|
|
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | Blog's up!
I'm not sure why Aisleyne thinks Noirin deserves to be called lazy. I've not seen any evidence for it and Marcus couldn't provide any evidence for it. I think she argued her corner pretty well actually and I was pleased to see she was willing to forgive and forget later.
It's a shame Ash is criticising my second favourite housemate but it looks like she's really liking my favourite (Halfwit) so it's all good 
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
| Thanks Julian
Link:
http://www.revealblog.co.uk/bbblog.ASP?articleID=1582
| |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| have to say I dont get where HW was being sweet to Kris about being up. I thought he was actually making a dig about them worrying when it was worse to be actually nominated. Fair enough, but I cant see how that was him being sweet, more to do with being his usual self absorbed with himself. That and the performance for the camera when the nominations were being announced. Rather staged and very pathetic I thought. I also wasnt impressed with the way he was on the live feed last night, but hopefully they will show it well as there seemed a lot of confusion about who was at fault with an argument with Noirin and Saivash, but I thought HW's contribution was stupid. He didnt know but decided that he would have his say and make conclusions he had no idea about, but thats typical of him as he often attacks the ones he thinks are against him whether he has any evidence or not.
And saying he is sweet and Kris isnt ignores the fact of exactly what HW has been constantly saying about Kris, his relationship and his friends, to anyone who would listen. Why should Kris be pleasant to him after all that? I know I wouldnt | |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | The thing is, you could interpret it as a dig or as a genuine attempt to make them feel better. Whuch interpretation you go for probably depends on your existing preconception of his character.
Personally, I saw the tentative pats of reassurance on Charlie's back as evidence of the latter.
As for saying bad things about Kris, I'm a bit bemused at how he doesn't target Kris. He doesn't nominate him and he recently reckoned he was very likeable 
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| Julian - 9/7/2009 15:07
The thing is, you could interpret it as a dig or as a genuine attempt to make them feel better. Whuch interpretation you go for probably depends on your existing preconception of his character.
Personally, I saw the tentative pats of reassurance on Charlie's back as evidence of the latter.
As for saying bad things about Kris, I'm a bit bemused at how he doesn't target Kris. He doesn't nominate him and he recently reckoned he was very likeable
Regards
Julian
but he has said some nasty things to him (about how fake he is... sheep in wolf's clothing, how he is using Sophie in a fake relationship) and to others about him and even said to Kris about how a friend is using him (i.e. Lisa), all these things would mean that Kris has every right to not like him.
As for him touching Charlie's back that was more to his Sree like behaviour towards Charlie than anything else
I agree about its down to interpretation in relation to how he was saying it, and whilst I take it this way, I dont blame him for saying it, after all he has been up every week and if you are going to be up for the vote its better for your own self esteem to be up due to a bit of manipulation by BB than having to think you are disliked by your fellow h/ms. I totally understand him feeling that way and it wasnt rude of him to say it IMO, I just didnt see it as sweet either
Edited by bradley27 9/7/2009 16:07
| |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | It was insensitive to tell them he thought they were fake but I didn't see it as nastiness. He was drunk, he was asked a question and he answered rather too honestly for his own good. He regretted it later and also seems to have revised his opinion.
I really don't see any nastiness in Freddie. Just a certain level of social ineptitude!
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| Julian - 9/7/2009 16:45
It was insensitive to tell them he thought they were fake but I didn't see it as nastiness. He was drunk, he was asked a question and he answered rather too honestly for his own good. He regretted it later and also seems to have revised his opinion.
I really don't see any nastiness in Freddie. Just a certain level of social ineptitude!
Regards
Julian
that wasnt the only time he did it, but as you said before alot is to do with intepretations and we tend to see a good reason for someone doing something if we like them but a bad one if we dont.
Still none of them can complete with my all time favourites Nimmi and her cousin Nimmim  | |
| | |
| ukmsn entertainment have a collection of celebrity opinions on BB10, including Aisleyne's view on Kris&Co.
Check out Michelle Heaton's views - a "minority report" I think?
http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/tv/realitytv/big-brother/article.as...
| |
| | |
| Friday blog's up - and Aisleyne is dying to hear what you think of her take on what she calls"He Said She Said"
http://www.revealblog.co.uk/bbblog.ASP?articleID=1585
I didn't see the show myself so I can't really comment, but it seems to me that Ash has actually got the gist of it, despite the complexities of the situation itself PLUS the technical horlicks C4 made of it.
All I can say is - Ash, GET IN THERE - tell Siavash he needs to know himself and tell Noirin she's "all me me me me me me me me me me" - THAT's sort 'em out! | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| I still cant see how Freddie is considered so well when he completely lied through his teeth on the show. He claimed he wasnt there to hear Siavash name names and was in factt the guy who actually pushed him to name them when they were in the lounge. On top of that when it kicked off, where was he, in the corner of the room eating away and grinning. He knew exactly what was going on and he again hammed it up and lied, yet people say it was sweet of him to stick up for Siavash. Rubbish | |
| | |
Posts: 2530
| Freddie employed the 'Pete Bennett defence' AKA 'I was in the toilet at the time'. Only it wasn't a real toilet, he was in a virtual toilet of his own mind. Your problem Bradders is that you don't understand the complex, Gordian knot of Freddie's brain, which is a constantly calculating, computing and meditating entity.
| |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| secrethousemate - 10/7/2009 13:35
Freddie employed the 'Pete Bennett defence' AKA 'I was in the toilet at the time'. Only it wasn't a real toilet, he was in a virtual toilet of his own mind. Your problem Bradders is that you don't understand the complex, Gordian knot of Freddie's brain, which is a constantly calculating, computing and meditating entity.
thank heavens I thought I was alone watching a different version to the one everyone else watches  | |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | Ok, I understand that Freddie wanted Siavash to name names and I understand that he says he was in the toilet when the naming took place. Are people saying that they definitely saw him present when Siavash mentioned Kris and Karly, because I don't remember that 
In any case, there's no doubt in my mind that he acted out of a sense if indignation at Noirin's apparent betrayal of Siavash and, whether or not he heard any names, I still think it was an admirable gesture (despite thr melodramatics).
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| Julian - 10/7/2009 15:09
Ok, I understand that Freddie wanted Siavash to name names and I understand that he says he was in the toilet when the naming took place. Are people saying that they definitely saw him present when Siavash mentioned Kris and Karly, because I don't remember that
In any case, there's no doubt in my mind that he acted out of a sense if indignation at Noirin's apparent betrayal of Siavash and, whether or not he heard any names, I still think it was an admirable gesture (despite thr melodramatics ).
Regards
Julian
yes he was there, it was the same conversation with the four of them. He lied. As for his gesture I felt it was a total show and quite pathetic for a grown man to act that way, especially when he was lying when he was doing it. And it was made more stupid by the fact that whilst claiming he didnt hear the names (a lie) he then claimed that although he didnt he KNEW that Siavash was being truthful and KNEW the others werent. He was in no position to make that statement. He could have said he believed but he was definate, showing his nasty and cunning side again. That along with him watching it going along eating away and smiling, enjoying the spectacle in front of him, said it all for me. The guy is quite clearly either a nasty stirrer or just a simpleton with no social skills. No doubt when the others nominate him again next week, people will attack them, but why should they nominate someone ahead of a guy that makes such grand and stupid comments about them. I wonder how many would feel the same if they were stuck in a place with him telling them what they are all the time.
Interestingly if you watch back on the conversation between the four Siavash doesnt say Karly and Kris were the two, he mentioned that they knew the nickname, not that it was a trrible nickname in the first place. If thats the worst that going to be said about anyone they would be very lucky. Also with Noirin, the trouble wasnt just that she broke a confidence it was the fact she went on for hours about it. She was still shouting her mouth off at 4am when I turned it off. It was a massive fuss about nothing. | |
| | |
Posts: 5071
Location: Scottish Borders | I was watching live feed last night, and it was Freddy and Marcus doing the plotting, trying to recruit Noirin to vote with them and slagging off the rest. They even slagged off Siavash, when he wasn't present. Marcus said there were only two bad one's in there, meaning Lisa and Karly.
If that isn't trying to influence nominations, I don't know what is?  | |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | bradley27 - 11/7/2009 02:02
yes he was there, it was the same conversation with the four of them.
...
Interestingly if you watch back on the conversation between the four Siavash doesnt say Karly and Kris were the two, he mentioned that they knew the nickname, not that it was a trrible nickname in the first place.
So you're saying that Siavash didn't mention the names of the people who had given Noirin the nickname and you're also saying that Freddie was lying when he said he wasn't there when Siavash mentioned the names?
I think you just shot your own argument in the foot there
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | emptybox - 11/7/2009 17:58
I was watching live feed last night, and it was Freddy and Marcus doing the plotting, trying to recruit Noirin to vote with them and slagging off the rest. They even slagged off Siavash, when he wasn't present. Marcus said there were only two bad one's in there, meaning Lisa and Karly.
If that isn't trying to influence nominations, I don't know what is?
This is why the whole bitching/game-playing accusation is always just a matter of perspective. When you get a group of people together who don't like another group of people they are going to be spending a fair amount of time discussing their mutual dislike of the other people.
Whether the public accept that as ok or not depends on whether they agree with their opinions rather than the fact that they are expressing them. It's bitching and manipulation if the public don't agree with it (Lisa on Freddie to Karly and Kris) and friendly advice and insight if they do (Siavash to Noirin on Karly and Kris).
Since Marcus thinks that Lisa is a nasty piece of work who is deliberately trying to set up a block vote against himself and Freddie for the sole purpose of winning the game, he is obviously going to want to persuade Noirin not to fall for her machinations.
Personally, unless it's blatant rule breaking, I think it's perfectly natural social and house dynamics and I'm not really bothered by it on either side, to be honest.
Regards
Julian
| |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| emptybox - 11/7/2009 17:58
I was watching live feed last night, and it was Freddy and Marcus doing the plotting, trying to recruit Noirin to vote with them and slagging off the rest. They even slagged off Siavash, when he wasn't present. Marcus said there were only two bad one's in there, meaning Lisa and Karly.
If that isn't trying to influence nominations, I don't know what is?
this year I really think they are about as bad as each other, with the possible exception of Soph and Rod, but only because I doubt if they know how to be devious.
I just get amazed when people just seem to use double standards, some are allowed to behave in one way, some arent for behaving the same way. Freddie was a complete arrogant idiot in the DR on tonights show and apparently they didnt show halfof how Marcus was trying it on time after time with Noirin, yet weirdly she gets the blame, even though she couldnt have been more clear.
But this love for Freddie just amazes me, he is not worse than the others but some seem to ignore or excuse everything he does. I just dont get it. He bitches he back stabs, he calls others fake shows his arrogance, yet when others get upset by his personal nasty comments and say something back, they are the bad ones. Just dont get it | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| Julian - 11/7/2009 22:21
bradley27 - 11/7/2009 02:02
yes he was there, it was the same conversation with the four of them.
...
Interestingly if you watch back on the conversation between the four Siavash doesnt say Karly and Kris were the two, he mentioned that they knew the nickname, not that it was a trrible nickname in the first place.
So you're saying that Siavash didn't mention the names of the people who had given Noirin the nickname and you're also saying that Freddie was lying when he said he wasn't there when Siavash mentioned the names?
I think you just shot your own argument in the foot there
Regards
Julian
no, they took it that he said those names, but he actually said all 4 but mentioned those two first and the others decided that he said it was those two. But maybe I was dreaming, but he was there, he wasnt in the toilet was he? Thats called a lie, a lie he continually repeated that night | |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | bradley27 - 12/7/2009 01:04
no, they took it that he said those names, but he actually said all 4 but mentioned those two first and the others decided that he said it was those two. But maybe I was dreaming, but he was there, he wasnt in the toilet was he? Thats called a lie, a lie he continually repeated that night
I don't know if he was in the toilet when the names were mentioned or not. I just finished watching the live feed and it didn't cover that moment at all. I'll see if the Highlights are downloadable anywhere tomorrow (as I've deleted them off Sky+) but, unless the camera shows Halfwit in the room at the exact time the names were mentioned then I see no reason to believe he was lying.
I can't even see the motive for such a lie. Saying he hadn't heard the names only detracts from his attempt to defend Siavash so what would have been the point?
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| Julian - 12/7/2009 02:42
bradley27 - 12/7/2009 01:04
no, they took it that he said those names, but he actually said all 4 but mentioned those two first and the others decided that he said it was those two. But maybe I was dreaming, but he was there, he wasnt in the toilet was he? Thats called a lie, a lie he continually repeated that night
I don't know if he was in the toilet when the names were mentioned or not. I just finished watching the live feed and it didn't cover that moment at all. I'll see if the Highlights are downloadable anywhere tomorrow (as I've deleted them off Sky+ ) but, unless the camera shows Halfwit in the room at the exact time the names were mentioned then I see no reason to believe he was lying.
I can't even see the motive for such a lie. Saying he hadn't heard the names only detracts from his attempt to defend Siavash so what would have been the point?
Regards
Julian
the highlight do show it quite clearly | |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | bradley27 - 12/7/2009 10:02
the highlight do show it quite clearly
Ok, I've re-watched the highlights and I will concede that Freddie was in the room (and part of the conversation) when the names were mentioned.
I think the highlights are also pretty clear that Siavash explicitly stated that Karly and Kris called her a Rabbit. Something that he later denied and something which I'm quite sure they never called her.
But I still don't get what Freddie would have had to gain by lying about hearing the names when the thrust of his argument was that he was convinced the names were said!
I think the most likely assumption is that he'd forgotten.
Marcus, in talking to Noirin afterwards, said it was a long conversation over several hours in which several names had come up and he couldn't remember who specifically was mentioned which is why he stayed out of the argument. If Marcus couldn't remember which names were mentioned it's entirely possible that Freddie could have forgotten hearing them at all. It's really the only explanation that makes any sense, as far as I can see...
Regards
Julian | |
| | |
Senate Member
Posts: 794
| Julian - 12/7/2009 13:22
bradley27 - 12/7/2009 10:02
the highlight do show it quite clearly
Ok, I've re-watched the highlights and I will concede that Freddie was in the room (and part of the conversation ) when the names were mentioned.
I think the highlights are also pretty clear that Siavash explicitly stated that Karly and Kris called her a Rabbit. Something that he later denied and something which I'm quite sure they never called her.
But I still don't get what Freddie would have had to gain by lying about hearing the names when the thrust of his argument was that he was convinced the names were said!
I think the most likely assumption is that he'd forgotten.
Marcus, in talking to Noirin afterwards, said it was a long conversation over several hours in which several names had come up and he couldn't remember who specifically was mentioned which is why he stayed out of the argument. If Marcus couldn't remember which names were mentioned it's entirely possible that Freddie could have forgotten hearing them at all. It's really the only explanation that makes any sense, as far as I can see...
Regards
Julian
whether he had anything to gain from lying or not doesnt matter, the fact is he lied. Marcus said he couldnt remember which were the names, thats possible, but Freddie lied completely by saying he wasnt there, claiming to be in the toilet at that specific time, but he was. We cant tell whether Marcus is lying or not, he may or may not have remembered the names (although if you watch carefully Siavash names all four), but we know for sure that Freddie is lying because he didnt say he couldnt remember the names, he claimed to not be there.
I'm afrad its a case like every time with Freddie, excuses are made for his nasty or lying behaviour every single time.
Edited by bradley27 12/7/2009 16:15
| |
| | |
Posts: 5071
Location: Scottish Borders | I think the whole conversation was an attempt by Siavash, Freddie and marcus to influence Noirin against the other team. It looks like it has worked in the long term, but on the night Noirin nearly blew it apart by confronting the others. I think Freddie and Marcus both distanced themselves from the conversation, saying they weren't there or couldn't remember, in order to try to minimize the damage, and make it look like a matter between Noirin and Siavash rather than a conspiracy? But I also think drink befuddled the whole episode.
Edited by emptybox 12/7/2009 16:40
| |
| | |
Executive Member
Posts: 1644
Location: Edgware, Middlesex | bradley27 - 12/7/2009 16:10
whether he had anything to gain from lying or not doesnt matter, the fact is he lied. Marcus said he couldnt remember which were the names, thats possible, but Freddie lied completely by saying he wasnt there, claiming to be in the toilet at that specific time, but he was.
I think the motive is entirely relevant since, without one, it's far more likely that he was just mis-remembering rather than lying.
Personally I believe it would have been out of character to have lied at that point and I'm completely convinced that he believed he was telling the truth - but then my assessment of his character is clearly at odds with your own
Regards
Julian | |
| |
Jump to page : < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >
Now viewing page 4 [25 messages per page] | |
|
|
Reveal magazine - Aisleyne's Big Brother 10 Blog
