₦airaland Forum

Nigeria was cooked a long time ago

Brendaniel:
All the questions you asked here is because of the same reason I am talking about, "the fear of the Igbos" ....

The question you should be asking is why the south east is more militarized than the north even though south east is far more safer than the north?

What is the fear of Nigeria about the south east?

The answer is what I just told you...

You don't know the Igbos, that's why, the people who know are the people either acting in fear or respect of the Igbos...

That's why some of them are ready to do anything to make sure the status quo remains like this for the Igbos in Nigeria, sadly that decision is pulling Nigeria backwards and destroying it, it is like a man hating his legs and instead, ties his legs to keep the leg from moving but forgetting that his body won't move either but keeps trying and believing he will move with his legs tied...



That's just the situation of Nigeria, It didn't just start today, you don't know the Igbos...

Can you tell us ONE thing Igbos have done that warrants all this you're writing. They lost the civil war DESPITE initially winning and going all the way to Ore, and despite having South South in their corner. The North removed Ironsi after only 6 months and have dominated the military since. Ojukwu was pardoned and ran for president. How does that tally with fear? To add to all this, can you tell us HOW it benefits Igbos to have a land-locked country?? Remember, South South and their oil and ports are gone. Vast number of Igbos are in other parts of Nig. They'd now all be foreigners to be kicked out at will. You folks should THINK sometimes.
The Ahmadu Bello yiu talked about, how many Northerners were ranking military when he said that compared to today. How many were top govt officials? See the tape below - he said he'd hire "another Nigerian" last


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_odAy4rVz8?si=mKYA3su8y-pctxZo

Brendaniel:
It is you who is living in self denial and doesn't know the Igbos, why do you think the south east is the most militarized region in Nigeria even before MNK started IPOB?

Was south east the most dangerous place to live at the time?

The problem with you guys is you people are not detailed and miss a who lot of things, why do you think the north has stopped attacking the Igbos in the north?

Even while Buhari was in power.

When last did you hear of any attack?

The only place noise is still being made against the Igbos in Nigeria is the south west and the reasons are now very clear, it is not even about Tinubu if that's what you think...

You guys have lived so long with the Igbos and don't know the Igbos, the ones who know among you are either scared of seeing the Igbos have their own country or simply give the Igbos respect.

But for you, you are still far from reality, like I always tell you guys, time will reveal it to you even if you don't want to know...

Amazing, simply amazing. None is so blind as one who refuses to see. "You don't know Igbos"!. So why is MNK in jail all this time despite Igbos? So why is SE militarized despite Igbos. Abd why not tell us why the North stopped attacking Igbos (according to you) and what it has to do with knowing Igbos? Mention one thing that results in knowing Igbos. Amazing, simply amazing. Burying head in the sand and refusing to take it out!

jiggyman:
Well, I don't imagine myself going to lagos and not going out with my friends. But I mean its crazy world

If you're doing better than them just be careful. Especially if you're still trying to break out of that pack

Brendaniel:
100 times worse? Then you don't know the Igbos...

Those who know are the ones scared of letting the Igbos govern themselves by themselves...

You don't know the Igbos, even south Africa will stop that nonsense if it was a Biafran only country...

I just notice you have people have lived with the Igbos for long but know very little about the Igbos.

I used to tell my brothers something, that if Nigeria was only the north and the Igbos there would have been just mainly 2 outcomes:

1. Nigeria would have split peacefully a long time ago without fight or

2. The north and the Igbos would have been living in peace with clear cut boundaries and respect for each other.

It is the Yorubas who keep giving the north the confidence to do nonsense...

You don't know the Igbos...

You know the Igbos better than Ojukwu who led the fight for secession but later in life said the time for that had passed. South Africans kill Igbos constantly and if it weren't that it is a somewhat westernized country with many enlightened citizens it'd be worse. The West and South South are not like that. They'd take Igbo's property and their Police will look the other way (remember, it'd now be THEIR Police, and THEIR courts and judges and Supreme Courts). Stop being in denial of what will certainly happen

Brendaniel:
And what is your understanding of separation ?

I think you people keep doing the mistake of mixing up separation with repatriation....

It doesn't happen like that, are Nigerians not in Ghana and almost every country in the world?

Even countries that separated still have their citizens living in both countries, you think if Nigeria divides today then the Igbos will pack their load and start going to the east?

It doesn't work like that, as long as they are citizens of west Africa, they will continue living and doing business where ever they are just like Nigerians in Ghana, Togo and so on.

So yes I believe more than 90% of Igbos dont want to be Nigerian citizens...

I can assure you 90% of Igbos who are established in the West don't want to wake up one day to find they're in a foreign country. You see how South Africans treat Nigerians, it will be 100 times worse.
The North is a different matter - they won't agree to separation. So the whole thing is a waste of time!

Brendaniel:
Why do you say it is impossible?

Because lots of Igbos in other parts of the country don't want it and even those who went home for Xmas will soon be rushing back. And the North doesn't want it for what they benefit. And most of the West really don't care one way or another except those that fought a war to prevent it

ponlear:
Omoh... Village people at work

This one is NOT village people. It is Nigeria that happened - people parking trucks on the road with no clear sign that says it is not moving

Wotowotoman:
Stop talking trash. In the US a passport is called passport just like it is called passport in Nigeria. It is also called international passport or passport book or passport booklet in Naija, the US and every other country. These are just different ways to call a passport. Don’t try to sound smart by over complicating a very simple thing. Hiss

You obviously didn't read the post I responded to originally. Go back and read it. He was saying they call it just "passport" while we "mistakenly" call it "international passport". I was trying to point out we also call it just "passport" while they also call it "passport book"

jiggyman:
But u r more likely to be poisoned by someone close to u.

No matter how close I am with someone here,I wont eat there food compared to naija where u visit friends and food is offered

Just don't get too close to your mates you are doing better than. Be friends with your mates doing better than you (if you can stand the depression). They'll never poison you but it's not fun

I knew it was Trump's heaven, USA, before I even opened the thread

Brendaniel:
The moment you understand why Nigeria is the way it is today, you will be seeking the dissolution if you really love to have a country that works, except you don't seek to have a country that works...

But this is IMPOSSIBLE. Why not work towards somethings that is at least possible.
There is no consensus among any group (even Igbos) that there be separation. How do you separate people who don't want to be separated?

Wotowotoman:
Trash 🗑️

Hiw is it trash. In US the full name for passport is "passport book". In Nigeria the full name for passport is "international passport"

jiggyman:
At least, no body is gonna poison me because of envy.

Do you know how happy people are when enjoying, they loose guard!

That's the point - envious people (village people) can be anywhere and sometimes village people are not who you expect

SixSeven:
You are missing the point. They call passport the travel document while the photo is called passport photo. If you go to the embassy and they want your passport photo, they don't call it passport, they say PASSPORT PHOTOGRAPH. Nigerians will call it passport.

Same way, they call what we call international passport "passport book". Same way Nigerians sometimes call international passport just passport, they also call passport book just passport but the full name is passport book.

SeriouslySense:
This is why i stop from friendship. And i like pets

There is no friends only acquitances.

It's okay to have friends as long as they are doing better than you - if you can handle the depression

jiggyman:
.

Na mumu de go village

But village people can be waiting for you anywhere and in any country

SixSeven:
I was agreeing with you but I will not say Nigerians have a wonder because of the term INTERNATIONAL PASSPORT. I have to give consideration to the use of language.

In Nigeria, if you tell someone to bring their passport, they will bring a passport photograph for you. To distinguish the travel document from a passport, we call it international passport.

This is a function of language and I will not blame Nigerians for this use. After all, when travelling you are also told to affix a passport to some documents.

In Nigeria, ‘passport’ often refers to a passport photograph. This dual meaning likely explains why the travel document is commonly called an ‘international passport. This usage reflects a common phenomenon in sociolinguistics known as semantic extension, where a word acquires additional meanings within a particular speech community. In Nigeria, the term “passport” has evolved to also mean passport photograph in everyday usage. As a result of this dual meaning, speakers often specify “international passport” to distinguish the travel document from the photograph.

In contrast, in the UK and the US, “passport” retains a single meaning the official travel document while “passport photo” remains a fixed compound phrase. This difference explains how language adapts to local communicative needs rather than reflecting incorrect usage.

How does this below jive with your long thesis?

insidelife22:
No Matter where you go remember, village people are always waiting for you.

Also remember village people can be anywhere and that they can be waiting for you in any country

Fujiyama:
^^^
There's no such thing.

The word 'billionaire' doesn't have a different meaning in Nigeria. You are one or you are not. A billion is a real number.


^^^
You must be very familiar with Nigerian billionaires to speak so authoritatively about their real estate choices.



^^^

How do know this to be true?

In that case why were u questioning the use of the word. They ARE billionaires in Naira!

Yes I researched their primary and secondary esidencies

Fujiyama:
^^^
I did.



^^^
Terrible, terrible error.

'Billionaire artists and entrepreneurs'? I don't know of any billionaire artists. And billionaires are not necessarily invested in the greater good. In fact, there's a lot to suggest that they often work against the greater good.

'Billionaires' residing in Lagos doesn't translate to much in the grand scheme of things. And Lagos does screech to a halt once the rains start. You can tag or bookmark this thread and come back to it in the next 5 months.

We call extremely rich people "billionaires" in Nigeria. All the real (dollar) billionaires in Nigeria have residences in Lagos, and for most that's their primary residence.
I live in Lagos, you don't. Lagos never comes close to "grinds to a halt"

Fujiyama:
^^^
The 'foreigner' who wrote this piece is obviously emotionally invested in Lagos - and that's ok. (Even if he mysteriously spells Lagos with an 'e' ).

But the naked truth is that Lagos consistently ranks abysmally low on almost every liveability index you can think of. Hundreds of thousands of residents live daily lives of real misery. That simply cannot be denied.

So while Lagos may have a peculiar 'energy' (and all the other adjectives that supporters and fans describe the city with), it falls far short on the stuff that really matters - schools, roads, healthcare, public services etc. For example, every single year, the city grinds to a halt once the wet/rainy season starts. But supporters claim that the city has a vibe or zest - so perennial flooding doesn't matter.

Well, all that 'energy' or zest or vibe doesn't count when the basics of modern city life are still largely absent.

You obviously didn't read my previous screenshot of the beginning.
It is a VIDEO by a white guy. See the thumbnail below. What I posted is some of the transcript.
Which Lagos screeches to a halt?? You forget all the billionaire artists and entrepreneurs you read about all reside in Lagos

Fujiyama:
^^^


There are also foreigners with very uncomplimentary things to say about the same Lagos. The equation is now balanced.

Call a spade a spade. The violence during this festival simply reveals the truth about the real Lagos.

Cultural events of this nature are supposed to highlight all that is good, noble etc. They are not for celebrating pointless, mindless violence - violence which some people on here are bending over backwards to explain or justify.

There is nothing positive about this garbage.

But this is only a minuscule part of Lagos.
The foreigner continues below

Carndidlaydid:
Is it not Lagos

Very overrated state... Full of thugs and touts... Ireally don't know what people see in that state

Dirty environs... A friend of mine told me the last time he saw waste management people was last month showed me couple of pictures.. Iwept for the unhealthy state of Lagos that day...

This is like saying in Nigeria Boko Haram is everywhere. See below, what a foreigner has to say about Lagos on Youtube

ExudeLoveToAll:
No b small thing...life hard for man

Life hard for POOR man just as e hard for UNAPPEALING woman

Mosco100:
Thank God my own December is clean, by the Blood of Jesus.

Whoever coined that term is sick

abbey621:
Jews existed before the modern day Israel, you're just too ignorant to recall! I used the example of Catholics to show you how one religion can have multiple interpretations or belief system since you didn't realize Judaism could be traditional or reformist but once again another point that flew over your head!

Finally you said man's job is to impregnate and die yet he's expected to leave assets and have no say in how they're distributed....ARE YOU MENTALLY CHALLENGED? Use that chatgpt or Google to answer this simple question, who lived longer in the BC era, was it man or woman? You'll be shocked to know men actually outlived women so once again your nature argument is pure LAMBA.....Don't bother replying, your lack of intellect is comedic!

Merry Christmas. So you concede the Jew argument - we have determined that in today's Judaism you're accepted as a Jew only if your mother is a Jew but not your father. So also do other systems by the way - like embassies for immigration, a man has to prove marriage to the mother of the child he wants to immigrate, but a wonan doesn't have to. Simply because a man can have a whole village of children by women he's not married to, can even do it by donating sperm, but a woman can only have a few children.

As for the other point, we are discussing WHAT NATURE INTENDED!!!.
Originally (prehistorically) men used to have sex with a woman and walk away (as nature intended - marriage being man-made), so how will those children be his lineage and inherit from him? I'm awaiting your answer.
Merry Xmas.

abbey621:
You and whom discussed traditional Jew? Are you deliberately ignorant? You mentioned traditional and I gave you example of other types of Jews. I even gave you example of catholic and other denominations but your silly ass is hung up on a singular view rather than wholistic view. You keep mentioning nature without providing evidence aside from oh only women can guarantee that they're their children's mother.

Even biologically you must be MENT to believe a man that can impregnate a whole nieghborhood in one month is less of a controller than a woman that can bring a baby once or twice a year.

Fianlly, was this discussion not about inheritance? Let's bring it all back to who creates inheritance and controls it, you really think this was naturally intended to be a woman? you admitted the man hunts, builds house, basically creates all the assets yet the woman controls them? CLOWN TALK! Your argument of nature simply makes no DAMN SENSE!

Ok, you're indeed dense not just arguing. Either that or something is wrong with you. It is not about "many types of Jews". There is a jewish country called Israel. They accept people whose mothers are Jews but not fathers. I only gave that as example. Why are you throwing in Catholics, etc. Are you ok?

Once again, if Nature intended lineage to be by men it'd have made men the ones who bore the babies and raised them. As you said a man can impregnate a whole village and therfore won't have time for them. A woman has only a few and therefore takes good care of them. The man has many women while the woman has only one major man. Nature intended that the woman pass on to her children whatever the man left with her while the man has all his wealth in his women's houses with nothing for him to pass on. That's how Nature intended it. All the man' weath are with his wives and they pass them on to their children! That's what Nature obviously intended. Basically Nature intended that men be disposable. Their job is to impregnate as many women as possible then die. Lineage, inheritance, and all other things are meant to be through women. That's how NATURE intended it!

abbey621:
Again you ignored the premise that there are more than one type of Jew, traditional and reofrmed, just like we have Catholics, Deeper Life and others. Further, your scenario makes zero sense, if the hunter did not bring food home would there be anything to survive on? The house they're living, if he did not build it where would they sleep? Let me now burst your brain, women died way earlier in the olden days than men, from childbirth to simple infections, this is why it is not unusual to find many households with multiple wives.....Again I ask you, who is the true custodian here? Someone that cannot fend for themsleves or the provider?

I must say I asm highly disappointed, I expected you to bring factual evidence with a timestamp, for example an ancient civilization where inheritance was passed down the female line but all you seem to do is bring up conjecture.....STOP IT!

Either you are dense or you are just arguing for argument sake.
There can be a million types of Jews, what we are discussing is the majority traditional Jews!

The issue is not who brought what, the issue is how Nature intended things. Here is how Nature intended things: A man marries a woman or several women and also has concubines. He goes to their houses to get them pregnant and provide as much as he can and be a father figure to the children . Nature did not intend lineage to be through him but through the mothers. That's the only reliable real lineage there can be. "Children of one father" is dubious, "children of one mother" is NOT!

I am SURE my mother's mother is her mother and so forth, going all the way back to the beginning. But I'm not sure mother's father or anybody's father is their father. Gives you an idea what Nature intended!

abbey621:
You obviously are making up shit, which nature? Is it biblical, ancestrial or traditional? You need to be specific for me to understand where you're coming from? Name your starting point, even your example of Jew is misplaced at best and WRONG at worst. Are you a traditional Jew or a Reformed Jew? It's like catholic vs deeper life, same faith but different interpretations!

About the Jewish stuff, see below and be shocked.

My starting point? A man has to go out and hunt and gather and fight and DIE. He doesn't know which of his children are truly his and doesn’t really have that deep a bond with them and he's often away from home and likely soon die from one thing or another. Nature forces the woman to stay home and tend the next generation (which she is 100% certain are her children), and tend the homestead and tend what has been gathered and has fewer chances of dying. Please, honestly, who among the two did nature intend for the lineage (and therefore inheritance) to go by?

abbey621:
You're the one not applying common sense if you cannot distinguish between taking care of the home and being the custody of inheritance/home. I have input an exact query in Google to show you what you overlooked. You're wanting us to believe that women who couldn't own land or legally put their name on most assets as far back as 400BC were originally custodian of inheritance? Does that make sense to you?

You obviously did not carefully read what I wrote. I said NATURE intended it that way, but MEN changed it. Nature gave women everything that makes it natural that lineage and inheritance be matrilinial - because they are custodians of the home and because it's only the mother that is 100% sure is the mother of the children. Even today, you are a Jew only if your mother is a Jew NOT your father. Even so, see below