Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

If Rwanda is truly governed by its Constitution, then someone should explain why a cabinet minister Dr. Jean Damascene BIZIMANA at Youth Forum felt the need to begin by saying: “Respected First Lady, I thank you for giving me this opportunity in this Youth Forum.” Under Rwandan law, ministers...

sheilakamuzinzi's profile picture

U.Sheila C kamuzinzi 🇷🇼🇸🇬

4,811 subscribers

15,973 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

“IYALOJA GENERAL” IS ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL Ever since the purported “installation” of a new ”Iyaloja” in Edo State by Mrs. Folasade Tinubu-Ojo, who styles herself the Iyaloja-General of Nigeria, I have been inundated with questions asking me to comment. Because of my ongoing investigation into the Edo State vs EuroAfrica CCI $250 Million deal, I initially held back. But after reviewing the Nigerian Constitution and relevant statutory frameworks, it is clear that the very concept and office of an Iyaloja-General is not only alien to Edo culture, but also illegal unconstitutional, and without statutory authority. Consequently, it has no legal power to confer titles in Edo State. Let us break this down carefully: 1. Is “Iyaloja-General” a constituted office? No. There is no federal constitutional or statutory office called “Iyaloja-General.” The 1999 Constitution (as amended) lists federal and state offices, commissions, and authorities. The title “Iyaloja-General” does not appear anywhere. It is a traditional or civil-society designation, not a public office created by law. 2. Do states have market women’s associations? Yes, but these are typically private associations, registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020. They enjoy legal personality but have no governmental authority. Some states, such as Lagos, have created state-level market councils by law, but this is not universal and is strictly state-specific. 3. In Benin, what regulates the Iyeki role? The Oba of Benin has made it clear: market leadership in Benin is guided by the Iyeki system, a traditional office. Traders in each market choose their Iyeki, and the Oba’s palace confirms the selection. Iyeki duties are cultural and administrative, rooted in Benin tradition. There is no Edo State statute that overrides this customary process. 4. What authority does an “Iyaloja-General” have in Edo? None. Under the Nigerian Constitution, there is no power for an “Iyaloja-General” to install market leaders in Edo. At best, such an appointment would carry weight only inside her private association, not within Edo’s traditional or legal framework. For context, Lagos State is considering a Market Authority Bill that proposes an advisory council where an Iyaloja-General may be mentioned. But that is Lagos State law, not federal law, and it does not extend to Edo. 5. How much is the Edo State Government backing this? Despite the Oba’s firm rejection of the Iyaloja concept in Benin, the so-called installation was hosted inside the Edo State Government House. Reports confirm that top officials attended: the governor’s sister (who's the "first lady" of Edo State, representing her brother), the Commissioner for Women Affairs, the Commissioner for Health (Dr Cyril Oshiomhole), and several others in Governor Okpebholo’s administration. During the event, promises of “2.5 million votes” for President Tinubu in the 2027 elections were openly made. That raises urgent questions: • Was this really a customary installation, or a political rally disguised as tradition? • Why has the Edo State Governor himself remained silent since? • Why did the state government lend institutional weight to an office that is neither constitutional, nor statutory, nor indigenous to Edo culture? 6. On the ethnic spin Some have tried to frame this as an ethnic quarrel. That is misleading. The Oba of Benin never reduced the matter to who was installed, but to what was being installed. His objection was categorical: the very concept of an Iyaloja-General is alien to Benin tradition. Therefore, even if it had been an Edo woman from Ogbe who was “installed,” it would still be wrong. This is a matter of legality and culture, not ethnicity. My conclusion From a legal perspective, the title “Iyaloja-General of Nigeria” is nonexistent in the Constitution. From a cultural perspective, it is alien to Benin tradition.
0:15

“IYALOJA GENERAL” IS ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL Ever since the purported “installation” of a new ”Iyaloja” in Edo State by Mrs. Folasade Tinubu-Ojo, who styles herself the Iyaloja-General of Nigeria, I have been inundated with questions asking me to comment. Because of my ongoing investigation into the Edo State vs EuroAfrica CCI $250 Million deal, I initially held back. But after reviewing the Nigerian Constitution and relevant statutory frameworks, it is clear that the very concept and office of an Iyaloja-General is not only alien to Edo culture, but also illegal unconstitutional, and without statutory authority. Consequently, it has no legal power to confer titles in Edo State. Let us break this down carefully: 1. Is “Iyaloja-General” a constituted office? No. There is no federal constitutional or statutory office called “Iyaloja-General.” The 1999 Constitution (as amended) lists federal and state offices, commissions, and authorities. The title “Iyaloja-General” does not appear anywhere. It is a traditional or civil-society designation, not a public office created by law. 2. Do states have market women’s associations? Yes, but these are typically private associations, registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020. They enjoy legal personality but have no governmental authority. Some states, such as Lagos, have created state-level market councils by law, but this is not universal and is strictly state-specific. 3. In Benin, what regulates the Iyeki role? The Oba of Benin has made it clear: market leadership in Benin is guided by the Iyeki system, a traditional office. Traders in each market choose their Iyeki, and the Oba’s palace confirms the selection. Iyeki duties are cultural and administrative, rooted in Benin tradition. There is no Edo State statute that overrides this customary process. 4. What authority does an “Iyaloja-General” have in Edo? None. Under the Nigerian Constitution, there is no power for an “Iyaloja-General” to install market leaders in Edo. At best, such an appointment would carry weight only inside her private association, not within Edo’s traditional or legal framework. For context, Lagos State is considering a Market Authority Bill that proposes an advisory council where an Iyaloja-General may be mentioned. But that is Lagos State law, not federal law, and it does not extend to Edo. 5. How much is the Edo State Government backing this? Despite the Oba’s firm rejection of the Iyaloja concept in Benin, the so-called installation was hosted inside the Edo State Government House. Reports confirm that top officials attended: the governor’s sister (who's the "first lady" of Edo State, representing her brother), the Commissioner for Women Affairs, the Commissioner for Health (Dr Cyril Oshiomhole), and several others in Governor Okpebholo’s administration. During the event, promises of “2.5 million votes” for President Tinubu in the 2027 elections were openly made. That raises urgent questions: • Was this really a customary installation, or a political rally disguised as tradition? • Why has the Edo State Governor himself remained silent since? • Why did the state government lend institutional weight to an office that is neither constitutional, nor statutory, nor indigenous to Edo culture? 6. On the ethnic spin Some have tried to frame this as an ethnic quarrel. That is misleading. The Oba of Benin never reduced the matter to who was installed, but to what was being installed. His objection was categorical: the very concept of an Iyaloja-General is alien to Benin tradition. Therefore, even if it had been an Edo woman from Ogbe who was “installed,” it would still be wrong. This is a matter of legality and culture, not ethnicity. My conclusion From a legal perspective, the title “Iyaloja-General of Nigeria” is nonexistent in the Constitution. From a cultural perspective, it is alien to Benin tradition.

IZZY OMORUYI

23,701 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

America is a people, not an idea, not a marketplace, and certainly not a “creedal nation.” The modern absurdity of the “creedal nation” thesis, endlessly repeated by hostile elites and the managerial class, including people like Neil Gorsuch, rests upon the belief that America is fundamentally held together not by a continuous historical people, but by adherence to abstract constitutional propositions. A constitution is not a mystical tablet suspended above history, nor a set of abstract propositions existing independently of the people, and thus the civilization, that produced them. It is the political expression of a particular people shaped by a continuous cultural inheritance and a shared conception of legitimacy. The American constitutional system did not emerge from universal abstractions floating in a vacuum; it arose from a distinct Anglo-American founding population and the cultural hegemony it established, rooted within the broader continuity of the European peoples who settled and shaped the early republic. Their understanding of liberty and sovereignty had already been formed long before the Declaration of Independence gave formal expression to those assumptions. The American founding was not the birth of an abstract creed for all mankind, but the formalization of a political order already embodied within a particular civilization and the people from whom it emerged. Once that continuity is severed, once the founding people for whom the constitution served as a reflection of their own character begin to fade from history or disappear altogether, constitutional interpretation becomes increasingly unstable, because the text remains while the community that once gave it coherence gradually recedes from existence. The words survive, yet their meaning shifts according to the assumptions of those interpreting them. “Liberty,” “equality,” “rights,” and even citizenship itself become endlessly elastic concepts, detached from the framework that once constrained them. Under such conditions, the creed ceases to function as a real foundation and instead becomes a rhetorical instrument through which competing factions impose their own political preferences while cloaking them in the language of constitutional inevitability. The constitution itself slowly ceases to function as an inheritance and instead becomes a battleground over who possesses the authority to redefine the nation. This is the contradiction at the center of the “creedal nation” thesis. A creed cannot sustain a fixed national meaning once severed from the people who produced it. If the White population from which the constitutional order emerged is transformed beyond recognition or disappears altogether, then the creed itself becomes untethered from any stable interpretation. The constitutional language remains, but its meaning shifts with each successive population interpreting it through different assumptions about society and legitimacy. Under such conditions, the nation no longer possesses a stable constitutional identity, because the historical community from which that identity emerged no longer exists in the same civilizational sense. What remains is not fidelity to a permanent constitutional inheritance, but an endless struggle over the power to redefine the nation itself.
0:15

America is a people, not an idea, not a marketplace, and certainly not a “creedal nation.” The modern absurdity of the “creedal nation” thesis, endlessly repeated by hostile elites and the managerial class, including people like Neil Gorsuch, rests upon the belief that America is fundamentally held together not by a continuous historical people, but by adherence to abstract constitutional propositions. A constitution is not a mystical tablet suspended above history, nor a set of abstract propositions existing independently of the people, and thus the civilization, that produced them. It is the political expression of a particular people shaped by a continuous cultural inheritance and a shared conception of legitimacy. The American constitutional system did not emerge from universal abstractions floating in a vacuum; it arose from a distinct Anglo-American founding population and the cultural hegemony it established, rooted within the broader continuity of the European peoples who settled and shaped the early republic. Their understanding of liberty and sovereignty had already been formed long before the Declaration of Independence gave formal expression to those assumptions. The American founding was not the birth of an abstract creed for all mankind, but the formalization of a political order already embodied within a particular civilization and the people from whom it emerged. Once that continuity is severed, once the founding people for whom the constitution served as a reflection of their own character begin to fade from history or disappear altogether, constitutional interpretation becomes increasingly unstable, because the text remains while the community that once gave it coherence gradually recedes from existence. The words survive, yet their meaning shifts according to the assumptions of those interpreting them. “Liberty,” “equality,” “rights,” and even citizenship itself become endlessly elastic concepts, detached from the framework that once constrained them. Under such conditions, the creed ceases to function as a real foundation and instead becomes a rhetorical instrument through which competing factions impose their own political preferences while cloaking them in the language of constitutional inevitability. The constitution itself slowly ceases to function as an inheritance and instead becomes a battleground over who possesses the authority to redefine the nation. This is the contradiction at the center of the “creedal nation” thesis. A creed cannot sustain a fixed national meaning once severed from the people who produced it. If the White population from which the constitutional order emerged is transformed beyond recognition or disappears altogether, then the creed itself becomes untethered from any stable interpretation. The constitutional language remains, but its meaning shifts with each successive population interpreting it through different assumptions about society and legitimacy. Under such conditions, the nation no longer possesses a stable constitutional identity, because the historical community from which that identity emerged no longer exists in the same civilizational sense. What remains is not fidelity to a permanent constitutional inheritance, but an endless struggle over the power to redefine the nation itself.

Chad Crowley

17,235 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Our call: Arrest and neutralise the destabilisers. Dismantle and prosecute their financiers. Enforce full accountability. The Republic now finds itself at a juncture where hesitation is a luxury it can no longer afford. The State must consolidate its defenses—not merely in rhetoric, but through deliberate, codified action under the full weight of constitutional authority, national-security doctrine, and the discipline demanded of a mature democracy. The pattern of coordinated disruptions emerging from the Duterte-aligned bloc bears all the hallmarks of a structured destabilisation effort: disinformation deployment, agitation tactics, recruitment of sympathisers within institutions, and attempts to fracture the chain of command. Under any reading of the Constitution, the Revised Penal Code, and the Human Security framework, these manoeuvres fall squarely within the ambit of threats to national stability. Thus, the Marcos administration is duty-bound to respond with calibrated precision: 👉🏻 Activate and harmonise all national-security instruments. Through the National Security Council, NICA, AFP, PNP, and allied legislative partners, the government must move in unified posture— establishing a common operating picture, shared intelligence repositories, and rapid reporting channels across executive clusters. This is well within the State’s authority under Article VII, Section 17 and the President’s power of control over all executive departments. 👉🏻 Expedite investigative and prosecutorial processes. Accelerate fact-finding and case build-ups under the mandates of RA10175, RA11479 within constitutional bounds, and the Revised Penal Code provisions on sedition, inciting to rebellion, and conspiracy against the government. Speed is not optional, rather it is a safeguard against the metastasis of subversive narratives. 👉🏻 Enforce accountability inside the perimeter of governance. Any public official— civilian or uniformed— who facilitates, shelters, or coordinates with destabilising actors must be subjected to the full sanctions of administrative and criminal law, including the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, the Code of Conduct for Public Officials, and internal disciplinary regimes of their respective institutions. Complicity is not neutrality, rather it is participation. 👉🏻 Reaffirm the primacy of the chain of command and the authority of the State. The President, as Commander-in-Chief under Article VII, Section 18, is empowered to suppress lawless violence, rebellion, and coordinated attacks on the stability of the Republic. Any group attempting to weaponise disorder must confront a government that is both constitutionally anchored and operationally unified. 👉🏻 Communicate with strategic clarity and doctrinal discipline. Public briefings, intelligence synopses, and inter-agency updates must be transparent, coordinated, and firm— demonstrating that the government is not merely observing the threat landscape, but actively shaping it. Information dominance is a fundamental principle of national security. For those testing the tensile strength of the Republic, the State must respond with the unambiguous posture of a government unwilling to yield ground. For those sowing division, the administration must embody steadiness— guided by law, fortified by intelligence, and resolute in mission. Not a corridor of governance should be compromised. Not a pressure point of the State should be ceded. The Philippines shall not be bent by actors escaping from the light of justice. In this crucible, the Marcos administration has the rare opportunity to demonstrate command presence, constitutional fidelity, and disciplined nation-building— proving to citizens and adversaries alike that the Republic’s institutions, once tested, do not waver. They endure. They respond. They prevail. Armed Forces of the Philippines Bongbong Marcos Criminal Investigation and Detection Group Department of Justice (DOJ)
0:49

Our call: Arrest and neutralise the destabilisers. Dismantle and prosecute their financiers. Enforce full accountability. The Republic now finds itself at a juncture where hesitation is a luxury it can no longer afford. The State must consolidate its defenses—not merely in rhetoric, but through deliberate, codified action under the full weight of constitutional authority, national-security doctrine, and the discipline demanded of a mature democracy. The pattern of coordinated disruptions emerging from the Duterte-aligned bloc bears all the hallmarks of a structured destabilisation effort: disinformation deployment, agitation tactics, recruitment of sympathisers within institutions, and attempts to fracture the chain of command. Under any reading of the Constitution, the Revised Penal Code, and the Human Security framework, these manoeuvres fall squarely within the ambit of threats to national stability. Thus, the Marcos administration is duty-bound to respond with calibrated precision: 👉🏻 Activate and harmonise all national-security instruments. Through the National Security Council, NICA, AFP, PNP, and allied legislative partners, the government must move in unified posture— establishing a common operating picture, shared intelligence repositories, and rapid reporting channels across executive clusters. This is well within the State’s authority under Article VII, Section 17 and the President’s power of control over all executive departments. 👉🏻 Expedite investigative and prosecutorial processes. Accelerate fact-finding and case build-ups under the mandates of RA10175, RA11479 within constitutional bounds, and the Revised Penal Code provisions on sedition, inciting to rebellion, and conspiracy against the government. Speed is not optional, rather it is a safeguard against the metastasis of subversive narratives. 👉🏻 Enforce accountability inside the perimeter of governance. Any public official— civilian or uniformed— who facilitates, shelters, or coordinates with destabilising actors must be subjected to the full sanctions of administrative and criminal law, including the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, the Code of Conduct for Public Officials, and internal disciplinary regimes of their respective institutions. Complicity is not neutrality, rather it is participation. 👉🏻 Reaffirm the primacy of the chain of command and the authority of the State. The President, as Commander-in-Chief under Article VII, Section 18, is empowered to suppress lawless violence, rebellion, and coordinated attacks on the stability of the Republic. Any group attempting to weaponise disorder must confront a government that is both constitutionally anchored and operationally unified. 👉🏻 Communicate with strategic clarity and doctrinal discipline. Public briefings, intelligence synopses, and inter-agency updates must be transparent, coordinated, and firm— demonstrating that the government is not merely observing the threat landscape, but actively shaping it. Information dominance is a fundamental principle of national security. For those testing the tensile strength of the Republic, the State must respond with the unambiguous posture of a government unwilling to yield ground. For those sowing division, the administration must embody steadiness— guided by law, fortified by intelligence, and resolute in mission. Not a corridor of governance should be compromised. Not a pressure point of the State should be ceded. The Philippines shall not be bent by actors escaping from the light of justice. In this crucible, the Marcos administration has the rare opportunity to demonstrate command presence, constitutional fidelity, and disciplined nation-building— proving to citizens and adversaries alike that the Republic’s institutions, once tested, do not waver. They endure. They respond. They prevail. Armed Forces of the Philippines Bongbong Marcos Criminal Investigation and Detection Group Department of Justice (DOJ)

The King

23,880 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

The Zimbabwean Senate has voted in favour of the controversial Constitution Amendment Bill (No. 3) by 75 votes to 4, with one abstention. The opposition CCC, which has 27 senators in the 80-member chamber, voted alongside ZANUPF. The bill seeks to extend the presidential term from five years to seven years, provide for the future election of a president by Parliament rather than through a direct popular vote, and make a number of other far reaching constitutional changes. The vote means that the bill now awaits the signature of Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa before becoming law. Its passage marks one of the most significant constitutional changes in Zimbabwe’s recent history and is likely to remain the subject of intense political, legal and constitutional debate. The bill also seeks to allow Mnangagwa to influence the selection of his successor and potentially block his deputy, General Constantino Chiwenga, from succeeding him. If and when Mnangagwa signs it into law and there is no significant resistance from within ZANUPF, the military or broader society, it will signal a major setback to Chiwenga’s presidential ambitions, short of an intervention that changes the political landscape. More importantly, it will represent a further consolidation of ZANUPF’s hold on power and diminish the prospects of Zimbabwe having a president from outside the ruling party in the foreseeable future. The self evident story is how Mnangagwa has been assisted by influential business interests, including wealthy individuals aligned with ZANUPF, who may have more to lose from a Chiwenga presidency than from the continuation of the current political order. The only developments that could realistically halt this process would be a military intervention and a sustained national uprising. At present, however, all of these possibilities appear distant from political reality.
0:18

The Zimbabwean Senate has voted in favour of the controversial Constitution Amendment Bill (No. 3) by 75 votes to 4, with one abstention. The opposition CCC, which has 27 senators in the 80-member chamber, voted alongside ZANUPF. The bill seeks to extend the presidential term from five years to seven years, provide for the future election of a president by Parliament rather than through a direct popular vote, and make a number of other far reaching constitutional changes. The vote means that the bill now awaits the signature of Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa before becoming law. Its passage marks one of the most significant constitutional changes in Zimbabwe’s recent history and is likely to remain the subject of intense political, legal and constitutional debate. The bill also seeks to allow Mnangagwa to influence the selection of his successor and potentially block his deputy, General Constantino Chiwenga, from succeeding him. If and when Mnangagwa signs it into law and there is no significant resistance from within ZANUPF, the military or broader society, it will signal a major setback to Chiwenga’s presidential ambitions, short of an intervention that changes the political landscape. More importantly, it will represent a further consolidation of ZANUPF’s hold on power and diminish the prospects of Zimbabwe having a president from outside the ruling party in the foreseeable future. The self evident story is how Mnangagwa has been assisted by influential business interests, including wealthy individuals aligned with ZANUPF, who may have more to lose from a Chiwenga presidency than from the continuation of the current political order. The only developments that could realistically halt this process would be a military intervention and a sustained national uprising. At present, however, all of these possibilities appear distant from political reality.

Hopewell Chin’ono

99,073 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

This is just an ignorant question. Fox News’ Peter Doocy to WH Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre: “Say that the Pentagon at some point picks up an incoming nuke, it's 11pm. Who do you call? The First Lady?" What if it was 2am, 3am, or 5am? Presidents sleep too, as hard as that is to believe. If you think that when a president goes to sleep the US government seizes all operations and security measures, you are ignorant. - Yes, Biden is old. - Yes he needs more sleep. - No this is not an honest question by Doocy. It’s basically media engagement farming.
0:17

This is just an ignorant question. Fox News’ Peter Doocy to WH Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre: “Say that the Pentagon at some point picks up an incoming nuke, it's 11pm. Who do you call? The First Lady?" What if it was 2am, 3am, or 5am? Presidents sleep too, as hard as that is to believe. If you think that when a president goes to sleep the US government seizes all operations and security measures, you are ignorant. - Yes, Biden is old. - Yes he needs more sleep. - No this is not an honest question by Doocy. It’s basically media engagement farming.

Brian Krassenstein

4,251,803 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

To Keir Starmer The highest court in our land has confirmed that the law is as stated by women’s rights groups. Women have toiled, suffered abuse and vilification, and spent a fortune to get to this point. Just to have the law confirmed as what it obviously always was. Trans activists have attacked and hounded feminists, loudly and often violently attempting to prevent us from meeting to discuss our rights, and defacing monuments. These images from yesterday should alarm you as they do us. Years of institutional indulgence have left activists emboldened to show their desire to commit violence against women in broad daylight and in public. Women’s safety is at risk if you do not take strong and immediate action. It is a dangerous moment for the women in this fight. Now we have labour MPs and ministers of your own government, whose job is to apply the rule of law, plotting to undermine this ruling. Will you, our Prime Minister, stamp out this subterfuge? Will you put an end to the misogynistic attempts to destroy everything that belongs to women? Will you finally undo over a decade of bad decisions and guidance stemming from your predecessors and end this war decisively? Anyone seeking to defy the law of the land should leave government. The law has spoken, will you?
0:17

To Keir Starmer The highest court in our land has confirmed that the law is as stated by women’s rights groups. Women have toiled, suffered abuse and vilification, and spent a fortune to get to this point. Just to have the law confirmed as what it obviously always was. Trans activists have attacked and hounded feminists, loudly and often violently attempting to prevent us from meeting to discuss our rights, and defacing monuments. These images from yesterday should alarm you as they do us. Years of institutional indulgence have left activists emboldened to show their desire to commit violence against women in broad daylight and in public. Women’s safety is at risk if you do not take strong and immediate action. It is a dangerous moment for the women in this fight. Now we have labour MPs and ministers of your own government, whose job is to apply the rule of law, plotting to undermine this ruling. Will you, our Prime Minister, stamp out this subterfuge? Will you put an end to the misogynistic attempts to destroy everything that belongs to women? Will you finally undo over a decade of bad decisions and guidance stemming from your predecessors and end this war decisively? Anyone seeking to defy the law of the land should leave government. The law has spoken, will you?

Women's Rights Network - WRN

91,350 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

🇩🇪‼️🚨 NO HOUSE FOR YOU! Right-wingers and conspiracy theorists might not be able to buy houses in Germany soon! A new bill from the Ministry of Construction by Verena Hubertz suggests that communities should be able to block real estate sales if the buyer is suspected of pursuing "unconstitutional aspirations." The ministry’s stated goal is to "strengthen the common good and prevent social grievances." Cities and municipalities should be allowed to check who is behind a real estate purchase and what this person thinks. It is enough if authorities assume that the buyer’s views could have a "political effect" in the long term. The municipality can then obtain information from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, review the purchase, and, if in doubt, exercise its right of first refusal. Digital ID and no anonymity on social media already sounds nice? Post something on X and you can’t buy a house anymore… We’ll see if this bill will pass, but it’s suggested by the current government majority coalition. Crazy that the current ruling party wants this.
0:10

🇩🇪‼️🚨 NO HOUSE FOR YOU! Right-wingers and conspiracy theorists might not be able to buy houses in Germany soon! A new bill from the Ministry of Construction by Verena Hubertz suggests that communities should be able to block real estate sales if the buyer is suspected of pursuing "unconstitutional aspirations." The ministry’s stated goal is to "strengthen the common good and prevent social grievances." Cities and municipalities should be allowed to check who is behind a real estate purchase and what this person thinks. It is enough if authorities assume that the buyer’s views could have a "political effect" in the long term. The municipality can then obtain information from the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, review the purchase, and, if in doubt, exercise its right of first refusal. Digital ID and no anonymity on social media already sounds nice? Post something on X and you can’t buy a house anymore… We’ll see if this bill will pass, but it’s suggested by the current government majority coalition. Crazy that the current ruling party wants this.

Lord Bebo

52,341 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

The most brutal form of liberal authoritarianism has arrived in Hungary. The new Prime Minister has submitted a proposal to arbitrarily remove the President and replace him with his own puppet, pushing Hungary into years of constitutional crisis. Since the President signs all laws into force, there is a serious legal question whether any further legislation (!) signed by an illegitimate president will remain valid. The political persecution of opponents continues. First, Hungarians were denied the right to re-elect Viktor Orbán. Now they are being denied the right to re-elect Fidesz MPs who have served in Parliament for more than 12 years. At the same time, the government is terminating the mandates of the heads of constitutional institutions, including judges of the Constitutional Court. These measures are plainly incompatible with Hungary’s Constitution, as well as with the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has become one of the most prolific parliamentary speakers in modern history - on a level with Fidel Castro - spending hours every day shouting, pointing fingers, and threatening the opposition from the podium. The attached video speaks for itself. This is not how a thousand-year-old European nation should be governed.
0:15

The most brutal form of liberal authoritarianism has arrived in Hungary. The new Prime Minister has submitted a proposal to arbitrarily remove the President and replace him with his own puppet, pushing Hungary into years of constitutional crisis. Since the President signs all laws into force, there is a serious legal question whether any further legislation (!) signed by an illegitimate president will remain valid. The political persecution of opponents continues. First, Hungarians were denied the right to re-elect Viktor Orbán. Now they are being denied the right to re-elect Fidesz MPs who have served in Parliament for more than 12 years. At the same time, the government is terminating the mandates of the heads of constitutional institutions, including judges of the Constitutional Court. These measures are plainly incompatible with Hungary’s Constitution, as well as with the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has become one of the most prolific parliamentary speakers in modern history - on a level with Fidel Castro - spending hours every day shouting, pointing fingers, and threatening the opposition from the podium. The attached video speaks for itself. This is not how a thousand-year-old European nation should be governed.

Balázs Orbán

55,184 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Is Election Commission of India or BJP trying to support minority TVK Vijay . A person is considered to be a Chief Minister only after: * Proving his party majority in the legislative assembly * He should be invited by the Governor for swearing in as a single majority party. * And protocols to provided only after swearing in on behalf of the honourable Governor of TN. Until that happens, it is considered to be a Governors Rule under Constitutional Article. The velumani (DGP) has no authority to assign Chief Minister-level convoy or protocol before a government is formally formed and before the Governor’s approval. TVK Vijay has not yet proven a majority in the Assembly and has not been officially announced as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. I Personally need Sandeep Rai Rathore IPS🇮🇳 to remember something you were promoted as DGP in DMK government and appointed as first ever Commissioner of Avadi. Then as Tamil Nadu Police something went gone under you which made a very bad impression against the government (Armstrong murder) so you were removed from COP for GREATER CHENNAI POLICE -GCP . I accept that you were in UPSC DGP Panel that doesn’t mean you were not recognised by DMK so your working out of nomes to TVK. Its not a duty and a decorum of a DGP amd especially of a HOPF of TN. If Sandeep Rai Rathore IPS🇮🇳 is so much affectionate with Vijay let him go and join as a Personal security to Him. As a tax payer i have the right to question how can my money be spent for CM security with him being acknowledged only to show the DGP wisdom can he do this is Amit Shah Sleeping. I urge गृहमंत्री कार्यालय, HMO India to look into this matter and take appropriate action if any rules or protocols have been violated.
0:16

Is Election Commission of India or BJP trying to support minority TVK Vijay . A person is considered to be a Chief Minister only after: * Proving his party majority in the legislative assembly * He should be invited by the Governor for swearing in as a single majority party. * And protocols to provided only after swearing in on behalf of the honourable Governor of TN. Until that happens, it is considered to be a Governors Rule under Constitutional Article. The velumani (DGP) has no authority to assign Chief Minister-level convoy or protocol before a government is formally formed and before the Governor’s approval. TVK Vijay has not yet proven a majority in the Assembly and has not been officially announced as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. I Personally need Sandeep Rai Rathore IPS🇮🇳 to remember something you were promoted as DGP in DMK government and appointed as first ever Commissioner of Avadi. Then as Tamil Nadu Police something went gone under you which made a very bad impression against the government (Armstrong murder) so you were removed from COP for GREATER CHENNAI POLICE -GCP . I accept that you were in UPSC DGP Panel that doesn’t mean you were not recognised by DMK so your working out of nomes to TVK. Its not a duty and a decorum of a DGP amd especially of a HOPF of TN. If Sandeep Rai Rathore IPS🇮🇳 is so much affectionate with Vijay let him go and join as a Personal security to Him. As a tax payer i have the right to question how can my money be spent for CM security with him being acknowledged only to show the DGP wisdom can he do this is Amit Shah Sleeping. I urge गृहमंत्री कार्यालय, HMO India to look into this matter and take appropriate action if any rules or protocols have been violated.

Tiruchi Suriyaa

114,279 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

2025 has been a good comeback year for the Wales family❤️ As Queen Elizabeth was quoted saying: “The lessons from the Peace process are clear: Whatever Life throws at us, our individual responses will be all the stronger for working together and sharing the load”👌🏽 Last year, the Royal family felt like it was crumbling with the “Annus Horribilis” of cancer announcements. And yet, seeing everyone carry on and especially seeing how the Wales family handled all the pressures and challenges they went through as a family is heartwarming to witness. 2024-2025 saw the story of a young family going through challenges and tribulations together and overcoming together❤️ As Prince William said to Brazilian Host Luciano Huck about sharing Catherine’s cancer journey with their children: “Every family has its own difficulties and its own challenges. It's very individual and sort of moment-dependent as to how you deal with those problems", “We choose to communicate a lot more with our children […] Sometimes you feel you're oversharing with the children"👌🏽 "But most of the time, hiding stuff from them doesn't work, and so explaining how they feel, why that's happening, giving them other viewpoints as to why they might be feeling like they are sometimes helps give them a bigger picture, and they can relax more into it rather than being really anxious about 'what are you hiding from me'?". "There's a lot more questions when there's no answers."❤️ One can tell by how this family moves as “one body” that they are a very tight knit family with children who are quite emotional aware and attuned to their parents’ emotions. This, in turn, creates a stronger family bond, and a family that supports each other, overcomes together🔥 This is what we have come to expect of our Royal family: to lead the way in showing the resilience of the British spirit especially during the hard times👌🏽 Thus, this Christmas video of the Wales family reminded me of Prince William saying to Eugene Levy during his how iconic interview: “I’d say 2024 was the hardest year I’ve ever had. You know, life is sent to test us as well, and being able to overcome that is what makes us who we are”❤️ #PrinceandPrincessofWales 📹 Kensington Palace
0:17

2025 has been a good comeback year for the Wales family❤️ As Queen Elizabeth was quoted saying: “The lessons from the Peace process are clear: Whatever Life throws at us, our individual responses will be all the stronger for working together and sharing the load”👌🏽 Last year, the Royal family felt like it was crumbling with the “Annus Horribilis” of cancer announcements. And yet, seeing everyone carry on and especially seeing how the Wales family handled all the pressures and challenges they went through as a family is heartwarming to witness. 2024-2025 saw the story of a young family going through challenges and tribulations together and overcoming together❤️ As Prince William said to Brazilian Host Luciano Huck about sharing Catherine’s cancer journey with their children: “Every family has its own difficulties and its own challenges. It's very individual and sort of moment-dependent as to how you deal with those problems", “We choose to communicate a lot more with our children […] Sometimes you feel you're oversharing with the children"👌🏽 "But most of the time, hiding stuff from them doesn't work, and so explaining how they feel, why that's happening, giving them other viewpoints as to why they might be feeling like they are sometimes helps give them a bigger picture, and they can relax more into it rather than being really anxious about 'what are you hiding from me'?". "There's a lot more questions when there's no answers."❤️ One can tell by how this family moves as “one body” that they are a very tight knit family with children who are quite emotional aware and attuned to their parents’ emotions. This, in turn, creates a stronger family bond, and a family that supports each other, overcomes together🔥 This is what we have come to expect of our Royal family: to lead the way in showing the resilience of the British spirit especially during the hard times👌🏽 Thus, this Christmas video of the Wales family reminded me of Prince William saying to Eugene Levy during his how iconic interview: “I’d say 2024 was the hardest year I’ve ever had. You know, life is sent to test us as well, and being able to overcome that is what makes us who we are”❤️ #PrinceandPrincessofWales 📹 Kensington Palace

Canellecitadelle

37,100 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

📜 Lavrov just accidentally destroyed Russia’s own legitimacy “If an agreement is signed by people whose legitimacy is uncertain, their successors may question it,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, referring to President Zelenskyi. Let’s pause here. Because in trying to undermine Ukraine, Lavrov just undermined the entire Russian state. If legitimacy determines the weight of international agreements, then Russia has no legal standing left. Let’s review: ◾ Putin has violated the Russian constitution by clinging to power beyond two terms, rewriting laws to suit himself. ◾ Elections in Russia are a performance — opposition jailed, media silenced, ballots rigged. ◾ The Kremlin staged illegal referenda in occupied Ukrainian territories — territories where they had no right to be, and where even the idea of “voting” under occupation is obscene. ◾ Russia has annexed land through war crimes. And yet it claims to “uphold law”? So when Lavrov questions Zelenskyi’s legitimacy — a president elected in free, democratic elections recognized by the entire world — he’s not making a legal argument. He’s projecting Russia’s own collapse of legality onto others. This is the classic tactic of dictatorships: accuse your enemy of your own sins. But in doing so, Lavrov just admitted that any future deals with Russia can be voided too — because their own system is built on fraud, violence, and constitutional rot. In other words: If agreements are only valid when leaders are legitimate — then no treaty with Russia is worth the paper it’s printed on. #Ukraine #Russia #Russians
0:19

📜 Lavrov just accidentally destroyed Russia’s own legitimacy “If an agreement is signed by people whose legitimacy is uncertain, their successors may question it,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, referring to President Zelenskyi. Let’s pause here. Because in trying to undermine Ukraine, Lavrov just undermined the entire Russian state. If legitimacy determines the weight of international agreements, then Russia has no legal standing left. Let’s review: ◾ Putin has violated the Russian constitution by clinging to power beyond two terms, rewriting laws to suit himself. ◾ Elections in Russia are a performance — opposition jailed, media silenced, ballots rigged. ◾ The Kremlin staged illegal referenda in occupied Ukrainian territories — territories where they had no right to be, and where even the idea of “voting” under occupation is obscene. ◾ Russia has annexed land through war crimes. And yet it claims to “uphold law”? So when Lavrov questions Zelenskyi’s legitimacy — a president elected in free, democratic elections recognized by the entire world — he’s not making a legal argument. He’s projecting Russia’s own collapse of legality onto others. This is the classic tactic of dictatorships: accuse your enemy of your own sins. But in doing so, Lavrov just admitted that any future deals with Russia can be voided too — because their own system is built on fraud, violence, and constitutional rot. In other words: If agreements are only valid when leaders are legitimate — then no treaty with Russia is worth the paper it’s printed on. #Ukraine #Russia #Russians

Devana 🇺🇦

79,422 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

When I see this feral mob snarling at a young Jewish woman who just wants to sing - and who has to actually be trained to withstand boos - and who then goes on to to deliver the most triumphant performance - I can’t help but think of the lines from the psalms: “I will fear no evil…. You prepare a table before me in view of my tormentors” “Let a thousand encamp at your side and a myriad at your right hand, but to you it shall not approach” The most important thing as a Jew truly is to never give in to fear If there is a people who are equipped to be outnumbered and surrounded by enemies - and to emerge victorious every time - it is us Go Eden
0:16

When I see this feral mob snarling at a young Jewish woman who just wants to sing - and who has to actually be trained to withstand boos - and who then goes on to to deliver the most triumphant performance - I can’t help but think of the lines from the psalms: “I will fear no evil…. You prepare a table before me in view of my tormentors” “Let a thousand encamp at your side and a myriad at your right hand, but to you it shall not approach” The most important thing as a Jew truly is to never give in to fear If there is a people who are equipped to be outnumbered and surrounded by enemies - and to emerge victorious every time - it is us Go Eden

leekern

274,187 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

We cannot be silent. 20 year old Jewish Iranian Arvin Netanel is scheduled to be executed by the Islamic Republic of Iran imminently. Why? Because he loaned money to a Muslim who then refused to give it back. When Arvin confronted him, the boy tried to stab him with a knife. Arvin fought back and ultimately in self defense, the other boy was killed. Because Arvin is a Jew however, the IR’s laws allow the family of the Muslim boy to demand the death penalty for Arvin, which they are doing despite the fact Arvin’s family offered a financial settlement. If the situation were reversed, a non-Muslim does not have that same right. This is blatant Islamic supremacy. Arvin’s mother released this message pleading for Arvin’s life. Please speak out for Arvin. #CutTheRope
0:17

We cannot be silent. 20 year old Jewish Iranian Arvin Netanel is scheduled to be executed by the Islamic Republic of Iran imminently. Why? Because he loaned money to a Muslim who then refused to give it back. When Arvin confronted him, the boy tried to stab him with a knife. Arvin fought back and ultimately in self defense, the other boy was killed. Because Arvin is a Jew however, the IR’s laws allow the family of the Muslim boy to demand the death penalty for Arvin, which they are doing despite the fact Arvin’s family offered a financial settlement. If the situation were reversed, a non-Muslim does not have that same right. This is blatant Islamic supremacy. Arvin’s mother released this message pleading for Arvin’s life. Please speak out for Arvin. #CutTheRope

Emily Schrader - אמילי שריידר امیلی شریدر

131,520 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

This video is from a country where there is just 𝟭 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝟳𝟮𝟬 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 , but 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗩𝗜𝗣, 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝟯 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘀 are assigned. We’re talking about India, which has one of the 𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲-𝘁𝗼-𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝘀 in the world. And yet, time and again, 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗼𝘆𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 are seen escorting not just elected leaders, but also their family members, even those who hold no official position or public duty. One of the most recent examples came just a few months ago, when 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗻 of Rajasthan’s Deputy Chief Minister was seen filming a reel, sitting in an open jeep, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱. The very officers who should’ve been 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 were instead following a 𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲. Sadly, such misuse of state machinery is not rare. Senior advocate Harish Salve once recounted that he saw 𝗳𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 in his neighbourhood. Upon inquiry, he discovered they weren’t there for a minister, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 of a Chief Minister. Yes, a relative. Not an elected official. Not even a bureaucrat. 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲. This is how public institutions get hollowed out from within. To be clear, yes, certain positions absolutely require security, and no one disputes that. For instance, presidents and Prime Ministers around the world do receive protection, and rightly so. But their security is tied to the 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱, not to who they are as individuals. In India, however, that crucial line between 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲 has been dangerously blurred. And unless we begin to 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲, it will keep growing, unchecked, unchallenged, and unpunished. -------------------------------------- As Acharya Prashant often says: "In a democracy, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿. Which means, the real transformation begins with the 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗻." Leaders simply mirror the collective consciousness of the public. If the public is 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘂𝗻𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲, 𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱, the leadership will reflect the same. That’s why it’s not enough to blame politicians or institutions — the public must first awaken to its responsibility. So raise tough, informed questions now — before the cost of silence becomes too high.
0:17

This video is from a country where there is just 𝟭 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝟳𝟮𝟬 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 , but 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗩𝗜𝗣, 𝗮𝗻 𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝟯 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘀 are assigned. We’re talking about India, which has one of the 𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲-𝘁𝗼-𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝘀 in the world. And yet, time and again, 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗼𝘆𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 are seen escorting not just elected leaders, but also their family members, even those who hold no official position or public duty. One of the most recent examples came just a few months ago, when 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗻 of Rajasthan’s Deputy Chief Minister was seen filming a reel, sitting in an open jeep, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗱. The very officers who should’ve been 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 were instead following a 𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲. Sadly, such misuse of state machinery is not rare. Senior advocate Harish Salve once recounted that he saw 𝗳𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗛𝗮𝗿𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗵𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗵 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 in his neighbourhood. Upon inquiry, he discovered they weren’t there for a minister, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 of a Chief Minister. Yes, a relative. Not an elected official. Not even a bureaucrat. 𝗝𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲. This is how public institutions get hollowed out from within. To be clear, yes, certain positions absolutely require security, and no one disputes that. For instance, presidents and Prime Ministers around the world do receive protection, and rightly so. But their security is tied to the 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱, not to who they are as individuals. In India, however, that crucial line between 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗲 has been dangerously blurred. And unless we begin to 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲, it will keep growing, unchecked, unchallenged, and unpunished. -------------------------------------- As Acharya Prashant often says: "In a democracy, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿. Which means, the real transformation begins with the 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗻." Leaders simply mirror the collective consciousness of the public. If the public is 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝘂𝗻𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲, 𝗼𝗿 𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱, the leadership will reflect the same. That’s why it’s not enough to blame politicians or institutions — the public must first awaken to its responsibility. So raise tough, informed questions now — before the cost of silence becomes too high.

PrashantAdvait Foundation

180,595 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

We expect politicians to lie most of the time. To betray us for their own gain, and to take advantage of us. We have seen and experienced this more than enough times for us to be wary of it. What we do not expect is for the family of a girl fighting for her life to deceive us and, on top of that, to use her to do so. This man, masquerading as a concerned family member and victim, has been caught claiming that he will use Yumn and stage a video "thikolhun beynun vaa gothah," and keep her there needlessly for "a long time." While I support the fight for justice and rights, this movement has been too muddied up by the elements that have infiltrated it. This is no fight for #JusticeForYumn or any other justice, as we can see in this chatlog of Mooch. I am thoroughly disappointed and disgusted, Mooch. To use her to sensationalise it just to get more cash for you is beyond words. Its no wonder sex offenders like Rashwan and liars like Shiman are organisers. A nice little symbiotic relationship between Mooch and politics.
0:17

We expect politicians to lie most of the time. To betray us for their own gain, and to take advantage of us. We have seen and experienced this more than enough times for us to be wary of it. What we do not expect is for the family of a girl fighting for her life to deceive us and, on top of that, to use her to do so. This man, masquerading as a concerned family member and victim, has been caught claiming that he will use Yumn and stage a video "thikolhun beynun vaa gothah," and keep her there needlessly for "a long time." While I support the fight for justice and rights, this movement has been too muddied up by the elements that have infiltrated it. This is no fight for #JusticeForYumn or any other justice, as we can see in this chatlog of Mooch. I am thoroughly disappointed and disgusted, Mooch. To use her to sensationalise it just to get more cash for you is beyond words. Its no wonder sex offenders like Rashwan and liars like Shiman are organisers. A nice little symbiotic relationship between Mooch and politics.

RaajjeLeaks 

193,841 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

14 dinners got me everything I ever wanted in this world. This is a love letter to everyone who came to a Family Meal in the last 12 months. You took a chance on someone who wasn’t the traditional fit for this community, walked into dinners blind (a hidden guest list and no guarantee of what you’d get out of it) and gave me the one thing in this world you can’t buy back: your time. Growing up I was drawn to lot of startup movies/shows (The Social Network, Silicon Valley) and all I ever wanted as someone 10,000 miles away from where all of that was happening, was to be in it. In the restaurant industry, family meal is a moment when bartenders, servers, cooks, dishwashers eat together and get to know each other outside of service. Too often as founders, researchers, investors, engineers, you’re expected to always have the right answers, be “impressive” and in a constant state of being “on.” In a world where everything is so transactional, Family Meal was created to take you off your proverbial line and give everyone a break from the performance. For 14 dinners I’ve kept Family Meals sponsor-free to keep the intention behind it all pure. I didn’t want homework from anyone to deliver insights, founders, or potential recruits on a platter. In our world, money is a commodity and protecting what makes these dinners feel genuine is a price I’d happily pay. I think it has served us well. And through this experiment I’ve found some of the most non-transactional, inspiring, and quietly brilliant people that put me in awe everyday. 14 dinners got me everything I ever wanted in this world, and it has been a great pleasure being your host. Season 2 starts in 2026. your host, alicia
0:16

14 dinners got me everything I ever wanted in this world. This is a love letter to everyone who came to a Family Meal in the last 12 months. You took a chance on someone who wasn’t the traditional fit for this community, walked into dinners blind (a hidden guest list and no guarantee of what you’d get out of it) and gave me the one thing in this world you can’t buy back: your time. Growing up I was drawn to lot of startup movies/shows (The Social Network, Silicon Valley) and all I ever wanted as someone 10,000 miles away from where all of that was happening, was to be in it. In the restaurant industry, family meal is a moment when bartenders, servers, cooks, dishwashers eat together and get to know each other outside of service. Too often as founders, researchers, investors, engineers, you’re expected to always have the right answers, be “impressive” and in a constant state of being “on.” In a world where everything is so transactional, Family Meal was created to take you off your proverbial line and give everyone a break from the performance. For 14 dinners I’ve kept Family Meals sponsor-free to keep the intention behind it all pure. I didn’t want homework from anyone to deliver insights, founders, or potential recruits on a platter. In our world, money is a commodity and protecting what makes these dinners feel genuine is a price I’d happily pay. I think it has served us well. And through this experiment I’ve found some of the most non-transactional, inspiring, and quietly brilliant people that put me in awe everyday. 14 dinners got me everything I ever wanted in this world, and it has been a great pleasure being your host. Season 2 starts in 2026. your host, alicia

your host, alicia

45,252 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

🚨🎙️GIANNI INFANTINO ISSUES EMOTIONAL APOLOGY AFTER FIFA ABANDONS PRIVATE INVESTMENT PLAN “Over the last few days, I have listened carefully to the concerns raised by confederations, federations, clubs, players and supporters from around the world. When this proposal was first discussed, our intention was never to divide football or compromise the values of the game. We believed we were exploring a unique opportunity that could help football grow and create long-term benefits for future generations. However, after hearing the feedback and seeing the reaction across the football community, it became clear that we underestimated the concerns surrounding these plans. We underestimated how many people would view this as a step in the wrong direction, and for that, I take responsibility. To everyone who felt disappointed, betrayed or that FIFA had broken their trust, I sincerely apologize. That was never our intention. The World Cup means far more than any business proposal, and when something creates this level of division within football, it is our duty to stop, listen and rethink our position. We have done exactly that. After careful reflection, we concluded that this was not the right path for the game. No financial opportunity is worth risking the unity of the football family. Football belongs to its supporters, its players and its communities, and their voices have been heard. Today, we move forward together. We have listened, we have learned, and we will work to rebuild the trust of everyone who felt let down by this process. For that reason, the proposal will not proceed, and our focus returns to protecting the future of football and the values that make this sport special.” “We Underestimated The Concerns, And For That I Apologize” No financial opportunity is worth dividing the football family. We have listened, reflected and decided not to proceed. Football belongs to its fans, and today we are choosing unity over disagreement. We have learned from this experience, and we will work hard to rebuild the trust of everyone who felt let down by these plans.” (Skysport)
0:13

🚨🎙️GIANNI INFANTINO ISSUES EMOTIONAL APOLOGY AFTER FIFA ABANDONS PRIVATE INVESTMENT PLAN “Over the last few days, I have listened carefully to the concerns raised by confederations, federations, clubs, players and supporters from around the world. When this proposal was first discussed, our intention was never to divide football or compromise the values of the game. We believed we were exploring a unique opportunity that could help football grow and create long-term benefits for future generations. However, after hearing the feedback and seeing the reaction across the football community, it became clear that we underestimated the concerns surrounding these plans. We underestimated how many people would view this as a step in the wrong direction, and for that, I take responsibility. To everyone who felt disappointed, betrayed or that FIFA had broken their trust, I sincerely apologize. That was never our intention. The World Cup means far more than any business proposal, and when something creates this level of division within football, it is our duty to stop, listen and rethink our position. We have done exactly that. After careful reflection, we concluded that this was not the right path for the game. No financial opportunity is worth risking the unity of the football family. Football belongs to its supporters, its players and its communities, and their voices have been heard. Today, we move forward together. We have listened, we have learned, and we will work to rebuild the trust of everyone who felt let down by this process. For that reason, the proposal will not proceed, and our focus returns to protecting the future of football and the values that make this sport special.” “We Underestimated The Concerns, And For That I Apologize” No financial opportunity is worth dividing the football family. We have listened, reflected and decided not to proceed. Football belongs to its fans, and today we are choosing unity over disagreement. We have learned from this experience, and we will work hard to rebuild the trust of everyone who felt let down by these plans.” (Skysport)

MatchReport

86,287 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

This is not Hiroshima. This is not Gaza. This is not Lebanon. This is not Iran. This is Ukraine now… bombed with FAB-3000, a 3-ton bomb. Events that should not be publicized, yet must be highlighted. I remember when I sat alongside President Zelensky's representative during a closed-door diplomatic meeting under the mediation of the Turkish president aimed at encouraging Ukraine to resume the “Istanbul peace talks” with Russia. When we reached a critical juncture, the Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister asked a question while I was trying to persuade him to return to negotiations: "What if you were in my shoes—with your land occupied and your people killed every day, while Putin violates international law on a daily basis? Would you continue to fight and support the resistance, turn to negotiations, or surrender?” At that moment, I wanted to give him an answer based on a similar personal experience, not a diplomatic one; for I was thinking of Lebanon, where our people were being killed daily and our land was under occupation. I pointed out that Israel currently occupies and controls 10% of Lebanon (that was the figure at the time; it has since risen to 20%)—the same proportion that Russia occupies and controls of Ukraine. The World condemned Russia, but cannot condemn Israel! Ukraine itself sided with Israel, citing the right to self-defense! The issue was never occupation. It was the identity of the occupier. I mentioned that international law hasn’t failed in Ukraine or in Lebanon or in Gaza and beyond. This’s not the failure of the law. The law stands and its principles remain clear. The failure is our collective will to uphold it. And to put a punishment for those who violate the international law. International law is not optional that you invoke only when it suits you. Double standards in international law—and the weaponization of that law to serve national interests—have led to a situation where international law is no longer respected. War crimes beget war crimes—When the international community failed to bring one state to justice for violating the international law, they knew they can do it again, and another state will inevitably follow suit with impunity. I concluded by stating that I would shift the focus to human security rather than state security; however, negotiating human security requires a ceasefire first. Otherwise, it would be tantamount to surrender, allowing the other to impose its terms and forcing you to concede. International law must be the same for everyone everywhere, and no State above international law. If I criticize your side, you assume I'm on theirs. If I criticize their side, they assume I'm on yours. You are both wrong. My position is guided by principles and upholding the law rather than alignment. I am basically against anything that kills people or destroy the planet we live on. I belong neither to this side nor that; I belong to humanity and Earth.
0:17

This is not Hiroshima. This is not Gaza. This is not Lebanon. This is not Iran. This is Ukraine now… bombed with FAB-3000, a 3-ton bomb. Events that should not be publicized, yet must be highlighted. I remember when I sat alongside President Zelensky's representative during a closed-door diplomatic meeting under the mediation of the Turkish president aimed at encouraging Ukraine to resume the “Istanbul peace talks” with Russia. When we reached a critical juncture, the Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister asked a question while I was trying to persuade him to return to negotiations: "What if you were in my shoes—with your land occupied and your people killed every day, while Putin violates international law on a daily basis? Would you continue to fight and support the resistance, turn to negotiations, or surrender?” At that moment, I wanted to give him an answer based on a similar personal experience, not a diplomatic one; for I was thinking of Lebanon, where our people were being killed daily and our land was under occupation. I pointed out that Israel currently occupies and controls 10% of Lebanon (that was the figure at the time; it has since risen to 20%)—the same proportion that Russia occupies and controls of Ukraine. The World condemned Russia, but cannot condemn Israel! Ukraine itself sided with Israel, citing the right to self-defense! The issue was never occupation. It was the identity of the occupier. I mentioned that international law hasn’t failed in Ukraine or in Lebanon or in Gaza and beyond. This’s not the failure of the law. The law stands and its principles remain clear. The failure is our collective will to uphold it. And to put a punishment for those who violate the international law. International law is not optional that you invoke only when it suits you. Double standards in international law—and the weaponization of that law to serve national interests—have led to a situation where international law is no longer respected. War crimes beget war crimes—When the international community failed to bring one state to justice for violating the international law, they knew they can do it again, and another state will inevitably follow suit with impunity. I concluded by stating that I would shift the focus to human security rather than state security; however, negotiating human security requires a ceasefire first. Otherwise, it would be tantamount to surrender, allowing the other to impose its terms and forcing you to concede. International law must be the same for everyone everywhere, and no State above international law. If I criticize your side, you assume I'm on theirs. If I criticize their side, they assume I'm on yours. You are both wrong. My position is guided by principles and upholding the law rather than alignment. I am basically against anything that kills people or destroy the planet we live on. I belong neither to this side nor that; I belong to humanity and Earth.

Mohamad Safa

70,069 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

American Muslim scholar, Hamza Yusuf co-founder of the Zaytuna College declares that “the whole concept of an ‘Islamic state’ is a fantasy in the minds of the modern Islamists” & confirms that the vast majority of Muslim states in history were “secular” (see above post for what he means by ‘secular’). As I recently argued in my Oxford Union debate - which we won - the reading into Islamic sources of the modern idea of a unitary legal ‘state’ (dawlah) over all of society, is an anachronism. It is the retrospective imposition of the European Westphalian nation-state concept onto traditional Islamic sources. The word ‘state’ (dawlah) is entirely absent from *all* Islamic sources of Shariah. As is the word ‘law’ (Qānūn) and as is the word ‘constitution’ (Distūr). It is thus impossible for the term ‘Islamic State’ to be anything other than a modernist reading. And Shariah is not a ‘law’ (the concept of unitary legal system did not exist) so there is no such thing as ‘Sharia law’. There is only Shariah (which means ‘the way’). Islam did not define any fixed notion of state, and hence the matter is left to the people to adopt within Islamic parameters. Here is my recent 10 minute Oxford Union debate speech which explains further:
0:17

American Muslim scholar, Hamza Yusuf co-founder of the Zaytuna College declares that “the whole concept of an ‘Islamic state’ is a fantasy in the minds of the modern Islamists” & confirms that the vast majority of Muslim states in history were “secular” (see above post for what he means by ‘secular’). As I recently argued in my Oxford Union debate - which we won - the reading into Islamic sources of the modern idea of a unitary legal ‘state’ (dawlah) over all of society, is an anachronism. It is the retrospective imposition of the European Westphalian nation-state concept onto traditional Islamic sources. The word ‘state’ (dawlah) is entirely absent from *all* Islamic sources of Shariah. As is the word ‘law’ (Qānūn) and as is the word ‘constitution’ (Distūr). It is thus impossible for the term ‘Islamic State’ to be anything other than a modernist reading. And Shariah is not a ‘law’ (the concept of unitary legal system did not exist) so there is no such thing as ‘Sharia law’. There is only Shariah (which means ‘the way’). Islam did not define any fixed notion of state, and hence the matter is left to the people to adopt within Islamic parameters. Here is my recent 10 minute Oxford Union debate speech which explains further:

أبو عمّار

13,298 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

The case of Débora Rodrigues is a brutal example of what happens when the judicial system abandons impartiality and turns into a tool of political repression. The disproportionate sentence imposed on her, comparable to those given for violent crimes, has no reasonable justification in a democratic state governed by the rule of law. It is a judicial aberration that reveals the vindictive nature of those in power in Brazil today. Even if Débora had committed a serious crime, her punishment should have followed principles of proportionality, considering her clean record and personal circumstances. But as far as we know, her "great threat" was a symbolic act—a peaceful protest. A 14-year sentence is not justice; it is institutionalized torture. Those who condone this, whether through silence or justification, must understand that tomorrow they could be the next target. Today it’s Débora—tomorrow it could be any citizen who dares to challenge the establishment. Brazil is moving toward a regime where political dissent is punished with the harshest penalties, while criminals allied with those in power receive pardons and privileges. If lawmakers do not take a stand against this injustice, they will be signing the death sentence of Brazilian democracy. You are absolutely right to bring this case to the international community. History shows that authoritarian regimes only retreat when faced with both external and internal pressure. This is no longer just a political issue—it is a humanitarian one.
0:15

The case of Débora Rodrigues is a brutal example of what happens when the judicial system abandons impartiality and turns into a tool of political repression. The disproportionate sentence imposed on her, comparable to those given for violent crimes, has no reasonable justification in a democratic state governed by the rule of law. It is a judicial aberration that reveals the vindictive nature of those in power in Brazil today. Even if Débora had committed a serious crime, her punishment should have followed principles of proportionality, considering her clean record and personal circumstances. But as far as we know, her "great threat" was a symbolic act—a peaceful protest. A 14-year sentence is not justice; it is institutionalized torture. Those who condone this, whether through silence or justification, must understand that tomorrow they could be the next target. Today it’s Débora—tomorrow it could be any citizen who dares to challenge the establishment. Brazil is moving toward a regime where political dissent is punished with the harshest penalties, while criminals allied with those in power receive pardons and privileges. If lawmakers do not take a stand against this injustice, they will be signing the death sentence of Brazilian democracy. You are absolutely right to bring this case to the international community. History shows that authoritarian regimes only retreat when faced with both external and internal pressure. This is no longer just a political issue—it is a humanitarian one.

Arlete Caetana

31,385 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce