Agboriotejoye:
You answered the question yourself. Why would she take a part-time course? She does not need to work to pay her fees which is usually the reason for going part time. If you had said maybe she did a foundation course it would have sound more possible than part-time.

I literally said that she may have done a part-time, foundation, IT or 1-year abroad course; go back and check.

You wrote that "part-time does not mean that you will spend two years extra", when thats exactly what it means.

Part-time is not only to do with work or money. Some people have long-term health conditions, small children, sick parents, or are unable to cope with the pace of the full-time course.

Agboriotejoye:
we can see, there is no peculiar circumstance for her to have had to spend five years since she's the president's daughter and everything is basically taken care of.

You dont know if she was homesick and needed to spend time back home with her family, you dont know if she was trying to arrange her marriage, you dont know if her parents summoned her back home, you just dont know!

People have all sorts of reasons for delaying their studies which they explain and work out with their programme tutor. Why are you making all these assumptions as if you know her

midnighter:


I literally said that she may have done a part-time, foundation, IT or 1-year abroad course; go back and check.

You wrote that "part-time does not mean that you will spend two years extra", when thats exactly what it means.

Part-time is not only to do with work or money. Some people have long-term health conditions, small children, sick parents, or are unable to cope with the pace of the full-time course.



You dont know if she was homesick and needed to spend time back home with her family, you dont know if she was trying to arrange her marriage, you dont know if her parents summoned her back home, you just dont know!

People have all sorts of reasons for delaying their studies which they explain and work out with their programme tutor. Why are you making all these assumptions as if you know her

You don't know her too or do you? If you do kindly tell us if she did any of the above and indeed spent more than three years. What you and ur collegiate zombie are trying to do is to prove that Buhari did not send his daughter to school in the UK after becoming president. So far as we know, there is no reason for her to have to spend five years so all these ur conjectures remain what they are. And it remains presumable and logical that she spent three years and therefore started school after Buhari became president. All that ur homesick and arrange marriage as if Buhari no dey London for three months in 2017 na only you know. So, go and do ur investigations or keep quiet and stop defending who no send you work with half-truths and innuendos

Agboriotejoye:

You don't know her too or do you? If you do kindly tell us if she did any of the above and indeed spent more than three years. What you and ur collegiate zombie are trying to do is to prove that Buhari did not send his daughter to school in the UK after becoming president. So far as we know, there is no reason for her to have to spend five years so all these ur conjectures remain what they are. And it remains presumable and logical that she spent three years and therefore started school after Buhari became president. All that ur homesick and arrange marriage as if Buhari no dey London for three months in 2017 na only you know. So, go and do ur investigations or keep quiet and stop defending who no send you work with half-truths and innuendos

I am not defending anything Sir, I just saw the comment at the bottom of the page and replied to it.

You shouldnt allow your irritation towards the president to cloud your judgement and start unnecessarily bad-mouthing somebody's graduation. Its not her fault that her father is the president, just like its not our fault that we are not children of presidents. I dont like him either but what youre saying doesnt make any sense.

The man was in London for 3 months in 2017 so that means she wont go home for years? That is total nonsense.

Youre the only person giving out half-truths and innuendos here, which is why youre finding it so difficult to defend what you wrote up there.

midnighter:


I am not defending anything Sir, I just saw the comment at the bottom of the page and replied to it.

You shouldnt allow your irritation towards the president to cloud your judgement and start unnecessarily bad-mouthing somebody's graduation. Its not her fault that her father is the president, just like its not our fault that we are not children of presidents. I dont like him either but what youre saying doesnt make any sense.

The man was in London for 3 months in 2017 so that means she wont go home for years? That is total nonsense.

Youre the only person giving out half-truths and innuendos here, which is why youre finding it so difficult to defend what you wrote up there.

Maybe you should have read the comment well before jumping in to display your zombeism. I'm irritated not that he sent his kids abroad to school, but the hypocrisy involved. For example, a certain polytechnic is closed presently because the rector bribed his way to extend his tenure beyond retirement age while deducting workers' salary arbitrarily. Again, why did the man deceive everybody that he would not send his kids to school abroad in 2015 when he had no intention of doing so? Why lie? Is it just to bear the title president? I'm sure you're aware that universities do go on holidays so I wonder where you got the idea from that she did not go home for years. Like I said, your poor attempts at plausible reasons for her to have spent five years remain conjectures. There's no logical evidence that any of such thing happened. Her sister Zahra who is older I believed spent 3yrs which is well known and in the social media. So I don't know how you expect me to accept ur conjectures which are all innuendoes

Agboriotejoye:

Maybe you should have read the comment well before jumping in to display your zombeism. I'm irritated not that he sent his kids abroad to school, but the hypocrisy involved. For example, a certain polytechnic is closed presently because the rector bribed his way to extend his tenure beyond retirement age while deducting workers' salary arbitrarily. Again, why did the man deceive everybody that he would not send his kids to school abroad in 2015 when he had no intention of doing so? Why lie? Is it just to bear the title president? I'm sure you're aware that universities do go on holidays so I wonder where you got the idea from that she did not go home for years. Like I said, your poor attempts at plausible reasons for her to have spent five years remain conjectures. There's no logical evidence that any of such thing happened. Her sister Zahra who is older I believed spent 3yrs which is well known and in the social media. So I don't know how you expect me to accept ur conjectures which are all innuendoes

I started out just informing you that it was possible for somebody to stay in school for over 3 years. Then you took it in another direction until we ended up here.

I am not sure of the relevance of the bolded to the issue at hand; maybe you could contextualise it.

That there are closed polytechnics, dilapidated universities and uninhabitable hostels up and down the country, though very unfortunate, does not detract from the fact that what I said was true.

Are you referring to a campaign promise? If he pledged that he wouldnt send them abroad and then went ahead and did that, then he is a hypocrite, I agree.

You said that the dude was in London for 3 months in 2017 so how can she be homesick when the father is around? Now that youve seen that that doesnt make any sense, you suddenly remembered holidays.

The fact that her sister spent 3 years does not have anything to do with it; you must not follow exactly the same path as your sister, just because she is your sister.

There is no logical evidence that anything like that happened, yet you havent given any logical evidence that it hasnt happened either. You dont want to acknowledge that what I said was true, just because they may possibly apply to the lady in question. Thats where all the argument is coming from

All I said was that it was possible for somebody to stay in school for 5 years, which you want to argue about just because you dont want that woman in particular to have studied for 5 years. So rules which obtain for everybody in the UK suddenly must not apply to the woman because you want to prove a point about her father? Strange reasoning.

Why all these hatred for the young lady who doesn't even know that you exist?

seangy4konji:
Your father is a bastard.a heard man.

I said so..if your father was responsible you should have gone to university of Ibadan, uni ife,calabar, uniport,Maiduguri but he choose to spend our money on you to his second country. Uk..he spend over six months there treating his ear problem while our universities are in ruins..

Shebi you reciece dollar alert to wear Gucci now.Gucci that will kill all of you....

A man that will break your heart is what God will provide for you and your sisters.

Congrats to you and your deaf father.

PS..in case you don't know..ask your mum Aisha..I respect her ..you are a basyard from a nigga in daura that your mum used to lodge in Sheraton.

oyatz:
Why all these hatred for the young lady who doesn't even know that you exist?

And in your shallow mind she exist in my world?

Out of all the beautiful girls in awka,ihialla,ife port Harcourt it is the daughter of a deaf heardman I would have interest in.

I don't think you have been maltreated by a calabar lady before....

Daura lounloun.

Daughter of a cow rearer. ..take a trip to Singapore or Denmark.u would see hottie..

PS..if not for nepotism, bigotry,corruption, looting,abuse of power and negative energy this leaders have,one a scale of IQ,they,their children will b at the bottom of table IQ,problem solving wise...just a few..

midnighter:


I started out just informing you that it was possible for somebody to stay in school for over 3 years. Then you took it in another direction until we ended up here.

I am not sure of the relevance of the bolded to the issue at hand; maybe you could contextualise it.

That there are closed polytechnics, dilapidated universities and uninhabitable hostels up and down the country, though very unfortunate, does not detract from the fact that what I said was true.

Are you referring to a campaign promise? If he pledged that he wouldnt send them abroad and then went ahead and did that, then he is a hypocrite, I agree.

You said that the dude was in London for 3 months in 2017 so how can she be homesick when the father is around? Now that youve seen that that doesnt make any sense, you suddenly remembered holidays.

The fact that her sister spent 3 years does not have anything to do with it; you must not follow exactly the same path as your sister, just because she is your sister.

There is no logical evidence that anything like that happened, yet you havent given any logical evidence that it hasnt happened either. You dont want to acknowledge that what I said was true, just because they may possibly apply to the lady in question. Thats where all the argument is coming from

All I said was that it was possible for somebody to stay in school for 5 years, which you want to argue about just because you dont want that woman in particular to have studied for 5 years. So rules which obtain for everybody in the UK suddenly must not apply to the woman because you want to prove a point about her father? Strange reasoning.

You started out with giving reasons why she could have spent five years. While I agree with the part-time, I let you know that possibility of her doing part-time is remote. But you insisted that it could have been the case bringing up reasons like being homesick like she's a secondary school student or she's been in Nigeria all her life. That's what I'm trying to let you see. There is nothing about her that we know that suggests she could be homesick for example giving the fact that she gets an holiday every three months, her parents go to the UK every five months or thereabouts. You also alluded to reasons people do part-time and I let you know such do not apply in her case except you don't realise the daughter of ego she is.
Anyway the guy I was having the argument with was looking to prove that buhari never sent his child to school as president because yes!! He promised not to send any of his kids abroad as president at Chatham house.
The illustration I gave you is to buttress the reason why these elites practically abandoned our educational system. Imagine if his daughter was in that school, do you think the rector could have done what he did? That's where I'm going with that illustration.
I understand if you said it's possible she spent more than three years but you must also agree that the possibility is remote esp given the fact that it's the speed and structure of Uk schools that endears it to Nigerian elites

midnighter:


I am not defending anything Sir, I just saw the comment at the bottom of the page and replied to it.

You shouldnt allow your irritation towards the president to cloud your judgement and start unnecessarily bad-mouthing somebody's graduation. Its not her fault that her father is the president, just like its not our fault that we are not children of presidents. I dont like him either but what youre saying doesnt make any sense.

The man was in London for 3 months in 2017 so that means she wont go home for years? That is total nonsense.

Youre the only person giving out half-truths and innuendos here, which is why youre finding it so difficult to defend what you wrote up there.

Kindly explain how I bad-mouthed her graduation. It is even you and ur cohort that are claiming she spent five years that are bad-mouthing her graduation. I'm exposing the hypocrisy of the father and you're here defending it by saying she spent donkey years in school

Agboriotejoye:

Kindly explain how I bad-mouthed her graduation. It is even you and ur cohort that are claiming she spent five years that are bad-mouthing her graduation. I'm exposing the hypocrisy of the father and you're here defending it by saying she spent donkey years in school

I was uninformed of the rationale behind your comment; from a bystander who just read that post in isolation by chance it seemed like you were just trying to pooh-pooh the girls achievement by going out of your way to prove that there was no way she could have schooled for 5 years.

Now that you've explained that your motivation is related to the hypocrisy of politicians embezzling public funds meant for our educational system and lavishing them on their own children so that they will study outside, I can see that you weren't bearing an actual grudge against this lady but the circumstances that allowed her to go there.

By the way 5 years is not "donkeys years" neither is it an insult. Somebody who scaled through a difficulty to complete their education will always be a source of admiration to others so the assertion is neutral and not negative.

Hmn, I hope you know that the children of public officers are NOT public office holders and are like any other private citizens.

Their rights can't be limited because their parents are Governors, Senators or President.

On legal grounds,children of the President that are above 18 years are adults with their own rights.

They can attend any University anywhere they like, they may not even need the president's money to attend the schools.

kaylardz:
Senate should make law prohibiting public office holders from patronising foreign universities and hospitals. This is the only way i think we can develop is this country.

midnighter:


I was uninformed of the rationale behind your comment; from a bystander who just read that post in isolation by chance it seemed like you were just trying to pooh-pooh the girls achievement by going out of your way to prove that there was no way she could have schooled for 5 years.

Now that you've explained that your motivation is related to the hypocrisy of politicians embezzling public funds meant for our educational system and lavishing them on their own children so that they will study outside, I can see that you weren't bearing an actual grudge against this lady but the circumstances that allowed her to go there.

By the way 5 years is not "donkeys years" neither is it an insult. Somebody who scaled through a difficulty to complete their education will always be a source of admiration to others so the assertion is neutral and not negative.

I hear you. Case closed

Agboriotejoye:

You started out with giving reasons why she could have spent five years. While I agree with the part-time, I let you know that possibility of her doing part-time is remote. But you insisted that it could have been the case bringing up reasons like being homesick like she's a secondary school student or she's been in Nigeria all her life. That's what I'm trying to let you see. There is nothing about her that we know that suggests she could be homesick for example giving the fact that she gets an holiday every three months, her parents go to the UK every five months or thereabouts. You also alluded to reasons people do part-time and I let you know such do not apply in her case except you don't realise the daughter of ego she is.
Anyway the guy I was having the argument with was looking to prove that buhari never sent his child to school as president because yes!! He promised not to send any of his kids abroad as president at Chatham house.
The illustration I gave you is to buttress the reason why these elites practically abandoned our educational system. Imagine if his daughter was in that school, do you think the rector could have done what he did? That's where I'm going with that illustration.
I understand if you said it's possible she spent more than three years but you must also agree that the possibility is remote esp given the fact that it's the speed and structure of Uk schools that endears it to Nigerian elites

The statement "the possibility of her doing part-time is remote" doesnt make any sense here, because anybody can do part-time for any reason. You asserted that people study part-time because of financial/work commitments, which is simply not true! So I provided you with other reasons that people may study part-time, the list of which was not exhaustive.

This "there is nothing" "there is no reason" stuff is your sticking point. "There is nothing about her that we know ...". The things we know about her are very few. What about the whole host of other things that we dont know?

Not only secondary school students get homesick, even adults can become so. She gets a holiday twice a year, so? What if its not enough for her, what if she's sick, what if shes dyslexic, what if she needs to be kept in line so that she doesnt misbehave, what if she takes time off for religious obligations, what if she couldnt cope with her studies, what if We dont know! Your assertions can never cover the infinite possibilities that abound concerning why she may have done a part-time course.

Okay; that was wrong of him anyway. He should have kept some in Nigeria but then, is it fair to allow the innocent baby to suffer an educational system that is lacking (that was not only his doing but also the doing of presidents past). He should just have kept his children out of his campaign because everybody knows that its not safe or practicable for them to study in Nigeria.

Your illustration is apt; there is an Igbo adage that says "When somebody else's house is on fire, to you its as if theyre just burning trash". People only act like that when their own interests are not at stake. It's a pity.

The speed and structure of foreign universities is what actually makes it more likely that she could spend 5 years in school because they are 100 times more organised and understanding of individual students' circumstances that can interrupt their studies. All they have to do is let the school know of their issue, fill out some forms and follow due process. If people could do such in Nigeria we wouldnt be reading sad stories on here every day of how somebody got kicked out at 300 level and had to start all over again.

That's what is called TRANSFERRED AGRESSION.


Most of those criticizing the achievement of the young lady are doing so out of pure hatred for the President and not based on any rational or patriotic ground.

Justmemyself1:
And let me ask some of you a question.. Are you also saying that if my sons and daughters are top students who get MIT scholarships, you're saying I should get them to refuse the scholarships and instead attend a university in Nigeria because I am a public office holder in Nigeria? Is there any sense in this?

To those doubting the possibility that the president's daughter could actually be top class in what she studied, have you not seen instances where professors' children turned out average academically? I have seen many! Or have you not seen instances where some average joe's children turned out academically exceptional? Again, I have seen many. Unless you know of and/or have dealt directly with people, it's futile trying to rubbish their efforts as some of you are trying to do to the president's daughter.

Agboriotejoye:
I hear you. Case closed

Okay

midnighter:


The statement "the possibility of her doing part-time is remote" doesnt make any sense here, because anybody can do part-time for any reason. You asserted that people study part-time because of financial/work commitments, which is simply not true! So I provided you with other reasons that people may study part-time, the list of which was not exhaustive.

This "there is nothing" "there is no reason" stuff is your sticking point. "There is nothing about her that we know ...". The things we know about her are very few. What about the whole host of other things that we dont know?

Not only secondary school students get homesick, even adults can become so. She gets a holiday twice a year, so? What if its not enough for her, what if she's sick, what if shes dyslexic, what if she needs to be kept in line so that she doesnt misbehave, what if she takes time off for religious obligations, what if she couldnt cope with her studies, what if We dont know! Your assertions can never cover the infinite possibilities that abound concerning why she may have done a part-time course.

Okay; that was wrong of him anyway. He should have kept some in Nigeria but then, is it fair to allow the innocent baby to suffer an educational system that is lacking (that was not only his doing but also the doing of presidents past). He should just have kept his children out of his campaign because everybody knows that its not safe or practicable for them to study in Nigeria.

Your illustration is apt; there is an Igbo adage that says "When somebody else's house is on fire, to you its as if theyre just burning trash". People only act like that when their own interests are not at stake. It's a pity.

The speed and structure of foreign universities is what actually makes it more likely that she could spend 5 years in school because they are 100 times more organised and understanding of individual students' circumstances that can interrupt their studies. All they have to do is let the school know of their issue, fill out some forms and follow due process. If people could do such in Nigeria we wouldnt be reading sad stories on here every day of how somebody got kicked out at 300 level and had to start all over again.

Ok let me ask you a simple question to show you ur argument is without basis
If someone were to ask you the duration for a degree in the UK what will be ur response?

Someone claimed that she did a five year course in the UK. I responded that there's no five year course in the UK. You then jumped in mentioning extenuating circumstances which no one have ever heard of in connection with the subject of discussion. As far as we know, she's neither dyslexic nor a student needing special care. So all ur conjectures are possibilities but can't be applied in her case cause we don't know of such being her case. The dude who claimed she did a five year course has already stopped arguing cause he knows he's lying. The question is what's the basis for ur argument.
Mind you, even in Nigeria, you can defer ur course too for whatever reasons. There are even special circumstances where people spend three years to get a degree in Nigeria. But I'm sure if you're asked by a foreigner how long to get a degree in Nigeria, you'll simply say four years and five years for engineering courses.
I don't know if you studied physical sciences or mathematical probability but if you did you'll know what is called constant and variables.
If you understand that concept, you'll know ur argument is purely academic and has no basis in this context

Agboriotejoye:


Ok let me ask you a simple question to show you ur argument is without basis
If someone were to ask you the duration for a degree in the UK what will be ur response?

Someone claimed that she did a five year course in the UK. I responded that there's no five year course in the UK. You then jumped in mentioning extenuating circumstances which no one have ever heard of in connection with the subject of discussion. As far as we know, she's neither dyslexic nor a student needing special care. So all ur conjectures are possibilities but can't be applied in her case cause we don't know of such being her case. The dude who claimed she did a five year course has already stopped arguing cause he knows he's lying. The question is what's the basis for ur argument.
Mind you, even in Nigeria, you can defer ur course too for whatever reasons. There are even special circumstances where people spend three years to get a degree in Nigeria. But I'm sure if you're asked by a foreigner how long to get a degree in Nigeria, you'll simply say four years and five years for engineering courses.
I don't know if you studied physical sciences or mathematical probability but if you did you'll know what is called constant and variables.
If you understand that concept, you'll know ur argument is purely academic and has no basis in this context

A course in the UK typically lasts for 3 years. But you cant use typical circumstances to apply to every single individual; that is why they are "typical" and not "unconditional". It is not cast in iron that you must only read for 3 years or rusticate, so your reasoning has no basis.

This particular statement you made is the stone in your rice:

Agboriotejoye:
So how come she's graduating one year later?

There is no particular answer to that question, that is what Im trying to explain to you.

The bolded is the issue here: You responded to me that part-time course doesnt mean you will do 2 years extra when that is simply not true. You then moved the goalposts that how can she do part-time when she has money. I explained that its not always to do with money. You now said that she cannot be dyslexic when you dont have her medical records, do you

If you had just acknowledged that people can study for more than 3 years instead of trying to rubbish a known fact then we wouldnt be having this problem.

There you go again, with that "as far as we know" stuff. But you dont know! How will you know except if she comes out and tells you The missing information here is when exactly she started reading that course and whether she read it for 3 years or not. And if not, why not? Therein lies your pot of gold.

Exactly, they are possibilities which means they are possible, no matter how unlikely they are. The point of being an exception to a rule is that your case is exceptional! So pointing out that the chance is "remote" is redundant here because the likelihood of anybody in the whole population
deviating from the norm is already less than usual.

If you yourself understood constants and variables, you wouldnt be trying to discard variable factors as if they dont exist. Just because a variable is small it doesnt mean it doesnt affect the constant. Thats if you even know what the quantities of those variables are, which you dont, because you dont know her!

It may be academic and theoretical, but that doesnt make it totally untrue as you were suggesting in the first place.

midnighter:


A course in the UK typically lasts for 3 years. But you cant use typical circumstances to apply to every single individual; that is why they are "typical" and not "unconditional". It is not cast in iron that you must only read for 3 years or rusticate, so your reasoning has no basis.

This particular statement you made is the stone in your rice:



There is no particular answer to that question, that is what Im trying to explain to you.

The bolded is the issue here: You responded to me that part-time course doesnt mean you will do 2 years extra when that is simply not true. You then moved the goalposts that how can she do part-time when she has money. I explained that its not always to do with money. You now said that she cannot be dyslexic when you dont have her medical records, do you

If you had just acknowledged that people can study for more than 3 years instead of trying to rubbish a known fact then we wouldnt be having this problem.

There you go again, with that "as far as we know" stuff. But you dont know! How will you know except if she comes out and tells you The missing information here is when exactly she started reading that course and whether she read it for 3 years or not. And if not, why not? Therein lies your pot of gold.

Exactly, they are possibilities which means they are possible, no matter how unlikely they are. The point of being an exception to a rule is that your case is exceptional! So pointing out that the chance is "remote" is redundant here because the likelihood of anybody in the whole population
deviating from the norm is already less than usual.

If you yourself understood constants and variables, you wouldnt be trying to discard variable factors as if they dont exist. Just because a variable is small it doesnt mean it doesnt affect the constant. Thats if you even know what the quantities of those variables are, which you dont, because you dont know her!

It may be academic and theoretical, but that doesnt make it totally untrue as you were suggesting in the first place.

I'm beginning to suspect I'm arguing with a knucklehead.
Did you read that aspect of "one year later" in isolation or you read the whole thing?
Context lady, context!!
Again, there's nothing to indicate that any of such occurred from what we know, so except you have dat info, it's safe to assume she spent the statutory three years.
Let me educate you a little. Variables are unknowns. As far as you don't know the exact conditions of those variables they remain unknown and therefore are ignored until the conditions become clearer. I hope you can relate this with this subject.
Again, the person who claimed she spent five years never said it was due to part-time or any other additions you brought up. That's why I've been asking for the basis of ur argument.
To all intents and purposes, as far as we know, she spent three years, not dyslexic, not arranging marriages, not homesick, no sick parents (abi na she take care of bubu in 2017 ni) or any religious commitments.
Do you even know how many Muslims are in Uk schools? Just imagine them taking time off for religious commitments. It sounds so frivolous.
I don't even believe Uk allows people extend their stay in school so blatantly. The system operates strictly like a business. No time to waste.

But besides all dat, I'm still trying to see what basis you're trying to justifying the assertion that she spent five years in school

Agboriotejoye:

I'm beginning to suspect I'm arguing with a knucklehead.
Did you read that aspect of "one year later" in isolation or you read the whole thing?
Context lady, context!!
Again, there's nothing to indicate that any of such occurred from what we know, so except you have dat info, it's safe to assume she spent the statutory three years.
Let me educate you a little. Variables are unknowns. As far as you don't know the exact conditions of those variables they remain unknown and therefore are ignored until the conditions become clearer. I hope you can relate this with this subject.
Again, the person who claimed she spent five years never said it was due to part-time or any other additions you brought up. That's why I've been asking for the basis of ur argument.
To all intents and purposes, as far as we know, she spent three years, not dyslexic, not arranging marriages, not homesick, no sick parents (abi na she take care of bubu in 2017 ni) or any religious commitments.
Do you even know how many Muslims are in Uk schools? Just imagine them taking time off for religious commitments. It sounds so frivolous.
I don't even believe Uk allows people extend their stay in school so blatantly. The system operates strictly like a business. No time to waste.

But besides all dat, I'm still trying to see what basis you're trying to justifying the assertion that she spent five years in school

Do you agree that it is possible for somebody to spend more than the typical 3 years in school owing to a range of factors now? Or not

That was the genesis of this conversation.

And insulting me when I did not provoke you just shows how primitive and unintelligent you really are. Do invectives and statistics go hand in hand What a shame...

midnighter:


Do you agree that it is possible for somebody to spend more than the typical 3 years in school owing to a range of factors now? Or not

That was the genesis of this conversation.

And insulting me when I did not provoke you just shows how primitive and unintelligent you really are. Do invectives and statistics go hand in hand What a shame...

That's where you're wrong and I've been explaining to you. The genesis of the conversation is that someone claimed her course has a five year duration not the possibility of spending a bazillion year in school.
You refused to see that even when I pointed to you that's the genesis of the conversation. Instead, you started ascribing reasons why she could have spent five years when it has never been known that she spent five years. I hope you can see how you went out of point from the initial discussion.
And it's infuriating when you keep arguing out of context. Nobody said it's impossible to spend five years in a UK school.
What I've been saying is
1. There's no five year course in Uk
2. There's no evidence she extended her course beyond the statutory three years
3. Even if it were possible for her to have done dat, there's no evidence that such realities exist, thus to all intents and purposes it's safe to assume she spent the statutory three years
Thank you

Agboriotejoye:


That's where you're wrong and I've been explaining to you. The genesis of the conversation is that someone claimed her course has a five year duration not the possibility of spending a bazillion year in school.

Such was the genesis of the conversation between me and you.

A course with a duration of 5 years is what that dude said, and an undertaking of studies that managed to last for a period of 5 years is what I pointed out to you before you began to implicate yourself.

U ru ese o

President Buhari's nepotism is outstanding and he is yet to purge himself of military mindset.
The shortcomings and failures of his administration are crystal clear.

However, Buhari alone can NOT fix our educational system. This will require the collective, conscious and deliberate efforts of all Nigerians.

It's very laughable and quite ironic to see parents who pay mercenaries to write JAMB for their children, cultists who kill/rape fellow students on campus,SUG officials who embezzled students fund, Lecturers who sleep with students before passing them , average students who cheat in exams from pry schools to universities and Oloshos who are part time students/part time prostitutes coming on this faceless forum to lament why Buhari hasn't fixed the rottenness in our educational system and sending his daughter to school abroad.

midnighter:


Such was the genesis of the conversation between me and you.

A course with a duration of 5 years is what that dude said, and an undertaking of studies that managed to last for a period of 5 years is what I pointed out to you before you began to implicate yourself.

U ru ese o

midnighter:


A part time degree in the UK takes 5 years or more.

Lol the presidents daughter and youre talking about visa? After how many million Ha!

Anyway I was just reminding you that there are such circumstances that can extend the course beyond 3 years

People also switch courses, take time off or do foundation years, who knows what her own case was.

This was ur initial post. You can tell me if the bolded does not mean you're certain she spent five years

The topic of the thread is buhari's daughter graduating from uk school. My bone of contention is his hypocrisy. The other guy's line of defence is claiming she was in school before he became president. Now read ur posts and try to see who's line of reasoning you're trying to align with

Agboriotejoye:


This was ur initial post. You can tell me if the bolded does not mean you're certain she spent five years

The topic of the thread is buhari's daughter graduating from uk school. My bone of contention is his hypocrisy. The other guy's line of defence is claiming she was in school before he became president. Now read ur posts and try to see who's line of reasoning you're trying to align with

Okay sir

subcbouy:
No b lie. Some we curse their parents for not sending them abroad. Some we fault political class for their parents failure. Some we transfer aggression of their negligence to seeking better academic progression abroad. Some we blame politicians for our fake professors on campus. You can add yours.

I have nothing to say to you you are just a typical example of our failed educational system if you do not know the difference between we and will


I drop my pen smh for you