Humble beginning's,Catholic... Criminologists.
Lagos, Nigeria
Joined October 2016
- Tweets6.9K
- Following659
- Followers515
- Likes10.1K
Triumphant retweeted
Before I married my wife, she was subscribed to Pastor Jerry Eze on YouTube and join his live stream every morning.
I instructed her to unsubscribe from his Channel and she did so immediately.
I then built an Altar in our home and bought a Catholic Missal.
I take the readings and the Gospel daily and sing the Responsorial Psalm, then we pray together as a couple.
That early hour with God every morning as I proclaim the Gospel with her has been so much amazing 🤩
Triumphant retweeted
Patriarchy existed to STOP OTHER MEN.
You really think men invented patriarchy to hold YOU down? You are too weak, too fragile, too irrelevant for men to waste invention on you.
Men invented patriarchy to protect their lands, food, money, resources, women and children FROM MEN.
500 years ago women didn't know what patriarchy was because it was SURVIVAL.
No police. No 911. No guns. No cell phones. If a rival tribe wanted you, they killed your men, raped you, took your land, took your food, and married you off to their sons or kept you as maids, servants, and sex slaves. That was history.
Patriarchy said: TOUCH HER AND YOU DIE. She belongs to this man, this family, this tribe. That was not oppression. That was a DEATH THREAT to other men to keep you safe.
Pregnancy = 9 months useless. Breastfeeding mother can't run, can't fight, baby cries and brings wolves.
Who hunted? MEN.
Who fought bears? MEN.
Who fought other men? MEN.
Who built houses in snow? MEN.
Who died in wars? 90% MEN.
If men left women alone to be "independent" in 1500, you would have gone EXTINCT in one winter. No food. No fire. No protection.
You are alive today because of patriarchy.
Modern luxury - AC, Uber Eats, iPhone, birth control, police made yall RETARDED and ungrateful. You think world was always safe.
You think animals don't hunt humans for food?
Who stopped all these? Patriarchy. Men who built walls, laws, armies, civilization so you can sit on TikTok with fake eyelashes and say "patriachy oppress me."
You are not oppressed. You are PROTECTED and too dumb to know it.
Without patriarchy, you wouldn't be CEOs. You'd be extinct or a sex slave to the strongest man in your own village that’s been conquered by the enemy.
Patriarchy is not why you are suffering. Patriarchy is why you are ALIVE to complain.
Triumphant retweeted
Chris Rock accuses Will Smith of practicing selective outrage and reminds him that he stayed quiet when his wife was sleeping with their son’s friend.
Will has always been the bigger star. Will takes his shirt off in movies and played Muhammad Ali, while Chris played Pookie in New Jack City. Even in animation, Will played a shark while Chris played a zebra.
But Chris says everyone knows what happened, and he had nothing to do with Will and Jada’s entanglement.
He points out that Will’s wife was sleeping with their son’s friend, and although he normally wouldn’t speak on their private business, they were the ones who brought it to the internet.
Chris ends by questioning why two people as talented as Will and Jada would stoop so low.
Triumphant retweeted
Nigerian radical Islamist leads young volunteer cadets in parade chanting “Give me AK47 to go into the infidels in Jos, in Enugu on a Sunday and spray fire on them while they worship”
Triumphant retweeted
Reaction To a Viral Video Showing Members Of a Government-Recognised Organisation In Northern Nigeria, Dressed In Uniform, Calling For AK-47 Rifles To Be Given To Them So They Can Travel To Enugu State And Att@ck Christians During Sunday Church Services. They Say They Want The Guns To K!ll “Infidels” While They Are Worshipping And Celebrating In Church👀🤦🏾♂️.
Triumphant retweeted
I didn't go to college until I was 30. This gave me a chance to see it with the perspective of an adult.
One lecture in Industrial Psychology, in particular, I will never forget.
The professor spoke about how an effective job description focused on concretely measurable tasks, not vague instructions, or characteristics.
For example, "maintain an 85% or greater average on customer feedback surveys", instead of "be cheerful and upbeat", or even "interact positively with customers".
This means that goals are clear, and performance is measurable. A job is to do something, not be something.
Once some of the students had wrapped their minds around this concept, the professor decided to do a class exercise.
He asked the female students to come up with a job description for "husband". At first, this went fine. The girls noodled around a bit with things they wanted their husbands to be (tall, etc), but he was able to gradually steer them towards describing what they wanted in terms of actions.
But then he asked the male students to define a wife in the same way.
And all the girls became upset. Some of them had full-on meltdowns.
Every single thing that a male student wanted, or expected, from his hypothetical future wife was sexist, oppressive, old-fashioned, misogynistic, patriarchal, etc.
They were literally screaming. Some of them in tears.
And I realized something pretty quickly. It wasn't the actual, concrete responsibilities of the female role that they objected to.
It was the idea of there being a female role at all, with any attached responsibilities.
These women didn't want to be wives. They wanted to be pets.
What's a pet? Well a pet is not a wife, or a friend. A pet is a creature of instinct, which you bring into your home because you like how it naturally behaves.
You get a cat because you want to behave like a cat, and do things a cat naturally does, like play with string, and purr when you pet him. If he's smart, he'll adapt to you somewhat, but he doesn't have responsibilities other than "be a cat".
If you get a wife, you get a wife so she will do things for you, specific things that are the responsibilities of wife, like care for your home, bear and raise your children, cook nutritious meals so you don't have to eat processed slop, look after your emotional well-being, and so on.
These girls didn't want to be held responsible for those things. As married women, they might have anticipated doing some of them, but only some of the time. Only when they felt like it.
The cat chases the string if and when it wants to, not because chasing the string is its job.
These young millenial women didn't realize it, but they wanted to be pets. And that's what they were in their college relationships. They hung out with guys when they wanted to, had sex with them when they wanted to, broke up with them for someone new when they wanted to.
Their relationships had no element of reciprocal responsibilities. They were perfectly at home with the idea of men having responsibilities to them, but they would repay those men if they chose, and how they chose, not how the men actually wanted.
And as I've said twice already, someone you have responsibilities to, but who has none to you, is a pet, or a child.
Since our ancestors, in a moment of foolishness and weakness, allowed women to vote, it is no longer legal to dole out the corrective spankings a great many of them both need and read pornographic novels about.
Therefore, the corrective measure, for any man who finds himself with a pet instead of a wife, is to withdraw from any husbandly duties and start actively searching for alternatives.
This can either result in a correction of the behavior, or the end of a relationship that offers no value. Either is acceptable.
This may strike some of you as dishonorable, but there is no honor in keeping a broken pact, or in serving those who despise you.
Men must have the pride and self-worth to say "I will be honored and respected, or I will depart to a place where I can be, even if I must be alone there."
Men must honor and respect themselves.
Triumphant retweeted
When women ask questions like:
"What is wrong with a single man marrying a single mother?"
This young man just phrased a response with clarity.
Triumphant retweeted
VeryDarkMan Sends a Strong Message To Davido, Accusing Him Of Hypocrisy And Using His Fans For Political Interests.
“Davido, Henceforth, I Don’t Want To See You Talking About Nigerian Politics Again Because You’re a User And a Hypocrite. You Used Your Fans. Stay Out Of Nigerian Politics, Because If You Don’t, I Will Come For You, Finish You And Expose You Completely. You Don’t Care About The People Of Osun Or Nigerians. It’s All About Your Selfish Agenda And Interests. That’s Why Your Uncle Has Done Nothing Since Becoming Governor Of Osun State. No Infrastructure, No Employment, Nothing! With Your Influence And Exposure, One Would Have Expected You To Help Attract Investors, Development And Other Opportunities To Osun State.”
Triumphant retweeted
Marriages survived because men had the heart to endure women.
It lasted for generations because of MEN. Because of our emotional intelligence and our compassion for our wives.
Not because women were good partners. Because men learned to overlook a lot of stupid shit women do just to let peace reign.
Let's be real, women are NOT easy to live with.
They are not romantic. Their whole idea of romance is RECEIVING. What he bought for me, where he took me, what he did for me. Never what they give.
They are not funny. They are overly sensitive, they hate accountability, they hate saying sorry, they hate initiating sex with their own husbands, and they are controlling as hell. Stubborn and rebellious.
And that domestic violence you hear about in marriages? Most of it is STARTED by the wife. Pushing, slapping, throwing things, talking reckless, provoking until the man reacts. Then she wants to play victim.
Look at any relationship that doesn't have a man in it,it doesn't work.
Lesbians? Highest divorce rate. Highest abuse rate. Because there is no man there to tolerate their violence and their emotions. Two women together can't handle each other.
Female friendships? Even worse. Pure gossip, backbiting, jealousy, cutting each other off over the most childish things.
They will have 10 female friends by 2022. By 2026, only 2 are left. She has fought with ALL of them. Every single one is now an enemy.
But men are the problem.
Triumphant retweeted
Because for far too long we allowed it. And the truth is some of us never even realized it was this way. I’m the mother of 3 sons and also have been raped. It was not until my sons started getting to the dating age that I realized how quickly and permanently a false rape charge could ruin their lives after seeing some headline about a case like that. It’s one of those thing most people assume is not treated with a major double standard. Probably in the same way so many people truly even still believe that “no one is transing kids” even after hospitals announced they’re halting their children’s trans surgeries they were previously performing. “Nobody is cutting off a teenage girl’s breasts! That is just not a thing!” Ok. Same thing. “Being too drunk to consent means it is rape” but only if you are a female and if the male is also too drunk to consent, he has a penis which can get erect even in a coma…but he’s now a rapist. It is absurd and HAS TO END.
Triumphant retweeted
EXPOSED: The Omani pilot who attempted to crash the FlyDubai airline from Dubai to Israel, has revealed his original plans for the first time. You won't believe your ears.
This guy 😂😂😂
When I left Islam, I committed apostasy. I was dehumanized and tortured for it.
I couldn’t believe the evil my own people were capable of.
@liamtuffs1 asked a Muslim on his podcast: “so if someone left Islam, you’d kill em?”
His response confirms what happened to me.
Triumphant retweeted
🚨🇵🇹 Cristiano Ronaldo: “The coach had broken his word to me.
At the end of the match I only wanted everything to finish with the victory and to be alone. I did not go to greet the fans. A failing that is solely my responsibility and that should not have happened. I apologise to the Portuguese who supported us intensely there, I apologise to the fans, and I apologise to those who, without being Portuguese, may have travelled there to see me and whom I may have disappointed.
Forty-eight hours later we had a conversation — myself, the coach and Simão Coutinho — since he had been the one accompanying our conversations in August. It was a deep moment, very frank, without any kind of filter.
We agreed that there was only one way to close this “case”: that the coach repeat what he had just told me in private, in the presence of Simão Coutinho, but in the press room.
What was agreed was simple: the coach would begin the press conference with this subject, seeking to close the matter by telling the truth. He would say that I never asked to play any minutes, that it was the coach and no one else who proposed the plan for this camp to me, and that it was a mistake to put me on to warm up and then not bring me on, and that if it happened again he would not do it.
We ended that meeting with the coach asking me for a hug, promising me that he would say at the conference what he had just said to me, and that the matter would be overcome. I would not play in Denmark and I would play the match at the Dragão. All of this in the presence of Simão Coutinho, always.
At the coach’s request, a meeting then took place between himself, Simão Coutinho and Tiago Craveiro by videoconference, in which what we had discussed was summarised.
A short document was produced which I myself validated and which, with my knowledge, was delivered to the coach, as he had requested.
The conference was what is known: the posture had nothing to do with our meeting; I heard expressions and an aggressiveness that I do not believe I deserved, an attitude of “I want, I can and I command” that he never showed me, not even remotely, in private the day before.
The notes I validated were the following:
“I think it is important, also because it is the truth, to clarify a few things before talking about Denmark:
1. I myself, and no one else, proposed to Cristiano a plan for him this sporting season with the National Team. It was a long and very good conversation.
2. I know how much he lives and loves the national team and the weight he has in the world, and even more the weight and the positive influence he has had on the national team for 24 consecutive years.
3. The plan I proposed to Cristiano was accepted.
4. He never questioned my options. He was exemplary, loyal and professional.
5. The match in Norway was not part of the plan I drew up for him. However, I felt that he had managed to recover physically from the first match and I warned him that I might have to use him. Cristiano agreed.
6. I made a mistake by putting someone of the stature of Pelé or Maradona on to warm up and then not putting him in the game. If it were today I would not do it.
7. To close the subject: I want Cristiano in the National Team. In fact I do not want him a little, I want him a lot. Fortunately he also believes in me. He believed at Al Nassr and he does here as well.
8. About not greeting the fans. We have already spoken about that. Someone who has played more than 230 matches for the national team does not receive lessons from me on love for Portugal. It was a moment of frustration that erases nothing. He is the player who gives the most autographs, takes the most selfies, and shows the most affection to the fans. Let us not invent problems where they do not exist. When we are not happy we react. That was all.
None of these notes, therefore, said that the coach should even apologise to me.
It was the second time he had broken his word to me”.
Triumphant retweeted
🚨🇵🇹 Cristiano Ronaldo: “I decided to leave the camp without waiting for any further breach of word. For me the truth is still the most important thing in the relationship between people. However much it hurts, let them tell me the truth.
In fact, in a conversation I had with the President of the FPF and with the coach on the morning of the day of that press conference — they can certainly confirm this — I reaffirmed that if they did not want me there they should tell me. It was enough for them to be frank with me. I would accept that and I promised that we would prepare something beautiful, as I dream will happen, and no one would be left angry.
I remember it as if it were today. They replied in unison that no. That my place was in the National Team.
Never, at any moment, have I interfered in any technical or tactical decision of any coach or national team manager in almost 25 years of career.
I accept, for better or worse, what they propose that I do. I respect the decision, and when they break their word to me, I feel that my place is not there.
I also owe an apology to my national team teammates for having left the camp.
Despite the absolute breach of trust in the coach’s word, as those who witnessed these conversations can attest, I should not have done it. The responsibility is exclusively mine.
I apologise to the Portuguese people once again, but the breaking of one’s word has, for me, a defining impact. I felt that, from that point on, my remaining would only harm the working group, and I did what I have always said I would do if I did not feel useful: I packed my bags and left.
The consequence of this act of mine must be assessed and punished by the Portuguese Football Federation. I understand that the punishment should have no mitigating factors. I am not just any player; I am team captain, and that constitutes an aggravating factor.
I have already apologised, but I know that attitudes must have consequences. Anyone who is in football as I am knows that, regardless of each person’s status, the rules are the same for everyone.
On this subject, I have heard a great deal of talk about farewell matches, that I must have a dignified farewell and that the Federation wants to give me that opportunity.
I learned in life, often hungry and with nothing to eat, that no one gives anything to anyone.
I can promise all my fans, naturally and especially all Portuguese people, that we will have one or more farewell matches; there will be time for that.
But when I think of the national team, what I really think of is competing. That is what I thought on the day I was given the news of my father’s death.
I was at a camp with our national team and I decided to stay there until the end of the match the following day. I did for the country what I would never do for any club.
Therefore, if I am physically well, playing for my club, with goals I hope, after serving the suspension that may be applied to me, I will be available, as I have always been until today, to compete and win for our national team.
This is, believe me, the purest of truths.
Cristiano Ronaldo”.
Triumphant retweeted
Truly shocking culture war on #BBCQT
Former Conservative now Reform UK's Suella Braverman who was born in London says,
"I'm not an English person"
Then suggests you can only be English if you have a lineage or ancestry which dates back a few generations.
A black man in the audience says he considers himself English because he was born here, and that she is enforcing a racist view that says being born here does not make you English.
Oli Dugmore, "The political function of what she was saying earlier is that you can only be English if you are white.. That is a racist point of view"
Fiona Bruce then repeatedly asks Suella Braverman to address Oli Dugmore's allegations, she repeatedly refuses to adding, "I do not call myself English, I am British Asian"
At the end, Freudian slip, "I don't consider myself to be white, er er er English. I'm Asian of Asian heritage. I don't see why that's controversial"
My view: Braverman is entitled to describe her own identity as British rather than English.
But turning that into a definition of who can be English is racial exclusion dressed up as patriotism.
A Black or Asian person born and raised here, speaking with the local accent, sharing the life and culture of this country, is no less English than anyone else.
England has never been a racial category. It is a country, a culture and a shared civic identity, and trying to make whiteness the entry requirement is both historically illiterate and deeply divisive.
Braverman has previously argued that people without generational ties to England should not claim to be English.