₦airaland Forum

franugo:
Hello landers.

So I got back from work today to see Prof Mgbeke Sandra Duru's video, while I did not watch everything from start to finish, I did notice some inconsistencies I'll like to point out.

1. Prof Mgbeke claims she does not know SP Akpabio but a review of her live video shows that he's saved in her phone and is actually one of her most recent chats. It's also shown clearly in the video @ 47 mins in, that she was in a voice call with him recently. Don't take my word for it, investigate by yourself.

2. Her failed attempts to pronounce some basic Igbo names in an attempt to seem posh we're easy to see through. This is a lady that lived and worked in the East for many years, some of those years were in the corridors of power in Imo state, how can she not know these pronunciations?

3. She has not explained why Natasha contacted her in the first place. Sounds ridiculous that Natasha will send such messages to someone she does not know (prof Mgbeke claims she didn't know Natasha till Natasha reached out to her via Whatsapp), sending messages that could destroy her if exposed to an untrusted and unvetted third party? How's that make sense??

4. Prof Mgbeke claims she has integrity because she was raised by Whites....(I have personal issues with that line of thought but I am trying to be free of sentiments in my review)...It is a fact that Prof Mgbeke has had dealings in the past with politicians in Nigeria, infact it is stated that she thought about forming a party to contest for imo governorship herself, and many allegations were made against her character, such a person valuing integrity is laughable. Show me a politician who values integrity, they're all the same to me, none of them impresses me (with the exception of one who shall not be named as they're not party to this shit show).

So there you have it, I tried to remain objective and impartial. My final conclusion, I think prof Mgbeke is being malicious and fraudulent in her assertions.

Have you used this same brain to review Natasha’s claims too?

yemre:
Bro, that's a very good review of professor Sandra Duru's claims there but a crucial part where her evidence (recorded conversation) was mentioned was left out. Why?

Also left out was Natasha's part of the story where she made an allegation but unable to produce an evidence of her allegations. Why?

I don't want to believe this is deliberate!

Your review has to be balanced for us to know you are not writing based on sentiments or emotions.

I've not said any of them is right or wrong but a balanced review and presentation of proofs will do Justice to this matter without biases.

Peace!

Hello yemre, I didn't hear any VN in the video, prof Mgbeke saying she has a VN is not evidence enough for me, that's just conjecture till the vn comes out. As for Natasha's allegations against SP, I did not speak about it because it's still alleged, not proven in anyway and my review was on Prof's video.

alobright17:
Have you reviewed Natasha's claimed and also asked why she's not posting evidence? Or your duty is just to review one side of the devide?

You can as well do that and publish your findings

anonimi:
The irresponsible mgbeke blackmailer don hammer for Akpabio’s head.

https://www.nairaland.com/3836453/sandra-durus-landlord-throws-out

Exactly what Natasha antecedent is.... So why take Natasha serious and denounce Prof Mbege's claim?

Your hypocrisy is loud.

Tareq1105:
You were biased in your assessment.

Why didn't you ask Natasha to respond and bring out evidence to counter Prof assertions?

Natasha needs to come up with something stronger bcoz both of them actually chatted.

Yes, it's possible she may not have met Akpabio before now but common she might be asking for financial reward from him for the information she has about Natasha plan to bring him down.

The truth is Natasha and Prof fell out and she decided to blow everything. Just listen to the audio again.

Hello Tareq, I'm guessing you didn't watch parts or all of the video (I didn't watch all of it too so don't be embarrassed ). Prof claims that she has never spoken to SP and that she didn't know Natasha from Adam, at least till Natasha chatted her up to frame SP.
I do not know Natasha, how can I ask her to respond to prof Mgbeke? Besides I think I say something about Natasha's rebuttal of the video yesterday too, just search for it.

Useless Prof. Why can't Akpabio sue Natasha if he's not scared of evidence being revealed in court?

alobright17:
Have you reviewed Natasha's claimed and also asked why she's not posting evidence? Or your duty is just to review one side of the devide?

Na Anti-Akpabio reviewer.

He knows his audience are GULLIBLE AND HUNGRY like Natasha claimed

buhariguy:
have you reviewed Natasha allegations against akpabio,
She said her husband were behind them when akpabio were sexually harrasing her with words, without touching her or raping her in the presence of her husband,
You supporting Natasha should be ashamed for stupidity,
Such allegations shouldn't be mentioned at all

I never said I supported Natasha, where's this coming from? I did a thread about Prof Mgbeke's video ONLY.

emkz:
Extremely brilliant review.

Let us also review your review.



My own thoughts on your review.

Your review reeks of fallacy of ad hominem. Instead of addressing the issues raised, you veered into an attack on the personality of Professor Mgbeke. This strategy mirrors Natasha's strategy from day 1, and speaks of disturbing unintelligence. Instead of addressing the matter of shouting in the senate and behaving like a thug, she brought up an unrelated matter of sexual allegations. When the senate ethics committee sat to hear the matter, Oby Ezekwesili launched a marauding attack on Onyekachi Nwaebonyi which caused the ethics committee to postpone the hearing indefinitely. Whenever Natasha is asked for evidence, she raises her voice. Now, Professor Mgbeke has submitted evidence, and the best Natasha could do was submit links saying Professor Mgbeke is a scammer, was thrown out by her landlord and co. If Professor Mgbeke is indeed a scammer, Natasha contacting her also establishes that fact on Natasha, because "show me who your friends are, and I will tell you who you are".

Finally, your review falls short of academic standards. You reviewed Professor Mgbeke, but did not review what she said. Your strategy is to discredit Professor Mgbeke, so that by so doing, no one would believe what she said. This would automatically prevent you from defending what Professor Mgbeke said against Natasha. If you want to toe that line, Natasha lied in the past against Reno Omokri and deleted all the evidence when Reno exposed her lie. Someone close to her paid Reno compensation to abandon the matter. If Professor Mgbeke is discredited, please can you explain to us why we should believe Natasha, given her antecedents?

If the stupid reviewer never reply you and some nairaland.com is still liking that review,then we have a long way to go in this country. We are not interested in the Truth but convenient falsehood

bixton:
You have tried but yo huaven't done justice t the issue. Do you remember those armed robbers who sometime years ago robbed a bank in Kwara State, when Hon. Saraki was still SP and it was found out that in the mobile phones of one of the robbers, he had the SP contact details in it, the SP denied knowing them and investigations was done and I can't remember what happened after. But Nigerians stood on the side of Saraki because he was fighting the President of the he FRN as at that time and a majority of us the masses saw it as a plot by the FG.
Can you liken it to that of Prof. Ngbeke claiming not know Akpabio.
I do hope you know many of us have in our phones contact of people we can't truly say we know them or have any relationship with them whatsoever.

Now, back to the issue of Sen. Natasha...
I keep wondering why she brought up a sexual harassment allegation against the SP and she has refused to take the issue to Court!!!

Why did Sen. Natasha have to wait for how many months or years before bringing up the sexual harassment issue just because her seat was changed and she refused to abide by the rules of the legislative house !!!


So many things are really off about Sen. Natasha and judging by her past, she seems to flaunt her beauty to drag potential men into blackmail if they don't do her bidding....

Hello bixton, SP Akpabio's contact was top in prof Mgbeke's recent list not just contact, I'm guessing you know how WhatsApp works. Secondly, if you look at that part well enough, you'll see that there was a Whatsapp call between her and SP very recently.

As I have stated before, I didn't bring up Natasha's claims against SP cause they're all alleged for now, I am in no position to know if it's true or not and my review was strictly on prof Mgbeke's video

jogojogo:
Where una see this number 1? I have seen the video severally and never saw this. Can we see the screenshot please

I added a screenshot in my op, it's around minute 47 of the full clip.

2mch:
Which Nigerians?

Igbos

TempleHouse:
SS PEOPLE ARE DEFENDING AKPABIO !
NIGERIANS IGBOS ARE DEFENDING NATASHA !!

Fixed

alpamo6:
I find it hard to believe that Natasha would open up to a stranger on the phone and make derogatory remarks about everything. If this woman is telling the truth, then someone may have cloned Natasha’s phone.

And her voice, documents? She knows way too much to be cloned, please. I am a journalist and I have watched it over and over again.

There may be one or two inconsistencies. The woman is saying the truth, or why would she risk multiple lawsuits in the USA?

casualobserver:
Are you a useful eed iot too or are you auditioning for the role?

Look it is clear there is something suspicious about the woman. I also noticed some of the things you mentioned. I just put it down the the elevation of chartalans into our public space.

You claim you are being objective, you are not.

You are attacking her character and maybe rightly so but you have not addressed the substance of what she posted.

I believe the calls happened and there is evidence. Why focus on the call from the SP but ignore the interaction with Natasha on the same phone? Natasha denied knowing or ever talking to her. The same phone that you use rightly to question the involvement of the SP is the same phone that proves there were interactions with Natasha.


What I think happened is this: All these activists are paid attack dogs. Sandra was contacted by Natasha to play a role but for some reason she decided against it. It could be because she developed a conscience or more likely because she decided her interests were better served by taking the info to the SP. So she contacted the SP and was paid a higher fee and double crossed Natasha. The fact that she changed sides and now has a relationship with the SP does not mean her info is not real…..focus of the evidence not on the characters.


All parties in this are dubious characters. What an objective person should do is deal with the evidence!

The fact that I am a habitual liar or a fraudster does not mean I am not telling the truth. It is up to you if you are truly objective to look beyond the characters involved and look at the evidence.

I don’t think Sandra is clean but I believe the recording I heard and I believe the evidence of contact with Natasha which she denies.


Natasha has made claims claims she has evidence of sexual harassment but all she has done is muddy the waters and whipping up sentiment without showing any evidence. All she has done is frustrate any efforts to present her case. Whatever the shadowy nature of this Sandra woman, like I have said all these activists and NGOs are shadowy characters, she claimed to have evidence and released the evidence. Is the evidence real and damaging…to me it is. Can you prove her evidence is manufactured that the recorded voice calls are fake or the callhistory with Natasha is fake? That is all that matters…. Everything else is immaterial.

I'll ignore your insults because you brought up some fine points and I'll like to respond to them.
Firstly, I stated already in my op that politicians bore and irritate me, all of them bar one so I have no vested interest in which way the case finally ends up, only the truth interests me.
Secondly, I do not know Natasha's number, I cannot confirm if the number shown on Prof's phone is actually Natasha's contact. Prof says she has VN evidence but I didn't hear any VN in the video so I can't speak on that.
Thirdly, I agree that most activists are paid attack dogs, it's a known fact actually and totally not unexpected.
Fourthly, I did not speak about Natasha's allegations because they're just mere allegations with no evidence presented so far, same reason I didn't talk about Prof Mgbeke's VN claim.

Dannyset:


There's no need for that na. Do you want him to annoy the mob?

To them, Natasha is clean and holy.

Idiots everywhere.

They are useful idiots like oby Ezekwesili.

Okeona:
Why didn't you review evidences against Natasha and flaw them?

Focus on her point rather let's see how objective you are

I don't understand your comment bro, I made a review of prof Mgbeke's video. If you want to review any of Natasha's video, you're free to do so

emkz:
Extremely brilliant review.

Let us also review your review.



My own thoughts on your review.

Your review reeks of fallacy of ad hominem. Instead of addressing the issues raised, you veered into an attack on the personality of Professor Mgbeke. This strategy mirrors Natasha's strategy from day 1, and speaks of disturbing unintelligence. Instead of addressing the matter of shouting in the senate and behaving like a thug, she brought up an unrelated matter of sexual allegations. When the senate ethics committee sat to hear the matter, Oby Ezekwesili launched a marauding attack on Onyekachi Nwaebonyi which caused the ethics committee to postpone the hearing indefinitely. Whenever Natasha is asked for evidence, she raises her voice. Now, Professor Mgbeke has submitted evidence, and the best Natasha could do was submit links saying Professor Mgbeke is a scammer, was thrown out by her landlord and co. If Professor Mgbeke is indeed a scammer, Natasha contacting her also establishes that fact on Natasha, because "show me who your friends are, and I will tell you who you are".

Finally, your review falls short of academic standards. You reviewed Professor Mgbeke, but did not review what she said. Your strategy is to discredit Professor Mgbeke, so that by so doing, no one would believe what she said. This would automatically prevent you from defending what Professor Mgbeke said against Natasha. If you want to toe that line, Natasha lied in the past against Reno Omokri and deleted all the evidence when Reno exposed her lie. Someone close to her paid Reno compensation to abandon the matter. If Professor Mgbeke is discredited, please can you explain to us why we should believe Natasha, given her antecedents?

Hello emkz,

I like your review. I did not watch the parts you spoke about, I'll have to go watch the full video and revert, I was pretty tired after the long day yesterday. Give me till EOD and I'll modify this comment with my observations from the full video. Again, I'll ignore your insults and condescension because they have no bearing on the issue at hand. Have a great weekend bro👍

As much as I wanted to be neutral about these Duru ex-Natasha, I have some questions to ask.Has anyone researched the phone number and doesn’t match Natasha?Is the voice note from the WhatsApp number or AI?Before you support or oppose, have you done good research to be sure of who’s lying or not?What’s Natasha’s stand on this?Has she been treating her with court as usual (I remember the yes, Daddy case, and no one has yet to be sued)? I will advise we all try to be careful with our emotions when it comes to politicians and their employers, as they’re all playing a superiority game with our lives.

Sandra Duru is a Devil!
Love her, believe her, trust her, but be prepared to be scammed.

alobright17:
Have you reviewed Natasha's claimed and also asked why she's not posting evidence? Or your duty is just to review one side of the devide?

You guys seem to think I'm on Natasha's side of this divide, I couldn't care less about her tbh. I watched prof Mgbeke's video, saw some irregularities and pointed them out. Natasha has not provided any evidence to backup her claims and she was photographed smiling sheepishly with the SP, a man she publicly accused of unwarranted sexual advances.... they're all unserious characters in the comic that is the Nigerian political space. They're both of a similar frame in my mind.

franugo:
Hello landers.

So I got back from work today to see Prof Mgbeke Sandra Duru's video, while I did not watch everything from start to finish, I did notice some inconsistencies I'll like to point out.

1. Prof Mgbeke claims she does not know SP Akpabio but a review of her live video shows that he's saved in her phone and is actually one of her most recent chats. It's also shown clearly in the video @ 47 mins in, that she was in a voice call with him recently. Don't take my word for it, investigate by yourself.

2. Her failed attempts to pronounce some basic Igbo names in an attempt to seem posh we're easy to see through. This is a lady that lived and worked in the East for many years, some of those years were in the corridors of power in Imo state, how can she not know these pronunciations?

3. She has not explained why Natasha contacted her in the first place. Sounds ridiculous that Natasha will send such messages to someone she does not know (prof Mgbeke claims she didn't know Natasha till Natasha reached out to her via Whatsapp), sending messages that could destroy her if exposed to an untrusted and unvetted third party? How's that make sense??

4. Prof Mgbeke claims she has integrity because she was raised by Whites....(I have personal issues with that line of thought but I am trying to be free of sentiments in my review)...It is a fact that Prof Mgbeke has had dealings in the past with politicians in Nigeria, infact it is stated that she thought about forming a party to contest for imo governorship herself, and many allegations were made against her character, such a person valuing integrity is laughable. Show me a politician who values integrity, they're all the same to me, none of them impresses me (with the exception of one who shall not be named as they're not party to this shit show).

So there you have it, I tried to remain objective and impartial. My final conclusion, I think prof Mgbeke is being malicious and fraudulent in her assertions.

Nice analysis. What’s your take on the allegations Natasha made against the senate president?

If you’ve made these known in the past, kindly share the links with me


Let’s try to make balanced analyses if we truly want to be impartial. I await your feedback

Omoawoke:
Have you used this same brain to review Natasha’s claims too?

There's no evidence to review in Natasha's case. She made an allegation against the SP and didn't provide any evidence, what am I supposed to review there? Did you see their recent photograph together where they're both smiling with their teeth out? Don't stress yourself for any of these politicians at all, you'll get burned

iLoveYouToo:
Nice analysis. What’s your take on the allegations Natasha made against the senate president?

If you’ve made these known in the past, kindly share the links with me

Natasha made a claim without any evidence whatsoever, there's nothing to review in her case till evidence is presented. I have nothing to say about an unsubstantiated allegation

franugo:
I don't understand your comment bro, I made a review of prof Mgbeke's video. If you want to review any of Natasha's video, you're free to do so

What was prof video about? She claimed Natasha denied of knowing or having conversations with her and she brought evidences of their conversations.

You as an objective reviewer that you claimed to be, we expect you to highlight all prof points and flaw them one after the other maybe you can make sense

franugo:
Natasha made a claim without any evidence whatsoever, there's nothing to review in her case till evidence is presented. I have nothing to say about an unsubstantiated allegation

According to your submission, credibility and politicians have nothing in common. Yet, you’ve made quite a number of posts here promoting and defending Peter Obi in the past, isn’t he a politician too?

franugo:
Natasha made a claim without any evidence whatsoever, there's nothing to review in her case till evidence is presented. I have nothing to say about an unsubstantiated allegation

There’s no way under the sun that you’re impartial in your analysis, except you release a counter thread that makes front page, speaking about the positive sides of this woman.

After reading your post, you come across as a paid agent

Oh I'm on fp, was wondering why my mentions were coming in like a tap....thank you to the mod that FP-ed me.

Let me clear a misconception you guys have, I do not support Natasha or SP, I don't know either of them and I have no side in this case. I simply say a video and reviewed it, everything in the op is my personal view from the parts of prof Mgbeke's video that I watched. I'll also like to state, for those of you tying gele on the Natasha - SP issue that they were both pictured smiling and gisting like long time friends even after the allegations were made. They're both sides of the same coin, if e too over Natasha, she will decamp to APC and everything will be swept under the rug, DO NOT take this issue personally because the protagonists certainly do not.

@seun why can't I modify my own posts na? I wanted to put this on the op

iLoveYouToo:
There’s no way under the sun that you’re impartial in your analysis, except you release a counter thread that makes front page, speaking about the positive sides of this woman.

After reading your post, you come across as a paid agent

Lol, they couldn't pay me enough bro.

franugo:
Lol, they couldn't pay me enough bro.

“EriMoss” admit with your full chest that you’re partial, it stinks from afar.

iLoveYouToo:
According to your submission, credibility and politicians have nothing in common. Yet, you’ve made quite a number of posts here promoting and defending Peter Obi in the past, isn’t he a politician too?

Hello, if you look at my op, I Stated that I was unimpressed by all politicians bar one, he is the one I'm impressed by but that does not make me an attack dog for him. He is not part of this issue so I didn't mention him.