₦airaland Forum

ok' i am not KX. so i ddint make any allegations.
now as to the people looking into a box, they looked into what was more than a box, they looked into the ARK OF COVENANT. with israel
before i go further, i would like to assume that we have finished thrashing the issue of the topic right else why would you need to derail

Those that pry into what is forbidden, and come too near to holy fire, will find it is at their peril. that was a symbol in which the HIGH PRIEST of israel could look upon only once a year through a cloud of incense. for some people to just pry into it and think nothing will happen is simply funny.
it's simply, when impurity faces fire, it is consumed!!!

you clearly don't have any clue of what an analogy is.
second you arent thinking
third, God is not a man. yes he is not. DId i say he was?

LagosShia:
i do not engage into personal contests and confrontation.i need not to do that when i am armed with bible verses that can send shivers down your spine and shake the very essence of your so called christian faith.
i base my arguments on facts and particularly bible verses.

according to the same bible itself as illustrated by Paul,[s]the usefulness of any scripture is based on four things:[/s]

1.) Teaching
2.) Condemnation reprimand/reproof
3.) Correction
4.) Righteousness instruction in righteousness

(2Timothy 3:16)

you can kindly enlighten us to which of the four categories do the Indecency.graphic verses fit and are useful.thanks.

i'll paste that scripture in two bible translations KING JAMES VERSION kjv and CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH VERSION CEV
Everything in the Scriptures is God's Word. All of it is useful for teaching and helping people and for correcting them and showing them how to live. CEV
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: KJV

CLEARLY WE SEE THAT THE USEFULNESS OF SCRIPTURE IS NOT BASED ON FOUT THINGS. IN CASE YOU SKIPPED ELEMENTARY ENGLISH, LEMME HELP
IF I SAY THE ENTIRETY OF A CAR IS USEFUL FOR DRIVING, SITTING AND SLEEPING, DOES THAT MEAN THAT'S ALL THE CAR'S USEFUL FOR? CAN IT NOT CARRY LUGGAGE AND THE REST?

NOW TO YOUR ISSUES. YOU MAY NOTICE I NOTICED AND CANCELED YOUR POINT 2. I CHALLENGE YOU TO SHOW ME ANY BIBLE THAT TELLS YOU THAT IT IS FOR CONDEMNATION, DON'T BOTHER, YOU SIMPLY WONT FIND.

I WILL USE TWO STORIES TO ESTABLISH MY POINT
1. LOT AND HIS DAUGHTERS: it TEACHES me to raise my children properly; it REPROOFS me when i am directed by the lust of my eyes ( back up a lil on lot's story and you'll see how he landed in sodom in the first place) it CORRECTS me; it INSTRUCTS me in RIGHTEOUSNESS not to allow my self to become drunk/useless such as to do wrong and not be aware of it

2. ONAN: it TEACHES of God's plan to raise a wholesome community, whereby a man's name will not be erased and forgotten; it REPROOFS from wickedness, onan could have refused publicly but he didnt yet he didn't try to raise his brother's heir; I'm sure you see how it CORRECTS in the severity of the punishement GOd gives and INSTRUCTS me in RIGHTEOUSNESS, do not shy away from doing the right thing even if you dont benefit

FINALLY, HOW THESE NOW DRIVES YOU TO LUST SHOWS A LITTLE SOMETHING ABOUT THE WAY YOU THINK!!!

I THINK KNOW YOU ARE MISTAKEN. I HAVEN'T MADE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST YOUR PROPHET. DEFINITELY NOT KNIGHT1. AND AS FOR THE PASSAGE YOU QUOTED, FIRST OF ALL, THAT WILL NOT BE MY PORTION IN JESUS NAME. SECOND, I'M HAPPY YOU ARE ADMITTING THAT I'M DOING SOMETHING CORRECT BY THE VERY FACT THAT YOU QUOTED THAT PASSAGE. GOD BLESS YOU

LagosShia:
sir,the burden of proof lies on you to prove your accusations against our Prophet (sa).many threads have failed in doing that.and if by "submission" you mean the verse of killing underage boys,then that has being discussed.

and if you accuse me of "avoiding your submission" refers to me quoting the bible of massacre of more than 50,000 people at once,for your pleasure,you should know that you have done likewise by bringing in the name of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (sa) into this discussion.this thread is about the killing by your bible god of underage boys.it has nothing to do with Islam.

if you want to again deny your bible as regards 1 SAMUEL 18:25-27,then you can do it here.i need not open another thread.you are using the name of your "god" (Jesus) invain.you're cheering over what you see as my crime for quoting another verse of the bible,but you didn't see that with the same eye when you provocatively made false allegations against our Prophet (sa).so the power of Jesus is indeed defeating you and making you confuse.that is the result of what Jesus said here:

Matthew 7:22
"Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?''

dont be too excited.emotions do not add reason to your word.

whatever you have to say,should not be even directed towards me because i opened a thread solely based on two bible verses.i did not add anything.you guys came up with your explanations to deny what your bible is declaring.

PLUS I THINK CAN OFFICIALLY CHANGE YOUR SIGNATURE TO ANOTHER SET OF 'MUSINGS' WHICH WE WILL BE HAPPY TO CLARIFY

LagosShia:
the meaning of that word has being clarified.those boys were not adults regardless how hard you try to manipulate the verse to cover for your shame.



I am still waiting for the Christian that would come and present to me just one instance to break the world record of your Bible god who killed more than 50,000 people at a go for looking into a box.that record is unbeatable even by Hitler:

1 Samuel 18:25-27
Then Saul said,“Thus shall you say to David,‘The king desires no bride-price except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that he may be avenged of the king’s enemies.’” Now Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king’s son-in-law. Before the time had expired, David arose and went, along with his men, and killed two hundred of the Philistines. And David brought their foreskins, which were given in full number to the king, that he might become the king’s son-in-law. And Saul gave him his daughter Michal for a wife.

DID YOU NOT SEE THE BOLDED WHEN YOU WERE READING IT?


THEN CAN YOU PLEASE GIVE ME THE REFERENCE FOR  WHERE FIFTY THOUSAND PEOPLE WERE KILLED FOR LOOKING INTO A BOX? I CAN'T SEEM TO FIND IT

LEMME ASK YOU SOMETHING. YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER O, JUST THINK ABOUT IT

IN YOUR THINKING, WHAT IS THAT THING THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD TO DO? HOW DID GOD CREATE THE FIRST MAN? IF GOD CREATED MAN AND WOMAN, YOU THINK HE CANNOT CREATE ANOTHER MAN?

now to your issue, i will like to make use of what is known as analogy
there is something called MITOSIS in biology
cell division: the process by which a cell divides into two daughter cells, each of which has the same number of chromosomes as the original cell.
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

if a cell (biologically, the basic unit of living things) which we shall name Baba undergoes a process of mitosis and becomes two cells, Baba and Bobo, which are equal in identity and content, it means Baba=Bobo abi?
now if Baba, though equal to Bobo calls Bobo a Son, would that be wrong/ incorrect?
NOW THAT'S JUST BIOLOGY, THINK ABOUT IT AND REFER TO MY QUESTION TO YOU?

WHAT IS THAT THING THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD?

LagosShia:
you need to read the verse again so next time you wouldn't be adding your own words into it.

common man!!!
just accept that you were wrong on this one and move on.

Knight1:
First of all
that chapter is part of what we today will call penal code. for judges. you may actually enjoy the read. as a matter of fact i wonder how come you raised the question on onanism

here is a very severe but just law to punish impudence and immodesty. 1. The instance of it is confessedly scandalous to the highest degree. A woman could not do it unless she were perfectly lost to all virtue and honour. 2. The occasion is such as might in part excuse it; it was to help her husband out of the hands of one that was too hard for him. Now if the doing of it in a passion, and with such a good intention, was to be so severely punished, much more when it was done wantonly and in lust.[i][/i] 3. The punishment was that her hand should be cut off; and the magistrates must not pretend to be more merciful than God: Thy eye shall not pity her. Perhaps our Saviour alludes to this law when he commands us to cut off the right hand that offends us, or is an occasion of sin to us. Better put the greatest hardships that can be upon the body than ruin the soul for ever. Modesty is the hedge of chastity, and therefore ought to be very carefully preserved and kept up by both sexes.

NEXT THREAD!!!!!!!!!!

does that look like (added) scripture; a simple explanation of what you don't understand. first you accuse me of promoting lust, later you say i'm double mouthed, now i'm adding to scripture?
just read this thing and see how funny you sound.
my advise? run away and create another thread where you will receive a befitting answer from me or someone else!

two mouths?
i only highlighted that from my first reply since you seem not to have understood it. feel free to read it again.

you have not commented on my submission. actually you have, by avoiding it and raising another issue. put it in a new thread and by the Power of Jesus Christ, it shall be defeated!!

LagosShia:
i am not interested in even wasting my time to reply you line by line especially after this:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-736626.0.html#msg9679128

all i have to make you realize are the following points:

1.) Men of God who are praised and blessed by the same God are either engaging themselves or are engaged in immorality.
2.) these narrations found in the so called "word of God" (bible) which is believed to be "inspired" are inspiring and promoting lust and immorality.
3.) your "lord and saviour",Jesus,is reported to be from a lineage of adultery,pros.titution and in.cest as the action of Judah exhibits.

lemme guess? if it were to be you, you'd bring him from the lineage of people who have never sinned right?
from the righteous clan and ancestry of LagosShia shey?
and how those stories make you lust and tend to immorality really amazes me. you may have to look inward to know the actual 'inspiration' of lust in you

PS. you may check that thread you posted and the others. your answer await you!

LagosShia:
WHICH WOMAN ON EARTH THAT IS TRYING TO SAVE THE LIFE OF HER HUSBDAN WOULD BE JUDGED AS BEING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF LUST WHEN HER HUSBAND'S LIFE IS IN DANGER? IN WHICH COURT IS THAT? THAT RIDICULOUS FOOLISHNESS CAN ONLY BE EXPLAINED BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU.AMAZING!!! IF THE WOMAN IS INFLUENCED BY LUST FOR THE MAN TRYING TO KILL HER HUSBAND,SHE WOULD ACTUALLY ALLOW THE MAN TO KILL HER HUSBAND.THEN THE CRIMINAL WOULD EITHER RA.PE HER AND EXHAUST THE LUST BURNING IN HER CHEST OR SHE WOULD GO AFTER HIM HERSELF.BUT WE HAVE THE CASE OF A WOMAN HITTING A MAN ON HIS PRIVATE PARTS TO SAVE THE LIFE OF HER OWN BELOVED HUSBAND.IS THAT A WOMAN DRIVEN BY LUST? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR SENSES

People have long ignored this thread.it better for it to be ignored than for you to post rubbish.

YOU KNOW YOU COULD HAVE JUST KEPT QUIET INSTEAD OF REPLYING AND SHOWING IGNORANCE.I'M SURE YOU THOUGHT YOU HAD FOUND A WAY OF ESCAPING THE POINT. READ THE BOLDED PART AGAIN
Now if the doing of it in a passion, and with such a good intention, was to be so severely punished, much more when it was done wantonly and in lust.

lemme try really simple english
if a woman does that in pure interest of her husband, she is to lose her arm TALKLESS/ NOT TO NOW EVEN IMAGINE THE extreme possibilty of lacking in restraint as to grab a man's privates.

if a woman wants to defend her husband, there are several parts of a man to attack, even men with sense don't grab each other's privates when fighting

First of all
that chapter is part of what we today will call penal code. for judges. you may actually enjoy the read. as a matter of fact i wonder how come you raised the question on onanism

here is a very severe but just law to punish impudence and immodesty. 1. The instance of it is confessedly scandalous to the highest degree. A woman could not do it unless she were perfectly lost to all virtue and honour. 2. The occasion is such as might in part excuse it; it was to help her husband out of the hands of one that was too hard for him. Now if the doing of it in a passion, and with such a good intention, was to be so severely punished, much more when it was done wantonly and in lust.[i][/i] 3. The punishment was that her hand should be cut off; and the magistrates must not pretend to be more merciful than God: Thy eye shall not pity her. Perhaps our Saviour alludes to this law when he commands us to cut off the right hand that offends us, or is an occasion of sin to us. Better put the greatest hardships that can be upon the body than ruin the soul for ever. Modesty is the hedge of chastity, and therefore ought to be very carefully preserved and kept up by both sexes.

NEXT THREAD!!!!!!!!!!

YOU SEE AGAIN THAT OUR GOD IS ONE OF MERCY AND FORGIVES THOSE WHO GENUINELY REPENT. HE IS AWARE THAT OUR HUMANITY CAUSES US TO BE FRAIL AND DO WRONG BUT WHEN WE TRULY DESPISE OUR SINS HE CLEANSES US AND MAKES US ABSOLUTELY WHOLE AGAIN.

YOUR REMAINING POINTS ARE SIMILAR SO I WILL GO THROUGH THEM TOGETHER.
FOR ABSALOM, AMMNON etc, they were doing bad and it is not in doubt, if you expect GOd to tell you sweet sweet stories, you are wrong. all these are given for us to learn from the mistakes of others and avoid them.

Finally,which is the best part of it all ,David killed a loyal man, took his wife. very very baaaad! in man's eyes, such a one is beyond redemption no matter what he does. and that's how we know that God's ways are not our ways. something happened in that story, David truly repented and sought GOd and GOd blessed him.
a strong man is not one who has never fallen, he is one who can rise again after falling;


NEXT THREAD!!!!

1. The case of "Lot's incestous encouter"- the problem with most people who try to attack the bible is that you people fail to read the whole of even the chapters you want to defame. those girls did what they did without their father's knowledge or consent.
they had lived in Sodom and had been raised there. now they gave birth to sons namely Moab and Benammi(ammonites), if you continue to follow the story of moab and ammon in the bible you will understand that GOd considered them an abomination and repeatedly commanded the Israel not to have anything with them. Hence we have established that God doesnt condone incest!
Num_24:17 I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.
Ezr_9:1 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations[size=8pt][/size], even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites.

2.Reuben and his father's wife- Again because you always fail to read the complete story, your arguement falls through again
Gen 49:1 And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.
Gen 49:2 Gather yourselves together, and hear, ye sons of Jacob; and hearken unto Israel your father.
Gen 49:3 Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power:
Gen 49:4 Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel; because thou wentest up to thy father's bed; then defiledst thou it: he went up to my couch.
that curse came to pass such that the tribe of Reuben almost got wiped out until Moses prayed for mercy upon them, infact nobody of repute ever came from that tribe
AGAIN GOD DOESN'T CONDONE IMMORALTY

3. jUDAH AND TAMAR:
Genesis 38:12-23
It is a very ill-favoured story that is here told concerning Judah; one would not have expected such folly in Israel. Judah had buried his wife; and widowers have need to stand upon their guard with the utmost caution and resolution against all fleshly lusts. He was unjust to his daughter-in-law, either through negligence or design, in not giving her his surviving son, and this exposed her to temptation.
I. Tamar wickedly prostituted herself as a harlot to Judah, that, if the son might not, the father might raise up seed to the deceased. Some excuse this by suggesting that, though she was a Canaanite, yet she had embraced the true religion, and believed the promise made to Abraham and his seed, particularly that of the Messiah, who was to descend from the loins of Judah, and that she was therefore thus earnestly desirous to have a child by one of that family that she might have the honour, or at least stand fair for the honour, of being the mother of the Messiah. And, if this was indeed her desire, it had its success; she is one of the four women particularly named in the genealogy of Christ, Mat_1:3. Her sinful practice was pardoned, and her good intention was accepted, which magnifies the grace of God, but can by no means be admitted to justify or encourage the like. There was a great deal of plot and contrivance in Tamar's sin. 1. She took an opportunity for it, when Judah had a time of mirth and feasting with his sheep-shearers. Note, Time of jollity often prove times of temptation, particularly to the sin of uncleanness; when men are fed to the full, the reins are apt to be let loose. 2. She exposed herself as a harlot in an open place, Gen_38:14. Those that are, and would be, chaste, must be keepers at home, Tit_2:5. It should seem, it was the custom of harlots, in those times, to cover their faces, that, though they were not ashamed, yet they might seem to be so. The sin of uncleanness did not then go so barefaced as it does now.
II. Judah was taken in the snare, and though it was ignorantly that he was guilty of incest with his daughter-in-law (not knowing who she was), yet he was willfully guilty of fornication: whoever she was, he knew she was not his wife, and therefore not to be touched. Nor was his sin capable, in the least, of such a charitable excuse as some make for Tamar, that though the action was bad the intention possibly might be good. Observe, 1. Judah's sin began in the eye (Gen_38:15): He saw her. Note, Those have eyes, and hearts too, full of adultery (as it is 2Pe_2:14), that catch at every bait that presents itself to them and are as tinder to every spark. We have need to make a covenant with our eyes, and to turn them from beholding vanity, lest the eye infect the heart. 2. It added to the scandal that the hire of a harlot (than which nothing is more infamous) was demanded, offered, and accepted - a kid from the flock, a goodly price at which her chastity and honour were valued! Nay, had the consideration been thousands of rams, and ten thousand rivers of oil, it had not been a valuable consideration. The favour of God, the purity of the soul, the peace of conscience, and the hope of heaven, are too precious to be exposed to sale at any such rates; the Topaz of Ethiopia cannot equal them: what are those profited that lose their souls to gain the world? 3. It turned to the reproach of Judah that he left his jewels in pawn for a kid. Note, Fleshly lusts are not only brutish, but sottish, and ruining to men's secular interests. It is plain that whoredom, as well as wine, and new wine, takes away the heart first, else it would never take away the signet and the bracelets.
III. He lost his jewels by the bargain; he sent the kid, according to this promise, to redeem his pawn, but the supposed harlot could not be found. He sent it by his friend (who was indeed his back-friend, because he was aiding and abetting in his evil deeds) the Adullamite, who came back without the pledge. It is a good account (if it be but true) of any place which they here gave, there is no harlot in this place; for such sinners are the scandals and plagues of any place. Judah sits down content to lose his signet and his bracelets, and forbids his friend to make any further enquiry after them, giving this reason, lest we be shamed, Gen_38:23. Either, 1. Lest his sin should come to be known publicly, and be talked of. Fornication and uncleanness have ever been looked upon as scandalous things and the reproach and shame of those that are convicted of them. Nothing will make those blush that are not ashamed of these. 2. Lest he should be laughed at as a fool for trusting a strumpet with his signet and his bracelets. He expresses no concern about the sin, to get that pardoned, only about the shame, to prevent that. Note, There are many who are more solicitous to preserve their reputation with men than to secure the favour of God and a good conscience; lest we be shamed goes further with them than lest we be damned.
CREDIT: HENRY COMMENTARY

@Poster
i really don't get your point. Is it that the Prophet( and GOd) was too harsh in killing those children?

those children/young men brought the curses upon themselves. Would you as a person raise your own children to mock Men of GOd?
Read 2 Chronicles 36:16. the mocking was a commonplace sin of Isreal
The little children of Bethel, the boys and girls that were playing in the streets went out to meet him, not with their hosannas, as they ought to have done, but with their scoffs; they gathered about him and mocked him, as if he had been a fool, or one fit to make sport with. Among other things that they used to jeer the prophets with, they had this particular taunt for him, Go up, thou bald head, go up, thou bald head. It is a wicked thing to reproach persons for their natural infirmities or deformities; it is adding affliction to the afflicted; and, if they are as God made them, the reproach reflects upon Him. But this was such a thing as scarcely deserved to be called a blemish, and would never have been turned to his reproach if they had had any thing else to reproach him with. It was his character as a prophet that they designed to abuse. The honour God had crowned him with should have been sufficient to cover his bald head and protect him from their scoffs. They bade him go up, perhaps reflecting on the assumption of Elijah: “Thy master,” they say, “has gone up; why dost not thou go up after him? Where is the fiery chariot? When shall we be rid of thee too?” These children said as they were taught; they had learned of their idolatrous parents to call foul names and give bad language, especially to prophets. These young cocks, as we say, crowed after the old ones. Perhaps their parents did at this time send them out and set them on, that, if possible, they might keep the prophet out of their town. 2. A specimen of that ruin which came down upon Israel at last, for misusing God's prophets, and of which this was intended to give them fair warning. Elisha heard their taunts, a good while, with patience; but at length the fire of holy zeal for God was kindled in his breast by the continued provocation, and he turned and looked upon them, to try if a grave and severe look would put them out of countenance and oblige them to retire, to see if he could discern in their faces any marks of ingenuousness; but they were not ashamed, neither could they blush; and therefore he cursed them in the name of the Lord, both imprecated and denounced the following judgment, not in personal revenge for the indignity done to himself, but as the mouth of divine justice to punish the dishonour done to God. His summons was immediately obeyed. two she-bears (bears perhaps robbed of their whelps) came out of an adjacent wood, and presently killed forty-two children, 2Ki_2:24. Now in this, (1.) The prophet must be justified, for he did it by divine impulse. Had the curse come from any bad principle God would not have said Amen to it. We may think it would have been better to have called for two rods for the correction of these children than two bears for the destruction of them. But Elisha knew, by the Spirit, the bad character of these children. He knew what a generation of vipers those were, and what mischievous enemies they would be to God's prophets if they should live to be men, who began so early to be abusive to them. He intended hereby to punish the parents and to make them afraid of God's judgments. (2.) God must be glorified as a righteous God, that hates sin, and will reckon for it, even in little children. Let the wicked wretched brood make our flesh tremble for fear of God. Let little children be afraid of speaking wicked words, for God notices what they say,. Let them not mock any for their defects in mind or body, but pity them rather; especially let them know that it is at their peril if they jeer God's people or ministers, and scoff at any for well-doing. Let parents, that would have comfort in their children, train them up well, and do their utmost betimes to drive out the foolishness that is bound up in their hearts; for, as bishop Hall says, “In vain do we look for good from those children whose education we have neglected; and in vain do we grieve for those miscarriages which our care might have prevented.” Elisha comes to Bethel and fears not the revenges of the bereaved parents; God, who bade him do what he did, he knew would bear him out. !!!!
Credit to Henry Commentary of Esword

lets move on to your next, err question/thread shall we?

this whole fuel subsidy removal thing is just fraud and it doesnt take serious arithmetic to detect it
PPPRA has said NIgerians consume between 32-35 million litres daily
http://www.nigerianbestforum.com/generaltopics/?p=54187

however dezianni claims we have spent 1.4 trillion on subsidy this year
divide 1.4tn by the N80 paid per litre, we get 17.5billion. divide that by (365-30 days of december)335 days,
means NIgeria pays for 52.2million litres per day!!!!

Where does the ( 52.2-35 =)17.2 million litres per day go?
that is the question our NASS should be asking!!!!!!!!!!!!

OP,
a revolution must have a leader, and one without any baggage at that.
If i wake up today and say i want to start a revolution, how many people will follow me? perhaps less than hundred, simply because the public doesnt know my credentials.
now in nigeria, which person can is both popular and righteous/credible enough to start (and fund too, cos revolters must eat)?
buhari? most people belive he has deep islamic tendencies/ too old--------------baggage
Falana? close to ACN/ defends corrupt governors --------------------------baggage
Dora? don't even get me started

the truth is at this stage, a revolutionn may never happen in Nigeria, and it isn't because the 'average nigerian youth' is a coward, i personally believe a lot are ready to die but the truth remains they'll likely die in vain!!!!
to drive change in Nigeria, we must look to peaceful means e.g why can't a group of young Nigerians decide to monitor each ministry through the use of FOI, constistently monitor their expenses and probably put them online for our numerous accountants to analyse? say 500 people take petroleum and all of it's depts and agencies, another takes police affairs, then we probably will drive a change we want.

are all our govt officials suffering from one illness or the other?
just arrest them and you start hearing all sorts of medical jargons

revolution? nah!!!!!!!
occupy protests? very possible

roughneck:
Both presenters from project fame, Joseph Benjamin and Dare Art Alade can do d trick

nice line of thinking. though i think they both express too much emotion on their faces to be James Bond

didn't Ndume just join the PDP? If the PDP had been sponsoring them all along and nowNdume is the chief financier ( a former enemy), just doesn't really add up

HE's seeing it the wrong way. It's more like tell-him-the-plain-truth syndrome!

okay. time to really tighten security cos those BH idiots are going to try and retaliate

when does this guy's tenure end please?

lol at all the comments

however i believe this thread is not for grammatical errors (therefore MrsJOnathan can be mercifully excluded + she is not a real leader in the sense of it)
it is for people who in all grammatical correctness have made spectacularly stupid statements
e.g Terrorism is a global phenomenon-you know who
WHen you fight corruption it fights back -Farida

that's actually a good price! hapi sales

mustspin:
@ op, wetin concern u for the PDP award wey dem do na, are u a party member?

MOST LIKELY THEY THOUGHT THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT THING HE HAS DONE IS THE ELECTIONS, FORGETTING HIS ACHIEVEMENTS AS ASUU PREZ. ANYWAY, THESE DAYS IT IS MORE HONOURABLE NOT TO HAVE A NATIONAL AWARD SEF

[quote author=Xavier. link=topic=805350.msg9576937#msg9576937 date=1321533151]What have we gotten ourselves into?[/quote]loool

I THINK IT'LL BE DIFFICULT FOR MOST PEOPLE TO ARTICULATE WHAT THEY DIDN'T IMAGINE OR EVEN ENVISAGE. JUST WHAT WAS EXPLAINED TO THEM. MOST PEOPLE, NOT ALL THOUGH.

why don't you just talk with him?

notice i ddnt say rake for him o. just civil adult to adult talk

philipinho:
Fhemmmy, I week for you too o.

you no serious

honeric01:
Alot of these women did do stuffs like this to put their kids through school. i am so moved by them all.

i went to vio hq abuja. although now that the house of reps has halted the process for now, i don't know what'll be happening there.

@Ovamboland
i am equally against fuel subsidy. i suggest you read the whole thread; everytime i have even remotely sounded otherwise, it's cos i quoted another nairalander's comment on this thread!

I HAIL THE GREATEST PHENOMENON ON THE PLANET


THE BLACK WOMAN[/size][size=8pt]

TRIBUTE!!!!