₦airaland Forum

'An inverted pyramid of piffle'

aisha2:
I was part of that conference, yes we know the problems and we are looking for solutions.

I hope the solutions don't include putting on designer glasses tinted by Rose. . . .or should I say tinted by NINS

McKren:
You know what??

America is equivalent to heaven and George W. Bush is Alfa and Omega.

Or rather,as you would prefer,America is evil and Bush is a demon.

I wonder how a request for proof led to an inane excuse of a satire.

Let me get this straight. . . . .Kwame Nkrumah,an iconic statesman?You wouldn't be saying that if you were one of the thousands of innocents locked up under the Preventive Detention Act.We are talking of man who declared Ghana a one-party state,who declared himself President for Life.A man whose Marxist leanings left Ghana poorer than it was before independence with mounting foreign debts and economic recession.

People love Nkrumah for being a spokesperson on Pan-Africanist ideals,however,the cliche,"action speaks louder than words" comes to mind when reflecting on Nkrumah.If a pedophile is a brilliant and eloquent spokesman on human rights issues,that doesn't mitigate the fact that he is still a pedophile.If a thieving dictatorial politician a la Nkrumah was a vocal Pan-Africanist,it still doesn't justify his thieving and dictatorial inclinations.

With respect to Mandela,the label of iconic statesman is more befitting.He embodied selfless leadership,a quality sorely lacking amongst Africa's leaders.However,his silence on the issue of HIV/AIDS while he was President has helped cost the lives of hundreds of thousands.

Another deserving African leader for me was Seretse Khama,Botswana's post-independence leader.He turned,one of the poorest countries in Africa into the fastest growing economy in the World between 1966 and 1980.He lent support to the Rhodesian militant movement and helped build a lasting democracy and one of Africa's strongest economies.

Tornadoz:
Do you really have to align yourself with the rascist to live there?

Do you have any other Neo-Nazis to cite for us?

Kobojunkie:
so how do they all become Christians and this war in iraq become a Christian versus islam war, according to Tornadoz ? Where do you come up with these CLAIMS @Tornadoz

Such people have disdain for facts.They draw conclusions that are baseless,having no relation to facts.We say that Bin Laden is motivated by religion and one of the obvious points is that there are no non-Muslims in Al Qaeda.

Kobojunkie:
Is Dick Cheney a Christian?? You mean all those gay dudes and atheists who happen to be right winged reps are christians too??

Even Karl Rove,"Bush's Brain,is an agnostic.Many members of Bush inner circle are not even Christian and a neo-conservative like Zalmay Khalilzad is a Muslim whereas Gen Abizaid is Arab. . . there are countless examples of members of the Christian Right who are not even Christian in the first place.

Tornadoz:
Christians will not carry placards cause we Christians are the "agent provocateur". We did the above for centuries and if muslims are carrying placards its because of christian provocation and you know it.

The first Crusade was launched in 1095AD,400 years after the first Jihad launched against the Byzantine Empire.Since Christians didn't attack Muslims untill 400 years after Muslims attacked Christians,one can see that Muslim provocation,not Christian provocation,precipitated the first round of Christian/Muslim strife.

Its a shame that when christians invade countries they expect the natives not to become terrorist, what a lame thought process the "Christian Right" have.

Terror by Muslims predates the birth of the US and there is no causal link between US invasion and Islamist terror.If not,Iraq would be the only state with terrorists.

Look inwards and you find the "Christian Right" is a lot more dangerous than all the muslim terrorist put together. "Christian Taliban George Bush" is busy fermenting trouble and terrorising the world, and what does the "Christian Right say? Nothing, they explain it away as democracy.

Yes,it was the Christian Right that killed 2 million in the Sudan and tens of thousands in Afghanistan during the Taleban rule.The Christian Right has been in existence for centuries,how many terror attacks have they mounted?

The easiest thing is to join the bandwagon in America and blame the muslims. Of the war raging aroud the world today, 90% has christian American involvement overtly or covertly.

That says more about your rabid anti-American paranoia than the real world.

@denex

The difference is that certain Shias,allegedly including Ahmedinejad, think they can precipitate the return of the 12th Imam by orchestrating chaos a la millenialist.The US president doesn't believe he can orchestrate the return of Jesus nor,more importantly,does he utilise the occasion of the UN General Assembly to lecture the world on the return of the Messiah.Whatever your beliefs,the UN is not the appropriate forum to to engage in a eulogy of your "Messiah".

Onye "allah" ka Loyalty bu

@WesleyenA

I reckon that if you have a high IQ,you can almost "afford" to be lazy,especially if you are born with a silverspoon -Bush scored 1206 on his SAT scores(at a time when a correlation with IQ scores existed.pre-1974)which is reckoned to give him an IQ between 125 and 129-http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1240592/posts

I should have changed my comments to laziness and below average IQ.You can manage without one if you compensate highly with the other but you can't manage without both.

churchill was a conservative in his youth and turned liberal when he became older.

Stated with the confidence cluelesness breeds.Churchill was never liberal,you may be confused by the fact that he joined the Liberal party,but that party has no correlation with what we now associate with leftist ideology.The Liberals were free-market ideologues,in today's society,Libertarian will be an apt description.

Churchill joined them because the Conservatives were dragging their foot instead of supporting free trade policies.However,Churchill still rejoined the Conservative Party in 1926 and remained a Tory until his death.

The quote is often attributed to him but there is little certainty about the source.

jagwar:
CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS?? i remember that didnt go too well in the US, even though it was planned for a sovereign country.

Introducing Soviet nuclear missiles into the US's next door neighbour is hardly comparable to mounting radar systems and other defensive systems in countries like Czech Republic and Poland who are not neighbouring states.These systems do not threaten Russia.

Comparing the Czech Republic to Cuba is absurd,even more absurd is comparing missile defense to nuclear weapons.

At the end of the day,one has to examine whether the US is to blame for Russia's lack of respect for many countries within the region.

This is what they call a sweet wind of change.In the past,people had to rely on friends and the net for information on Nigeria,but with the sweet wind of change blowing,we can now call upon traditional rulers to deliver such information to us.

denex:
It's not too bad. Just my left hand, arm, my left knee and the constant headaches. No broken bones and no internal injuries. At least not bad enough to start a thread on.

You sure say no be Bush want assassinate you? Speedy recovery. . . no allow those Jews silence you!

At least we are better than 18 nations on the continent.As OBJ reminded us,we are not as bad as Congo

jagwar:
It looks like the crisis in Iraq is not enough 4 this administration. The US is currently provoking Russia & Turkey -

*Meddling in their internal affairs
*Trying 2 set up a missile defence in Russian sphere of influence

[b]the result
*Turkey is currently preparing an invasion of northern Iraq to root out what it believes are terrorists.
*Russia is gradually resuming the arms race & the nuclear- cold war era (patrolling with long range bombers)
[/b]
& if i may add, there is a trade war going on between the US & China, & ofcourse tensions with Iran.

I may be wrong, but these look like the early stages of a world war. This may become more obvious when Europe begins to take sides.

One of the attributes of modern day discourse is to attribute to the US, responsibility for not just the actions of the US but the actions of others,be they nation states or terror groups.

So the US is responsible not just for invading,say Iraq, but for Turkey's decision to interfere in Northern Iraq,never mind that Turkey has done so before in the 90s and has constantly made incursions into that region.What about questioning the disgraceful way in which Turkey has been suppressing its Kurdish minority for decades?Not a word.Suddenly,the same people who criticize the US or Israel for breaching the sovereignty of other nations suddenly turn a blind eye to Turkey's actions and blame it on the US.

Suddenly,Eastern European nations like the Czech Republic and Poland, who have expressed a desire to host US missile defense systems have no right to do since the Czech Republic and Poland,wholly sovereign nations,are within Russia's "sphere of influence" and as such must obtain Russia's permission to host purely defensive weapons.What is the point of the concepts of sovereignty or independence,if nations like the 2,who were invaded and brutally occupied by Russia for decades,have to seek Russia's(their former occupier) permission to host defensive systems?

Trade wars between the US and China are also blamed on the US.Given that China has trade wars with pretty much every major trading nation or region on the planet,it is amazing that someone actually believes that the US is uniquely at fault.

To complete the list,tensions with Iran are cited.Of course,it was the US,not Iran, that made threats to wipe out another nation in the Middle East and currently occupies land belonging to the UAE.

What a simplistic view people have of international affairs.

The idealism of youth,Churchill was often quoted as saying-"If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain".

Ok,Winston erred a bit because I think the appropriate ages are 16 and 22 respectively.This aptly explains Wesleyan's leftist claptrap. . . . .with maturity she will get rid of the leftist piffle that she spouts in favour of a more cerebral approach to issues.

I think people are poor for two major reasons in the West-Laziness or below average intelligence.I believe all things being equal,those lacking the two aforementioned qualities have no reason to be poor in the long term while residing in the West.There is rarely a good reason for anyone, hardworking and possesing at least average intelligence,to be poor over the long term.Reasons of health or other extra-ordinary circumstances can impede your progress,beyond that,I see no good reason for persistent poverty.

Talk of Cesc Fábregas returning to his first club, Barcelona, moved on a step yesterday when his agent, Joseba Díaz, said he would listen to any offer from Camp Nou for Arsenal's influential midfielder.

Real Madrid have expressed interest in the 20-year-old but he has been linked in the Spanish press with the club where he learned his trade before joining Arsenal in 2003. "I have spoken with Cesc and we are not aware of any interest from Barça," Díaz said. "And if they do have interest . . . hopefully they do, because they are a great club who play great football and Cesc was very happy there."

[url]http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2190203,00.html[/url]

@Iykrion

Poverty is relative,relative to mean income in every economy.That way,poverty never ends in the West,so long as people earn below average income.

@his_grace a.k.a @labiyemmi

So you did your PHD at the age of 21?

I guess the Govt is trying to diversify the income stream away from a dependence on oil revenues.This is draconian way of doing it.What we need is a gradual development of other parts of the economy,not simply tripling consumption tax.

Most of the recent economic growth has been due to non-oil growth.A VAT increase slows down the economy and ultimately undermines the Govt's diversification objective.

vigasimple:
I think Hilary is a good person and will also be a good President. She earn it when she stand by husband in the middle of the verocious attack by the GOP during the Lewinski affair. She will also be in the unique position to get a friendly advise from a former President in out of Bed. A big shoulder to cry on when the though get going which surely will be.

Given her naked political ambitions,she had no choice but to stand by her husband.The Clintons were just as guilty for smearing their opponents.

There are loads of infinitely more qualified candidates outside of Obama/Clinton.Bill Richardson,John Edwards,John McCain,Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney are all better qualified.

Its between Fergie,Capello and Hitzfeld.

Ancelotti has had few years in management in which he has concentrated most of his efforts on winning the Champions League.Just this season,they have only won 2 games in Serie A. I believe if many other managers operated in that manner,they will be stacking up on titles in Europe as well.

At least you are robbed of ready excuses which you would have trotted out when the "Russian winter" envelopes the Gunners.

Once in a,Blatter,probably a victim of Jedi-Jedi,comes up with a hare brained idea to remind us that he is actually working in case we are doubtful.Obviously the idea won't come to fruition because of various legal,financial and political obtacles.

The idea will diminish the quality of many European Leagues.I guess Blatter,as FIFA President, has to think of the global game,not just Europe but it is debatable whether this measure would help countries in South America and Africa constantly hemorrhaging players.

The export of players,while detrimental to local leagues,has raised the standards for many national teams.The national team is after all zenith of football in any country.

In Europe,many clubs will struggle to compete-Someone pointed out that Shaktar Donestk won't be able to have beaten Celtic if they only had to depend on mostly Ukranian players.While there would be a general reduction in quality throughout Europe,the gap between the big footballing nations-Spain,Italy,Germany,France and England- and the rest would actually increase-clubs in Russia,Ukraine,Turkey,Scotland,Greece e.t.c just can't produce the players locally to compete.

debosky:
[b]are you saying Ronaldinho was not playing well at PSG? [/b]If he was an 'average player' why the heck did Barca buy him? I think all the Sallah meat is fuzzing up your hound brain.

Its like saying Ronaldo was an average player at PSV before going to Barca!

In his last season at PSG,he spent a good part of the season on the bench.It was clear that he had prodigious talent but he had too many run ins with Luis Fernandez who often responded by putting him on the bench.His form fluctuated wildly with his mood

That is a sharp contrast from Ronaldo who was outstanding at PSV.

jejelolatu:
Take kaka out of d a.c milan team,and it would be another story entirely.kaka controls d midfield,he dictates d pace of d game.unlike c.ronaldo,he cnt be easily marked out.it would take more than a gattuso or ashley cole to make him look ordinary. Kaka deserves to be named d nxt world player.

Kaka plays centrally where he can control the midfield unlike Ronaldo who plays on the flanks.

@Jackal

Did you hear about the 17 year old Partizan Belgrade striker we are supposed to be interested in?I think we should go for Karim Benzema,he is probably one of the best young striking prospect on the planet.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/football/karim-benzema.html

ocho cinco:
It smacks of Political opportunism as well but so did the initial push into Iraq which pleased his Religio-conservative supporters.

The suggestion that Bush's invasion of Iraq was political opportunism is risible.Polls done prior to the invasion all show that Bush's support fell amongst the Christian Right when the invasion was being mooted.There was no opportunity to be exploited amongst Evangelical Christians who are traditionally isolationist.Evangelical support for the war is based on their support for Bush not vice versa.

toshmann:
the move is going to work against US and middle east interests and only make the dems look a little bit confrontationally acceptable to their supporters

Dems are not in charge of foreign policy so they can afford to annoy who they want.During the Clinton Presidency,this measure would not have gained the support of Democrats even when they controlled Congress.

@Toshman

Then every war is a case of genocide for in every war,civilians die in large numbers.

toshmann:
correct (including saintly US/UK. They are even the worst perpetrators)

So you will prefer a world were genocide cannot be condemned?