Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

This is where you keep getting it wrong, Daudi Kabanda. If you genuinely have information regarding land matters for Gen. MK, then follow the proper channels. Intelligence gathering is not conducted through Twitter. It is done professionally collect verifiable evidence, submit your report to the appointing authority, and allow...

27,843 просмотров • 13 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Bret Weinstein cuts straight to the chase: "We are going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say, 'Where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with this election?' And we are gonna be caught in the following predicament. No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is, can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can easily. Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means, or it was the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not an accident. And the point that I wanna make primarily is the primary evidence against elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we are actually able to see, the moment by moment vote count that does something strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's really the thing that we must focus on." Bret Weinstein

The DarkHorse Podcast

696,337 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Propaganda can shape perceptions—but it cannot rewrite history. For years, a relentless political campaign has sought to portray the Gandhi family as the embodiment of corruption and anti-nationalism. Repetition of allegations, however, is not the same as proof. In this clip, Priyanka Gandhi does not respond with personal attacks. She asks a simple democratic question: Where is the evidence? She urges Parliament to debate unemployment, inflation, paper leaks, and the everyday struggles of ordinary Indians instead of recycling political propaganda. Every political family in India has faced criticism, and the Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi remains a serious and legitimate subject of historical debate. But beyond that chapter, the contributions of the Nehru-Gandhi family to India's freedom movement and nation-building are substantial and well documented. Jawaharlal Nehru spent years in British prisons during the freedom struggle, and under his leadership institutions such as the IITs, AIIMS, DRDO, and major public sector enterprises were established—institutions that continue to serve the nation today. Democracy demands that citizens distinguish between verified facts and sustained political messaging. Patriotism is not determined by slogans or propaganda; it is measured by sacrifice, public service, and commitment to the Republic. A mature democracy deserves debates based on evidence—not narratives repeated until they are mistaken for truth.

Ashok Dadhwal

53,456 просмотров • 23 дней назад

The speaker argues that the current student protests over exam paper leaks should not be limited to demanding the resignation of the Education Minister. Instead, he claims the root cause lies with the central government, alleging that institutions such as the Election Commission and the electoral system have been compromised. Key themes include: Criticism of the Prime Minister, the BJP, RSS, and the Union government. Allegations that repeated exam paper leaks reflect systemic governance failures. Calls for a broader political movement rather than a single-issue protest. Strong criticism of EVMs and advocacy for a return to paper ballots. Claims that democratic institutions have been weakened. Criticism of India's foreign policy, particularly regarding the US, Israel, Iran, China, and oil imports. Appeals for youth and citizens to participate in peaceful, sustained democratic movements. The video primarily expresses political opinions and allegations, many of which are disputed or not established as fact. For example: Claims that elections cannot be won unless permitted by the Prime Minister are political assertions, not proven facts. Statements about the Election Commission being completely controlled or elections being predetermined remain matters of political debate rather than judicially established conclusions. References to exam paper leaks are grounded in real incidents, but the attribution of responsibility to specific political actors is the speaker's interpretation. This video is less a news report and more a political speech. It mixes genuine public concerns—such as exam paper leaks, unemployment, and institutional accountability—with strong political accusations and personal opinions. Some criticisms are based on real events, while many broader conclusions are contested and should not be accepted as established facts without independent evidence. A healthy democracy allows criticism of governments, but it also requires citizens to distinguish between verified facts, political opinion, and rhetorical claims.

Ashok Dadhwal

14,831 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Yes, indeed, this is lawlessness by any standard. Even by banana republic standards, this is still lawlessness. Your country has a constitution, it has a government, it has a police service, and it has a ruling party. I am sure you can see that some of the people there are actually wearing ruling party T-shirts. It is lawless regardless of whoever does it. It is an embarrassment to South Africa as a country, what you are doing and what you are encouraging people to do. Your country has an immigration service. If people are in your country illegally, they should be arrested and deported through lawful processes. You do not go around destroying property, tearing down markets, and attacking people. It is illegal regardless of whoever does it. It is not illegal because I have said so. It is illegal because the laws of your country make it so. This is vigilantism, pure and simple, and it is tainting the reputation of South Africa, not only across Africa but across the world. If you have got satellite television in your home, you can see that these actions are being reported everywhere. It is not good for your country. This kind of barbarism undermines the rule of law, fuels division, and damages South Africa’s standing as a constitutional democracy. It is the actions of a few that are tainting the reputation of many. The average South African is not mindless like this. They respect the law, and they respect the fact that among them, in their communities, there are people from other countries. If those people are in the country illegally, you report them and the law takes its course through proper processes of arrest and deportation. You do not descend into mob justice, lawlessness, and destruction. That is not who South Africans are, and it must not be normalised.

Hopewell Chin’ono

80,812 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

It's Good To Be Anti-Islam... but not anti-Muslim. 'Islam is an ideology—a set of ideas. It is not defined by what any individual Muslim wants it to be, but by what it inherently is. No ideology is above critique—particularly one that explicitly seeks political and social dominance over every person on the planet. Additionally, ideologies are not entitled to human rights; these rights apply to individuals. As an ideology, Islam is not necessarily entitled to equal respect and acceptance. Ideas do not carry equal moral weight. The feelings or the number of those who believe do not make an idea true or good. Bad ideas should be challenged before they lead to bad consequences. Islam is not simply a belief about God. The word 'Islam' means submission. It is a set of rules that define a social hierarchy where Muslims submit to Allah, women submit to men, and all non-Muslims submit to Islamic rule. Since we do not live in a Muslim country—where censorship, intimidation, and brute force are used to protect Islam from intellectual analysis—we are still somewhat free to openly exercise our right to debate the merits of the Islamic value system against Western Liberalism. Consider the following questions: Are men really superior to women as the Quran says? Are women intellectually inferior as Muhammad taught? Does propagating material that curses people of other religions amidst random calls to violence create a better social environment? Is it right to keep women as sex slaves merely because the Quran permits this practice in numerous places? Should atheists and homosexuals have to choose between the noose or an outward profession of faith in Allah? Is conformity superior to freedom? Yes, there are Muslims who take issue with these aspects of Islamic theology, but that doesn't change what Islam is. Do not confuse the ideology with the individual. Do not draw conclusions about Islam based on the Muslims that you know, whether they are terrorists or humanitarians. Islam must be understood based on what it is, as presented objectively in the Quran, Hadith, and Sira (biography of Muhammad)." Thank you to the amazing Pat Condell, who released this video ten years ago. #Respect

Amy Mek

107,809 просмотров • 2 лет назад

My Final Word on the Matter A sister recently made a false allegation against me. It has been addressed. This is my final word. "Produce your proof, if you are truthful." —Surah Al-Baqarah (2:111) “The burden of proof is upon the claimant.” —Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Three days have now passed since Dunya Shuaib’s ex-husband gave a platform to the Stalker, who loudly proclaimed she possessed “damning evidence.” And yet—there is nothing. No documents. No photographs. No voice notes. No witnesses. Only silence. And this silence is not just disappointing—it is shocking, given the severity and scope of the claims that were made. For accusations so sweeping and specific, the total absence of even the most basic forms of proof speaks louder than any allegation. One cannot shout fire in a theatre, then flee when asked to show smoke. Even more disturbing is the glaring inconsistency of the Ex, who in the very video below insists that evidence must be presented when he is accused—citing the seriousness of a claim like zina. Yet when it comes to the Stalker, suddenly “her testimony is evidence.” This is not justice. This is partisanship masquerading as principle. Those who claim to possess the truth know how to bring it forward—if they have it. And should anyone dare submit falsehood, let it be known: others will respond on my behalf. Truth does not stand alone. It is defended. And not all of its defenders speak softly. And while we are speaking of truth, will the Ex condemn what was aired under his watch? Will the Ex disavow the open shirk—where I was called “God”—and the vile supplication asking Allah to curse my children with cancer? Or does his hatred excuse anything, so long as it is aimed at me? His silence here is not a shield. It is a signature. It speaks not of caution—but of cowardice. Not of neutrality—but of malice. There is nothing further to add. I will continue the work that my team and I are committed to, without distraction. I advise us all: do not give yourselves to suspicion and spectacle. Do not become tools for those—on and offline—who seek to harm Islam and Muslims. Preserve your dignity. And if you claim to stand for truth—then stand for it, even when it is inconvenient.

Mohammed Hijab

411,302 просмотров • 1 год назад