Ben Shapiro apologies to Andrew Neil for melt down Watch

Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#21
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#21
(Original post by z-hog)
Seen a few, earliest memories probably about Saddam's arsenal. More recently, and just off the top, Buzzfeed said they had seen evidence of Trump's obstruction to justice, the next day we had the Covington march with a Vietnam veteran who never set foot there, the Guardian had a big scoop on Manaforte visiting Assange in London but nobody else touched it, there are a few. The BBC had to pay a lot of money to the Ukrainian president for reporting something that never happened, they can surface anywhere these days.
And yet you seem to think the above article is ‘fake’? 🤔
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 week ago
#22
(Original post by Napp)
And yet you seem to think the above article is ‘fake’? 🤔
I'm not satisfied that Ben isn't being sarky and that the alleged apology isn't being exaggerated for the sake of making an anti-abortionist look bad, what exactly did he apologise for? From the link, it isn't clear. Neil comes down quite heavily with his talk of barbarism, perhaps looking for kudos at the BBC, it isn't terribly balanced and Shapiro says...

He earlier apologised on social media to Neil, saying he had “misinterpreted his antagonism as political leftism”.

Shapiro brought the 16-minute interview to an end as he cried foul over Neil questioning him on “lone things that sound bad out of context”.

“Frankly, I find this whole thing a waste of time,” he said. “You can think whatever you want of me, frankly, I don’t care. I don’t frankly give a damn what you think of me since I’ve never heard of you.”

Neil retorted: “And I’d never heard of you before I briefed myself for this.”

Then, as Neil pressed him to explain how society was turning its back on Judaeo-Christian values, as Shapiro’s bestselling book claims, Shapiro said he was not “inclined to continue an interview with a person as badly motivated as you”.

He removed his microphone and prepared to leave as Neil thanked him for demonstrating that anger was not part of American political discourse.
So what is the apology supposed to be about? He could be taking the p**s, how do we know that?

Let's face it, not onlly the title but the whole Guardianista piece is ,misleading. This is what they want to convey...

The segment went viral on social media, prompting Shapiro to say he had not been prepared and to concede defeat to Neil, who often takes oppositional positions with his guests.
That's not reality. At best, he apologised for calling him a leftie and that's what he meant by not doing his research. It's infantile to turn that into what the Guardian want to daze people with.

“As I’m not familiar with him or his work, I misinterpreted his antagonism as political Leftism (he termed the pro-life position in America “barbaric”) – and that was apparently inaccurate,” the pundit wrote on Twitter. “For that I apologise.”

After the interview aired on Friday he attempted to poke fun at the exchange.

“[Andrew Neil] DESTROYS Ben Shapiro! So that’s what that feels like,” he tweeted.
From the Indy. You thought he was serious, didn't you?
Last edited by z-hog; 1 week ago
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#23
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#23
(Original post by z-hog)
I'm not satisfied that Ben isn't being sarky and that the alleged apology isn't being exaggerated for the sake of making an anti-abortionist look bad, what exactly did he apologise for? From the link, it isn't clear. Neil comes down quite heavily with his talk of barbarism, perhaps looking for kudos at the BBC, it isn't terribly balanced and Shapiro says...



So what is the apology supposed to be about? He could be taking the p**s, how do we know that?

Let's face it, not onlly the title but the whole Guardianista piece is ,misleading. This is what they want to convey...



That's not reality. At best, he apologised for calling him a leftie and that's what he meant by not doing his research. It's infantile to turn that into what the Guardian want to daze people with.



From the Indy. You thought he was serious, didn't you?
How on earth are you sniffing a conspiracy in this? He got his arse handed to him, after all it doesn't take a genius to debate any old looser on Fox and Friends etc. as opposed to Neil who actually knows what he is talking about.
Strange though, I thought you would have liked Neil, him being the arch Conservative he is.
0
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 week ago
#24
Respect for admitting he was wrong and admitting it instantly.

When have you seen a leftie apologise when they're wrong and not just double down?
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 week ago
#25
(Original post by Jebedee)
Respect for admitting he was wrong and admitting it instantly.

When have you seen a leftie apologise when they're wrong and not just double down?
He didn't really apologise for anything, that's what we are led to believe. That he apologised for storming out or anything he said in the interview, to get the message that Shapiro was humiliated by Neil. To plant in people's heads that 'Shapiro conceded defeat'. Source: the Grauniad.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 week ago
#26
(Original post by Napp)
How on earth are you sniffing a conspiracy in this? He got his arse handed to him, after all it doesn't take a genius to debate any old looser on Fox and Friends etc. as opposed to Neil who actually knows what he is talking about.
What exactly did he apologise for again?
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#27
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#27
(Original post by z-hog)
What exactly did he apologise for again?
Surely you're capable of reading his tweets and the article for yourself?
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 week ago
#28
(Original post by Napp)
Surely you're capable of reading his tweets and the article for yourself?
Of course I am, that's how I got to the conclusion that the Guardian are bul*****ing us big time! Your inability to put the finger on what exactly he apologised for vindicates my view that they deliberately confuse people with their mumbo-jumbo. A Shapiro apology, for what?

The Guardian have become totally un-reliable in their political gaming, they know full well that Ben didn't apologise for anything and that he's being sarky with his tweeting but they still manipulate the thing for the benefit of those who are happy swallowing the header without question because they don't like Shapiro either. They got you and many others, didn't they?
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#29
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#29
(Original post by z-hog)
Of course I am, that's how I got to the conclusion that the Guardian are bul*****ing us big time! Your inability to put the finger on what exactly he apologised for vindicates my view that they deliberately confuse people with their mumbo-jumbo. A Shapiro apology, for what?

The Guardian have become totally un-reliable in their political gaming, they know full well that Ben didn't apologise for anything and that he's being sarky with his tweeting but they still manipulate the thing for the benefit of those who are happy swallowing the header without question because they don't like Shapiro either. They got you and many others, didn't they?
No, it is simply me dismissing your conspiracy riddled comment as risible.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 week ago
#30
(Original post by Napp)
No, it is simply me dismissing your conspiracy riddled comment as risible.
Yes but without a single argument and that is meaningful enough. Satisfactory.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#31
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#31
(Original post by z-hog)
Yes but without a single argument and that is meaningful enough. Satisfactory.
There's only so much I can bang my head against the wall with you before it becomes tedious.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#32
Report 3 days ago
#32
Having caught up with the full vid on this piece of FAKE NEWS, here's a list of a few people wanting to manipulate public consciousness their way:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...neil-interview

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/b...-a4139956.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8909841.html

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/b...view-1.7224502

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/11/u...ntl/index.html

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/0...s-andrew-neil/

Ad nauseam. Every single one of those propaganda outlets is out to con people into believing Shapiro was DESTROYED because they all read from the same sheet and hold the same journalistic levels of (lack of) integrity. In the same way they do it here, they do it with anything. Shapiro and Trump are deplorables in the eyes of the groups of interests behind these quality-less rags, for that reason they do it. Shapiro is a political enemy and dissenter to them and they fear him, for that reason the collusion springs into action the way it does.

Here's the vid, it's more than obvious that what they tell people is simply FAKE. Not a mistake or sloppy journalism, just manipulative fakeness. They deliberately set out to create a false narrative, as they do just about every day with Trump and lots of other things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VixqvOcK8E

Judge by yourself.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#33
Report 2 days ago
#33
(Original post by z-hog)
Having caught up with the full vid on this piece of FAKE NEWS, here's a list of a few people wanting to manipulate public consciousness their way:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...neil-interview

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/b...-a4139956.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8909841.html

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/b...view-1.7224502

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/11/u...ntl/index.html

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/0...s-andrew-neil/

Ad nauseam. Every single one of those propaganda outlets is out to con people into believing Shapiro was DESTROYED because they all read from the same sheet and hold the same journalistic levels of (lack of) integrity. In the same way they do it here, they do it with anything. Shapiro and Trump are deplorables in the eyes of the groups of interests behind these quality-less rags, for that reason they do it. Shapiro is a political enemy and dissenter to them and they fear him, for that reason the collusion springs into action the way it does.

Here's the vid, it's more than obvious that what they tell people is simply FAKE. Not a mistake or sloppy journalism, just manipulative fakeness. They deliberately set out to create a false narrative, as they do just about every day with Trump and lots of other things.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VixqvOcK8E

Judge by yourself.
Wait, so after all that fuss you were making in this thread a week ago, you only just watched the interview today? You realise everyone else already watched it, right? Y'know, before forming their opinions on it.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#34
Report 2 days ago
#34
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
Wait, so after all that fuss you were making in this thread a week ago, you only just watched the interview today? You realise everyone else already watched it, right? Y'know, before forming their opinions on it.
The clue was on 'the full vid' instead of the section where Neil goes opinionated and there was enough to go by already: It is a con to portray Shapiro's tweets as the apology and conceding defeat that the same media who have it in for Trump as well make up, it is an absolute insult to intelligence. Did you have an opinion at all or just glad to let someone else decide what that should be? Never mind, forget it.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#35
Report 2 days ago
#35
(Original post by z-hog)
The clue was on 'the full vid' instead of the section where Neil goes opinionated and there was enough to go by already: It is a con to portray Shapiro's tweets as the apology and conceding defeat that the same media who have it in for Trump as well make up, it is an absolute insult to intelligence. Did you have an opinion at all or just glad to let someone else decide what that should be? Never mind, forget it.
I'm talking about the full vid. Everyone saw that **** already my guy.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#36
Report 2 days ago
#36
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
I'm talking about the full vid. Everyone saw that **** already my guy.
Do you really want to pick a bone over this, the Guardian piece put against Ben's tweets was enough to tell the gap. Watching the part of the interview where it went off or the whole piece doesn't change anything, it is a distortion of reality to portray Ben apologizing for anything other than calling Neil a lefty and even then in a sarky way. It's not sloppy journalism, it is political activism and it's killing the profession's reputation.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#37
Report 2 days ago
#37
(Original post by z-hog)
Do you really want to pick a bone over this, the Guardian piece put against Ben's tweets was enough to tell the gap. Watching the part of the interview where it went off or the whole piece doesn't change anything, it is a distortion of reality to portray Ben apologizing for anything other than calling Neil a lefty and even then in a sarky way. It's not sloppy journalism, it is political activism and it's killing the profession's reputation.
Has this really been occupying your mind for the last week? It's crazy to me that you're having a harder time accepting that Ben Shapiro screwed up this interview than Ben Shapiro.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#38
Report 2 days ago
#38
(Original post by Captain Haddock)
Has this really been occupying your mind for the last week? It's crazy to me that you're having a harder time accepting that Ben Shapiro screwed up this interview than Ben Shapiro.
It simply came up earlier on You Tube as a sideline to something, not even looking for it. It was more like an afterthought. You couldn't possibly substantiate the claim of Shapiro screwing anything up because that simply didn't happen but I'm not going to talk about it anymore.
0
reply
Captain Haddock
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#39
Report 2 days ago
#39
(Original post by z-hog)
It simply came up earlier on You Tube as a sideline to something, not even looking for it. It was more like an afterthought. You couldn't possibly substantiate the claim of Shapiro screwing anything up because that simply didn't happen but I'm not going to talk about it anymore.
"Neil 1, Shapiro 0"
- Ben Shapiro
0
reply
PTMalewski
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#40
Report 2 days ago
#40
(Original post by Napp)
Cant say im an overt fan of Neil but it was rather nice seeing him give Shapiro a jolly good squashing.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...neil-interview
Could you just post a link to a vid with full interview next time? It's painful to read about such things, especially that then you need to search and check is the description accurate, for 70% of the time it's not.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Business Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (42)
16.03%
The paper was reasonable (130)
49.62%
Not feeling great about that exam... (58)
22.14%
It was TERRIBLE (32)
12.21%

Watched Threads

View All