₦airaland Forum

Sonnobax15:

Is your mother aware your sister has already clocked 31? .

You see this life . Funny life indeed.

A well educated man will marry a stark illiterate woman and upgrade her . But once reverse is the case, it'll look as if the whole world want to crash

Your family should be grateful to that man for at least agreeing to even settle down with someone whom menopause is already smiling at

So women in your village become perimenopausal at the age of 31? If that is the case then a platoon of gynaecologists need to visit your ancestral home in order to investigate. As a matter of urgency.

There was a story sometime back about a 15 year old autistic girl being assaulted in a store when she went shopping with her family. I don't know if this is a follow-up of the same story

TunezMediaBlog:
They are, Pharm Muna, her big sister, Dera who recently tied the knot and her baby brother, Emma 😭


https://www.tiktok.com/video/7658270014746709255?_r=1&_t=ZS-97kd2Mzkgz6

Lalasticlala Ishilove MissyB3 Fynestboi

Okay... I don't know them though. I don't even know the Nollywood 'star' they are related to

Axis313:
"Hitman"
He is one of the wrestlers that makes my childhood fun alongside the likes of Shawn Michael,Hulk Hogan, Edge, Batista, Rey Mysterio, Triple H, Steve Austin "Stone Cold", Bill Goldberg.
Happy birthday.

These men are not in the same generation.

Which nonsense crashing did he crash? How is selling fuel at 1k plus crashing??

GloriousGbola:
A drunk does not have the coordination to climb the empire state tho

_{You are just jealous because your center of gravity will not allow you to pull this stunt}

Mscheeeeeeeeeew

With a name like 'Beerkus', why won't they behave like drunks?

If not that Americans are overfed and spoilt, and thus have lost their common sense, tell me why it has to go all the way to the Supreme Court to be affirmed??

Still on the high side

190:
who ask you

Ask the gods

About time. The military drill was as useless as the 'p' in 'psycho'.

I have already reserved my username

GloriousGbola:

Let us pretend that we don't know...

Nword22:
Just an honest and intelligent conversation.

From Ngwaland we support this man effort and want replicate in Nigeria.

God bless us.

Indeed. The OP heading is a clickbait because there was no confrontation, but rather a civil monologue addressing some genuine concerns.

The man raised some genuine points though. Who are those abusing their hosts and saying they will rape their women and seize their lands? Those are the few bad eggs causing problems for the majority of the hardworking Nigerians.

However, this one sounds reasonable and enlightened, unlike the rabid xenophobes that have been looting and harassing people in the country.

cuffee:
at what age did you get married?

Ask the women in your family.

Illusioneffect:
Anyone who rewatches that film is sadomasochistic and the devil

What is the synopsis of the movie?

Engagement farming is a menace to modern day social media.

Brendaniel:
Apologies for the earlier remarks I made about you, I just got really provoked with your topic and comment... the message could have still been passed without the insults 🙏

No issues.

Samuell2019:
Voicemails for Isabelle 8/10

Loved it. Highly recommend

GloriousGbola:
this post is spambot compliant

I chose my words carefully 😂😂😂

The post has a source which I posted there, and I also made the observation that history in many forms can not be fully objective. Most students of history know the remote and immediate causes of the Crusades. There are several sides and each side will narrate events coloured with their own bias. This is the Islamic side. Anyone is free to disagree. It is your prerogative.

FreeStuffsNG:
There are some very interesting account in the "The Silk Roads: A New History of the World" by Oxford historian Peter Frankopan.

It will make you see the current crisis in modern day west Asia and the role played by China, Turkey, Russia, Italy and India/Pakistan as a cycle of history that goes way back.

Below is pix of my hardcopy of the book.

Thank you. I'll search out the hard copy.

sweetjohn:
Nonesense post. The crusade was formed as a reesult of the Muslim Ottoman Empire that were killing millions of Christians and jews in Europe and around the world. The European Christians then formed the crusade to teach Muslims a lesson and defend Christianity from extinction[s][/s]

You're missing the point. Yes, the Crusades did not arise in a vacuum; They were, in part, a response to years of conflict and Muslim expansion into Christian lands. But that doesn't mean they should be seen as some glorious or heroic campaign. They also involved massacres, brutality, and the suffering of countless innocent people. History is best understood with all its complexity, not through romanticised stories.

Like HeatSeeker pointed out up there, blood curdling, hair raising atrocities were committed on both sides.

Kobojunkie:
The Crusades did not begin in the first century AD. That's almost 10 centuries(1000 years) after the first century. And the crusades came after the Islamist warlords of Arabia had invaded and colonized the following lands, reducing much of the population to slave status:
⚈ Christian Egypt(Conquered between 639 - 642)
⚈ Christian Italy(even attacking Rome in 846)
⚈ Christian Libya (647 AD - 742 AD)
⚈ Christian Tinusia (647 AD - 742 AD)
⚈ Christian Algeria (647 AD - 742 AD)
⚈ Christian Morocco (647 AD - 742 AD)
⚈ Christian Cypress(even attacking Rome in 846)
⚈ Christian Crete (even attacking Rome in 846)
⚈ Christian Armenia (638 AD - 639 AD)
⚈ Christian Spain ( 711 AD - 714 AD)
⚈ Christian Portugal ( 711 AD - 714 AD)
⚈ Christian Byzantine/Turkey (Circa 8th century)
⚈ Christian Syria-Palestine( 634 AD - 641 AD) .

All of the above were regions that Islam invaded and colonized, enslaving and massacring its way through the Christian world. All of the above took place before the Christians, who then decided it was best they fought back if they were to survive the scourge.

I know when it began. That century thing confuses me a lot. 1095 is the ELEVENTH century, not FIRST 😂😂😂😂

HeatSeeker:
This comment was unnecessary

Actually, it isn't. I don't want anyone to start spamming the thread with "plz summarize".

I came across this very interesting post about the Christian crusades that began sometime in the first century AD.

The thing about history is this: it is difficult to come across a completely unbiased narration of events. I'll leave you to judge.

Kindly exit now if you have the attention span of a tweet.

The carnage unleashed by the Christian Crusaders upon the Islamic world they invaded, ostensibly to avenge the mistreatment of Christian pilgrims:

"When the first crusaders came trickling into the Muslim world, the locals had no idea who they were dealing with. Early on, they assumed the interlopers to be Balkan mercenaries working for the emperor in Constantinople. The first Muslim ruler to encounter them was a Seljuk prince, Kilij Arslan, who ruled eastern Anatolia from the city of Nicaea, about three days’ journey from Constantinople.

One day in the summer of 1096, Prince Arslan received information that a crowd of odd-looking warriors had entered his territory, odd because they were so poorly outfitted: a few did look like warriors, but the rest seemed like camp followers of some kind. Almost all wore a cross-shaped patch of red cloth sewn to their garments. Arslan had them followed and watched. He learned that these people called themselves the Franks; local Turks and Arabs called them al-Ifranj (“the Franj”).

The interlopers openly proclaimed that they had come from a distant western land to kill Muslims and conquer Jerusalem, but first they intended to take possession of Nicaea. Arslan plotted out the route they seemed to be taking, laid an ambush, and smashed them like so many ants, killing many, capturing many more, and chasing the rest back into Byzantine lands. It was so easy that he gave them no more thought.

He didn’t know that this “army” was merely the ragtag vanguard of a movement that would plague Muslims of the Mediterranean coast for another two centuries. While Urban had been speaking to the aristocracy up at the monastery, a vagabond named Peter the Hermit had been preaching the same message out on the streets. Urban had addressed nobles and knights, but presumably any Christian who went crusading could get the remission of sins the pope was offering, so Peter the Hermit was able to recruit from all classes—peasants, artisans, tradespeople, even women and children. His “army” left before the formal army could get organized, in part because his “army” didn’t feel much need to get organized. They were off to do God’s work; surely God would take care of the arrangements. It was these tens of thousands of cobblers, butchers, peasants and the like that Kilij Arslan succeeded in crushing.

The next year, when Kilij Arslan heard that more Franj were coming, he dismissed the threat with a shrug. But the Crusaders in this next wave were real knights and archers led by combat-hardened military commanders from a land where the combat never stopped. Arslan’s engagement with them came down to a battle of lightly clad mobile horseman firing arrows at the armored tanks that were the medieval knights of western Europe. The Turks picked off the Franj foot soldiers, but the knights formed defensive blocks that arrows could not penetrate and kept moving slowly, ponderously, and inexorably forward. They took Arslan’s city and sent him running to one of his relatives for refuge. The knights then split up, some heading inland toward Edessa, the rest heading down the Mediterranean coast toward Antioch.

The king of Antioch sent a desperate appeal to the king of Damascus, a man named Daquq. The king of Damascus wanted to help, but he was nervous about his brother Ridwan, the king of Aleppo, who would swoop in and grab Damascus if Daquq were to leave it. The ruler of Mosul agreed to help, but he got distracted fighting someone else along the way, and when he did arrive—late—he got into a fight with Daquq who had also finally arrived—late—and these two Muslim forces ended up going home without helping Antioch at all. From the Muslim side, this was the story of the early Crusades: a tragicomedy of internecine rivalry played out in city after city. When Antioch fell, the knights took vengeance for the city’s resistance with some indiscriminate killing, and then kept heading south, towards a city called Ma’ara.

Knowing what had happened at Nicaea and Antioch, the Ma’arans were terrified. They too sent urgent messages to nearby cousins, begging for help, but their cousins were only too glad to see the wolves from the west batter Ma’ara, each one hoping to absorb the city for himself once the Franj had blown by. So Ma’ara had to face the Franj alone.

The Christian knights set siege to the city and reduced it to desperation— but in the process reduced themselves to desperation as well, because they ate every scrap of food in the vicinity and then commenced to starve. Obviously, no one was going to feed these invaders, and that was the problem with setting a long siege in a strange land.

At last Franj leaders sent a message into the city assuring the people of Ma’ra that none of them would be harmed if they simply opened their gates and surrendered. The city notables decided to comply. But once the Crusaders made it into Ma’ara, they did more than slaughter. They went on a frightening rampage that included boiling adult Muslims up for soup and skewering Muslim children on spits, grilling them over open fires, and eating them.

I know this sounds like horrible propaganda that the defeated Muslims might have concocted to slander the Crusaders, but reports of Crusader cannibalism in this instance come from Frankish as well as Arab sources. Frankish eyewitness Radulph of Caen, for example, reported on the boiling and grilling. Albert of Aix, also present at the conquest of Ma’ara, wrote, “Not only did our troops not shrink from eating dead Turks and Saracens; they also ate dogs!” What strikes me about this statement is the implication that eating dogs was worse than eating Turks, which makes me think that this Franj, at least, considered Turks a different species from himself.

Amazingly enough, even after this debacle, the Muslims could not unite. Examples abound. The ruler of Homs sent the Franj a gift of horses and offered them advice about what they might sack next (not Homs). The Sunni rulers of Tripoli invited the Franj to make common cause with them against the Shi’i. (Instead, the Franj conquered Tripoli.)

When the Crusaders first arrived, the Egyptian vizier al-Afdal sent a letter to the Byzantine emperor, congratulating him on the “reinforcements” and wishing the Crusaders every success! Egypt had long been locked in a struggle with both the Seljuks and the Abbasids, and al-Afdal really thought the newcomers would merely help his cause. It didn’t seem to dawn on him until too late that he himself might be in the line of pillage.

After the Franj conquered Antioch, the Fatimid vizier wrote to them to ask if there was anything he could do to help. When the Franj moved against Tripoli, Afdal took advantage of the distraction to assert control of Jerusalem in the name of the Fatimid khalifa. He posted his own governor there and assured the Franj they were now welcome to visit Jerusalem anytime as honored pilgrims: they would have his protection. But the Franj wrote back to say they were not interested in protection but in Jerusalem, and they were coming “with lances raised.”

The Franj marched through largely empty country, for their reputation had preceded them. Rural folks had fled at their approach, and small towns had emptied into larger cities with higher walls for protection. Jerusalem had some of the highest walls around, but after a forty-day siege, the Crusaders tried the same gambit they had run successfully at Ma’ara—open the gates, no one will be harmed, they told the citizens—and it worked here too.

Upon securing this city, the Franj indulged in an orgy of bloodletting so drastic it made all the previous carnage seem mild. One crusader, writing about the triumph, described piling up heads, hands, and feet in the streets. (He called it a “wonderful sight.”) He spoke of crusaders riding through heathen blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Edward Gibbon, the British historian who chronicled the fall of the Roman Empire, said the Crusaders killed seventy thousand people here over the course of two days. Of the city’s Muslims, virtually none survived.

The city’s Jewish denizens took refuge in their gigantic central synagogue, but while they were in there praying for deliverance, the Crusaders blockaded all the doors and windows and set fire to the building, burning up pretty much the entire Jewish community of Jerusalem in one fell swoop. The city’s native Christians did not fare so well either. None of them belonged to the Church of Rome but to various Eastern churches such as the Greek, Armenian, Coptic, or Nestorian. The crusading Franj looked upon them as schismatics bordering on heresy, and since heretics were almost worse than heathens, they confiscated the property of these eastern Christians and sent them into exile."

~ Source: Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes by Tamim Ansary

It was all about context.

Don't know him

helinues:
See the innocent advise oo, they will start to be attacking the first lady

You can remain in the abject poverty if her advise don't make sense to you

No be everything una need to be wailing, nagging and hitting your head on the wall for

Oya carry basin and groundnut oil come to the roadside so that you can start frying akara, since what she said makes sense to you.

naptu2:
Israel? How many times has Israel attacked ISIS?

I really don't care, my love. As long as they are jihadists, I lump all of them in the same category