₦airaland Forum

horlando30:
Unfortunately, they currently have military and economic power to destabilize any country they wish to save for China, Russia, India etc. In such situation a weak nation must remain diplomatic with these people to remain intact.

The US or any super power can cook up any reason to destabilize or invade a weak one. The weak must be diplomatic or be ready to go to war. Well I dont think Nigeria can go to war with anybody at this time. So calm down

+
The USA going to war with Nigeria will never come up.

favor914:
Is the issue about Tinubu or Nigeria? What is there to stand up to, is it a personal issue?

+
I was not addressing myself to you. I know better than to do so.

omooba969:
If the king could take this action against his brother, and member of the royal family, imagine what consequence the common man would expect.

Say NO TO SEX ABUSE.

+
He ought to revoke Harry's title as Duke though.
Not that he has committed a particular crime, but withdrawing from Royal Duties amounts to breaking the social contract on which his privileges rest.

Saturnalia:
There is no way Trump is not as guilty as Epstein and Andrew. Trump that likes grabbing them by the pvssy.

+
And yet he is the toast of the evangelical Christian world.
This world is just a contradiction.

CaseSensitive:
Well if it looks like a duck, swims, like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it's safe to assume that it's exactly a duck. America has always used ridiculous pretexts to justify invasion, war, regime change etc, and the claims about "christian genocide" is not an exception. America doesn't give a flying duck (pun intended) about any Christian in Nigeria.

+
I could not agree more.
And oh, that was a really great play on words.

MarkNsukkaBread:
He is not being paid, he was just trying to humour the guy who accused him of receiving payment

:
Phew!
Well while one would certainly hope so, the stance of many of his likes who can NEVER see ANYTHING remotely wrong with ANYTHING done or neglected by the present administration leads one to believe that its one of two things - either they are paid posters or blinded by some parochial factor such as tribalism or religion.

YesDaddyTill203:
TACO President will chicken out sooner or later. He's just repeating what the religious fanatics in the US government told him.
Nigeria should tell him to fk off and concentrate on crimes in the US.

+
BAT cant stand up to Trump. They have too many of his secrets.

CaseSensitive:
It basically means Nigeria's crude oil and natural resources are of strategic interest to USA and they need to install their puppet to ensure smooth flow of the resources for cheap or barely nothing.

+
. . . . Thus you agree that these are early steps in a general plan towards regime change?

Kukutente23:
Given your rendition of history, was the extermination carried out justified? If not? Why not?

+
I don't believe you sincerely require an answer to this question.

On second thoughts, you just might, since you are able to justify genocide elsewhere.

honesttalk21:
I’m not arguing that the hadith is invalid; I just believe it’s important to consider its context rather than treating it as a universal rule. Each hadith should be interpreted in light of the Qur’an. The Prophet’s words never supersede it. The verses about fighting focus on defense rather than forcing belief. So, if a hadith seems to contradict the idea of no compulsion in religion, the real issue lies in our interpretation of it, not in the Qur’an itself.

+
Why don't you rather say the real issue lies in such an obviously obnoxious Sahih Hadith?

This is important when you put the reality of the comments by LordReed into focus: namely that Muslim fundamentalists have actually killed people relying on not just these verses but also the Quranic verses you are claiming are only defensive in nature.

Unbiased1:
77 years on and the Palestinians have been the ones dieing in large numbers. If their generations unborn take the same steps as the current generation, they will also die. 68k plus people have died so far. A record has been set, it can only get bloodier for Palestinians if they don't change their ways. That's the honest and bitter truth.

+
The honest and bitter truth is that Israel if it continues this way will only continue to purchase global bitterness towards itself which will make its long term security and even existence unsustainable.

It will collapse just as apartheid South Africa did. That's the long game you can't see.

As regards your short sighted triumph at the large numbers of Palestinian fatalities, you still fail to see that none of this will buy Israel peace, security and peace of mind. Rather it will ensure that they remain anxious and paranoid for ages to come, along with taking a toll in bloodshed even if not on the scale of that taken from their enemies.

Your worldview in this matter will lead to an eternity of reciprocal hatred and violence, which is a pity for one who claims to follow the Prince of Peace.

zero8zero:
It's 30k not 35k and I'm not complaining. Use your own advice and solve your wailing.

OMG you actually admit you are paid for this.
Jesus Christ of Kathmandu!

Funkyswagzz:
It's you people supporting this criminality that is the problem. You want to be logical with everything. Everybody can't reason same way you do. When people see black and call it black you will say the way he mentioned or described that black is very rude. This is the fundamental problem you have which makes you very protective of bad things that are obvious.

+
And yet they will claim they want a better country.
Disgusting.

How this man doesn't throw up each time he sees himself in the mirror is completely beyond me.

honesttalk21:
I’m not dismissing or denying existence of hadith, but question the context you apply it to. Did you consider how it fits with the Qur’an’s principle of no compulsion in religion before jumping to the conclusion that it calls for death for disbelief? Do you boldly say your view of the hadith supersedes the Quran?

Are you suggesting that that prescription as a Sahih (authentic) hadith is invalid?

Because the mere statement "there is no compulsion in religion" cannot abrogate it, when there are several Quranic verses which appear to corroborate such, including the verses which urge fighting until all believe in Allah and his prophet.

I think it's better you come out and say that that prescription in that hadith is void.

Unbiased1:
If I have to be bloody thirsty to ensure the continued existence of my country and its people, hell yeah I'll be worse than a vampire. Israel must continue on this path for as long as Palestinians keep plotting to destroy Israel.

+
The sad thing you don't recognize is that this path only guarantees generations more of assured bloodshed for both sides.

honesttalk21:
Now you are counting? You understand the question you ask very well and know the answer. Hadith are certainly respected, but they don’t hold the same divine status as the Qur’an, which the direct word/revelation of God. Muslims appreciate Hadith when they resonate with the teachings of the Qur’an, but they never take precedence over it.

+
You do know that the hadith which prescribes death for apostasy is a Sahih hadith?

Unbiased1:
When you know that for every 1 Israeli you kill, you will lose over 100 of your people, why then do you proceed to kill an Israeli in the first place? Must you kill an Israeli? Why start what you can't finish. Why start a conflict you know fully well will end in tears for you and your household?

+
It is not proven that Hamas was responsible.
And as I said, this pattern of egregious over retaliation is exactly why Israel has become a pariah state.

They are evidently blood thirsty.

honesttalk21:
That’s a pretty unfair assumption, as it implies I was part of the decision. Those who claim Islam commands the killing of apostates or non-believers are not following the Qur’an itself but later interpretations shaped by politics, not faith. In history, some rulers amid chaos and rebellion mistke or equate apostasy for treason, but I’m yet to find where any rightly guided leader ever issued such an order.

+
For the second time, I ask you - are you suggesting that Sahih Hadiths are not scripture for Muslims?

meobizy:
Such a lazy excuse of a human being.

+
This is a ridiculous way to judge the poor woman's predicament in a foreign land with all the restrictions and limitations which have been imposed on her. You also ignore the abusive non-consensual early marriage factor. This woman has virtually been treated as chattel, as a commodity - and yet you can make this chauvinistic, thoughtless, shallow and insensitive remark.

enemyofprogress:
what? What's wrong with it? Do you want to george what you don't really know? George not so as not to be georged

Dont worry, I am not "georging" you.
Since you refuse to accept correction.

Carry on "georging" things your way, ok?

descartes400:
In essence you are saying if a person commits a crime in 1995,let's say rape, and the punishment for rape as at that 1995 was 5years imprisonment as enshrined in the constitution then..though as at the time he committed this crime he was not found out but 2020

Meanwhile the law was amended to increase the prison term for rape to 10 years in 2010..

Crime committed in 1995
Prison term for crime as at 1995 was 5 years
Prison term was amended to 10 years in 2010
Crime was found out in 2020.

Are you saying that since the law as you said cannot be applied retroactively, they would have to still revert to the 5years prison term and not the amended 10 years?

+
Yes, that is the position of the common law principle against retroactivity. This is on the grounds of equity and fairness. It could only be otherwise if the legislature specifically provides in the law that it should apply retroactively and this is generally avoided on grounds of fairness. Indeed even if a legislature provides so, it is possible for a court to void such a provision on grounds of equity, fairness, natural law and the general rule of law.

The principle is expressed in Latin as lex prospicit, non respicit: "look forward, and not backward."

The principle is applied more strictly in criminal law, even though it applies to all law.

manmade:
Are you talking about the same rufai that was found guilty of traffic offence and convicted or another one? Stop this joke 🤣 abeg, he is one of our problems in this country.

+
A mere traffic offense does not mean he should shut up.
We know very well that is a forgivable incident compared to the atrocities politicians commit in this country.

Kukutente23:
It is neither silly nor a joke
History has it that some were accommodating while others were not
You have to make your distinction

+
History also has it that regardless of who was accommodating and who was not, they exterminated almost all of them by force (and by disease) and seized their lands and confined them to miniscule settlements.

So long as there were those nations who resisted them, then the case is established.

Another point to note is that even for those who are said to have been accomodating, it was not the case that the invaders were willing to go away if they were not accommodated. If they were not, they would have resorted to war and extermination as they did with others.

enemyofprogress:
what? What's wrong with it? Do you want to george what you don't really know? George not so as not to be georged

+


Joker.

IMPARTIAL:
This case is hard for me to comment on. If what she's saying is true, may God Almighty deliver her.

:
Nigeria is a miraculous country. As she has put her cry out to the public help will come her way from many directions. That one is guaranteed.

Kukutente23:
My clear point is that immigration has never been a natural right and you keep proving it

:
Then stop trying to claim that their ancestors had a right to be there. The irony is glaring.

PS: I haven't said I agree with him.

Kukutente23:
Who said they are unwelcome?

:
I'll take this as a silly joke.

enemyofprogress:
Please let's not george this matter until we hear from the other side of the story.

:
You are still writing this "George"
Okay oh.

Kukutente23:
You have still not shown from the Declaration of Independence where it said immigration is a right

Your love for Fela's lyrics is duly noted

+
His nuanced point is simply that natural rights are not created by documents written by men.