Lol sagamite funny you.

Emotional side connected by NITEL.

Don't worry sprint will take over very soon.

EfemenaXY:


It's relative.

I don't wait forever for them to be met. For example, why wait one week for something to get done if I can do it in one hour? D'you get me now?

I do

Sagamite:


I am afraid I am not the best person to ask that.

My answer would be of little value except you are married to me because I am quite different from most men, hence my expectations are different.

Most men either are confused about what they want or are "real men" that are well trained to sacrifice their happiness to please a woman and think that makes them "mature".

I don't fall into those categories. I am a Professor of Womantology and have different needs.

OK

Re: Boarding house experience...

Might not be lack of emotions... It might be more of processing situations differently. I am sure you were excited as per new experience.

I even opened my groundnuts in the car sef and enjoyed the ride to the hostel. By that evening, I followed a lady to her elder sister's hostel.

Boarding house is heavenly

Hmmmmmmmm

I domt know where to post this, but these are 3 very serious peices of advise


1. As soon as you start going out with someone please please pleaae determine their genotype and disclose yours. Dont wait until you are hopelessley in love before you establish this.
2. Introduce your partner to your parents and family ASAP, dont wait until its 3 weeks to the weddding. If ya'all dont get on, it will be easier to break it off sooner rather than later.
3. if your parents dont like your choice of partner, dont force your partner down their throats. . . .they may never like him/her and it will put imense stress on your marriage.

tearoses:
Hmmmmmmmm

I domt know where to post this, but these are 3 very serious peices of advise


1. As soon as you start going out with someone please please pleaae determine their genotype and disclose yours. Dont wait until you are hopelessley in love before you establish this.
2. Introduce your partner to your parents and family ASAP, dont wait until its 3 weeks to the weddding. If ya'all dont get on, it will be easier to break it off sooner rather than later.
3. if your parents dont like your choice of partner, dont force your partner down their throats. . . .they may never like him/her and it will put imense stress on your marriage.

1. Absolutely agree

2. Absolutely agree (Though 2 for me is accountability/seriousness than getting on with parents. When there are people on both sides you are accountable to, it makes the people in it more serious. From my experience. (again, it depends on the morals of the adult. I know a guy who introduced more than 5 girls to his family for marriage)

3. Not absolutely. However, I will say persuade and not force. If a youth is a Christian and he/she is 100% sure God chose their intended, no Jupiter should make them let go.

At where, Try the romance section, it would have a wider reach.

Good morning.

bukatyne:


1. Absolutely agree

2. Absolutely agree (Though 2 for me is accountability/seriousness than getting on with parents. When there are people on both sides you are accountable to, it makes the people in it more serious. From my experience. (again, it depends on the morals of the adult. I know a guy who introduced more than 5 girls to his family for marriage)

3. Not absolutely. However, I will say persuade and not force. If a youth is a Christian and he/she is 100% sure God chose their intended, no Jupiter should make them let go.

At where, Try the romance section, it would have a wider reach.

Good morning.

Good Morning Bukky

3 . . . .. on the face of it, love should conquer all and I will agree with you, but having seen fights between in-laws. It’s not something I will overlook.

I’ve seen it in 3 situations. . . . . . 2 of those situations ended in death, whereby the wife died. One died of a headache & shouting her MIL’s name and the other just collapsed and died just like that. Maybe its coincidental . . maybe not.

If the MIL says you will marry her son/daughter over her dead body run oooooooooooooo!! Especially if the other set of parents are hard people too who are ready to fight to finish. Not all in-laws are jeje people and they too will fight back.

I’m just musing jare. I have heard some things that just shock me. May God direct us all.

For those quite inquisitive, some of you would be aware that the US Democrats' presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, is in a bit of trouble because while she was US Secretary of State (i.e. Foreign Affairs Minister), she use her personal email to communicate on some of her official work. Hence taking a risk with an insecure public server.

Now the US State Department have been releasing last week some of her emails to the public after she turned them in.

Now read some of what was discussed about British politicians and the elite with one of her advisers.

Her unofficial adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, emailed her the following analysis:

“Cameron would be superficially friendly and privately scornful. Class has a lot to do with the contempt. A Cameron government would be more aristocratic and even narrowly Etonian than any Conservative government in recent history.”

"Nick Clegg has inbred arrogance" He adds that the former Lib Dem leader is “from no less a privileged background than Cameron, though seeming less snobbish because he went to Westminster instead of Eton and has a less pronounced upper-class accent”.

That Nick Clegg "will look down on her because he went to public school".

And that "Britain ruled by ex-public school boys had no friends in Europe".

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/01/new-hillary-clinton-emails-reveal-david-milibands-heartache-at-leadership-loss

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-and-clegg-are-snobbish-and-arrogant-us-government-advisers-told-clinton-10481271.html

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/hugo-rifkind/9622002/the-real-lesson-of-the-hillary-clinton-emails-most-secrets-are-boring/

EXACTLY the way I have always stated Cameron was on NL. Pretentious, fake cretin! Work with this kind of guy, he would fcking smile at you while looking down on you behind your back. He is always thinking he is smart and can manage the people by "intelligently" fooling them.

As I said, these positions are already shared out in the top public schools (what we call "private schools" in Nigeria) like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and co. And if you are not in the network of these aristocrats, whether you are black or white or green, you have little chance, they will look down on you.

The adviser said it, Cameron was going to appoint mainly from his secondary school just like I said. And that was what happened.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/may/01/cameron-defends-downing-street-appointments

And some moronic hooodrat ediot wants to be arguing with me about people I have studied and worked with extensively in the past few years of my life?

Fckng Labour leading class put 3 Oxbridge connected arsitocrats in leadership race for members to vote as leader, and then threw in one commoner they thought had no chance and was unvoteable just to give the illusion that they were not snobby.

Well, the commoner out-foxed them and won because he is the type that speaks the fck what he means and wants. I bet that guy is from Sagamu.

Sagamite me too I don't get all the fuss about a left wing party being too leftist

Like you said the media started all the not electable leftist talk but it apparently did not work.

damiso:
Sagamite me too I don't get all the fuss about a left wing party being too leftist

Like you said the media started all the not electable leftist talk but it apparently did not work.

Yep.

Just like they did against UKIP.

I have never seen such media intense and bias attack in my life especially from the BBC and [the homosexuality-champions] Channel 4.

Relentless attack to tarnish the party and/or make it look like an unserious set-up.

Coming up with one "ist" and "phobic" after the other to throw at them.

"Extremist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist, transphobic, alarmist etc".

Nigel Farage worked hard and did well. They just kept attacking with accusations to keep him busy (not talking about policy) and make his party look bad (if you keep on talking negative about someone's character, they will not look respectable, hence unelectable).

That is a tactic these western jourrnalist use, so that they can throw their hands in the air and say they are not bias and are just asking questions.

But if you are asking such negative questions all the time, then your accusations will subconciously be highly likely associated with the target. They know this and employ it very well alot of times.

If I keep on asking a man in public, at different times, over and over and over again, if he is sure he does not molests kids, soon people would soon start thinking "he might be doing that" even if there is no concrete evidence he does. It is human nature to the less sharp mind, which form the majority of people.

That is what is called media bias.

What this Jeremy Corbyn is going to try and bring to UK politics is the Scandinavian socialist system.

I am sure everyone knows it has worked perfectly well for the Scandinavians, so I wonder why all the subtle attack. The constant "is he unelectable?", which they hope would stick once they ask it over and over again.

That said, do I think a rapid application of the Scandinavian socialism would work in the UK?

No.

The British people have a different mindset and culture. It will take decades to change it. So you have to implement such changes extremely slowly.

That said, I am sure if Labour wins London Mayoral elections, house price growth will slow drastically.

Sagamite:
For those quite inquisitive, some of you would be aware that the US Democrats' presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, is in a bit of trouble because while she was US Secretary of State (i.e. Foreign Affairs Minister), she use her personal email to communicate on some of her official work. Hence taking a risk with an insecure public server.

Now the US State Department have been releasing last week some of her emails to the public after she turned them in.

Now read some what was discussed about British politicians and elite with one of her advisers.

Her unofficial adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, emailed her the following analysis:

“Cameron would be superficially friendly and privately scornful. Class has a lot to do with the contempt. A Cameron government would be more aristocratic and even narrowly Etonian than any Conservative government in recent history.”

"Nick Clegg has inbred arrogance" He adds that the former Lib Dem leader is “from no less a privileged background than Cameron, though seeming less snobbish because he went to Westminster instead of Eton and has a less pronounced upper-class accent”.

That Nick Clegg "will look down on her because he went to public school".

And that "Britain ruled by ex-public school boys had no friends in Europe".

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/01/new-hillary-clinton-emails-reveal-david-milibands-heartache-at-leadership-loss

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-and-clegg-are-snobbish-and-arrogant-us-government-advisers-told-clinton-10481271.html

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/hugo-rifkind/9622002/the-real-lesson-of-the-hillary-clinton-emails-most-secrets-are-boring/

EXACTLY the way I have always stated Cameron was on NL. Pretentious, fake cretin! Work with this kind of guy, he would fcking smile at you while looking down on you behind your back. He is always thinking he is smart and can manage the people by "intelligently" fooling them.

As I said, these positions are already shared out in the top public schools (what we call "private schools" in Nigeria) like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and co. And if you are not in the network of these aristocrats, whether you are black or white or green, you have little chance, they will look down on you.

The adviser said it, Cameron was going to appoint mainly from his secondary school just like I said. And that was what happened.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/may/01/cameron-defends-downing-street-appointments

And some moronic hooodrat ediot wants to be arguing with me about people I have studied and worked with extensively in the past few years of my life?

Fckng Labour leading class put 3 Oxbridge connected arsitocrats in leadership race for members to vote as leader, and then threw in one commoner they thought had no chance and was unvoteable just to give the illusion that they were not snobby.

Well, the commoner out-foxed them and won because he is the type that speaks the fck what he means and wants. I bet that guy is from Sagamu.

I know I'm sooooooooooooo far behind on my current affairs - but is this the elderly man from the trio that got selected? Even without knowing much about his background, I already preferred him on sight. Something about the way he carried himself got to me. Self-respect and genuine. Not some fake career wannabe aspirationist that'll sell his soul to the other party just to get "in there". I'm referring to Nicky C.

Sagamite:


Yep.

Just like they did against UKIP.

I have never seen such media intense and bias attack in my life especially from the BBC and [the homosexuality-champions] Channel 4.

Relentless attack to tarnish the party and/or make it look like an unserious set-up.

Coming up with one "ist" and "phobic" after the other to throw at them.

"Extremist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist, transphobic, alarmist etc".

Nigel Farage worked hard and did well. They just kept attacking with accusations to keep him busy (not talking about policy) and make his party look bad (if you keep on talking negative about someone's character, they will not look respectable, hence unelectable).

That is a tactic these western jourrnalist use, so that they can throw their hands in the air and say they are not bias and are just asking questions.

But if you are asking such negative questions all the time, then your accusations will subconciously be highly likely associated with the target. They know this and employ it very well alot of times.

If I keep on asking a man in public, at different times, over and over and over again, if he is sure he does not molests kids, soon people would soon start thinking "he might be doing that" even if there is no concrete evidence he does. It is human nature to the less sharp mind, which form the majority of people.

That is what is called media bias.

What this Jeremy Corbyn is going to try and bring to UK politics is the Scandinavian socialist system.

I am sure everyone knows it has worked perfectly well for the Scandinavians, so I wonder why all the subtle attack. The constant "is he unelectable?", which they hope would stick once they ask it over and over again.

That said, do I think a rapid application of the Scandinavian socialism would work in the UK?

No.

The British people have a different mindset and culture. It will take decades to change it. So you have to implement such changes extremely slowly.

That said, I am sure if Labour wins London Mayoral elections, house price growth will slow drastically.

As long as the Bank of England Base / Interest Rate stays low (even if artificially), then I'm cool with that abeg. I think it once peaked to 16% at the height of the recession in '92, compliments to the conservative government in power then.

EfemenaXY:


I know I'm sooooooooooooo far behind on my current affairs - but is this the elderly man from the trio that got selected? Even without knowing much about his background, I already preferred him on sight. Something about the way he carried himself got to me. Self-respect and genuine. Not some fake career wannabe aspirationist that'll sell his soul to the other party just to get "in there". I'm referring to Nicky C.

Exactly!

His name is Jeremy Corbyn.

The first time I saw him was on TV being interviewed by Guru-Murthy of Channel 4 with the typical UK TV interviewer aggressive, interrupting and I-must-trip-you approach and he categorically told Guru-Murthy off to shut up.

I had been waiting for long for a politician with some balls that would do that because I knew that is what I would do if I was the one.

I was so happy, I immediately whatsapp my friends to tell them I think I have finally found a UK politician I can back.

A politician that speaks his mind, not the cretins that are constantly looking for applause and want to look "modern".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4c_z8Jyuas

EfemenaXY:


As long as the Bank of England Base / Interest Rate stays low (even if artificially), then I'm cool with that abeg. I think it once peaked to 16% at the height of the recession in '92, compliments to the conservative government in power then.

I don't necessarily even agree with Corbyn's policies as I am not a leftist. I just like the fact that he stands for something and speaks his mind. Something British politics has missed since Thatcher and we have been having "Please-like-me", "I-don't-want-to-offend-anyone", "I-will-sit-on-the-fence-if-I-think-what-I-will-say-is-not-popular", Tony Blair-wannnabe, murrafucker politicians in all 3 major parties.

I prefer someone I disagree with but I know takes a position based on his genuine conviction.

Sagamite:


Exactly!

His name is Jeremy Corbyn.

The first time I saw him was on TV being interviewed by Guru-Murthy of Channel 4 with the typical UK TV interviewer aggressive, interrupting and I-must-trip-you approach and he categorically told Guru-Murthy off to shut up.

I had been waiting for long for a politician with some balls that would do that because I knew that is what I would do if I was the one.

I was so happy, I immediately whatsapp my friends to tell them I think I have finally found a UK politician I can back.

A politician that speaks his mind, not the cretins that are constantly looking for applause and want to look "modern".

Lol! Saga.

Oya lemme watch this first then, then will get back to you.

Sagamite:


Yep.

Just like they did against UKIP.

I have never seen such media intense and bias attack in my life especially from the BBC and [the homosexuality-champions] Channel 4.

Relentless attack to tarnish the party and/or make it look like an unserious set-up.

Coming up with one "ist" and "phobic" after the other to throw at them.

"Extremist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist, transphobic, alarmist etc".

Nigel Farage worked hard and did well. They just kept attacking with accusations to keep him busy (not talking about policy) and make his party look bad (if you keep on talking negative about someone's character, they will not look respectable, hence unelectable).

That is a tactic these western jourrnalist use, so that they can throw their hands in the air and say they are not bias and are just asking questions.

But if you are asking such negative questions all the time, then your accusations will subconciously be highly likely associated with the target. They know this and employ it very well alot of times.

If I keep on asking a man in public, at different times, over and over and over again, if he is sure he does not molests kids, soon people would soon start thinking "he might be doing that" even if there is no concrete evidence he does. It is human nature to the less sharp mind, which form the majority of people.

That is what is called media bias.

What this Jeremy Corbyn is going to try and bring to UK politics is the Scandinavian socialist system.

I am sure everyone knows it has worked perfectly well for the Scandinavians, so I wonder why all the subtle attack. The constant "is he unelectable?", which they hope would stick once they ask it over and over again.

That said, do I think a rapid application of the Scandinavian socialism would work in the UK?

No.

The British people have a different mindset and culture. It will take decades to change it. So you have to implement such changes extremely slowly.

That said, I am sure if Labour wins London Mayoral elections, house price growth will slow drastically.

While I don't actually agree with some of UKIPs policies the truth is most conservative backbenchers and members actually agree with most of them . But because of all this phoney centre right left centre centre centre rubbish they can't actually say it. UKIP actually had 4 million votes so it tells us a lot of people agree with them.

Yeah I think Jeremy Corbyn is actually a good thing for Labour because I think all the main stream parties esp in England (SNP is an exception). Unelectable,maybe (partly cos of the annoying Tory rhetoric of the working people vs 'benefit scroungers') but at least the landscape will be more varied and not just the 'oxbridge' career politicians that all look and sound the same.

I'm more worried about the implications of this her action than what she says about some British politicians.
She's our favorite candidate.

Sagamite:
For those quite inquisitive, some of you would be aware that the US Democrats' presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, is in a bit of trouble because while she was US Secretary of State (i.e. Foreign Affairs Minister), she use her personal email to communicate on some of her official work. Hence taking a risk with an insecure public server.

Now the US State Department have been releasing last week some of her emails to the public after she turned them in.

Now read some of what was discussed about British politicians and the elite with one of her advisers.

Her unofficial adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, emailed her the following analysis:

“Cameron would be superficially friendly and privately scornful. Class has a lot to do with the contempt. A Cameron government would be more aristocratic and even narrowly Etonian than any Conservative government in recent history.”

"Nick Clegg has inbred arrogance" He adds that the former Lib Dem leader is “from no less a privileged background than Cameron, though seeming less snobbish because he went to Westminster instead of Eton and has a less pronounced upper-class accent”.

That Nick Clegg "will look down on her because he went to public school".

And that "Britain ruled by ex-public school boys had no friends in Europe".

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/01/new-hillary-clinton-emails-reveal-david-milibands-heartache-at-leadership-loss

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-and-clegg-are-snobbish-and-arrogant-us-government-advisers-told-clinton-10481271.html

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/hugo-rifkind/9622002/the-real-lesson-of-the-hillary-clinton-emails-most-secrets-are-boring/

EXACTLY the way I have always stated Cameron was on NL. Pretentious, fake cretin! Work with this kind of guy, he would fcking smile at you while looking down on you behind your back. He is always thinking he is smart and can manage the people by "intelligently" fooling them.

As I said, these positions are already shared out in the top public schools (what we call "private schools" in Nigeria) like Eton, Harrow, Winchester and co. And if you are not in the network of these aristocrats, whether you are black or white or green, you have little chance, they will look down on you.

The adviser said it, Cameron was going to appoint mainly from his secondary school just like I said. And that was what happened.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/may/01/cameron-defends-downing-street-appointments

And some moronic hooodrat ediot wants to be arguing with me about people I have studied and worked with extensively in the past few years of my life?

Fckng Labour leading class put 3 Oxbridge connected arsitocrats in leadership race for members to vote as leader, and then threw in one commoner they thought had no chance and was unvoteable just to give the illusion that they were not snobby.

Well, the commoner out-foxed them and won because he is the type that speaks the fck what he means and wants. I bet that guy is from Sagamu.

Saga, that clip was awesome - and that's putting it mildly.

Corbyn was absolutely right about his interviewer applying "tabloid journalism", and that really was a cheap gimmick aimed at stirring an immediate outrage - and I fell for that too at the beginning when he asked him why he called those groups his "friends". If I (and I think many others too) hadn't heard Jeremy Corbyn's explanation, we definitely would have been biased.

His explanation was factual, straight to the point, and literally left his interviewer clutching at straws. He succeeded in making him look very unprofessional, despite all his years of "journalism". I think sometimes, these people need a proper shout-down.

Good viewing material. I certainly like guy a zillion times better. Maybe, after our wet lettuce of an ex-labour leader (Eds), there is some light at the end of the tunnel for Labour.

damiso:


While I don't actually agree with some of UKIPs policies the truth is most conservative backbenchers and members actually agree with most of them . But because of all this phoney centre right left centre centre centre rubbish they can't actually say it. UKIP actually had 4 million votes so it tells us a lot of people agree with them.

Yeah I think Jeremy Corbyn is actually a good thing for Labour because I think all the main stream parties esp in England (SNP is an exception). Unelectable,maybe (partly cos of the annoying Tory rhetoric of the working people vs 'benefit scroungers') but at least the landscape will be more varied and not just the 'oxbridge' career politicians that all look and sound the same.

The bolded got me cracking up!

Exactly!

Many of them know some of these things are right but have absolutely no balls to say it because they are terrified of the leftist British media coming to attack them with front page headlines like "Outrage", "Apologise", "Xenophobic" etc.

I have said it before on NL. The UK media is DESTROYING the country. They are making it impossible to make sensible policies, only populist/liberal policies are the only ones allowed and will not lead to media attacks.

This thing I am saying about the UK media is something you will be hearing them discuss in future. I can bet anyone on that. They are destroying the country.

This is how China and co will overtake them because they do not have such a problem and can make sensible policies.

Look at the pressure they are putting on the UK government to take refugees.

Refugees that are too large and some you don't even know how extremist they are. Worse still, when the local population is already very sensitive to migration.

And that foooool in Germany called Angela Merkel publicly told them to all start coming. Now today they are saying they can't take anymore. I have never seen such stupid political proclamation in my life.

"We are going to take 800,000 refugees this year"!

And you do not expect all soughts to pack their bags and try their luck even if they are not in real danger?

Some people are even throwing their passport away and claiming to be Syrians.

cococandy:
I'm more worried about the implications of this her action than what she says about some British politicians.
She's our favorite candidate.

I don't think she really used it for any sensitive and damaging things, as far as I am aware. She just used it to have conversations she did not want to be on US public records.

EfemenaXY:
Saga, that clip was awesome - and that's putting it mildly.

Corbyn was absolutely right about his interviewer applying "tabloid journalism", and that really was a cheap gimmick aimed at stirring an immediate outrage - and I fell for that too at the beginning when he asked him why he called those groups his "friends". If I (and I think many others too) hadn't heard Jeremy Corbyn's explanation, we definitely would have been biased.

His explanation was factual, straight to the point, and literally left his interviewer clutching at straws. He succeeded in making him look very unprofessional, despite all his years of "journalism". I think sometimes, these people need a proper shout-down.

Good viewing material. I certainly like guy a zillion times better. Maybe, after our wet lettuce of an ex-labour leader (Eds), there is some light at the end of the tunnel for Labour.

Exactly!

This Kristian Guru-Murthy is fast losing all forms of professional credibility with his interviewing approach.

He is becoming a complete tabloid journalist who is looking to provoke the people he is interviewing with moronic questions and strawmans.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTE8FPgHeE4

Quentin Tarantino did not know how to handle him though. He lost too much control.

Here is a brilliant chap that handled it better. This is how I will handle it on the day I choose not to be aggressive. Take a piss out of him and just talk shyt.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjC3ycS_2js

Sagamite:


Exactly!

This Kristian Guru-Murthy is fast losing all forms of professional credibility with his interviewing approach.

He is becoming a complete tabloid journalist who is looking to provoke the people he is interviewing with moronic questions and strawmans.

Quentin Tarantino did not know how to handle him though. He lost too much control.

Here is a brilliant chap that handled it better. This is how I will handle it on the day I choose not to be aggressive. Take a piss out of him and just talk shyt.

Nice ones, Saga.

The interviewer (oh pls what's his name again?), tends to go in too hard. That might work for some and not for others - but how can making unsuspecting people look silly be any good for his career? If his potential interviewees knew what to expect, then they'd be a lot more prepared like the Nigerian / Norwegian writer.

You know, I think there is a time and a place for everything. HARDTALK is more appropriate for such interviews.

EfemenaXY:


Nice ones, Saga.

The interviewer (or pls what's his name again?), tends to go in too hard. That might work for some and not for others - but how can making unsuspecting people look silly be any good for his career? If his potential interviewees knew what to expect, then they'd be a lot more prepared like the Nigerian / Norwegian writer.

You know, I think there is a time and a place for everything. HARDTALK is more appropriate for such interviews.

Exactly.

That is the culture of modern UK journalist nowadays.

Looking for the next day headline.

The feel they can do that because they interviewer will largely always remain anonymous and is giving no opinion (just asking questions), while the interviewed would be the popular person being provoked or tempted to say something disagreeable to be on the front page the next day.

Complete useless journalism not aimed at getting valuable information for the audience or challenge the interviewed rigorously. It is just aimed at extracting sensationalism.

That Ayoade nigga was damn ready.

By the end you will be wondering "what was that interview about again". He just talked rubbish throughout.

"You want rubbish? I go give you rubbish".

Sagamite:


Exactly.

That is the culture of modern UK journalist nowadays.

Looking for the next day headline.

The feel they can do that because they interviewer will largely always remain anonymous and is giving no opinion (just asking questions), while the interviewed would be the popular person being provoked or tempted to say something disagreeable to be on the front page the next day.

Complete useless journalism not aimed at getting valuable information for the audience or challenge the interviewed rigorously. It is just aimed at extracting sensationalism.

That Ayoade nigga was damn ready.

By the end you will be wondering "what was that interview about again". He just talked rubbish throughout.

"You want rubbish? I go give you rubbish".

Lol!

Saga, what's the name of that open panel discussion (with some representatives of the main political parties) that occurs some nights immediately after the 10 O'clock BBC News? The presenter of that show is a brilliant moderator. Exhibits top-notch professionalism without compromising his integrity in the process. Kind of like going in for the kill without actually killing the prey if you know what I mean.

Another good one is John Snow from Channel 4.

EfemenaXY:


Lol!

Saga, what's the name of that open panel discussion (with some representatives of the main political parties) that occurs some nights immediately after the 10 O'clock BBC News? The presenter of that show is a brilliant moderator. Exhibits top-notch professionalism without compromising his integrity in the process. Kind of like going in for the kill without actually killing the prey if you know what I mean.

Another good one is John Snow from Channel 4.

Question time.

The days of Sir David Frost are long gone in journalism.

What we have now is junk. The Piers Morgan era is what we have nowadays.

Sagamite:


Question time.

The days of Sir David Frost are long gone in journalism.

What we have now is junk. The Piers Morgan era is what we have nowadays.

Sweaty Piers Morgan? The guy's a joke, Saga.

EfemenaXY:

Sweaty Piers Morgan? The guy's a joke, Saga.

That Richard Ayoade just wanted to promote his book by talking about its content but the guy was trying to direct him to talk about being black and all the accompanying "do you feel prejudice in the industry and are their enough black content in it" etc, so they can get a headline in the papers in the morning saying "Richard Ayoade says the Entertainment industry is RACIST".

What the guy did not intend to say and was not interested in. Unfortunately, Quentin Tarantino gave him a headline that he could use. "Quentin Tarantino loses cool in interview".

Another tactic this media people use now when they realise their stuupid arguments have no legal grounds to stand on is to say "Don't you think you have a moral reponsibility to ..............."

My answer would be "Can you point me to the Book of Moral Responsibilities where you got that opinion from? What page? What chapter?".

Interviewer: "But surely you have some moral guiding principes, don't you think that should apply to .........."

My answer: "Unfortunately, the world is not about MY morals. It does not evolve around me. The world has over 7bn people in it with contrasting morals. I will stick to my authoritative and legal responsibilities in public and keep my morals to myself. Do you have any questions based on legalities or any wrong doing?"

This is another interview he did with Robert Downing Jr and pissed him off too like Tarantino.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok4t6DGXTmQ


Ayoade did well but this is Pharrell Williams DESTROYING him with Logic. SLAUGHTERED HIM!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHP-_JbSP2c

Sagamite:




The bolded got me cracking up!

Exactly!

Many of them know some of these things are right but have absolutely no balls to say it because they are terrified of the leftist British media coming to attack them with front page headlines like "Outrage", "Apologise", "Xenophobic" etc.

I have said it before on NL. The UK media is DESTROYING the country. They are making it impossible to make sensible policies, only populist/liberal policies are the only ones allowed and will not lead to media attacks.

This thing I am saying about the UK media is something you will be hearing them discuss in future. I can bet anyone on that. They are destroying the country.

This is how China and co will overtake them because they do not have such a problem and can make sensible policies.

Look at the pressure they are putting on the UK government to take refugees.

Refugees that are too large and some you don't even know how extremist they are. Worse still, when the local population is already very sensitive to migration.

And that foooool in Germany called Angela Merkel publicly told them to all start coming. Now today they are saying they can't take anymore. I have never seen such stupid political proclamation in my life.

"We are going to take 800,000 refugees this year"!

And you do not expect all soughts to pack their bags and try their luck even if they are not in real danger?

Some people are even throwing their passport away and claiming to be Syrians.

First thing my husband said( even though I won't lie that picture of the lil boy tugged at the emotional mother side of me),was wait why are they not pressuring Saudi Arabia,Dubai,Kuwait and Qatar to take on some refugees as well. The whole refugee crisis thing is mixed feelings for me and to be honest I can't see taking on more and more refugees being the long term solution.that said the human angle kinda makes it difficult to say don't take refugees. I kinda see David Cameron's point on not taking on those already in Europe cos like you said how do we know who is Syrian?

That Robert Downey video was just cringe worthy.

I could not believe my eyes that for two days straight a man calling a woman 'stunning' on LinkedIn was news that actually made the headlines. I was at home feeling ill and it was on every talk show /news programme/panel talk. Geez it was really annoying.i was like all hail the sensationalist British media.

I like David Dimbleby witty and straight to the point without necessarily being confrontational. I have missed watching Question time but I need to sleep early these days.

Nice atmosphere here.

damiso:


First thing my husband said( even though I won't lie that picture of the lil boy tugged at the emotional mother side of me),was wait why are they not pressuring Saudi Arabia,Dubai,Kuwait and Qatar to take on some refugees as well. The whole refugee crisis thing is mixed feelings for me and to be honest I can't see taking on more and more refugees being the long term solution.that said the human angle kinda makes it difficult to say don't take refugees. I kinda see David Cameron's point on not taking on those already in Europe cos like you said how do we know who is Syrian?

That Robert Downey video was just cringe worthy.

I could not believe my eyes that for two days straight a man calling a woman 'stunning' on LinkedIn was news that actually made the headlines. I was at home feeling ill and it was on every talk show /news programme/panel talk. Geez it was really annoying.i was like all hail the sensationalist British media.

I like David Dimbleby witty and straight to the point without necessarily being confrontational. I have missed watching Question time but I need to sleep early these days.

The media runs the circus now
This morning its jeremys turn to feel the heat
Gone are the days of trevor Macdonald and Zeinab Badawi
The only journalist I respect is Alex Crawford

As regards the refuge situation, unless the govt is going to build new housing and complete these in the next few weeks, I dont think that the UK has the infrastrcture to deal with this.
In my city, the council is carting homeless people off to Cambridge and Birmingham, becasue there are no spare family houses in the city. The influx of Eastern Europeans have put a strain on housing and other services.
I know people who have been looking to rent decent homes privately and have been looking for months.
Its possible that Germany already had infrastructure in place.
You are right . . .if every contry in the world took in some refugees including Nigeria, then the burden wont be on just a few countrys.

So why is Europe playing Bigger Brother?

Whose to tell who is Syrian?
Why not the other Middle East countries that are in the region.

Europe cant handle this...there will be xenophobia and how will they know if they have not opened the floodgates for Isis members. Granting automatic asylum are they crazy?
They are just asking for an avalanche of just about everyone who wants to leave Syria Iraq and Africa sef. As if the refugees leaving through Syria is not bad enough.
I don't get the EU honestly

For those that did not have the time or patience to read some of the links I posted above, let me extract some of the contents on this link to highlight my point that what we have in the UK is institutional stereotpying and institutional connections.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/may/01/cameron-defends-downing-street-appointments

The link is the news report about David Cameron appointing too much of his fellow ex-students of Eton into government (just like the Hillary Clinton adviser analysed will happen before he was elected PM).

“Cameron would be superficially friendly and privately scornful. Class has a lot to do with the contempt. A Cameron government would be more aristocratic and even narrowly Etonian than any Conservative government in recent history.”

Eton is the most prestigious secondary school in the UK and where most of the children of the King or Queen of England attend. Princes William and Harry attended it.

He appointed Jo Johnson as Head of Policy Unit at Downing Street (i.e. the equivalent of Aso Rock). The Policy Unit are the people that help the PM set all the policies to run the country.

Jo Johnson did not only attend Eton and then Oxford like Cameron himself, but he is also the junior brother of Boris Johnson, the famous Mayor of London, who also attended Eton and Oxford and was in the Burlington Club at Oxford during the same time David Cameron was in the club. There is even a picture of them in the Burlington Club. The Burlington Club is a social club in University of Oxford for the kids of extremely wealthy people. They are known to be high spenders and even thrash up venues because mummy and daddy will pay for it. So the Mayor of London and the Prime Minister have been school mates since pre-puberty.

He also appointed Christopher Lockwood to the Policy Unit. Christopher is the former brother-in-law of Earl Spencer. Earl Spencer also attended Eton and Oxford and is the brother of Princess Diana, who is the former wife of the Prince Charles, the future King of England.

Christopher Lockwood also attended Oxford like Cameron. He did not go to Eton though, but he attended St Pauls, the same school Cameron's second in command and Finance Minister, George Osborne attended. Also, in 1993, Lockwood went on holiday to Italy with Cameron and his then girlfriend (who later became his wife). So they have been paddy paddy, I go I go, I come I come, for a long time.

There are so many more old Etonians in the Downing Street staff. So if you are going to appoint for a senior position in your company where your business depends on government access or its policy (which you want to influence), which type of candidate will you appoint to increase your chances of success? .....................A nigga or wigga from the hood or from a third world?

Even a minister in Cameron's own cabinet, Michael Gove, someone who Cameron appointed but attended a far less prestigious private school, complained about the appointment of too many Etonians.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/14/gove-attacks-preposterous-number-old-etonians-cameron-cabinet

Jesse Norman, who is a part of David Cameron "policy board" (those that give external critique of the Policy Unit's work) and who also attended ..................(oya, make una guess, but no awards for getting it right o ) ........................Eton and Oxford, told a British newspaper when challenged about Etonians being apointed left and right that "Other schools don't have the same commitment to public service like Eton".

So you can see the mentality. They don't believe even those from lower private secondary schools have been "raised well enough" to do the job. Talk less of those too poor to attend a private secondary school. If you don't attended any of the top 20 private schools, your chances of getting to the top in the UK is quite harder.

So I ask: Is it about race?

What we have is institutional stereotpying and institutional connections.