Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
[๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐] ๐ ๐๐๐๐ฃ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ซ๐๐จ ๐๐ค๐ช ๐๐ค๐ข๐๐ฉ๐ค๐๐จ๐ ๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ! Why did Horangโs once flower-like first love, Ahjo, return as someone completely different? ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ก๐ผ๐! ๐ #WhenLifeGivesYouTomatoes #WorldDrop #LezhinUS #LezhinComics
18,639 views โข 11 days ago โขvia X (Twitter)
0 Comments
No comments available
Comments from the original post will appear here
![[๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐] ๐ถ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ค๐จ๐ฉ ๐ค๐ ๐๐ค๐ช ๐ถ ๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ! What secret is Jinyeong hiding from that missing year? ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ก๐ผ๐! ๐ #TheGhostofYou #WorldDrop #GlobalRelease #LezhinUS #LezhinComics #shorts](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1999826644681347158/amplify_video_thumb/1999048192818921472/img/l8hCHSvSfg5j_r1T.jpg)
![[๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐] ๐๐ฟ๐๐๐ข๐ค๐ฃ๐ ๐ฟ๐ช๐จ๐ฉ๐ ๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ! How did a Golden Alpha like you find me in a painting? ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ก๐ผ๐! ๐ #DiamondDust #WorldDrop #LezhinUS #LezhinComics](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2059258255264944494/amplify_video_thumb/2059196667036155904/img/LurstabTzHrgryqn.jpg)
![[๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก ๐๐] ๐๐ฝ๐๐๐จ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ! Can Jeongwon fake it till the cameras stop rolling? ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ก๐ผ๐! ๐ #BiasWrecker #WorldDrop #LezhinUS #LezhinComics](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2078102425026826295/amplify_video_thumb/2077662515992109056/img/PpzO-pWkY7y-iu-J.jpg)
![[๐ข๐ณ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐น ๐ฃ๐ฉ] ๐ซ๐๐ฎ๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฉ๐ค๐ง๐ข๐ซ ๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ! Can they bond as fathers despite their past? ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ก๐ผ๐! ๐ #EyeoftheStorm #BL #GlobalRelease #LezhinUS #LezhinComics](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1906619240800735589/ext_tw_video_thumb/1906561403668115456/pu/img/6EzFv7lHHE1ZMhzg.jpg)
![[๐ข๐ณ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐น ๐ฃ๐ฉ] ๐๐๐๐ก๐ฉ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ค๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐ค๐ฌ! Why does Ian keep pulling Eunsan closer? Will this unexpected meetup revive old feelings or just cause more trouble for Eunsan? ๐ค๐ฅ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ก๐ผ๐! ๐ #MeltingPoint #BL #GlobalRelease #LezhinUS #LezhinComics](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1901983175066173519/ext_tw_video_thumb/1901910376880783360/pu/img/Iz9weDTxhANi6oIg.jpg)
![[๐ฅ๐ชท] Wrote this as an archive because I finally had free time to put my thoughts about them into words, even if itโs a little late. You donโt have to agree with what I wrote here, just as I donโt expect everyone to read them the way I do. This is simply how Murong Qingyi and Ren Susu have always been to me. Iโve always loved stories where two people understand each other better than anyone else in the world, because theyโre also the only two people capable of hurting each other that deeply. We all know that Qingyi and Susu do not love in the same direction. We also know that, despite how similar they are, they learned completely different ways to survive. Theyโre mirrors of each other. Both carry wounds that began long before they met. Both learned sacrifice. Both spent years believing their own happiness mattered less than everyone elseโs. And yet, somewhere along the way, their hearts arrived at opposite conclusions about what love is supposed to look like. This is where they begin hurting each other without ever intending to. When Qingyi senses distance between them, his instinct is always to move closer. Not because he wants to control her, but because closeness has always been his way of loving. If someone he loves is suffering, he wants to stand beside them. If theyโre carrying something heavy, he wants to carry it with them. If theyโre walking into danger, his first instinct is to follow. Susu is the exact opposite. The moment she realizes the person she loves might get hurt because of her, her instinct is to step away. Not because she loves them less, but because distance has become her way of protecting the people she loves. She would rather carry everything alone than watch someone else bleed in her place. And so, without either of them intending to, they begin moving in opposite directions while chasing the very same thing, a love that feels safe enough to stay. What makes this so sad is that neither of them is choosing fear over love. It is that both of them loved with everything they had, but each had learned a different way of protecting that love. Qingyi isnโt trying to pressure her. Susu isnโt trying to reject him. Both are speaking the language of love. They simply arenโt speaking the same dialect. To Qingyi, love means staying. To Susu, love means leaving before staying becomes another tragedy. To Qingyi, sharing someoneโs burden is the purest form of devotion. To Susu, becoming someoneโs burden is the greatest fear she can imagine. So every time Qingyi helps her, Susu mistakes it for yet another sacrifice she is asking him to make. And every time Susu disappears, Qingyi experiences another loss he cannot understand. Yet the comfort one seeks becomes the discomfort the other experiences, leaving them to mistake protection for pain. Qingyi finds safety in knowing that someone chooses to stay, even when life becomes difficult. Having grown up questioning whether he would ever be chosen, he comes to equate permanence with love itself. To stay, despite everything, is not merely what he longs for. It is how he loves. Susu finds safety in making sure the people she loves have the chance to survive, even if that survival no longer includes her. After carrying guilt for so many losses, love becomes inseparable from sacrifice. In her heart, devotion is measured by what she is willing to give up, until leaving becomes the greatest kindness she believes she can offer. So love becomes something they keep missing, not because it isnโt there, but because they keep meeting it from opposite directions. Qingyi sees distance and feels another unanswered question. Susu sees closeness and feels another life she might destroy. Neither of them is responding to the present. Theyโre responding to the stories trauma has been whispering to them since they were children Qingyi asks, โWill you choose me this time?โ Susu asks, โWill you still alive if I do?โ Those two questions are sad because neither of them is wrong. Both fears are profoundly human. Both were born long before they ever found each other. Yet to call it incompatibility would be too simple. What stood between them was not the absence of love, but the presence of fears neither of them knew how to name. Itโs sad because their deepest fears are perfectly designed to trigger each otherโs. His greatest fear has always been losing the person he loves without understanding why. Her greatest fear has always been becoming the reason the person she loves loses everything. So, he moves closer. She moves away. This is the point where they begin to wound one another. Both believe theyโre loving correctly. The same moment calls for closeness in one heart and distance in the other, leaving them to mistake each otherโs protection for rejection. But love was never about asking him to stop staying or asking her to stop protecting. It was about helping them understand the fear hidden beneath each otherโs choices. They have to see each other not as the enemy of their needs. They were simply same person, but both are shaped by different wounds and protecting themselves in the only language they have ever known. Because in the end, it was never that Qingyi and Susu didnโt love each other enough. It was that they were both trying to protect the person they loved and simply searching for safety in love, each in the only way their heart had ever learned. One stayed. One left. Neither choice came from the absence of love. Both came from quiet hope. They were never standing on opposite sides of love. They were simply standing on opposite sides of fear. They are not simply one person who chases and another who runs. They are two damaged people whose deepest fears are perfectly designed to trigger each otherโs. Perhaps it was never about changing the way they love. It was about trusting the very thing they had feared their entire lives, that someone could stay without abandoning them, and someone could stay without being destroyed by loving them. Qingyi believes that if he can endure enough, love will survive. If he can bear enough pain, make enough sacrifices, stay through every storm, then perhaps no one will leave him again. But love was never asking him to prove how much he could survive. It was asking him to trust that he did not have to carry everything alone. Susu has mistaken fear for love for so long that it has become the language through which she loves. She calls it cowardice, because leaving feels easier than watching the people she loves suffer because of her. If she had loved Qingyi a little less, perhaps she could have spoken the words she kept swallowing. She might have trusted him with the truth instead of trying to protect him from it. But she loved him so completely that silence felt kinder than asking him to bear the unbearable weight of loving her. In Jane Austen words, โIf I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more.โ Susu believes love means protecting Qingyi from herself. Qingyi believes love means protecting Susu from everything else. Neither realizes that love cannot thrive when one person is always the protector and the other is always the one being protected. At some point, they must trust each other enough to become partners instead of martyrs. Because the truth is, there was never a version of their story where no one paid a price. Love had already asked something of them both. The only question was whether they would face those consequences separately, each trying to protect the other in silence, or together, with open hearts, clear eyes, and the quiet peace that comes from choosing one another even when the future cannot be promised. Also, I donโt agree with everything Qingyi and Susu did. Sometimes I wanted to scream at both of them, moments I wished they had chosen differently. But perhaps thatโs what makes them feel human. They arenโt defined by perfect decisions, but by deeply human ones, choices made in fear, in love, and in the desperate hope of protecting each other. Once you understand the fear beneath their choices, itโs much harder to reduce either of them to hero or villain. So, pleaseโฆ go easy on them. Theyโve gone through so much. โค๏ธโ๐ฉน โWho loves who more?โ At this point, I think itโs safe to say the person suffering the most in this relationship is me.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2083704976082395195/amplify_video_thumb/2083699973393350656/img/Am4ah0QCAz2NORaU.jpg)
!["You just hate Hichilema": The dramatic fall of Zambia's president By Sishuwa Sishuwa Hakainde Hichilema stood in the queue to becoming President of Zambia for 15 years before voters finally removed him from it in August 2021. This demonstrates how badly the man wanted this job. But it has taken him only five years in office to display his unfitness for the role. When it comes to the bigger national issues, such as safeguarding our cherished democracy, getting the best out of Zambiaโs mineral wealth, respecting the constitution and the rule of law, fighting corruption beyond rhetoric, genuine promotion of national unity and equitable distribution of appointments to public service positions, sorting out the cost-of-living crisis and the deplorable conditions of life for most Zambians, Hichilema has lamentably failed. In fact, I would go as far as saying that the President has become a clear and present danger to Zambiaโs economy, to our democracy, our constitutional order, our nationhood and its 'One Zambia Nation' foundation, and to the lives of ordinary Zambians. Voting Hichilema out of office will be the highest expression of patriotism. As I have previously stated, I am convinced that Hichilema will lose the election on 13 August. The only thing that can save him from defeat is pre-ballot death (of any candidate) or industrial scale vote-rigging. I really hope that we Zambians will never again elect a lying, tribal, corrupt, unpatriotic, vindictive, hypocritical, lawless, and undemocratic scumbag. In addition to his policy failures on major issues of public concern, one reason why Hichilema is losing the election (unless he rigs it on an industrial scale) is because of having extremist supporters, mostly Zambezi supremacists, who dismiss legitimate criticism of his leadership actions as hate speech and consequently enable his continued failure to be receptive to criticism, to reflect on the feedback provided by the governed, and to change for the better. When citizens (be it the Catholic Bishops, opposition parties, civic actors, or ordinary Zambians like me) raise governance concerns, they do so in the spirit of accountable democratic governance. They do not do so because they hate the president as a person, hate his ethnic identity, or hate where he was born. I insist that a better Zambia is possible but we wonโt get it if we treat criticism of presidential leadership failure as expression of hate. Unfortunately, even Hichilema himself has embraced this warped thinking that any criticism of his leadership actions is hate speech. This attitude has deprived him of the much needed feedback on his leadership performance and capacity to listen to divergent views, consequently impoverishing his presidency. We must embrace the unfamiliar, eschew haste in passing judgement, and be more tolerant and understanding. These qualities are especially essential to those in public leadership roles. I once raised concern that we seem to have prepared different standards for this president compared to those who came before him. If a leader can only provide five hours of electricity to the people in a day, they have failed. If a leader can only increase the cost of living, they have failed. If a leaderโฆI can go on. In addition to denying the president the benefit of legitimate public feedback on his performance, misconstruing criticism as hate makes it look like the responsibility of holding our public leaders to account falls on those who either love him or hail from the region where the president does not come from. If his supporters and Tongas, Lozis and Zambians from Northwestern Province join in calling out the wrongs of Hichilema, he will no longer play the tribal card of reducing all criticism of his leadership to ethnic hatred. In the uncritical minds of some of the president's supporters, I criticise Hichilema because I hate him! Most of the individuals who hold this view are people who repeatedly criticise me on this platform, even when their criticism is quite often devoid of reason or substance. I do not think those who criticise me do so because they hate me. I think they criticise me, even if I hold no elected public office, simply because they have a different take, different opinions, on things. Why is it so hard to apply the same logic to my criticism of an elected public leader like Hichilema who is accountable to us, the public? I have been providing regular political commentaries on Zambian affairs since 2009. Why was my much stronger criticism of Hichilema's predecessors, namely Rupiah Banda, Michael Sata, and Edgar Lungu, not considered hatred of these individual leaders? In fact, many of the individuals who today accuse me of harbouring hatred for Hichilema were people who were very happy with my much stinging criticism of the leadership failures of his predecessors. When I called Sata a tribalist and undemocratic leader who did not listen to advise, and provided evidence in support of my conclusions, they were happy to cheer me on, even as Sata's supporters said I was bitter and a Hichilema supporter. When I called Lungu a tribalist and corrupt leader, and provided evidence in support of my conclusions, they were happy to cheer me on, even as Lungu's supporters said I was bitter and petitioned the police to arrest me for sedition. Some of Hichilema's supporters, as part of the enjoyment of their exercise of the right to free expression, even insult me, call me names, or outrightly declare that they dislike me. Of course I would prefer content-based discussion, but if the best that anyone's mind can do is to insult me, I will consider their actions as part of the right to free expression. I recognise that people have the right to dislike me, to call me names, to wish me whatever they desire, to feel however they want about me. I have no problem with all this. I do not speak to be liked or secure the validation of anyone. I speak to express myself and I respect the right of other people to do the same. As I have repeatedly stated, free speech is not just for the people or thoughts we like or agree with; it is also for people we despise and opinions that we do not support. The important point is not the position I take on a given issue of public interest. It is the reasoning advanced in support of said position. If I say Hichilema is a lying, tribal, corrupt, unpatriotic, vindictive, hypocritical, lawless, and undemocratic scumbag, what is important is not simply this description; it is the reasons and evidence I have adduced in support of this conclusion. Anyone is welcome to challenge my conclusions or evidence, to say "I disagree with your argument for this and that reason." What I totally reject is the idea that criticism of a president's leadership actions amounts to hate; it does not. If I point out that Hichilema is failing to ensure adequate ethnic diversity in public appointments and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilema is a compulsive liar and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilemaโs fight against corruption is a sham and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilema is a compulsive liar and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilema has eroded Zambiaโs democracy and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilema has failed to reduce the cost of living, as per his campaign promise, and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilema (working in cohort with his friend Situmbeko Musokotwane) has facilitated the extraction of the countryโs mineral wealth by multinational corporations without ensuring sufficient returns in revenue collection for Zambia and provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. If I point out that Hichilema has failed toโฆand provide evidence in support of this assertion, anybody else is welcome to demonstrate weakness in my stated point of view. Simply dismissing my criticism as an expression of my alleged hatred for Hichilema is most unhelpful. Those who do so are depriving me the opportunity to learn what I do not know and Hichilema the opportunity to adjust his leadership style and change for the better. While I do not hesitate to share my opinions on matters of public concern, I also retain the intellectual integrity of one who is willing to abandon their point of view if its weakness can be shown. I have repeatedly stated that I harbour no hatred against Hichilema. What I hate is his bad leadership, whose meaning I have explained in the article below. There is no constitutional democracy in the world that requires citizens to love their elected leaders. Loving individuals is the responsibility of their spouses and family members. Once these individuals step up to hold elective public office, we owe them one thing: accountability or feedback on their performance. No elected public leader or their supporter should burden me or another person with any demand for affirmation or affection. In a functioning democracy, the duty of citizens is to hold their elected leaders to account so that they deliver basic services and do not undermine accountable democratic governance. This is what I have been doing across different administrations, including this one. As early as December 2021, when I analysed Hichilma's first 100 days in office, I raised governance concerns of his leadership in the hope that he could address them so that they do not grow into bigger problems. He did not listen. In 2022, when he was celebrating one year in office, I raised governance concerns of his leadership in the hope that he could address them so that they do not grow into bigger problems. He did not listen. In 2023, I raised governance concerns of his leadership in the hope that he could address them so that they do not grow into bigger problems. He did not listen. In 2024, I raised governance concerns of his leadership in the hope that he could address them so that they do not grow into bigger problems. He did not listen. In fact, as did his predecessor in 2021 in response to my criticism of the abuse of state institutions to fix critics and opponents, the president asked his supporters to report me to the police for alleged hate speech against him! In 2025, I raised governance concerns of his leadership in the hope that he could address them so that they do not grow into bigger problems. He did not listen. This year and for the many reasons that I shared in the interview on the link below, Hichilema is losing the election because he did not listen to criticism that we, as citizens, raised about his performance. He is also losing the election because of his extremist supporters who, in addition to a wilful but harmful failure to hold him to account, dismiss legitimate criticism of his leadership from other people as hate speech. What a pity! What a wasted opportunity! I have just read a story on a ruling party platform casually dismissing Global Witness's report that "Ahead of Zambia's general election...First Quantum Minerals and its associates have been running a decades-long covert influence campaign distorting the copper-rich nation's democracy" and that the Canadian firm has "become his [Hichilema's] largest funder in the upcoming 2026 election after pledging up to $50 million in support." The report adds that "FQM has reaped enormous benefits: major changes to Zambia's tax regime have save the company $771 million between 2022 and 2025, and it has been shielded from legal scrutiny." Rather than interrogating these grave concerns, the publisher, the Zambian Watchdog which is run from State House, is treating the issue so casually when Global Witness, a very credible international outlet, raises serious corruption and governance allegations. In January 2019, I raised questions about Hichilema's relationship with foreign mining firms, but was told by his supporters that I just hate him. Today, we are ere. The net result is that Hichilema, who in opposition politics had positioned himself as the reformist leader Zambia needed to reclaim its democracy, eliminate corruption, unite the country, and set it on the path to economic recovery, has, in power, turned out to be nearly everything he detested about his predecessor and, in some cases, much worse. Under his watch, corruption has thrived on a massive scale, the economy is a shambles, ethnic divisions have worsened, Zambiaโs previously principled foreign policy has been shredded into something unrecognisable, and democracy is essentially non-existent. The man who was expected to lead reform has instead transitioned into an aspiring despot. Unless he rigs the election, or eliminates his main rival, Zambians should prepare for a new administration after 13 August. Many voters have reached a point of no return and it is too late for Hichilema to change their mind. A combination of failure to listen and the "you just hate Hichilema" brigade has destroyed his once promising presidency. I see many people expressing surprise at the huge turnout at Brian Mundubile's rallies. What they miss is that the turnout reflects the revulsion against Hichilema rather than genuine support for Brian. Even if Brian was not there, voters would have rallied behind another candidate through which to express their opposition to Hichilema as a result of his major policy failures. As early as 2023, wen I noticed Hichilema's direction of travel, I warned that the greatest opposition that he and the UPND face is a politically alert and informed citizenry, not an opposition party: โThe biggest opposition that Hichilema faces is the people, particularly if he fails to lower the cost of living and tackle the huge unemployment outside the health and education sectors. They can stop opposition rallies like Edgar Lungu and the PF tried to do but if Zambians would have decided in a year or two that Hichilema must go at the next election, there is nothing that he can do to stop them....Even if Hichilema tries to, he cannot stop the peopleโs will. Even if he succeeds in killing the PF and in his manoeuvres to block his main political opponents from running in 2026, another platform and another candidate to serve as the outlet of opposition will be found. The voters will support any visionary patriot they see as better placed to be used as the vehicle for removing Hichilema just like they chose him as the vehicle for removing Lungu. Please tell himโ. Hichilema did not listen. Again. This continued failure to listen prompted my conclusion two years later that "Many Zambians may not know yet who they will vote for in the 2026 presidential election, but they already know who they wonโt vote for." The truth is that I tried to warn Hichilema in good time and at different points that he was heading in the wrong direction. The President, dripping with arrogance, did not listen. Think of it this way. A bus (representing a political party in power) is transporting passengers (active citizens) from Intercity terminus (2021, being the departure point of where we did not want to be anymore) to Nakonde (2026, being the arrival point of destination before subsequently deciding whether to book the same bus for the return trip). After leaving Intercity, some passengers notice that the bus is heading towards Livingstone (a wrong destination that takes us back to before 2021). A few of us (active citizens) decide to stand up (holding the leader to account) and confront both the driver (the president) and his conductor (Minister of Finance), demanding an explanation for why we are heading to Livingstone when we were promised that we woud be taken to Nakonde. Other passengers, mainly those who came from the ethnic group of the driver and conductor, defended the duo even before it could respond to our concerns. They repeatedly told us that "You just hate the driver. Please sit down!" One or two relatives of the conductor joined in support, saying the "The driver and the conductor are excellent and one of them has even won awards for stellar performance on his duties, including his remarkable capacity to understand direction of travel"! That is how some passengers kept quiet. I kept on talking, especially after we reached Choma in the hope that if we turned atthat point, we woudl not wast more time. I talked because I could not get off the bus at undesigned stations, so the only solution was to appeal to the driver to change course. I explained that it would be an act of extreme irresponsibility on my part as an active passenger to wait until the bus has reached Livingstone before holding the driver to account about the direction of travel. That is why I tried to warn the driver that we were headed in the wrong direction. Unfortunately, other passengers said we should just sit back comfortably, enjoy the ride which included some morsels of food delivered by the bus, and trust the driver because other drivers before him were much worse. In the end, we arrived in Livingstone, our undesired destination. Just when we were arriving, we saw another bus, loading passing from there directly to Nakonde. The driver, upon realising the cost of his failure to listen and the disappointment in the eyes of the passengers, urged everyone to sit down, promising that he would take us to Nakonde if we give him more time. With the exception of those who came from the driver's ethnic group and the auxiliary ones, most passengers, who had shown great faith in his driving skills by paying (voting) the fare for the bus as their mode of transport from Intercity to Nakonde, have left the bus for the other. These include those who had adopted silence during the journey after realising that the driver, aided by the choir mentioned, was not a listening kind. As I write this post, the alternative bus is almost full. The same passengers who accused those of us who, along the way, advised the driver to change course, of harbouring hatred for the driver are now wondering why nearly everyone is leaving the bus we came with for an alternative one that is promising to take us directly to Nakonde. One of the driver's supporters, reiterating the driver's earlier appeal that we should stick to the bus that brought us to Livingstone, just shouted at us a moment ago: "The alternative bus will take you to a wrong destination. Its driver cannot be trusted; just stick to this one because you won't have to pay a new fare". The supporter is overlooking the point that we are already at a wrong destination, the current driver has betrayed our trust, and that we would rather repose our trust in another person. It is not good to remain on a bus, driven by a person who does not listen, out of the fear that an alternative one might be driven by someone who could be worse. Let us try the alternative bus. If its driver takes us to a wrong destination, we will disembark from the bus we are about to jump onto, as we have done before, and find another one until we reach Nakonde. For me and other active passengers, such has been the the current driver's betrayal of our trust that we have reached a point of no return. We cannot trust this driver anymore, especially that when we tried to correct him, no one explained to us why our concerns were unfounded. We were just told that we hate hate the driver or his ethic group or or the province where he comes from. Recently, Dr Lee Habasonda, a lecturer in political science at the University of Zambia, told Reuters (watch the video clip on the link below) that electoral success is a matter of thresholds โ of grievances, feelings, frustrations, etc. Leeโs view is that once a certain threshold or tipping point has been reached, "no matter your manifesto, ideology, lies" or whatever those in power do or say, the voters will "decide to change government" because they would have reached a point of no return. Emotionally, many Zambian voters, including some that I know who voted for Hichilema in 2021, have passed that threshold where no matter what Hichilema or UPND does, these voters will reject him. This is because the threshold, or the point of no return, has been reached. As Lee argued, those in power "may say we have already won this election when they campaign but the political coalitions and realignment" suggest otherwise. When the opposition wins next month, we will need to advise them to get non-sycophants at State House and in the critical posts in the civil service. It is important that they understand that unless there is a clear shift away from the harmful culture we have raised concerns about, we will be compelled to challenge them with the same resolve we previously applied to both the PF and UPND governments. On my part, I promise that I will always be on the side of the people. You will not find me in government even after the election. Once Hichilema is out of office, I will leave him alone and my attention will shift to holding to account the next set of public leaders. As I made clear in 2021, I am content serving as an academic and I will work, as part of my civic duty, to hold the new Government to account as I did with previous Governments. I am not available for or interested in any form of government job. For now, Iet me continue listening to the attached song. Chalo chesu.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2078449842368483816/amplify_video_thumb/2078427007344427008/img/tCO3n_fY3sOVQlej.jpg)
![My cousin, Jonathan Ord asked me to teach the Come Follow Me lesson to his mission yesterday over zoom. This is the video I did and the full text. Hi. I am Brad Smith. I have ALS, which is a really weird disease that kills the motor neurons in my body. That means that I lose the connections between my brain and my muscles. My mind is still running at the normal rate. So, I can understand everything you say to me, but I canโt respond very quickly! I am getting faster, though. Last November I was the 3rd person in the world to receive the Neuralink brain implant. So I am controlling this computer with my brain. This is my old voice, recreated by AI from just two hours of me talking to my phone. I have come to see ALS as a calling, and I am trying to magnify it. I used to talk easily, but now I have to choose my words carefully, because it is hard and slow to type what I want to say. I joke that the Lord gave me ALS to get me to shut up. Those who knew me when I could talk laugh the hardest. President Ord is my first cousin. So we share grandma and grandpa Smith. Our grandma Smith was a character. When she taught at church, she would put a sign up that read: โthus saith the lord:โ so I will try to keep this within what the Lord has actually said, while trying to teach you to look at a basic principle of the gospel in a different way. Ironically, the first verse of Doctrine & Covenants 93 starts with โVerily, thus saith the Lordโ. This is an amazing section of scripture, Jesus Christ telling us to step up and be better! You should study it often. I will start with a story. I asked AI to make a video to dramatically tell the story. During college, I lived in Damascus, Syria, for a semester. It was a fantastic and wonderful experience. I especially loved exploring the Old City of Damascus. The Old City is built around the huge beautiful Umayyad mosque. Within the walls of the old city is a maze of narrow, winding, confusing streets and one really long straight street, as Saul found out in Acts 9:11. One day when a group of us were trying to get through this maze from the mosque to the Christian quarter of the Old City, we asked a man for directions. He thought for a second, then pointed and said, โGo left and then right, and then left and then right, and then left and then right, and then left and right, and youโll be there.โ Arenโt those the most ridiculous directions you have ever heard? We could have ignored him. But, we thought, he did know the city better than we did. So, with some laughter, off we went. Left. Right. Left. Right. And so on until, much to our surprise, we popped out at our destination. Life is a confusing maze. We face difficult choices, unexpected events, surprises, sorrows, opportunities, roadblocks. The Lord has given directions on how to get through to where we want to go. Sometimes the Lordโs directions seem odd, and we may struggle with the decision to follow. The Lord will not force us. It is our choice whether to choose and follow him. Wasnโt that fun? AI is getting crazy! I will be much less entertaining for the rest, but hopefully the spirit will teach you something new. The phrase โkeep the commandmentsโ (or โkeepeth my commandmentsโ) appears at least 4 times in Doctrine and Covenants Section 93, in verses 1, 20, 27, and 28. There are other references, like โkeep my sayingsโ in 52 and โobeyeth my voiceโ in 1. So, commandments are really important in this Revelation. I suggest that making the gospel a more central part of our lives depends largely on how we look at commandments. When you think of commandments, do you think โI canโt. Iโm Mormonโ? (That was a popular T-shirt slogan during my college years.) Although, with the recent guidance from President Nelson, it probably should be โI canโt, Iโm a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saintsโ. Itโs a common reaction: โThou shalt not do Cool Things.โ People LOVE to focus on all the things we CANโT do, as if we are trapped and deserve pity for our beliefs. No pity is needed. Commandments are opportunities, not constraints. Commandments are awesome! Allow me to illustrate. Imagine a spectrum between Good and Evil. Somewhere in the middle is โthe Lineโ that divides Good from Evil. As a teenager, I wanted to know where the Line was, so I could get close to it without going over it. I wanted to be on the โGoodโ side but still be able to do as many โCool Things" with my friends as possible. From my experience, I believe God gives us two types of commandments: 1) Get Back over the Line commandments and 2) Come Further into the Light commandments. Type 1, the Get Back over the Line commandments, could also be called โMisery Avoidanceโ commandments. They are designed to keep us out of misery or, if weโve crossed the Line, to bring us out of misery and back into the Good side. These are generally commandments with a clear and defined point of success, such as โThou shalt not kill.โ You will know, at the end of each day, whether you have successfully followed that commandment. I think all of the Ten Commandments fall into this category. The law of Moses was very black and white. The children of Israel had been in Egypt without a prophet for a long time when Moses received the law, and they needed to work on the basics. So, if you follow the Type 1 commandments, you will refrain from doing things that make you miserable. You will know you are in the Good if you can answer the baptismal interview and temple recommend questions honestly and faithfully. If you can do that, you have taken the basic steps necessary to avoid misery and are on a solid foundation for the next type of commandment. Type 2, the โCome Further into the Lightโ commandments, are the really cool commandments. Once we are out of the misery category, we can really start to pursue joy. So, God commands us to do things that he knows will make us happier and more like Christ. These commandments are the principles of eternal development, such as โLove thy neighborโ (Matthew 22:39). There is no clear end to loving our neighborโit requires positive and eternal progression. We can always love more, and we can always find another neighbor who needs our love. It is an eternal principle taught by Jesus Christ. And if we truly love our neighbor, refraining from killing him becomes pretty easy. It is through these commandments that we find joy in Jesus Christ. Elder Christofferson taught about this spectrum in the October 2018 general conference: โMost of us find ourselves at this moment on a continuum between a socially motivated participation in gospel rituals on the one hand and a fully developed, Christlike commitment to the will of God on the other. Somewhere along that continuum, the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ enters into our heart and takes possession of our soul. It may not happen in an instant, but we should all be moving toward that blessed state.โ Our goal is to go THAT WAY (toward Christ) as much as possible. So first, get back across the line and stop doing things that will make you miserable. Then make every effort to try and be like Jesus, to โlove one another as Jesus loves you.โ The gospel of Jesus Christ is more than just โnot doingโ stuff. It is about coming unto Christ, being perfected in him, and denying ourselves of all ungodliness. Discuss with your companion what commandments and mission rules are for โMisery Avoidanceโ and which are โCome Further into the Lightโ! And, remember, commandments are ALWAYS connected to huge blessings. The Lord promised, โThere is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicatedโand when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicatedโ (Doctrine and Covenants 130:20โ21). Whenever we obey any of Godโs commandments, we will get the blessing associated with that commandment. Elder David A. Bednar said: โThe gospel of Jesus Christ encompasses much more than avoiding, overcoming, and being cleansed from sin and the bad influences in our lives; it also essentially entails doing good, being good, and becoming better. Repenting of our sins and seeking forgiveness are spiritually necessary, and we must always do so. But remission of sin is not the only or even the ultimate purpose of the gospel. To have our hearts changed by the Holy Spirit such that โwe have no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continuallyโ (Mosiah 5:2), as did King Benjaminโs people, is the covenant responsibility we have accepted. โThis mighty change is not simply the result of working harder or developing greater individual discipline. Rather, it is the consequence of a fundamental change in our desires, our motives, and our natures made possible through the Atonement of Christ the Lord. Our spiritual purpose is to overcome both sin and the desire to sin, both the taint and the tyranny of sin.โ I LOVE this conceptโand as I have paid attention, I feel like apostles are trying to teach us this all the time. Are we listening? Let me repeat what Elder Bednar said. He said that the commandments help us change what we WANT. Why is that important? Remember my teenage desires? I wanted to be as close to the line as possible so I could still look cool for my friends. That is a good example of the โtyrannyโ of sin. Even though I was not actually sinning (probably because I was afraid of my mother), I still had some small desire to sin. I said, โI canโt. Iโm Mormonโ with many dramatic sighs. Overcoming the tyranny of sin is getting to the point where the sin no longer looks remotely interesting or fun because we are too busy loving our neighbors and trying to be like Jesus. Elder Dallin H. Oaks said: โThe Final Judgment is not just an evaluation of a sum total of good and evil actsโwhat we have done. It is an acknowledgment of the final effect of our acts and thoughtsโwhat we have become. It is not enough for anyone just to go through the motions. The commandments, ordinances, and covenants of the gospel are not a list of deposits required to be made in some heavenly account. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a plan that shows us how to become what our Heavenly Father desires us to become.โ This talk was given when I was on a mission, before most of you were born. It completely changed my perspective on the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is called The Challenge to Becomeโ and I recommend that you study it. When the Lord says keep the commandments, he isnโt just telling us to stop sinningโhe wants us to become like Christ and to have joy. Take a moment and think, Where am I on this continuum? Remember that none of us is perfect like the Savior, and we all need to lift one another. That is why we worship together. That is why we have priesthood quorums and the Relief Society, Primary, and youth organizations. The Lord taught us that truth when he said we all have different gifts: โTo some is given one [gift], and to some is given another [gift], that all may be profited thereby. To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithfulโ (Doctrine and Covenants 46:12โ14). The Savior is still WAY over there: a thousand miles away somewhere. That is why we have quorums. We all have a long way to go. Letโs link arms and run together. Let me finish by telling a story from my mission to support my testimony of Jesus. Years ago my mission president said something interesting: โEither the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is truly the kingdom of god on the earth... or it is the greatest fraud ever in history.โ It is audacious to claim to be the true Church of Jesus Christโbut let me explain exactly why I know that to be true. I always BELIEVED that I was raised in the gospel of Jesus Christ. My parents taught me well and I felt good following the commandments and studying the scriptures. That led me to serve a mission in Brazil. My turning point of testimony came when I was 20โat least 2/3rds through my mission. We were invited into a house in the โfundosโ of a propertyโa small structure built behind a larger house. The man was polite and allowed us to share our message. As I had done hundreds of times, I shared the story of Joseph Smith, a boy who sought the truth through prayer. I recited Josephโs own words in response to his prayer: โI saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me... When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the otherโThis is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" I felt the strongest feeling I had ever experiencedโan undeniable confirmation that what I said was true. It hit me in a way I can never forget! I knew that Joseph Smith was truly a prophet, and therefore the Book of Mormon was the word of god. What about the man we were teaching? How had he responded to my life-affirming spiritual experience? He shrugged and politely thanked us for the message. I was stunned. I felt like the windows of heaven opened on meโand he felt nothing. I learned that receiving answers to our prayers is like tuning a radio: not everyone is on the right frequency. For some reason, the Lord decided to broadcast on my frequency that day. I received the undeniable confirmation that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true. I have built on that foundation brick by brick since then. And every time someone has challenged me on Joseph Smith, I go back to that day in Brazil. I know that he was a prophet. My life has been blessed in ridiculously good ways since then. As I have tried to follow Jesus Christ, great things have happened to me. Even my hardest and most frustrating times have turned out to have a purpose. God has upturned my best laid plans over and over. But I look back and realize that I could never have planned any better. With the prophet Nephi I say: โI know that [God] loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things." (1 Nephi 11:17) When I say that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, that does not mean we have a monopoly on truth. I know Christians and Muslims who teach me to be betterโand Members of the church who are far from disciples of Christ. We just have more truth: scriptures, living prophets, ordinances, personal revelation, and answers to many of lifeโs biggest questions! That is pretty cool. But we canโt be prideful about the truth we have. You have all probably met people to admire both inside and outside of the church. So, I am all in. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is trueโnot a big fraud. And we are all trying to get closer to Christ. I know that Heavenly Father has a plan for me. Life has not been what I expected, but I trust him! I know that Joseph Smith is a prophet of Jesus Christ and that the Book of Mormon is true. This is โintelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. Light and truth forsake that evil one.โ With that knowledge, keep the commandments! In the name of Jesus Christ, amen .](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1961133396144656751/amplify_video_thumb/1961127653798547458/img/nIvUNxNHuUcT9YLP.jpg)
