₦airaland Forum

@topic,

To think I agree with Ibime 100% in this matter. This is turning out to be a good year o.

@Ikomi,

Your quote up there: One man's God is another man's devil. If I understand what it means - what I believe in might not necessarily be what you believe in. Then Tayo-D logically is it right to demonise what I believe in just because you don't believe in it. Now we are in the realm of logic - since I don't know which you stand for either spirituality or logic.

No one is demonising anybody.  So should Pat call the being he knows as the devil God just to please people like you?  Besides, who in Haitai claims that the agreement they had was with God?  I think you might want to start from there.  Do the locals themselves believe the pact was with God or with evil spirits that require drinking of human blood as part of the pact?

Hungarian Jews were killed in WWI, Jews all over Europe were massacred in WWII. Now Tayo-D going by logic, or spirituality which ever you choose, is there a curse on Jews?

Do I believe that the Jews' problems are related to their sins?  Absolutely.  Just as I believe that countries like Iran, Russia etc will be judged for what they did to Jesus' brethren.

A lot of these issues are things that can be discussed and understood only by Christians and careful study of the Word of God (notice I didn't say devil or demons).  This is why Pat Robertson directed his statement at Christians on a Christian programme.  The sole purpose was to get people to respond not only with their pockets, but also on their kneew.  Trying to misrepresent his intentions is mischievous at best.

@Ikomi,

It will be good to keep this discussion civil.  If you want roforofo fight, you know I can be both a gentleman and an agbero.  I will respond in kind if you chose to go down the uncivil path.

Now when you start merging your logic with spirituality, you see your not going to get too far.

This is where you trip yourself up when you potray the notion that you understand a faith more than the people who practice it.  There is definitely logic with faith.  In this instance, it takes faith to believe in curses. Logic follows it up by figuring out that certain actions will inevitably lead to curses.  Let me give you another example.  Faith and not logic tells me that when I am in need, what I should do is give the little I have on me.  After taking such a faith-ful action, logic dictates that I should look up to God and not men while seeking for a return.  I believe that Gods will supply all my needs, but logic tells me that I should go to work as an avenue to get my needs met.  

It would be beside the point to you, especially when it nips you in the bud. You were going by history so I decided to follow you up on history, but since you could not hold your ground based on history you decide to shove it aside

Why is it not beside the point?  The one you refer to as God (Mohammed's allah), is no more than a demon to me.  So when you and I call God, an outsider will need to know that we are doing so from diferent frame of references.  The one you call God is not the one I call God.  So when Pat said what he did, you need to know where he is coming from to fully understand what he is saying.

@Ikomi,

What you are saying is totally beside the point. One man's God is another man's devil. In the context of Pat Robertson's faith, the people made a pact with the devil. The logical implication of that action is the curse upon that land. He made the comment on a Christian broadcast to people of faith who understand what he said even if they do not all agree.

The Bible is clear that while God's mercy never ends in the lineage of the righteous, the children of the wicked will suffer the consequences of their forefather's actions up to the 3rd and 4th generation. That is an expression fo God's mercies. Assuming that is the case here as Pat Robertson obviously believes, then who are you to question his belief? He has brought attention to this issue so that people who believe like him will intercede for that nation. You really need to back off!

Robertson's expression is no different than that of many Christians in America who believe that America's prosperity and leadership in the world today is because of the faith of it's founding fathers. If they believe such, it is only logical that they will believe that other nations founded by a pact with the devil will suffer the consequences of such an action. This is so simple to see.

@cap28,

What is wrong with Bush? I am more concerned about getting Bill Clinton involved in the relief effort than I am of Bush. Is it not this same Clinton who said Obama's (a black man) place is to serve White people like him coffee? Why ask such a person to provide relief to mainly Black people?

@Ikomi,

First of all, Happy new year to you.
Now you help answer your own question, what is the truth in the statement he made? Is it that the Haitians should have allowed the French to rule them forever and not make a pact with anything - even if it is the devil - to kick the French out, or that God is no longer forgiving.
Tayo-D you help me out.

If you know the history of the revolution, you will understand that the brains behind that revolution allegedly made a pact with the devil to help them overcome the French. If such a pact was indeed real, is it wrong for anyone to then wonder aloud why Haiti has always been visited by one calamity or the other?

As to God forgiving, that is true. But forgioveness and breaking of curses comes from understanding that it exists and appraoching God to help deal with it. I believe Pat called attention to this fact so Haitians can at least contemplate this issue and try to deal with it.

Lastly, Pat spoke from a spiritual perspective, which means the words does not necessarily lend itself to human understanding and carnal interpretation. What he said may be true and it may be not. I don't know one way or the other.

@Ibime,

See Nigerians discussing why Haiti is phucked up. . . .hehehehe. . . meanwhile Haitians are wondering why Nigeria is phucked up. . . . whilst most Haitians are living on $2 a day, most of my Nigerian brothers are living on $1 a day.

Haba. How many Nigerians do you know that rely on and are sustained by baked clay? Isn't the little money they have a result of the benevolence of other nations? I believe Haiti is the biggest recipient of foreign aid the world over

Haiti is the only country in the world born from slave revolt. They have shown more balls for fighting oppression than any Nigerians have shown in their miserable life.

Which makes it more pathetic. This makes me ask the same question posed by Davidylan: "What is wrong with the Black African?" Could Haiti's problem be compounded by the fact that the average Haitian is heavily accented with a very low light-skin index?

Y'all quit the chat and focus on Nigeria. . . . and if you live on more than $1 a day, kindly donate the excess to our Haitian brothers in need.

@Ibime,

Why should Chavez listen to you or anyone else for that matter.  His ideological leaning is that capitalism is evil. Isn't that th central theme of his last speech at the UN?

I hope Americans are watching and learning!

@Ikomi,

Happy New Year to you my kindred foe.

Can Someone please explain to me how this guy qualifies as a man of God. This is a sincere question, I just need an explanation am not taking sides.

I think the first question you should ask is this: "Is there any truth to the statement he made"?

@JeSoul,

You better mind yourself o. I bind that siddon look attitude in Jesus' name. Better go out there and vote for Brown before I disown you finally. Do you know how much fear of God will be instilled in those politicians in Washington if Brown can somehow pull this off? You got the power girl, go use it.

By the way, the latest poll shows that Brown is up by 4% against Coakley. All well and good because my money must not go to waste. If my memory serves me correctly, this will be the first time ever I will be making any financial donations to any political party or candidate. I sent $50 to the Tea Party Express in support of Brown. I understand the guy is raking in like $1 million/day.

Oh God of TayoD, JeSoul and _{(not sure if I should include pres-elect)} , please here our humble prayer and give the people's seat back to the people. Put the pretenders and the good ol' boys club with the sense of entitlement to shame.

@topic,

If I may add my two cents as a dark-skinned, heavily accented Negro!  I have chosen to overcome all prejudice against me to ask a very important question.  Is Harry Reid still qualified to own a NFL team? 

And by the way, can someone please confirm the rumour that the Association of Non-Accented Light Skinned Negroes (NALSN) is raising funds for Uncle Harry's election campaign.  I understand that Clinton was persuaded to attend the fundraising when he was told that coffee will be served by Negroes.

@Ibime,

The fact is, there is no absolute truth

If that were true, why then should anyone take your statement seriously? How do you go through life without understanding and accepting that there are truths and there are lies?  Could we declare then that there is no absolute lie?

It is funny when people present ideologies as the absolute truth.

Ideologies are supposed to be based on truths.  Ideologies are imbibed through a deep reflection of facts/truth.

Difference between capitalism and socialism?  One recognises the sacredness of individual freedom and choice, and the other does not.  This is a biggy for one reason: all men are born free and were created to live free. Now that, is an absolute truth of life.

@Ikomi,

After providing the facts I will still have to explain it

What facts for goodness sake? Facts that you cannot rightly interprete?  Where in the text you provided does it say that Sunni or Shia divide is a tribal one?  The closest you may come to it is that the origin of the word sunni is rooted in the custom (not an ethnic group) of any tribe.  It never did, nor does it refer to an ethnic group as you have claimed.  You are such an olodo.

What something becomes does that make what it was irrelevant?

This is just a failed attempt to save face.  First, none of the words ever refered to an ethnic group.  Second, your description of the ME groups was not as it related to pre-islam, but as it currently exist.  The origin of Sunni is based on customary practices and you declared the word to mean an ethnic group. Shiites are a group rooted in a politics. So do we refer to Shiites as a political group then? Logic just fails you at every turn, doesn't it?

At this stage, wisdom dictates that you admit your lack of knowledge and quietly exit the thread as you brashly jumped into it.  However, I doubt you ever seek nor accept the dictates of wisdom.  Please consider these words that are usually spoken to fools like you: "It's better to be quiet and be considered a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

@Negro,

Are you sure you really want to discuss this topic? There are a lot of powerful people that will go to any extent to silence opposition to this new religion called global warming. Why a religion? It is absolutely not based on any verifiable scientific data. Possibly hacked emails released in the last few days reveal the manipulation and suppression of data that completlety invalidate the lies they are selling to us. Benny Maddof will cringe in the face of the this Ponzi scheme that the Left is perpetuating. And to think they associate 419 only to Nigeria.

@Ayatollah Ikomi,

Eventually the adjective Sunn[/b]i came to describe [b]the largest of the three primary sectarian divisions among Muslims I may not have read this book, but it provides enough information to prove that I am on the right side, and as always, you on the wrong.  I clearly pointed out this fact to you previously that the Sunnis are the largest group in the ME.  You on the other hand declared that the Shiattes were the largest group and were merely trying to control the ME because of this.  Do you see how wrong you are again?

I don tire to dey prove you wrong and educate you. Maybe 4Play will be gracious enough to continue when I stop. In the mean time, I will be on my way to Naija later this week for a well-deserved vacation.  I shall not be under any obligation to educate your sorry behind during that period!

@Ayatollah Ikomi,

May I use this opportunity to educate you on issues you know little about before you go on calling people names that would best describe you, except you have facts to proof me wrong.

You?  Educate someone??  How can you give what you don't have  I will explain the quotation you provided below to illustrate just how much you do not comprehend the things you read.  You have proven once and for all that reading does not equate to comprehension.

Early in the history of Islam, the Shia were a political faction (party of 'Alī) that supported caliphate of Ali ibn Abi Ṭalib and, later, of his descendants. Starting as a political faction, this group gradually developed into a religious movement.
In other words, Shiites are members of a religious group and not an ethnic group as you claim.  Understand that?

The term Sunni is an adjective formed from the noun sunna (plural sunan), an ancient Arabic word meaning "customary practice." Although in the pre-Islamic world of tribal Arabia the word sunna referred generally to the time-tested and widely accepted customs of a tribe, in the Islamic period the term came to refer specifically to the customary practices or "way" of the prophet Muhammad and the first generation of pious Muslims. Eventually the adjective Sunni came to describe the largest of the three primary sectarian divisions among Muslims
Even this clearly shows that Sunnis are a religious grop in Islam.  This divide is clearly stated to be religious and not ethnic as you keep blabbing.

@naliakar,

The idiot cant even get his own terminology or phrase straight on a subject he raised.

You are such a dolt. Perhaps you can help all of us by telling us if "eat deep into" is a technical economic terminology.  When you have no understanding of issues, just step away or keep quiet.  I suppose Ibime understands why I gave in to move the discussion along, but you however are so clueless that you can only read words without understanding the sentence. It is such a pity that money was wasted to send you to school in the first place.  You show no sign that you got any education.

I hope he has read the book I suggested to him, then come back and tell me that sunni and shite is a religion, and in no way an ethnic group.

First, I never said sunni and shite is  a religion as you claimed.  These are the two major sects of Islam, and I repeat they are no ethnic groups. I have explained to you times without number, and 4Play has been gracious enough to do the same that an ethno-religious grouping is different from an ethnic  or religious groupings. Please stop disgracing your alma matar on the www by broadcasting your ignorance repeatedly. Catholism and Protestanism are two major denominations of Christianity. Your logic will lead us to conclude that Catholics and Protestants must be members of an ethnic group. Do you see how stupid you are potraying yourself?

Ignorant loud idiot that he is.

Once again, you are putting a right label on a wrong horse.  This perfectly decsribes you.

@pres-elect,

in the spirit of thanksgiving i'll just laugh at tayo d today . . . . he he he he ha ha ha ha ha

It is not by force to provide an input on a topic, especially if you have nothing tangible to add to the discussion.  I hope you will remember that you are the first to turn attention to personalities.  I am sure this truth will elude you when you are given a dose of your own medicine.  It is very typical of you to take the first shot and start shedding crocodile tears when the table turns on you.  I wonder whose shoulders you will go crying on when you can't take it any more.

@topic,

Below is a reproduction of William Bradford's journal from [url]http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1650bradford.html#Private and communal farming[/url]

All this while no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expect any. So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other thing to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance) and ranged all boys and youth under some family. This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.

The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times; and that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labor and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors and victuals, clothes etc., with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it. Upon the point all being to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought themselves in the like condition, and one as good as another; and so, if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them. And would have been worse if they had been men of another condition. Let none object this is men's corruption, and nothing to the course itself. I answer, seeing all men have this corruption in them, God in His wisdom saw another course fitter for them.

@topic,

In the spirit of Thanksgiving that is being celebrated today, I thought I should bring to light an aspect of American history that many people are unaware of. Many of course will be shocked that the Pilgrims had experimented with Socialism. As expected, the experiment in socialism failed woefully and they had enough sense to revert to capitalism.

William Bradford, an elected Governor of the colony kept an extensive diary that catalogued their journey on the Mayflower, their lives as a colony up until his death. According to his writings, the pilgrims fell for socialist ideas that were espoused by people like Plato and some other intellectuals after him. Ideas that encouraged taking away personal property and bringing it into a commonwealth equally owned and shared by everyone with the sole aim of creating a happy community (a liberal's dream). Liberals are still seeking such utopia today.

William Bradford and his Chieftains quickly came to their senses when the community was close to starvation due to this experiment. People lost initiatives and would prefer to do nothing because they were guaranteed of food, shelter etc, regardless of their efforts. Thank goodness they changed directions on seeing the disaster that socialism was. Reverting back to capitalism brought back the prosperity they knew before trying out the social experiment they embarked upon.

Socialism failed America at its founding, and it will fail it again if tried.

@Jesoul,

it's either you increase the troops or bring them home,

On this I agree. War should be fought to win. It becomes unnecessary if this is not the goal.

@Ibime,

Thats why Republicans need to think twice before starting wars all the time.

Did I read this right? The US started this war? So what was 911? A friendly reminder of bonds of friendship?

@muhsin,

Did Prophet Muhammad really kill any innocent civilian?

So if I prove that he did, would you conclude then that he was a terrorist?

And, its obvious that you too subscribe to pres-elect words, right?

Why would you think so?

@yeswecan,

To be usefull, she has to disassociate herself with racist like Glenn Beck

The way Obama dissociated himself from people like Rev Wright baa?

By the way, what makes Glenn Beck a racist?

@montelik,

If Bob McDonnell is a moderate, then that would make Palin a liberal. McDonnell is not in anyway a moderate. please do not just repeat talking points you heard without checking them out. McDonnell is hard conservative on every level. just check his previous political history. The reason he won is because Virginia is a traditional Red state which only got swept up in "Obamamania" 12 months ago but has since come back to its roots. As for Chris Christie in New Jersey while he isn't as far-right as McDonnell. I wouldn't call him moderate, after all this is someone who has strong ties to the wildly unpopular G.W Bush administration. The main reason he won was because the incumbent governor of New Jersey was about as popular at election day, as was Bush when he left office. Further you observe that Palin did not campaign for any of these two yet they won, but your logic also applies to NY, after all she did not campaign there either. She supported all 3 candidates and campaigned for none. Why are you trying to differentiate?

Thanks for helping to school pres-elect. It appears he just comes online to repeat talking points without checking the facts himself. The same media that calls McDonnell a moderate also refer to Scozzafava as a moderate. What exactly is the correllation between those two? I tire for them politics. The RNC will be wise to ignore their premises, sugestions and unsolicited advises. I wonder if the same pres-elect will refer to Obama, Pelosi and Harry Reid as moderates or extreme Leftist.

Back to Sarah Palin. Obama campaigned in New Jersey and campaigned 3 times in the final week of election in Virginia and his candidates lost woefully. Despite all of these, these same Leftist want us to believe that the election were not a reflection of Obama but the race in NY23 where Palin did not even campaign ones is a reflection on Palin. See how they usually shift the goal post to accomodate their lack of logic?

Does it occur to pres-elect that the RNC did not have any candidate in the NY23 election? So why the surprise that they lost? In any case, Palin only endorsed the conservative candidate who went from less than 10% in the polls to receiving over 40% of the votes cast in a matter of 2 weeks. Imagine what would have happened if she actually campaigned for the guy.

@topic,

“I have borrowed money to make sure that this centre is not lacking behind, but my prayer is that after the World Cup, they will pay back all the monies that I have borrowed,” fumed the sub seat chairman.

Am I the only one that thinks its funny for the sub seat chariman to borrow money to host the World Cup? What is the cost of the money borrowed? Where did he get the money? What collateral did he use. I smell a rat!!!!

@Ibime,

All you've done is shift the GDP-weighting of Govt Spending and Consumer Spending from one to the other.

Exactly what I have been saying. The question is "who shouuld be trusted more to spend money wisely to develop the economy - the govt or the private sector"? I'll choose the private sector anyday!

@Mushin,

I have a question for you. Since you agree with pres-elect's premise that any one who kills a civilian is a terrorist, can we then conclude that your Prophet Mohammed was also a terrorist?

Before you go about filibustering, remember your slogan: "the truth is ONE"!

@Ibime,

If you remember during the recession caused by the tech bubble burst (and made worse by 9/11), George Bush came out and told everyone to go and spend money. George Bush was right, but some critics panned him.

This is the first time I noticed someone from your political persuasion agree that Bush actually inherited a recession.  Thank goodness that Bush didn't follow the Keynesian option which would have led to double-dip recession as we are sure to experience with Obama's economy.

Bush calling for the citizens to spend money is a different ball game altogether to having the govt borrow and spend as Obama is doing.  Citizens spend money to obtain the maximum value from the limited resources they have.  Govt on the other hand spend money to obtain a political capital, giving rise to waste and fraud.

It's funny that there is already a blueprint for coming out of a recession and Obama has chosen to ignore it.  Compare what Obama inherited to what Reagan inherited and check the different approaches with the outcomes we all know and expect today. Reagan inherited double digit unemployment, interest rates and inflation.  He reduced taxes significantly across board resulting in a steady growth of the GDP each year.  This growth was not based on debt that needed to be paid back, but was a reflection of the people having more money left in their pockets to spend and invest to make more money.  That is true growth. 

So just like Obama, Reagan and Bush believed that spending will help the economy get out of recession.  The differece in their philosopihies is that unlike Obama, the other two believed and ensured that the party with money to spend was the people and not the govt!

@JeSoul,

They say they hate her, she's dumb and stupid and poses no threat as a candidate since she has no real grasp on politics and can see Russia from her backyard - YET - they cannot stop talking about her, cannot stop covering her every move and word.

Don't you like it when the Democrat leaning media picks the opposition candidate for the Republicans?  Am I the only one that thinks their ill advised pills should be swallowed with a full tank of scepticism?

These same media houses wanted so-called RINO moderates to carry the RNC banner.  Their perfect candidates include people like John McCain, Norm Coleman and Scozzafava.  Only one problem with such candidates - they always lose.  Meanwhile, the so-called right-wing Republicans like Ronald Reagan, Michelle Bachman, Bob McDonnell and even Sarah Palin always win.  Any more wonder why they will want us to field another Democrat-lite candidate for the RNC?

@Ibime,

I think these Republicans are just trying to prey on the common man's naivety of economics.

Quite the contrary. I think the person who lacks understanding of economics is the govt - Geithner inclusive. Never mind that these are the same people who have acquired so-called knowledge and are academicians and theoreticians.

Economics as far as I am concerned is a matter of common sense. The average American understands that when in debt, the best way to get out of it is to stop adding to the debt whle watching your spending and living within your means. These Economists on the other hand tells us that we have to spend our way out of a recession and a deficit. How in God's name does that make sense.

Here is what Joe Biden said in relation to the above: “Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’” Biden said. “The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you.” - http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/51162 Can someone explain to me how that makes sense economically?

@Ikomi,

I'm glad you refered to the analogy I compared to your statement as absurd, because your statement makes as much sense as that one. In the spirit of revisionism, you are now trying to change the word "tribe" that you used in the first statement to "ethno-religious groups". You try no be small. Unfortunately for you, the record is there for all to see.

Back to the same paragraph, I can see that you have totally ignored to correct the other glaring errors in it. This just confirms the dullard that you are. Everybody knows that the Shiites are the minority sect of Islam in the ME. To think that you will come on the www to declare that the Shiites are the majority sect even in Saudi Arabia goes to show that you need to keep quiet when people are talking about the ME.

Starting with such a wrong premise, it is obvious that everything else you wrote deserves to be trashed. Olodo!

@MrCrackles,

MrCrackles:
Am i missing something here or what?
The article said " christianity is a fraud"
4play were you high on Otapiapia when you posted this thread or what

Yes you are missing something - your sense of humour and appreciation of sarcasm!