₦airaland Forum

Mavenb0x:
JeSoul, in case you are alarmed at some responses, don't be. Get set for more: SOS is delicate & controversial enough and your thread title is to be "blamed" & will wreak more. . .

Okay, my opinion. SOS is pure romantic poetry, and as was common before the repressive Victorian age, is highly eroti.c (or at least it was, in its hey day) in nature. God designed us that way, and it pleased him to wire us up to also be able to control ourselves when necessary. Se.x is a great thing! But as with all other things in nature, like gravity, it must be kept in check, properly moderated, or you fly into the sun. I never force the topic down people's throats but I believe God never intended us to indulge in carefree, temporary-commitment &irresponsible se.x like some animals. He wanted us to enjoy it in a sweet & controlled, defined atmosphere of a marital union.

If any, there are few lines pointing to a spiritual relationship with God. That was not the author's intent, IMO, so if any its a coincidence.

I think the book is there to show the virtues of chastit.y in the Shunammite woman, who was espoused to King Solomon. The romanti.c praise of the Wise King for the distinguished wise virgin is the theme in SOS and there are volumes to learn there if you dont have a "heart attack" at every eroti.c word!

- I don't think i would go as far as saying its highly love-related . . . cus the word "e.rotic" is a seriously strong word . . . that unfortunately meanings a lot of negative things to most people.

- I would rather use the phrase "highly playful" . . . the bible reports that Abraham and Sarah were playing with each other . . . (i want to believe the the kind of play is somewhat similar to what we have in Songs of Solomon).

- It think when the Bible wants to say something explicitly sexual and hence inappropriate for normal hearing, I think the bible uses the word "know" . . .David knew "so so and so ".  . ."Abraham knew his wife Sarah" and so on and so forth . . .

- Some of us are recuperating from having a dirty mind hence its helps not to use the lingo such as e.rotic and so on . . .

tollexboy:
IBADAN TI O JALE OJU LO ROO, SO PLEASE IBADAN SELF NA THIEF AND PEOPLE NOT FROM IBADAN SHOULD LEAVE IBADAN TO THEM because IBADAN PEOPLE ARE HEAVY THIEF, THEY ARE LAZY PEOPLE IN TIMES OF WORKING,

[quote author=mama-gee link=topic=248228.msg5303592#msg5303592 date=1263343253]Ibadan has become a homeland for all these armed robbers
I pity for those who live there for they are really suffering.[/quote]

Mekusxyz:
How will Ibadan not be filled with robbers when all they produce these days are almajiris and motor park touts?

JeSoul:
No2, you are hereby ordered to read your emails.

hi hi captain . . .

[quote author=~Sauron~ link=topic=374223.msg5303924#msg5303924 date=1263350783]The same Drogba that was consistently outscored by Lampard in his first 2 seasons?
Only the Arses fear Drogba. He is yet to score a league goal against United in 10 attempts.

That is for goats like you.
United bought Berbatov for his flair not for running around like a deranged gorilla.
We have Wazza, Park, Anderson, Fletcher n Scholes to do all the running.

What did Andy Cole say that hasn't been mentioned about Wilshere? There's no dispute that he has got some talent but is he the BRIGHTEST talent in England? Hell No.
Morrison shytes on him. The fact that we are even comparing Wilshere in the Arsenal senior team to a player that is yet to sign his professional contract speaks volume.

You have them in quantity NOT in quality.
Till date, Arsenal kids have not won a meaningful title under Wenger.


Walcott has activated the add-on clauses already.
He has been featuring for England in the WCQ and has played more games than anticipated in Arsenal.
Of course, y'all musta paid more than £12 milla to Southampton since 2006.

Tell us what these rookies have won for Arsenal?
They were beaten blue-black by Burnley last season and Citeh sodomised em this season.[/quote]You are going to make a very good propaganda minister cus u seem to have this natural ability to explain away even the unexplainable . . .

while you two thrash it out . . . lets those of us who are grasses watch and ponder.

@Ayinba . . . .

I am looking for a wife . . . how about you hook me up with a beautiful, brilliant, faithful, comitted Hajia . . .

SeanT21:
Her age is on her profile.

Okay you are correct i have checked the profile myself . . . lets hope the information, picture and classification of sex as presented on the profile are true. . .

cus to be frank I am now scared of the fact that some people on nairaland sometimes claim to be female when they are male or male when they are female . . .hence it always freaks me out when i even think about such possibilities.


--------------------------------------------

Nevertheless nairaland is a very weird place ,  . . hence i don't always trust what people post on their profiles . . . I am now

SeanT21:
I am all female ^{or so i think}. I am not tomboyish. I am just not into bdays. I prefer Christmas or other major holidays. I do not have a problem with "lovey dovey" things. I just get bored reading Solomon's love letters. PS: I am a big fan of Romantic films, ex, The Notebook or Pride and prejudice.

If you say so . . .


[quote author=~Preggy~ link=topic=380448.msg5303714#msg5303714 date=1263345174]Happy Birthday Mama-Gee

https://emoticons4u.com/party/fest33.gif https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/139.gif  https://emoticons4u.com/music/musik29.gif

I hope this aint a 'Publicity stunt'  [/quote]Let's hope so too  . . .

SeanT21:
U are falsely accusing me of being something I am not. Not fair at all..

Apologises then . . . its just that you sound like one . . .

SeanT21:
*wave to abuzola*. LOL.

- Just ignore him . . .

- He does not yet know how to switch between combat mode and normal mode . . .

SeanT21:
1. Since you don't like reading, do U read the other chapters?



[b]This is for No2atheism

- Yes I sometimes read other chapters . . .

- I am a scientist by nature hence off course i read . . .its just that my pattern of thought are areas of interest does not allow me to sustain a reading interest in the books of solomon.

- Like I said, I prefer to live the romance rather than read the romance . . .

2. I am not a tomboy but reading love letters are boring. Why not just get a romance novel??[/b]

I know a tomboy when i see one . . .

olabowale:
But with such a short attention span, no wonder you cant enjoy what "the wiseman King solomon" was saying. I see the reason what I write always fly over your head. My girl JeSoul is taking you to school, yet you cant even have a "lion hearted courage" to read it. You are scared almost out of your own skin; wow, man.

- Alhaji . . . Jesoul is not your girl . . .

- Ask Jesoul herself and she would tell you whether i have lion hearted courage or not . . .

- Romance does not scare me . . . far from it . . . it comes naturally for me . . . THE POINT I HAVE TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT I AM NOT A CONFORMIST . . . HENCE HOW I SHOW MY LOVE FOR A WOMAN IS NOT THE USUAL STEREOTYPICAL MANNER.

@JeSoul; Its the bohemian poet in you that is making you such a distinguished "preacher/teacher". If only it was the real deal. Just if only!

Alhaji . . . i hope you do not have other intentions for Jesoul . . .

olabowale:
@No2Atheism: Your wife will be a woman that either suffers silently or a woman who has no knowledge of what romance is, all because you lack the lovey dovey genetic trait. I thought that Jesus taught love and in a gentle as a dove way?

But with such a short attention span, no wonder you cant enjoy what "the wiseman King solomon" was saying. I see the reason what I write always fly over your head. My girl JeSoul is taking you to school, yet you cant even have a "lion hearted courage" to read it. You are scared almost out of your own skin; wow, man.

@JeSoul; Its the bohemian poet in you that is making you such a distinguished "preacher/teacher". If only it was the real deal. Just if only!

Alhaji,

Abeg stop talking about what you do not know . . .

Those ladies who know me personally know that I am as romantic as they come . . .   . . . the thing is just that there is a time of lovey dovey . . . I am not one that shies away from showing my romantic side in public . . . I am willing to do anything (legal) and romantic (biblical) whether in public or private that would make my woman (who ever she ends up being) feel loved and the center of attention.

When I say lovey dovey: I mean romantic stereotypes that people are expected to follow (for example I don't believe in cards . . . cus they are worthless to me . . . i prefer to give my woman something much more valuable than cards . . . and something that she would be using and hence always rememembering who gave her and why she was given) . . . I am not a conformist hence I don't show my romantic sides through expected stereotypical ways or manner.

[quote author=mama-gee link=topic=380448.msg5303423#msg5303423 date=1263340547]Today is my birthday, what do I do to make it lively?[/quote]

SeanT21:
Happy bday. Happy 23rd. My gift is in the mail.

I guess go to your fave restaurant with friends, etc. I am not big on bday celebrations.

How do u know mama-gee is 23yrs old . . . do u know her personally or something . . .

SeanT21:
Happy bday. Happy 23rd. My gift is in the mail.

I guess go to your fave restaurant with friends, etc. I am not big on bday celebrations.

- not into lovey dovey thingies
- not big on birthday celebrations.

Are you sure u are even a female person or are u male in disguise . . . cus those your statments sounds so tomboyish.

SeanT21:
noo, not at all. Just find it boring. Probably the only book in the bible that I do not enjoy reading. I usually try but stop somewhere in the middle of the chapter. I will say that, I do not believe that the book is Ungodly or unholy..

- No it is not boring  . . . unless u are a tomboy . . . 

- Cus most ladies that i know tend to like discussing or watching or reading about things like that in Songs of Solomon . . .

- Overall, the problem is that sex, intimacy, love and relationships has become seriously bastardised that people now think of it as something dirty ,  .hence why a lot of people tend to avoid such a discussion in a religious setting.

- Personally the reason i have not read it has more to do with the fact that:

1. I don't like reading.
2. Romantic scenarios are not really my thing.
3. I prefer to live through the romance rather than read it.
4. I have a short attention span hence i doubht i would be able to read that book through.


Other than the reasons above . . . i really don't think there is a big deal about Songs of Solomon.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets rememeber that there is a portion of the bible that said that: Abraham and Sarah were playing (which is normal), hence from a certain perspective, romance, love letters and love songs are not itself wrong . . . otherwise the bible would have said so. The problem however is that our (me included  ) exposure to p.ornography , lewd movies  as ended up warping our minds to an extent that most people now feel uncomfortable discussing romantic and love related issues in a spiritual setting.

Stillwater . . .  how far, how u dey . . . hope u have not forgotten the advise . . .

stillwater:
This is what I deduce from Songs of Solomon. . .

Nothing wrong in writing poems, love lyrics and showing your affection to someone you love.

True that . . .

SeanT21:
I was just thinking about this today. I was asking myself, "what do people learn from Songs Of Solomon". I rarely pay attention to it frankly. "Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.", blah blah. It is just a boring love letter between Solomon and his lover. Why read Songs of Solomon when I can read Proverbs and gain more wisdom.

Stop the holier than thou thingy

You make it sound as if you would complain if Solomon was writing it to you . . .


- I think its the holier than thou thingy thats making people uncomfortable with tackling the topic . . . personally i have nothing to lose by tackling it (I am messed up already) . . . its just that i sincerely have not read it at all hence I am not in a position to comment on it.

- It was too long winded for my brain to follow . . . my attention span is not that long . . . and since i am not really a fan of lovey dovey thingies . . . its easy to understand why i have not really been into study that particular book of the Bible.

@topic

Seriously Jesoul, I would appreciate that you treat this topic . . . i have heard snippets about it also but i have not really come to study it myself . . .

JeSoul:

---

No qualms bro. I understand. Did you check out the sermon?

I did not know that you sent links of sermons . . . maybe cus i never check the emails. . .

Try and send it again . . . as I am still too scared to open the other emails yet . . . . . .

When u send it this time, let it only contain the sermons or the links for the sermons . . . and then make sure the title of the email is called "Requested Sermons". Hence that way my mind would not immediately firewall it , .

Thanks . . .

Off course now . . .

- Imagine asking someone like me to preach from it . . .  . . . na to have complete mental breakdown be that . . . I do not really know that part of the bible yet i am already messed up mentally. . . . imagine if i now know the details.

- This is a nice topic . . . I would not mind for you to handle . . . cus i sincerely do not trust myself to handle such a topic . . .

--------------------------------------------------
@offtopic

I still never get the confidence to ready your email replies . . . am still in some kind of shock, guilt and disappointment with myself.

JeSoul:
Oh no you gat it wrong. Some thoughts require extensive descriptions and analysis - which is the case with most of your posts - and I ain't smacking on that at all! lol. I just have limited disposable e-time and my attention span [/i]is like that of a[b] restless wanderer lol[/b]
 
  But please, don't worry about length, I have no issues reading long as it is a good piece and this is! trust me, I cannot wait to dive into it and put myself in your spiritual shoes on this eden matter. Cheers! 

- Abeg let it not be like that of a restless wanderer. . . o o o

- You know the trauma I am already going through as a result of my own wandering mind . . . hence an advice from a brother to a sister. . . do not allow ur attention span be like that of a restless wanderer like me . . .

- you know u are my shrink . . .   . . .abeg stay sane so that those of us like me who are insane (and with many sorrows   ) can have someone to talk to . . .   . . . for the treatment of our insanity and sorrows .

Mavenb0x:
@No2Atheism: Please believe me when I say that this is my own personal revelation, and it isn't like I'm trying to fit something into the Word of God. I kept saying "I believe that" and not "It is so" or something like that because the only "proof" I can tender is inside me. But hey, assume its all false, but look on the brighter side:

Assume the Eden story is altogether literal. The nub of my gist here is that Adam's sin by virtue of disobedience with respect to the forbidden fruit caused "thorns and thistles" to come out of the "ground", and that was when Adam handed over the "controls" to the devil.

My express description of Eden the way I understand it, is to dispel the notion that it is an irrelevant mythical story, and has no consequential effect on natural man and the way the world turned out. The interpretation is not as important as the essence of what I'm portraying, I believe. Thanks!

- Okay no problem . . .

- I am just trying to advice as someone who is also prone to over analysis issues . . . hence I don't want you to fall into the same pit-falls that I have . . . I can authoritatively tell u that much study and intellectual understanding of the word does not automatically bring peace .  Hence why i hope u can be careful . . .

viaro:
@No2Atheism,

Yes, it's viaro addressing you. I came across to you as a ruffian in the other thread where you sought to know a bit more about me. I apologise, and please don't let that affect or colour your mind about what I'd say with regards to your post above.
I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to decipher the message of the Bible. Many people (more so Christians) struggle with the message of the first book of the Bible - Genesis; and if one has to carefully think through what we read there, we would find very intriguing things in the very first chapter alone! We should learn to appreciate the perspectives of other thinkers and yet be well grounded in the essentials to know how to weigh the inferences that are being presented to us, don't you think?
While many of us with an evangelical leaning would always look out for 'salvation' in any Christian post or discussions, it ought not to be the one thing that undergirds our discourses. Salvation is important; but there are many things we read about in the Bible itself that would leave you scratching our heads as to how they 'add anything to the message of salvation'.

Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy, which both in themselves are not evil. As tools to understanding the world, our existence, our faith and/or our salvation, they are indispensable - theology today would rather be so empty without a philosophy of any kind. The one thing that sets them out is that our faith and Christian worldview are not predicated on [i]philosophy - which is why the Bible warns us: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (2 Cor. 2:8).

Anyways, I hope this will be something for your consideration.

Okay . . . apologies accepted.

Mavenb0x:
I may like to wrap up this thread quickly (rather than abandoning it for long and leaving the discussion hanging), unless there are questions that will further elongate the discussion.

I will begin by assuming we all understand the parable of the vineyard described above. Now I will discuss Eden: cradle of mankind.

I do not believe the Eden story is mythical, neither is it entirely historical. I think it is heavily typed in allegory, and I intend to describe, as best as I can, my understanding of that story.

God created Adam and placed him in Eden. When he "made Adam in his image", he empowered Adam to be to this realm, as He is to everything in its entirety. It was a kind of ambassadorial position.

I believe the Garden of Eden was not a "garden", but a metaphysical realm which was the primordial home of mankind. This realm also had a superposition on the physical realm and had direct access into the spiritual, so there were "layers", so to speak, of interaction between physical and spiritual entities. As such, I believe the "trees" in Eden were not necessarily green perenniaal woody plants, but were instead primordial entities of a kind: spiritual beings, if you may. There are many instances in the Bible in which human beings are likened to trees.

Eze 31:9  I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him.

I believe that in Eden, these primordial beings were in control of numerous things, ranging from nature control to insight along the vast dimensions of human experience. In allegory, Adam was allowed to "eat" of any of the trees except one. i.e. he was allowed to utilize the primordial entities, who were subservient to him, in order to achieve his purposes. So, what then was that "tree of knowledge?".

The Hebrew word translated as knowledge is da'ath, and it means an awareness of endless possibilities. In particular, it describes that attribute of God that makes Him do things exactly the way He does them, in His own infinite knowledge. See other instances of the exact same word:

Isa 11:2  And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him--the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the reverential and obedient fear of the Lord--

Psa 139:4  For there is not a word in my tongue [still unuttered], but, behold, O Lord, You know it altogether. [Heb. 4:13.]
Psa 139:5  You have beset me and shut me in--behind and before, and You have laid Your hand upon me.
Psa 139:6  Your [infinite] knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high above me, I cannot reach it.
Psa 139:7  Where could I go from Your Spirit? Or where could I flee from Your presence?
Psa 139:8  If I ascend up into heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in Sheol (the place of the dead), behold, You are there. [Rom. 11:33.]


Job 21:22  Shall any teach God knowledge, seeing that He judges those who are on high? [Rom. 11:34; I Cor. 2:16.]

And the New Testament gives more insight into this, since God is the absolute embodiment of truth:
1Co 2:11  For what person perceives (knows and understands) what passes through a man's thoughts except the man's own spirit within him? Just so no one discerns (comes to know and comprehend) the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.

1Co 2:14  But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.

That "tree of knowledge of Good and Evil" in Eden is a personification of the Holy Spirit. The "tree of life" is a personification of Jesus Christ in that primordial realm. The two trees were in the "center" of the garden, meaning that they were administratively in charge of the other spiritual entities that Adam was allowed to control.

What I sincerely believe is that, because of man's absolute power in Eden, he had been warned against the corruption of trying to USE the Holy Spirit the same way he was discretionally using the other spirits to achieve whatever he wanted to get done. The corruption was easy to fall for, because the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was keeping all the spiritual entities in check. So, if one could control that ONE tree, he would "be as God" himself.

Now, Lucifer, "the serpent".


Eze 28:13  You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, the carnelian, topaz, jasper, chrysolite, beryl, onyx, sapphire, carbuncle, and emerald; and your settings and your sockets and engravings were wrought in gold. On the day that you were created they were prepared. [Gen. 3:14, 15; Isa. 14:12-15; Matt. 16:23.]
Eze 28:14  You were the anointed cherub that covers with overshadowing [wings], and I set you so. You were upon the holy mountain of God; you walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire [like the paved work of gleaming sapphire stone upon which the God of Israel walked on Mount Sinai]. [Exod. 24:10.]
Eze 28:15  You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created until iniquity and guilt were found in you.
Eze 28:16  Through the abundance of your commerce you were filled with lawlessness and violence, and you sinned; therefore I cast you out as a profane thing from the mountain of God and the guardian cherub drove you out from the midst of the stones of fire.
Eze 28:17  Your heart was proud and lifted up because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I lay you before kings, that they might gaze at you.


I believe Lucifer was a primordial being in Eden, and in this allegory, he was likened to a serpent due to the evil and cunning mischief.


Isa 14:12  How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
Isa 14:13  For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
Isa 14:14  I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Isa 14:15  Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.


In Isa 14:14 Lucifer wanted to "be like the most high" (see again Job 21:22 quoted somewhere above), but he wasn't able to do that without help. Yes, help from Adam. I strongly believe that the "eating" of the fruit that Adam and Eve did was to the effect of allowing some evil replicates of holy archetypes to come into existence. Adam and Eve played God by bypassing God's infinite knowledge and applying the "tree of knowledge" to their use. Thus, many good spiritual concepts were "fakened" by Lucifer, and till today there are many evil things that, with careful consideration, you will see, have very similar background spiritual principles, to the truth in God.

When man fell,

Gen 3:22  And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23  Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24  So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.


God didn't want man to take of eternal life in his sinful nature, because that would make for an eternal sinner. So he drove him out. And now, here is the crux of the discussion: I repeat v23


Gen 3:23  Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.


To "till the ground from whence he was taken", I understand to mean that man was subjected to those same laws that had been under his control hitherto. Natural laws and necessary insight into hidden things were taken away from him. Now he had to "till the ground" himself.

But as always, God had a plan: he was going to send that same tree of life, but it would be on his own terms. Adam would eat of it again (Jesus did), die and then have access to the tree of knowledge of good and evil. (Note the reversed trend).


Joh 10:10  The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.



Joh 16:13  Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.


@Deep Sight: The people you mentioned, definitely have spiritual principles going for them. the question is, is it the pristine spiritual principles fashioned by God, or the mirrored evil copies operated by Lucifer cunningly obtained using Adam's authority?

@Ancel: I hope the questions are also answered.

Phew. Exhausted. Need to get some sleep. Cheers.

- Wow  . . . even this is way beyond me

@mavenbox

Am sorry but i think u really need to slow down with all these ideas cus at the end of the day they are just all still "ideas". Problems and heresy start creeping in wen we start trying to find the so called hidden truth. Even the Bible did not tell us that The Messiah taught people all that you seek to be teaching here . . .

Why not keep things simple and stick to only what the Bible says . . . other than trying to decipher what you think the Bible is saying . . .For example this metaphysical idea is nothing more than an addition and aan idea cus in reality the Bible does not say anything like that. And it requires faith to even believe in the metaphysical thingy . . . which means it requires faith in something outside of the bible . . . which then raises the question as to why we would want to put our faith in the wisdom of man rather than in something already so simple like the good news . . . . see where i am going with this.

Does this metaphysical thingy wingy add anything to the message of salvation . . . personally i don't think so hence its not right to include it to what the bible has already said.

Your analysis of some places are quite good . . . however this whole metaphysical thingy wingy is starting to creep me out . . .

One motto i have is that:

. . . IF THE CREATOR THOUGHT THAT WE NEEDED TO KNOW IT IN ORDER TO BE REDEEMED THEN HE WOULD HAVE TOLD US . . .

Not telling us does not mean it might not exist and neither does it mean it might exist . . . nevertheless the bottomline is still that why add something we can't proof to the bible.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Creator is supreme . . .hence there would always be things beyond our understanding . . . more so wen we are living in the flesh compromised by sin . . .and more so since Lucifer has an opportunity to use our own flesh against us.

Hence why it is dangerous to continue with the idea of trying to decipher so called hidden mysteries . . .

Historical marriage and antecedents of the British helping the North to rule Nigeria makes me highly sceptical of all this Yar-Adua Audio . . .

If he can talk to BBC why not Nigerians . . .

Why not a Video report showing him live . . .


British Intelligence are not that stupid . . .


Can the British Intelligence please trace the call and tell us where the call is emanating from exactly. . . so that we can know where Yar-Adua is really . . . since they are claiming that its Yar-Adua.


Why did BBC get an interview a day before the planned protest march . . .


---------------------------------

See where am I going with this . . .

Ndewo . . .

Imelagi . . .

Mekusxyz:
Go back to my all posts on this matter. I have always advocated for the SS first because they are the most politically marginalized. Rotation is rotation and it will get to everyone eventually. At least the SE will have it before those who have had it can get it again. So no sweat. I love my SS brothers as you can see from all my posts. I can actually claim SS because I have my family house there and have lived there (in Eleme, Rivers State) much of my life.

I doubt that cus if i undertsand it properly its bound to a an oscillating arrangement i.e.

North - South

South - North

North - South

South - North

and so on

Thus wat happens is that each North or South would then determined which region it should be by itself . . .

Thus if South South gets the presidency, it would go back to the North before coming back to the South again . . .(for the SE)

Hence it means at least there would be 28yrs interval before the South West gets the presidency again . . . going by the logic i have above (i.e. Second Term of the North 4yrs , South South 8 years, South East 8 yrs, North 8yrs)

someone send me the link for the audio abeg . . .or is it on live television. . .

South East . . . .2016 . . here we come . . .

Someone should please provide an audio link and not a news report . . .

This could just be the usual British + Northern Nigeria wayo . . . at work all over again . . .

Hence until i hear the so called audio report myself . . . i am not believing . . .it :

- Speaking with Yar Adua is an exclusive hence why would they not choose to publish an exclusive audio or has talking to him become a National Security concern all of a sudden.