₦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.

You addressed everything except the main point of her video.

Are you saying she didn't have those discussions with Natasha? Or she is lying about what Natasha said or didn't say?

That is the only thing that matter in her video, and unfortunately you failed to address that.

See conclusion on being objective and impartial. Our insincerity in Nigeria is a big problem to the progress of the country.

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.

But you find it easier to believe her sexual lies against the SP without evidence abi Just continue eeh

franugo:
You can believe whatever you want to believe, that's your opinion and it certainly doesn't affect me in any way.

You believe the one she did against the SP earlier but find it hard to believe this recent one now abi Just continue as your point is irrelevant in the first place

You can say that again...thank God for intelligent people like you that can read in between the lines, and are not dumb...9

alpamo6:
My take: How could Natasha say so much to someone over the phone—denying sexual harassment, plotting to remove SP, insulting her followers, and claiming she gave money to Ezekwesili—all in call? If she had accomplices, I doubt she'd reveal such evil plans to even them, let alone a stranger. This feels like calculated manipulation. Something doesn’t add up.

Now..that is objective and reasonable, how could she do this, because we don't expect a sensible person to be so open mouthed.

It does not mean she didn't though. Prof Ngbeke said she did, and provided relatively reasonable evidence to back up her claim. Natasha have not directly denied the claim, she was more intrested in attacking the personality of the prof.

So back to your post, if indeed Natasha said all this things, what kind of person is she, morally and intelligently.

alobright17:
What is she going from one platform to another instead shutting up and wait for court case ?

In recent times you know number of footballers getting destroyed by false accusations from ladies E.g Mendy of Manchester City at long last the guy was innocent .


Now why are people like you siding the accuser even without evidence on what basis are you siding her , over just a claim she made ? Don’t you know anyone can make a claim even against you ? I thought there’s a saying that you’re innocent until proven guilty?


I can side with the accused until proven guilty. Someone like Natasha if she has any iota of evidence would’ve posted it even before court case .


You’ll see that in the end this lady will never provide anything called evidence since there’s none .should we bet ?

My opinion is that she is more intrested in the noise the case is generating than in actually pursuing any case.

Same way Obi is yet to make any progress on the yes daddy tape till today

TenQ:
I am not sliding anyone!

Is Akpabio a saint?

It is not ethically wrong for Akpabio to want to date Natasha, it is only ethically wrong if he is punishing Natasha for not agreeing to his whims!
Neither of them are saints!

we’re not here talking about who’s a saint or not because both of us and all those critics of both parties are not saint , we’re trying to find evidence to the accusation made and the accusation isn’t wether Akpabio is a saint or not .

Even if you toast a babe and she refused and then accuse you of rape with no proof will the judge say oh you’re guilty all because by the way you’re not a saint ? Be sincere with the answer let’s see .

alobright17:
we’re not here talking about who’s a saint or not because both of us and all those critics of both parties are not saint , we’re trying to find evidence to the accusation made and the accusation isn’t wether Akpabio is a saint or not .

Even if you toast a babe and she refused and then accuse you of rape with no proof will the judge say oh you’re guilty all because by the way you’re not a saint ? Be sincere with the answer let’s see .

If I was Natasha o, no public pressure will make me release my evidences until we meet in court.

I don't know about you

frankson1:
Which court did Lietasha sue Akpabio for sexual harassment if she was telling the truth??

Has Akpabio sued Natasha for false allegations made against him?

!

Lamasta:
You believe the one she did against the SP earlier but find it hard to believe this recent one now abi Just continue as your point is irrelevant in the first place

I don't believe I made any reference to Natasha's allegations against SP in the op

loffyloffy:
You addressed everything except the main point of her video.

Are you saying she didn't have those discussions with Natasha? Or she is lying about what Natasha said or didn't say?

That is the only thing that matter in her video, and unfortunately you failed to address that.

Hello Loffy, I can't be sure about her claims since I can't confirm if the number truly is Natasha's number. If it is, then she definitely has a case to answer. Truth is difficult to come by when politicians are involved, I stuck to stuff I can at least confidently backup

frankson1:
Franugo, have you reviewed all the allegations Natasha has made to be true, starting from Reno Omokri's case??

Hello namesake, I only reviewed the Prof's video as there were things that I found strange in it. For Natasha's claims, they're currently not backed up by any evidence that I can review, I'll hold off till something tangible is presented.

Omoawoke:
You created a narrative and a thread, I didn’t

I’m only asking you do same to Natasha

Does her allegations make sense, despite being known as a serial liar and manipulator

Her allegations are hers to make, she has not provided any evidence so I cannot ascertain the truthfulness of it. I am trying to steer off it till I see concrete evidence presented

alobright17:
Did you wrote a review on all her appearances, claims and accusation too ?


What is the one sided review tend to accomplish? Oh to say the number isn’t hers or she’s not the one that is on the other side of the chat ?


If I review even the acclaimed holy books I’ll find many inconsistency on them . A good reviewer do it on both sides not just looking for fault on one side . Do away with your bias and accept the fact.

There is nothing to review in Natasha's claims, they're mere claims till she provides evidence that can be reviewed. What exactly do you want me to review in her allegations? I don't know what goes on between the SP and Natasha, we can only infer from evidences that we're given and she has not given any, merely made a baseless (for now anyway) claim.

Thewesterner:
I am not in support of any one of them. Nigeria polithievians are all the same. Senator Natasha should just drop a snippet of some of her evidences... Fire for Fire... EVIDENCE FOR EVIDENCE.

THANK YOU!!! You are the only person that has mentioned me that has a clear understanding of my point. I am not in support of any of them, they're all bad eggs who dine together in corruption and affluence. I am simply pointing out that they're inconsistencies in Prof's video.

TenQ:
If I was Natasha o, no public pressure will make me release my evidences until we meet in court.

I don't know about you

Then the SP remain innocent until proven guilty, what do you think about this ?

alobright17:
Then the SP remain innocent until proven guilty, what do you think about this ?

Very true. This is why I haven't given much thought to her allegations, they're baseless till I see proof

alobright17:
Then the SP remain innocent until proven guilty, what do you think about this ?

I judge neither of them.

Why?

1. Neither of them is a saint
2. I wasn't present at any of their engagements
3. I am not privy to any documented evidence between them

franugo:
Hello Loffy, I can't be sure about her claims since I can't confirm if the number truly is Natasha's number. If it is, then she definitely has a case to answer. Truth is difficult to come by when politicians are involved, I stuck to stuff I can at least confidently backup

Maybe you should have just called your post observations instead of a review then.

Review implies that you are addressing the main points of the video, which in reality you are not doing.

Just the way I didn't believe natasha, same way I didn't believe what the woman said, especially when she said natasha called the other women fools or something

This Natashall atikpo has made Nigerians not to concentrate on vital things concerning the country again

franugo:
THANK YOU!!! You are the only person that has mentioned me that has a clear understanding of my point. I am not in support of any of them, they're all bad eggs who dine together in corruption and affluence. I am simply pointing out that they're inconsistencies in Prof's video.

Alright... Kundus

TenQ:
I judge neither of them.

Why?

1. Neither of them is a saint
2. I wasn't present at any of their engagements
3. I am not privy to any documented evidence between them

is the matter at hand about who is a saint or what?

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?

In your mind now you've sounded reasonable and highly intellectual. For someone to claim not to know Akpabio, Yahaya Bello, Ododo, Patoranking, Nsima and the likes, when she's a full fledged Nigerian and had had a stint in the political terrain should raise eyebrows and doubts about the authenticity of her claims. Add that to the fact that she's had contact with Akpabio and her case is already dead on arrival. She having any contact whatsoever with Akpabio nullifies everything she said because you can easily put two and two together. If you want to make such claims you should have no links with the other side else it shows you've been bought. You must be neutral. But I guess you were too drunk in your analysis and lame attempt to review a review that you couldn't see this part clearly.

alobright17:
is the matter at hand about who is a saint or what?

The problem is taking sides to judge the other!

Have you heard me say that Akpabio was guilty!
Neither have I said Natasha is a liar!

There lies the difference!

TenQ:
The problem is taking sides to judge the other!

Have you heard me say that Akpabio was guilty!
Neither have I said Natasha is a liar!

There lies the difference!

my question is the matter about who’s a saint or not ? For Natasha is lying until she prove otherwise because truth is just one . Both of them can never be telling lies at the same time , so the accuser bears the responsibility of proving evidence of her claim til then she’s a lair .


What is all this have I said this one is guilty or the other one is a lair ?

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?

Chai,I never knew,we still have very intelligent people in this country like you.God bless you for schooling that hypocrite called,franugo

alobright17:
my question is the matter about who’s a saint or not ? For Natasha is lying until she prove otherwise because truth is just one . Both of them can never be telling lies at the same time , so the accuser bears the responsibility of proving evidence of her claim til then she’s a lair .


What is all this have I said this one is guilty or the other one is a lair ?

I guess you have information that the rest of us dont have.

Even our laws presumes innocent until proven guilty!

TenQ:
You should have answered the question rather than ask "What evidence!?"

What will you do if you have Evidence?

akpabio will be in jail

buhariguy:
akpabio will be in jail

Will you announce it to everyone or wait till you get to the Court of Justice before you start singing?

This season film will also come to an end soon