If you work at BBC news then your job is to agree with your boss and her/his politics. Sadly they haven't been a news organisation for well over 15 years and even though they occasionally report the actual news, it's accidental because they can't find a way to twist the subject/story to suit 'The Message'.
Yes that's right she is just a sl*t for them to use and throw away quite literally...she is known for being a little skankk blowing all the blokes under the table back at the office you got no idea what her breath smells like mate litres of jizz all day
Tristan is very young if he believes making money was the intended end goal of universities. That was so in America and England only briefly. For centuries, a university degree was the means for passing knowledge from generation to generation, a principle that began to deteriorate in the late 1970s as requirements in general education were dumped to make way for job training and electives in Women’s Studies, African American Studies, and Native American Studies. [Skip the next paragraph if you don’t want to know how those courses came about.] By this period, Leftist politics had become quietly engrained in the Humanities and Social Sciences faculties. Men with seniority saw that their political principles would demand that they make women and minorities part of department chairmanships, so they quickly established new, small, and poorly funded departments and sent the women and minorities off to play “chairman” in those offices. But the key to taking over universities had been discovered: drop the requirements. These requirements had been what ensured that a college graduate knew history, read the important books that had formed both Western and world thought, had exposure to great poetry and fiction and art, and knew facts about their world. When I was a college freshman in the fall of 1965, every freshman at my school had to pass these foundation courses over the next two years: two courses each in the history of Western Civilization, two in American history, two courses of expository writing, one in English literature, one in American literature, four courses in a single foreign language, a course in Public Speaking, a course in Logic, a course Sociology, a course in Psychology. Additionally, four courses were required in either Philosophy (epistemology, cosmology, metaphysics, ethics) or Religious Studies. What was the point? A college degree was supposed to indicate that the person had learned the important ideas that shaped our lives, could articulate them and communicate their own ideas, and had learned “how to learn” through the experience of exchanging ideas with their peers and professors. Everyone shared the basic knowledge from the requirements and used that knowledge to learn the courses in the major they had selected-which had its own set of requirements. By the 1990s, virtually all the rigor was gone from every field except the sciences and technological fields, and the people in those disciplines began becoming one-dimensional nerds. BUT EVERYONE WAS INDOCTRINATED. More so with each passing decade.
University is about giving people the means to make money. Your view is idealistic at best. Reality is you’re way off my friend. But given you’re engrained in the world of universities it’s not surprising how detached you are from reality.
@@dbo4506 Obviously, you did not read what I said. If you are under thirty, that is understandable. I explained that there was a time when universities were dedicated to job training. BYW, being knowledgeable about universities and knowing their history does not mean “being engrained.” And, as a matter of truth, I am not an idealistic person. I’m extremely pragmatic. I do understand the value of education, however, whether it be through formal means, which now excludes most private and almost all public education in America because it is now limited to political indoctrination; one-to-one (intelligent, educated parents can home school K-12); or self-education. Andrew Tate is a sterling example of an autodidact.
@@yatsu4683 I understand that and find it unjust too, but my point was that eventual coertion or their business in the porn market led to this mess and not the media coverage of the present...it will be interesting to see how this plays out... 14 months...Guantanamo bay i.e. has a worse record...unfortunately not uncommon to imprison people without charges... Cheers
@@yatsu4683 They havent been imprisoned for 14 months at all. Theyve been INVESTIGATED for 14 months. Were in jail for 3, then on house arrest for 3. Theres also a lot of evidence. You arent even close to being correct. No surprise that an idiot like you is a tate fan.
@@savagedpepe6930 No, they are being charged for the cam girl business. You are repeating a lie Tristan tate told you. If all you know is what the tates tell you, then you know nothing.
I wonder how the courts are going to spin this interview against them? It’s extremely risky to be doing interviews with a running court case. Regardless of whether that chosen 45min was cut out for later or not.
This is how you win in a political debate or in an interview when you are being accused of something. You give an answer to the question that is a ( fact) that shows to everyone that can see that you are right. Andrew Tate did not do this he either did not answer the question or did not tell the truth or state facts when he did answer. As an example Andrew Tate said in one of answers i never said that, ( if Andrew Tate is seen on video saying it seen by millions it is not true or not a fact. So can someone please explain how did Andrew Tate wipe the floor with the BBC when none of his answers were fact or True?
When an interviewer immediately comes in with loaded questions liken to an interrogation rather than a conversation it shows exactly what the BBCs intent was. The fact she scatches her head and hugs her arm out of nervousness shows how easily Andrew answered her and challenged the accuracy if her information. She had to call it quits and even after BBC edited and did their best to hide how frustrated and uncomfortable she was. It was still obvious the BBC had an agenda and failed at it. Yet gave a nice sympathetic calm interview to Philip Scofield who is an actual groomer and everyone is chilled about that.
@@lanternstylez her information was 100% correct it was Andrew Tate not telling the truth, like for example i never said that? He is seen saying exactly that on video. You obviously have not watched the self confession videos.
@@PeterLewis21 you're only bit of evidence is one line which means it discredits everything else he says? 👏👏👏 you can't say anything about the rest if the interview or how obviously frustrated she is that he's got an answer for all her accusations.
@@Shiggystardust i agree its something the BBC could have done, it could be something to do with it being an on going investigation. The clip is there all over the internet Millions have seen it. The BBC did well they got Andrew Tate to deny 100% indisputable (facts) millions have seen.
Honestly, the senior bbc executives wouldn’t have been interested in who was on the Tate interview. They have far bigger things to think about. Your arrogance is just incredible. Also, I didn’t see an intellectual superiority in Andrew at all. What I saw, which is what I always see him do, was him raising his voice louder than her, interrupting her, talking over her and generally acting cocky and macho. This is not intelligence.
How did the BBC lose he did not answer any questions, and every question answered was not true. So how is this wiping the floor with the BBC? I could go through every answer to her questions and prove it was not true. Prime example Andrew Tate to one of the questions said ( i never said that) he did say that it is on a video seen by millions.
Nah as a tate fan, he fell exactly where she asked about how he used "work for me and we can make money together" which was written in his cobratate site, and he was denying it heavily when in truth he did write in his website. I remember. Edit: To clarify this isn't an aha moment because he just gave them the offer and they had every right to deny it and even leave after. Women need to be held accountable for their decisions, too.
The fact that she shook andrews hand on her way in and refused to when she left shows you all you need to know Defeat often times leads to resentment
If you work at BBC news then your job is to agree with your boss and her/his politics.
Sadly they haven't been a news organisation for well over 15 years and even though they occasionally report the actual news, it's accidental because they can't find a way to twist the subject/story to suit 'The Message'.
15 years? It's way longer then that, they were working with Jimmy saville and covering him up
Not as bad as all the UA-cam channels yet. Social media geeks will believe anything they see online.
I don't even know what they report on cuz I don't watch matrix media
She is just a pawn, the establishment dont care if she got rekt. Dont work for evil corps it wont worth the salary and it againts ur dignity
Yes that's right she is just a sl*t for them to use and throw away quite literally...she is known for being a little skankk blowing all the blokes under the table back at the office you got no idea what her breath smells like mate litres of jizz all day
Tristan might overestimate the bbc management. Those corporate people are actually that dumb.
better overestimate than underestimate lol
YES Nail on the HEAD WELL DONE TristoN 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Tristan is very young if he believes making money was the intended end goal of universities. That was so in America and England only briefly.
For centuries, a university degree was the means for passing knowledge from generation to generation, a principle that began to deteriorate in the late 1970s as requirements in general education were dumped to make way for job training and electives in Women’s Studies, African American Studies, and Native American Studies. [Skip the next paragraph if you don’t want to know how those courses came about.]
By this period, Leftist politics had become quietly engrained in the Humanities and Social Sciences faculties. Men with seniority saw that their political principles would demand that they make women and minorities part of department chairmanships, so they quickly established new, small, and poorly funded departments and sent the women and minorities off to play “chairman” in those offices.
But the key to taking over universities had been discovered: drop the requirements. These requirements had been what ensured that a college graduate knew history, read the important books that had formed both Western and world thought, had exposure to great poetry and fiction and art, and knew facts about their world.
When I was a college freshman in the fall of 1965, every freshman at my school had to pass these foundation courses over the next two years: two courses each in the history of Western Civilization, two in American history, two courses of expository writing, one in English literature, one in American literature, four courses in a single foreign language, a course in Public Speaking, a course in Logic, a course Sociology, a course in Psychology. Additionally, four courses were required in either Philosophy (epistemology, cosmology, metaphysics, ethics) or Religious Studies.
What was the point? A college degree was supposed to indicate that the person had learned the important ideas that shaped our lives, could articulate them and communicate their own ideas, and had learned “how to learn” through the experience of exchanging ideas with their peers and professors. Everyone shared the basic knowledge from the requirements and used that knowledge to learn the courses in the major they had selected-which had its own set of requirements.
By the 1990s, virtually all the rigor was gone from every field except the sciences and technological fields, and the people in those disciplines began becoming one-dimensional nerds. BUT EVERYONE WAS INDOCTRINATED. More so with each passing decade.
watch out,we got a college graduate over here
@@mariopsota5806 Graduate? I taught college students for decades.
Wow
University is about giving people the means to make money. Your view is idealistic at best. Reality is you’re way off my friend. But given you’re engrained in the world of universities it’s not surprising how detached you are from reality.
@@dbo4506 Obviously, you did not read what I said. If you are under thirty, that is understandable. I explained that there was a time when universities were dedicated to job training.
BYW, being knowledgeable about universities and knowing their history does not mean “being engrained.”
And, as a matter of truth, I am not an idealistic person. I’m extremely pragmatic. I do understand the value of education, however, whether it be through formal means, which now excludes most private and almost all public education in America because it is now limited to political indoctrination; one-to-one (intelligent, educated parents can home school K-12); or self-education. Andrew Tate is a sterling example of an autodidact.
Pass me the cigar please...
They are making millions a month with just the the real world.
poor Lucy lol NOT
Its funny how people are arguing over things that have nothing to do with them😂 #Ihateitheresometimes
Isnt it the way they MADE money? They no longer work with onlyfans stuff etc. but their alleged crimes are still punishable if proven...
They’ve been imprisoned for 14 months with no evidence for the countless charges against them. 14 months.
@@yatsu4683 I understand that and find it unjust too, but my point was that eventual coertion or their business in the porn market led to this mess and not the media coverage of the present...it will be interesting to see how this plays out...
14 months...Guantanamo bay i.e. has a worse record...unfortunately not uncommon to imprison people without charges...
Cheers
@@yatsu4683 They havent been imprisoned for 14 months at all.
Theyve been INVESTIGATED for 14 months. Were in jail for 3, then on house arrest for 3.
Theres also a lot of evidence.
You arent even close to being correct.
No surprise that an idiot like you is a tate fan.
they arent being charged for the cam girl business, they are being charged for stealing money from tik tok girls somehow lol
@@savagedpepe6930 No, they are being charged for the cam girl business.
You are repeating a lie Tristan tate told you.
If all you know is what the tates tell you, then you know nothing.
I wonder how the courts are going to spin this interview against them? It’s extremely risky to be doing interviews with a running court case. Regardless of whether that chosen 45min was cut out for later or not.
of cours he was there his in house arrest what stupid question pbd
It’s called a leading question my guy
Lucy has spoken about it search the video. lucy speaks out andrew tate
Link the vid
Funny how they are now walking back and downplaying their webcam business after years of bragging about it.
Stop it, feed the cat
Because it has been years. Also, it doesn’t even have to do with getting charged
Funny how u give af when u shouldn't
They're free. Get bent hoe lol enjoy your post wall years
So what they had a webcam business.... the girls did what they wanted just like when u work at McDonald's... u get a salary not a profit share...
Oh didn’t get to the 16 yo kids in his DMs maybe after prison
For the low price of 49 dollars a month yeah okay 😂😂 its a farce
ALMIGHTY GOD KABIR is the father of all souls that JESUS, MOHAMMAD, GURU NANAK, VEDH was telling in BIBLE, QURAN, GURU GRANTHA SAHEB
Ok
God is one and has no match and his not a 'father"
@@yousseftriaxis4135 God is jesus
@@harakiri8548 makes a lot of sense
This is how you win in a political debate or in an interview when you are being accused of something.
You give an answer to the question that is a ( fact) that shows to everyone that can see that you are right.
Andrew Tate did not do this he either did not answer the question or did not tell the truth or state facts when he did answer.
As an example Andrew Tate said in one of answers i never said that, ( if Andrew Tate is seen on video saying it seen by millions it is not true or not a fact.
So can someone please explain how did Andrew Tate wipe the floor with the BBC when none of his answers were fact or True?
When an interviewer immediately comes in with loaded questions liken to an interrogation rather than a conversation it shows exactly what the BBCs intent was.
The fact she scatches her head and hugs her arm out of nervousness shows how easily Andrew answered her and challenged the accuracy if her information. She had to call it quits and even after BBC edited and did their best to hide how frustrated and uncomfortable she was. It was still obvious the BBC had an agenda and failed at it. Yet gave a nice sympathetic calm interview to Philip Scofield who is an actual groomer and everyone is chilled about that.
@@lanternstylez her information was 100% correct it was Andrew Tate not telling the truth, like for example i never said that? He is seen saying exactly that on video.
You obviously have not watched the self confession videos.
@@PeterLewis21 you're only bit of evidence is one line which means it discredits everything else he says?
👏👏👏 you can't say anything about the rest if the interview or how obviously frustrated she is that he's got an answer for all her accusations.
If he said what the bbc claimed how come they wouldn’t just edit the clip into the interview???
@@Shiggystardust i agree its something the BBC could have done, it could be something to do with it being an on going investigation.
The clip is there all over the internet Millions have seen it.
The BBC did well they got Andrew Tate to deny 100% indisputable (facts) millions have seen.
Honestly, the senior bbc executives wouldn’t have been interested in who was on the Tate interview. They have far bigger things to think about. Your arrogance is just incredible. Also, I didn’t see an intellectual superiority in Andrew at all. What I saw, which is what I always see him do, was him raising his voice louder than her, interrupting her, talking over her and generally acting cocky and macho. This is not intelligence.
Oh how wrong you are lmfao, do your homework, all your homework before you arrogantly post. NPC
How did the BBC lose he did not answer any questions, and every question answered was not true.
So how is this wiping the floor with the BBC?
I could go through every answer to her questions and prove it was not true.
Prime example Andrew Tate to one of the questions said ( i never said that) he did say that it is on a video seen by millions.
the women who accused them were not involved in the webcam business
@@wakemaster9999 some of them or all of them were
The BBC lost. You are a sheep and Tate is a Top G.😊
How many comments have you made on here so far? I’ve counted 5
Nah as a tate fan, he fell exactly where she asked about how he used "work for me and we can make money together" which was written in his cobratate site, and he was denying it heavily when in truth he did write in his website. I remember.
Edit: To clarify this isn't an aha moment because he just gave them the offer and they had every right to deny it and even leave after. Women need to be held accountable for their decisions, too.
Ooh hang on il give u money not
Con men
Literally NOTHING the tate (rape) bros say is truthful.
Everything is misleading, false or complete and utter lies.
Everything.
OK bro 😂
@@concretemixer3018 Dudes live in a warehouse.
Tell me 1 thing that’s wrong
@@Brumtown175 He said he was poisoned.
@@Brumtown175 and again, he lives in a warehouse and pretends its a mansion.