28 means that our entire existence—life, activity, and very being—is enveloped in and sustained by God. It's not pantheism (we are God), but profound dependence: God is the source and sustainer of all life. Paul uses Greek cultural touchpoints to make the biblical God relatable, then challenges idolatry and calls for response to the risen Christ. This is one of the clearest New Testament examples of contextual evangelism to a non-Jewish audience.

Just because you want the verse to mean something else doesn't mean it has to.

+
AI is a bad philosopher and theologian.

See the blue bold however in part confirmation.

As per the red bold note that I had distinguished between panentheism and pantheism. Obviously beyond your AI philosophy.

chieveboy:
Come on lol. I don't even know that feature exists on here. I was even wondering if you deliberately ignored me for reasons seeing you replying to others.



We both might have studied Eckankar, but what you might not have noticed is Eckankar avoids matters to do with discussing the very nature of the worlds of computer simulation or "lower worlds" as they call it. But if you have your ears to the ground, several Eckankar literature subtly spilled the beans. In one, it describes the antics of the "almighty Gods" who are mere gatekeepers but love to present themselves as "almighty God", likening it to how the Wizard of Oz pulls it off using a booming 'loud speaker' to send their voice tremoring into the 'simulus'. This and many more depending in your range of exploration of the Eckankar teachings for one, and other occult/spiritual materials and of course personal experimentation and exploration.

The above said, I wish to let you know that all advanced spiritual teachings which knows its onions understand the universe (lower worlds) to be a holographic simulation and yes, it works exactly as a human computer does but much more advanced; and by all definitions of a computer, is one. A computer can be made of organic material, I hope you know this?

A guy called billyionare once had a thread on how the physical universe is a recursion of the inner one. But of course you must have read something along this line in Eckankar! Its almost a no-brainer that even advanced physics had now wrapped its head and tools around a fascinating finding that 'reality' is 'idiomaterial' (is a thought/matter duality). This means reality exists as though in its templaic form and most importantly in a templaic region or plane where all exists as though or idea, and this is apt and in tandem with advanced spirituality.

What this means is any material thing is merely a physical representation of Thought or an Idea and they exists in a binary complementary union or what I will call a 'do me I do you' concurrent mirroring of one another from the top mental/idea level to the physical with the shape and form taking effect based on the 'membrane' of the plane that though or idea finds it self till it looks like a Plastic cup on the physical. We built the Hololens off of this and its not the first time we mimic nature.

CC Deepsight

+
Powerful response. The red-bold particularly resonates with me and I WILL recommend it to LordReed, even if I know it will have no traction with him.

tctrills:
you are accusing me of what you are doing.
In whom we live = He give us life
In whom we move = gives us the strength to move
And have our being = we belong to Him

+
Now this is astonishing.

The script says that you live in someone. It says you move in that person. It says you have your being inside that person.
It is clearly panentheistic and he was quoting a Greek philosopher as I told you already.
And you are writing things it absolutely does [b]no[/b]t say.
This explains alot about the religious.

I mean just look at the bold in yours, the last line. What kind of voodooo magical interpretation is that?

friday2011:
Regardless of what ever happened, on what basis will u be needing the police man?

+
E fear me ooooooh!
In fact in that precarious position considering that crimes of desperation may occur its best to do away with him.

Dannieln1:
Na Wetin happen that day go depend who go survive.

Like

+
Wisdom.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Feldie:
Trump's administration will finally destroy the US. The way they talk is always foolish and uncouth. All previous US government had these plans, implemented them but never said it out loud

+
GBAM!

DomPerignon:
Spanish golden age began on the same year they expelled all Jews from their land.

Spain has a very bad opinion of Jews giving that Jews sided with the Moors to invade and occupy Spain for 700ys.

The gates of Toledo were opened to Muslim army by Jewish traitors.

Spain remains the most anti semitic nation on earth and for very good reason based on all what Jews did to them.

+
You should be careful here. The history is deep and the Spanish really persecuted and tortured Jews horrifically.

LordReed:
Gosh are you this inane? You don't realise that saying I got Hitler wrong means you think Hitler is right? You guys must have dust for brain cells.

+
Don't go and kill yourself bro. I tell you. Arguing with any Trumpist (and generally these neo-fascist conservatives who dont even understand principle or ideology) is like banging one's head against a brick wall.

People who see a genius chess move in every fart of Trump's and defend even the wackiest statements from him and his allies.

tctrills:
I understand you didn't outrightly say you believe in that but for now, you are the one defending that doctrine.

Now we live and move and have our being in God. Clearly means that it's God that makes us live and move and He created us. It doesn't mean or indicate that we are inside God or His cells.
How did you come to such conclusions?

+
Why are you deliberately reading into the script what is not there? How does "in whom we live and move and have our being" translate to "God created humans?"

LordReed can you comment on the last two points in my OP so we move along to my own main personal treatise on this matter.

3. The "Processor Speed" (The Speed of Light) Just as a computer processor has a maximum clock speed that limits how fast information can travel across a circuit board, our universe has a universal speed limit: the speed of light.

4. The Mathematical Universe Hypothesis: Max Tegmark, a cosmologist at MIT, argues for the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (MUH). He notes that the deeper we look into reality, the more the "physical" stuff disappears, leaving only mathematical structures behind. The Argument: If you look at a video game character, they look like a person, but they are actually just a collection of numbers and equations. Tegmark argues that since our universe is perfectly described by math, it may literally be a mathematical structure (or a program) rather than a physical thing that math just happens to describe.

Tctrills,

I am sorry to say but this is a very watery and weak revert.

tctrills:
I would address a few things and hopefully you will get clarity on the rest.
When the bible says the wages of sin is death, it was only refering to man. So there is no need to bring up animals.

How can you magisterially and imperially proclaim this? Death is a factor that applies to living things in the physical world. Your bible however insists that it is the result of sin. I ask again if animals sin. On what grounds do you exempt animals from this quagmire?

Also, when the battery in your phone dies, it's not because of sin.

Dont be absurd.

Good you brought up Galatians 6:7.to show the Justice of God, we reap what we sow hence we reap punishment when we sow sin but then, did you consider what happens when we sow repentance? We reap forgiveness all thanks to the mercy of Christ.

One can repent without believing in the ritual human sacrifice teaching which says that the death of Christ is what saves one.

Now let's move on. You claim that only you can bear the spiritual consequences of your actions and that's mostly true when you don't repent. When we repent we no longer bear that consequence.

Yes - and repentance is not dependent on any belief in blood sacrifice. Repentance involve genuine contrition, seeking the forgiveness of God and those hurt and a determination to change one's ways.

We are forgiven because the price has been paid.

This is pagan.

Lastly you make the claim that Jesus was not a willing sacrifice because He pray for the cup to pass by. Well that's being very unfair to Him and the bible.
Was He in pain? Yes
Did He wish the pain to end? Yes
Was He a willing sacrifice? Yes
All 3 are correct.
A friend of mine was once bitten by a snake on his farm in a village.
The villagers applied a very painful treatment to the bite.
Was my friend in pain? Yes
Did he wish the pain to cease? Yes.
Did he willingly allow himself to be treated? Yes.
So taking that verse and claiming Christ was not a willing sacrifice is unfair to the rest of the bible.
Ephesians 5:2: "...just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God".

+
Then we can only conclude that scripture contradicts itself in this matter.

Reference:
One of those countries I mentioned on the other Afolayan thread was India. It has many 2,000 megawatt solar plants costing between 1 to 2 billion dollars to commission. This is the electricity you say that tools the youth of that country to create value and grow wealth. Power to get out of poverty.

Lagos where most of you are evacuates about 1,200 megawatts from the grid. Imagine what a doubling of the energy supply to Lagos will cause in terms of availability, stability and price if only one of such plants can be established.

These are the kind of discussions citizens should be having. Solution based discourse on how to make life better. So that when government says it wants to spend a billion on some nonsensical white elephant, the people say, No.

Rather spend it on what benefits all and has the potential to create real wealth and unshackle many from poverty.

+
The other day I was talking about how power is a priority and some chap on this platform began to say its only because Nigerians are entitled and they want to use the power to watch football. I could have wept.

Ride on Master Strategist.

LordReed:
You do realise that at the so called space in the atomic is irrelevant ant the macro level right? Do you realise that are gaps between the threads that make up your suit? Does that make your suit insubstantial? These things don't scale up.

Besides it doesn't mean reality is pixelated because it is made up discrete particles.

+
I see your point, even if i think you are being a tad simplistic in this. Still lets move along.

LordReed:
I thoroughly disagree. Pixels exist on screens not in the reality we share. The world around us is not pixelated, that's not a thing.

+
Not only on screens, in terms of our visual capacities. I think I was careful to say that.

The reason I first asked if you believe that space may be divided infinitely is because surely you are aware that we cannot really account for what exists between atoms, electrons and such. And that at that microscopic level it can be said that there is more "insubstantiality" than substantiality to what appears to us as hard impenetrable matter. But I didnt want to digress there, and thats why I have said well, with what we perceive visually, there are limits, and no I dont think you are right to say its limited to screens.

Nevertheless lets close the arguments in the OP as I have a treatise of my own to make.

LordReed:
Hypothetically, yes. Take a length and divide it by 2, then divide the half by 2, then again and again. You can do this infinitely.

+
Hypothetically, I concur. But in terms of this reality that we perceive about us, you must perforce agree that that we are limited to the building blocks of the pixels of the things we can see. There is the view that this thus discloses a formatted or programmed rendition of our reality. This is reinforced by the fact that the deeper you zoom into the images of things around you the more they lose form. Nonetheless I will not dwell too much on this argument not least because it is not the strongest one even for me. I just wanted to pass through and note it. Let us deal with the last two I mentioned in my OP before I proceed to my main argument, which I shall present to you. Ride on, I await.

LordReed:
Sorry but the Planck Length is not the theoretical "smallest" possible length. It is the smallest length that is meaningful to our current understanding of the universe. It in no way says that lengths smaller than Planck length don't exist.

+
Do you think you can divide space infinitely.