Bolton Wanderers Football Club Fan Forum for all BWFC Supporters.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » The murky tale of Iles, the ST, SKD and Michael James?

The murky tale of Iles, the ST, SKD and Michael James?

+5
karlypants
Natasha Whittam
Norpig
boltonbonce
Sluffy
9 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
Anybody else wondered why random events keep happening in respect of the club?

I mean a while back not one but two Baronesses wrote a joint statement about the issues at the club - how often does that happen, did you even know we had two Baronesses in the first place?

What was all that about Bassini saying he bought the club without having any obvious money to buy it with - how often do you see Jim White having exclusive interviews on Sky with such bizarre storylines?

The yesterday we had the latest 'random event'.

It started off all seemingly innocent with Iles publishing the story that Mike James had paid some staff wages from his own pocket - a good news story at last but then something quite unexpected happened - Kevin Davies seemingly had a major pop at James on Twitter (in reply to Iles twitter tweet about his article), so much so that he copied his tweet to the Administrator at the club!



Ok, odd in a way, but even odder when people started to point out later that the gift of money to pay the staff wages from James was not news at all - it was mention weeks back by non other than Ken Anderson himself!

So why has Iles written an article about it weeks after the event?

He states in his article that the Bolton Wanderers Community Trust wrote a statement stating James largesse, so I thought I'd go and have a look at it at source but nothing on the BWCT website or Twitter account - strange?

And as BWCT is a charity and the donation given to them by Mr James, then why are they only now just publicising the fact?  Did Mr James want them to, did they seek his permission first to do so?  

This is a reply to a poster called Chris I did yesterday morning before things became more clearer as to what seems to be going on -

"It does seem a bit random this?
Thought nothing of it until Kevin Davies tweet about a 'conflict of interests' and thought why is he sticking his beak in, then I remembered a throw away line in an interview he made some months back about being asked to be involved in a bid to buy the club from Eddie by a group that included Stelios (up to that time I just thought the Stelios bid to buy the club was some made up joke - but apparently it was a genuine attempt).
So out of curiosity I thought I'd see what the Bolton Wanderers Community Trust statement said and couldn't find it either on their web site or twitter account (well not in the last few days, I've not dug back to see if they said something around the time of the event itself).
So is there something more to all this, is Davies involved in one of the rival bids that the Administrator turned down in favour of FV, what prompted the BWCT statement and where is it - is it an official announcement or simply an answer to a question asked by someone (Iles?) and if so why make it known now - before the FV deal has been struck?
Probably nothing more than an unconnected series of events but I do find it strange that Davies is rattling his cage and referring it to the Administrator at the club (as per his tweet) as you would think it would be good news - not something sinister - that a local Bolton fan is putting his own money into trying to save the club.  Also strange that as I suspect Mr James didn't want a fuss being made when he donated the money to the BWCT (a charity remember) otherwise no doubt it would have been headlines in the paper at the time in respect of his generous donation to help out others - that the BWCT is putting out a statement (where is it, I can't seem to find it on their official site?) that they are broadcasting the news now? Did Michael James know they were making such a statement about him and if so did he give them permission to do so?
Maybe I'm over thinking it but it does seem an odd sequence of events particularly at this moment in time with nothing yet signed or sealed.
Oh and Chris for what it is worth I would have thought the ST would be much more closer involved with Davies than Michael James and Iles breaking the story now would indicate they are all closely linked together still.  Maybe they have backed the wrong horse again?".

Then today another tweet from Davies clearly showing why the shit is being stirred now -



Ah, so that's it!

A smear campaign - or at least it certainly looks like it to me.

A random article with no obvious link to the source of where it originated from(?), that enabled a high profile ex player to make inference to dodgy dealings to the person seemingly on the threshold of taking ownership of the club - yet this same ex-player having said no a dickie bird about it - even though it happened some three years ago, until this most crucial of time - how convenient.

Also explains why the ST was so much against James - in particular Nightingale's outburst, at the public forum they held recently.

A contrived article from Iles (a massive supporter of the ST) that enabled an attack on James (on the cusp of him taking over the club) and putting stuff into the public domain at the worst possible moment for James, by Kevin Davies, who is coincidently also a massive supporter of the ST too.

Well fancy that!

Also do we know if the ST themselves have not been involved in bidding for the club as part of a consortium of one of the other potential purchasers who wasn't selected as the preferred bidder by the Administrator?

Maybe if the FV bid stalls and fails due in someway to this shit flinging, they could be part of the bid that replaces James and goes on to own the club?

Seems to me the ST have already decided who their next bogeyman is going to be once the ghost of Ken as left the building.

Of course it could all just be random happenings that only ever occur at Bolton and no place else!

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Your first thought about overthinking it may be correct Sluffy  Very Happy

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I've stopped reading any post over 50 words.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Your first thought about overthinking it may be correct Sluffy  Very Happy

Maybe I am but you can't deny all sorts of random things seem to be happening around the club.

I've been told of a direct link between the Baronesses and the ST - why else would they have suddenly popped up from nowhere and disappear again just at the time the ST was gunning for Anderson and then their credibility got blown out of the water over Allanson?

God knows what the Bassini involvement was - I'm guessing that had something to do with Ken?

Why did Iles suddenly decide to do a story on James (without any obvious reason to do so - it was old news already in the public domain for at least a month or more?) - or no apparent trace of the statement the BWCT supposedly made - and tee up Davies perfectly to launch his 'attack'?

Why is Davies suddenly mentioning it now - he's either known about it and sat on it for at least three years - and fwiw - as far as I remember organised by Trevor Birch and nothing at all to do with being mates with Gartside or Eddie?

Why did the ST have a pop at James (and Eddie Davies family) at their public forum - a really strange thing to do at the time I thought?

Just seems far too many random 'coincidences' for my liking.


PS - just counted, there's more than 50 words so at least Natasha won't be reading this!

karlypants

karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I've stopped reading any post over 50 words.
Well I’ve finally started to read them as they are more interesting than your seven words. Razz

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

Nigelbwfc


Nicolas Anelka
Nicolas Anelka
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Anybody else wondered why random events keep happening in respect of the club?

I mean a while back not one but two Baronesses wrote a joint statement about the issues at the club - how often does that happen, did you even know we had two Baronesses in the first place?

What was all that about Bassini saying he bought the club without having any obvious money to buy it with - how often do you see Jim White having exclusive interviews on Sky with such bizarre storylines?

The yesterday we had the latest 'random event'.

It started off all seemingly innocent with Iles publishing the story that Mike James had paid some staff wages from his own pocket - a good news story at last but then something quite unexpected happened - Kevin Davies seemingly had a major pop at James on Twitter (in reply to Iles twitter tweet about his article), so much so that he copied his tweet to the Administrator at the club!



Ok, odd in a way, but even odder when people started to point out later that the gift of money to pay the staff wages from James was not news at all - it was mention weeks back by non other than Ken Anderson himself!

So why has Iles written an article about it weeks after the event?

He states in his article that the Bolton Wanderers Community Trust wrote a statement stating James largesse, so I thought I'd go and have a look at it at source but nothing on the BWCT website or Twitter account - strange?

And as BWCT is a charity and the donation given to them by Mr James, then why are they only now just publicising the fact?  Did Mr James want them to, did they seek his permission first to do so?  

This is a reply to a poster called Chris I did yesterday morning before things became more clearer as to what seems to be going on -

"It does seem a bit random this?
Thought nothing of it until Kevin Davies tweet about a 'conflict of interests' and thought why is he sticking his beak in, then I remembered a throw away line in an interview he made some months back about being asked to be involved in a bid to buy the club from Eddie by a group that included Stelios (up to that time I just thought the Stelios bid to buy the club was some made up joke - but apparently it was a genuine attempt).
So out of curiosity I thought I'd see what the Bolton Wanderers Community Trust statement said and couldn't find it either on their web site or twitter account (well not in the last few days, I've not dug back to see if they said something around the time of the event itself).
So is there something more to all this, is Davies involved in one of the rival bids that the Administrator turned down in favour of FV, what prompted the BWCT statement and where is it - is it an official announcement or simply an answer to a question asked by someone (Iles?) and if so why make it known now - before the FV deal has been struck?
Probably nothing more than an unconnected series of events but I do find it strange that Davies is rattling his cage and referring it to the Administrator at the club (as per his tweet) as you would think it would be good news - not something sinister - that a local Bolton fan is putting his own money into trying to save the club.  Also strange that as I suspect Mr James didn't want a fuss being made when he donated the money to the BWCT (a charity remember) otherwise no doubt it would have been headlines in the paper at the time in respect of his generous donation to help out others - that the BWCT is putting out a statement (where is it, I can't seem to find it on their official site?) that they are broadcasting the news now? Did Michael James know they were making such a statement about him and if so did he give them permission to do so?
Maybe I'm over thinking it but it does seem an odd sequence of events particularly at this moment in time with nothing yet signed or sealed.
Oh and Chris for what it is worth I would have thought the ST would be much more closer involved with Davies than Michael James and Iles breaking the story now would indicate they are all closely linked together still.  Maybe they have backed the wrong horse again?".

Then today another tweet from Davies clearly showing why the shit is being stirred now -



Ah, so that's it!

A smear campaign - or at least it certainly looks like it to me.

A random article with no obvious link to the source of where it originated from(?), that enabled a high profile ex player to make inference to dodgy dealings to the person seemingly on the threshold of taking ownership of the club - yet this same ex-player having said no a dickie bird about it - even though it happened some three years ago, until this most crucial of time - how convenient.

Also explains why the ST was so much against James - in particular Nightingale's outburst, at the public forum they held recently.

A contrived article from Iles (a massive supporter of the ST) that enabled an attack on James (on the cusp of him taking over the club) and putting stuff into the public domain at the worst possible moment for James, by Kevin Davies, who is coincidently also a massive supporter of the ST too.

Well fancy that!

Also do we know if the ST themselves have not been involved in bidding for the club as part of a consortium of one of the other potential purchasers who wasn't selected as the preferred bidder by the Administrator?

Maybe if the FV bid stalls and fails due in someway to this shit flinging, they could be part of the bid that replaces James and goes on to own the club?

Seems to me the ST have already decided who their next bogeyman is going to be once the ghost of Ken as left the building.

Of course it could all just be random happenings that only ever occur at Bolton and no place else!
Can I just point out that Phil Gartside had died by the time it was reported that the car park had been sold, if memory serves.

I'd always been led to believe Trevor Birch sold the Car Park after Eddie Davies stopped funding us.

Maybe my memory has gone though.

karlypants

karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
I’ve got to say that I thought good old Trevor sold it too from what I remember.

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

karlypants

karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Thanks mate. Could have sworn he sold it off but appears that we are wrong.

It must be the amount of shit that’s been flying around the last few years. Smile



Last edited by karlypants on Sun Jun 23 2019, 10:13; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Not sure how a FU emoji got there!)

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Thanks mate. Could have sworn he sold it off but appears that we are wrong.

It must be the amount of shit that’s been flying around the last few years. Smile ::FU::

No Nigel and yourself are absolutely correct in your recollections - poor Phil Gartside had died of brain cancer on the 10th Feb, 2016, and Eddie had employed Trevor Birch to replace him and bring the club to sale some several months earlier when Mr Gartside could no longer work.

In fact I'd remembered that It was Birch and not Gartside who did the deal with Mike James but had been holding that little nugget back just in case things got a little bit more interesting on the Wways thread, so that I could see where the debate was going, knowing I was able to trump whatever argument developed with the actual facts - ie that Birch had come in from 'outside' and was working to secure the best deal for Eddie Davies and not be involved in some 'old boys' network to 'defraud' the club/Eddie and financially benefit Mr James.

The debate never took off though, so I never got round to using the fact.

Well remember though Nigel and Karly!

Very Happy

Nigelbwfc


Nicolas Anelka
Nicolas Anelka
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Your first thought about overthinking it may be correct Sluffy  Very Happy

Maybe I am but you can't deny all sorts of random things seem to be happening around the club.

I've been told of a direct link between the Baronesses and the ST - why else would they have suddenly popped up from nowhere and disappear again just at the time the ST was gunning for Anderson and then their credibility got blown out of the water over Allanson?

God knows what the Bassini involvement was - I'm guessing that had something to do with Ken?

Why did Iles suddenly decide to do a story on James (without any obvious reason to do so - it was old news already in the public domain for at least a month or more?) - or no apparent trace of the statement the BWCT supposedly made - and tee up Davies perfectly to launch his 'attack'?

Why is Davies suddenly mentioning it now - he's either known about it and sat on it for at least three years - and fwiw - as far as I remember organised by Trevor Birch and nothing at all to do with being mates with Gartside or Eddie?

Why did the ST have a pop at James (and Eddie Davies family) at their public forum - a really strange thing to do at the time I thought?

Just seems far too many random 'coincidences' for my liking.


PS - just counted, there's more than 50 words so at least Natasha won't be reading this!
This may or may not be relevant to your 'conspiracy theory'

I seem to remember the Supporters trust asking for donations to help buy the club during the winding up petitions, which then changed to "a fighting fund"against the EFL over the points deduction for going into administration. 

I thought it strange they switched focus. Had they already talked to somebody who was bidding? 

Now of course, the news of the 'fighting fund' has now disappeared. Wasn't there £18k in it? Or am I imagining that?

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
£19,142 at present.

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:This may or may not be relevant to your 'conspiracy theory'

I seem to remember the Supporters trust asking for donations to help buy the club during the winding up petitions, which then changed to "a fighting fund"against the EFL over the points deduction for going into administration. 

I thought it strange they switched focus. Had they already talked to somebody who was bidding? 

Now of course, the news of the 'fighting fund' has now disappeared. Wasn't there £18k in it? Or am I imagining that?

Thanks for that Nigel.

The link to the Just Giving page for future reference.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Fwiw I reckon the ST fancied that they were first in the queue if we went into Admin, with the Administrator being required to talk to them and that they expected other people to piggyback their bids on to them (form a consortium) to be able to buy the club before the others had a chance - with the ST being the public face of the winning bidders but with someone else being the moneymen.

I had in mind the Gaspard bid with the kilji's, although I had nothing to base that on other than the most feasible and realistic bidders after FV if you rule out the nonsense of having billionaires fighting amongst themselves to take us over (anybody still think the Chinese were here to buy the club or look at the ice-bath as I suggested was far more likely?).

Anyway it doesn't work like that and all the Administrator is required to do is consult with them in the first 21 days of marketing the club and I think they realised that with James being part of FV they had no chance in reality.

Once they realised that then the only hope they had was if they could knock out the FV bid and thus all this concoction by them to seemingly smear James and get him somehow excluded from the FV bid.

I thought it was really weird and random of Iles to write and publish that article on James - it wasn't even recent news(???) and then for Kevin Davies to tweet such an inference as he did in relation to the story (did the baronesses turn the offer to do such a random thing this time(?).  It's not even as though SKD tweets to Iles articles - so why on earth do it this time with such an apparent attack on James at just the most crucial moment of the sale being on the cusp of it being signed???

All very odd and contrived to my way of thinking.

Anyway back to the ST's solicitor - did anyone catch this on the ST's official FaceBook site from about 5 or 6 days ago. Mike  Smith being the founder and Board Member of the ST -


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Is there no update from the solicitor the trust employed

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] As soon as you become a member Trevor. I'm sure you'll be one of the first to know...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] The Trust is supposed to be looking after the interests of ALL Bolton supporters not just those who are paid up members of the Trust. Hence your comment Michael is insulting to any true Wanderer.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Why is me informing a non-trust member (who by the way is not only derogatory, but often libelous against ST Board members) that one of the advantages of being a full member is you get early access to trust business insulting to any true supporter... ???

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Michael Smith surely the Trust isn't supposed to be a private Club, and don't you exist to pride a link to the Club for all supporters not just your members. Hence in my humble opinion you should be providing all supporters with the same information at the same time.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Terrible isn't it considering the ST in their own words - and the very first thing they state on their website is describing their reason for being as -

"The Bolton Wanderers Supporters’ Trust is a democratic, not for profit organisation of supporters, committed to strengthening the voice of supporters in the decision making process at the club, and strengthening the links between the club and the community it serves".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hardly treating all fans as equal then and hardly looking to strengthen the links with the new owners as seems likely they will be FV and Mike James!

Oh and Mr Barber has gone on several more times to ask the question on Facebook and is clearly being ignored.

The thing is though that many who contribute towards their funding plea certainly were not ST members and Mr Barber may well have contributed money into the fund and have quite a reasonable request to know what has happened to his (and everybody else's) money!


However no doubt I'll be told once again that I'm obsessed with the ST and that the ST are perfect and I'm the one with the problem.

Yeah, right.

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
Thought I'd bump this.

For two reasons really, the first is that I wanted to talk about Iles behaviour from yesterday/today and thought I'd done a general thread on him, which if I had I couldn't quickly find but also that I'm sure Bob would enjoy the read above if he hadn't seen it before anyway - Iles behaviour yesterday...

The background is that the the young co-commentator on the radio did an interview with Evatt and later Doyle after the match, I didn't hear it myself but this is a part of it Tweeted by the young man himself -



...seems Iles didn't like it and tweeted and an aggressive slap down to it - which he said that to do post match interview you don't talk much, ask short questions and any player interview you safe for Monday.

Well the lad stuck up for himself, tweeted back his reasons why he did the interview as he had and importantly asked Evatt at the end if he was happy with how the interview had gone and that he was happy for it to go out.

Iles then received a torrent of tweets asking why (in my words) he was bullying the young bloke?

Here is a couple he replied to -









Another also pointed out Iles himself did a player write up following the match last week on Sunday (Baptiste nearly missing his goal) so he didn't even do what he was preaching himself!

Seems Iles has since got cold feet about all of this and has now deleted most of his tweets, including his original one, in respect of all this.

The general feeling of most seemed to think that Iles didn't like the competition from the youngster!

All a storm in a tea cup I know but interesting that more than a few called Iles out about this rather than blindly follow his every word as they normally do!

karlypants

karlypants
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Bit of an arsehole.

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Thought I'd bump this.

For two reasons really, the first is that I wanted to talk about Iles behaviour from yesterday/today and thought I'd done a general thread on him, which if I had I couldn't quickly find but also that I'm sure Bob would enjoy the read above if he hadn't seen it before anyway - Iles behaviour yesterday...

The background is that the the young co-commentator on the radio did an interview with Evatt and later Doyle after the match, I didn't hear it myself but this is a part of it Tweeted by the young man himself -



...seems Iles didn't like it and tweeted and an aggressive slap down to it - which he said that to do post match interview you don't talk much, ask short questions and any player interview you save for Monday.

Well the lad stuck up for himself, tweeted back his reasons why he did the interview as he had and importantly asked Evatt at the end if he was happy with how the interview had gone and that he was happy for it to go out.

Iles then received a torrent of tweets asking why (in my words) he was bullying the young bloke?

Here is a couple he replied to -









Another also pointed out Iles himself did a player write up following the match last week on Sunday (Baptiste nearly missing his goal) so he didn't even do what he was preaching himself!

Seems Iles has since got cold feet about all of this and has now deleted most of his tweets, including his original one, in respect of all this.

The general feeling of most seemed to think that Iles didn't like the competition from the youngster!

All a storm in a tea cup I know but interesting that more than a few called Iles out about this rather than blindly follow his every word as they normally do!
Poor from Iles. Really really poor from SKD though in 2019. If Shazza’s cosying up to the ST, how will it go down with MJ?



Last edited by Ten Bobsworth on Mon Aug 16 2021, 08:52; edited 1 time in total

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
So how much was involved in SJK's seemingly spiteful 'conflict of interest' claim? How much did MJ donate to Bolton Wanderers Community Trust? 

BWCT gets most of its money from grant-aiding bodies and charitable trusts  and doesn't disclose details of its donations. However its audited accounts show that it received total donations of £29,445 in 2018/19 and £27,728 in 2019/20 (including any tax recovered under Gift Aid).

Ten Bobsworth


El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
Isn't it interesting that no-one seems interested, except you and I Sluffy? I honestly don't know how folk can endlessly pursue mind-numbing trivia and ignore this kind of stuff.

Forget Iles, what was going through SKD's head to come out with this bizarre accusation? Who was putting these ideas into his head and how come he couldn't see through it all?  Doesn't it almost beggar belief?

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Isn't it interesting that no-one seems interested, except you and I Sluffy? I honestly don't know how folk can endlessly pursue mind-numbing trivia and ignore this kind of stuff.

Forget Iles, what was going through SKD's head to come out with this bizarre accusation? Who was putting these ideas into his head and how come he couldn't see through it all?  Doesn't it almost beggar belief?
It's a puzzle Bob, and no mistake. This might help. Or not. 

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Isn't it interesting that no-one seems interested, except you and I Sluffy? I honestly don't know how folk can endlessly pursue mind-numbing trivia and ignore this kind of stuff.

Forget Iles, what was going through SKD's head to come out with this bizarre accusation? Who was putting these ideas into his head and how come he couldn't see through it all?  Doesn't it almost beggar belief?

Each to their own I guess Bob, what we find interesting is clearly not what most others do.

I think the bottom line is that some of us like to understand things for ourselves whereas others are simply quite happy to take the word of someone else to be the truth of the matter.

In my case at least, that is why I find it incomprehensible how vast numbers of people, millions and millions of them worldwide, clearly believe what they read on social media to be true without question???

I guess there must be something about our make up, upbringing, education, professional training, personal values, integrity, inquisitive nature, healthy scepticism, temperament and probably many other factors that make us look and evaluate things in a way that most others do not?

I don't know what it is really but to me, it somehow seems people simply lack general common sense.

I mean look at the USA where something like 70% of Republicans believed the election was 'rigged' and Trump really won, or that weirdo in Plymouth somehow believed it was women's fault he was still a virgin and that give him the right somehow to shoot a little 3 year old dead - I mean wtf???

How many people believed/still believe the QAnon bollocks, loads believe that Covid vaccinations are some sort of way of controlling people or some such nonsense, so is it any wonder that loads of people believe 'tame' stuff that Iles, the ST and SKD spout - which clearly doesn't stand up to any actual scrutiny?

I've given up a long time back about trying to put people straight about things and have for sometime now simply state the facts, give links to what I say and give them an opportunity to be better informed - but I know even just doing that is just a waste of my time as most are happy to believe I'm the crank, not the Trumps or Marc Iles (or any other social media 'influencer you'd care to name).

It's how it is I'm afraid.

For the record I stood alone on here when I said Anderson had not raped and pillaged the club and was running the club in accordance with the law.

The fact is that two years after he left no one has found anything he has done that was illegal.

Similarly I stood alone on here again when I said Tory Covid cronyism could not have occurred simply because it is civil servants who award contracts and not politicians.

Again the fact is that 18 months on, not one case of cronyism/corruption has even been strong enough to be taken to the police, let alone been proved as actually happened.

I remember being open to ridicule on here when TROY pointed out that who should people believe, Maugham a QC, tweeting such was going on or an has been former provincial local authority employee on a footy forum!

Well I'm still waiting to see Maugham land the first blow despite all his numerous  stories of innuendo and many thousand twitter disciples following his every word.

I won't be holding my breath that he ever will too!

It's all pretty pointless really, it's water under the bridge with SKD, people will still believe social media without question, nobody will change their minds that Anderson was a crook and the Tory government is corrupt but if any of them even casually looked to see what the basic facts where/are, they could see for themselves that they believed something from social media that simply wasn't true.

That's the way it simply is these days Bob.

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:



I guess there must be something about our make up, upbringing, education, professional training, personal values, integrity, inquisitive nature, healthy scepticism, temperament and probably many other factors that make us look and evaluate things in a way that most others do not?
Well, pardon us for living. Shocked

BoltonTillIDie

BoltonTillIDie
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
Well, pardon us for living. Shocked
Hark at Woodward and Bernstein  Laughing

boltonbonce

boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse

okocha

okocha
El Hadji Diouf
El Hadji Diouf
Oh the arrogance! Astonishingly lacking in self-awareness and humility...

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:I guess there must be something about our make up, upbringing, education, professional training, personal values, integrity, inquisitive nature, healthy scepticism, temperament and probably many other factors that make us look and evaluate things in a way that most others do not?
Well, pardon us for living. Shocked

Well pray tell then why millions and millions of people gormlessly, like sheep, DO believe what they read on social media without question?

Is it perhaps they are educated, professionally trained, etc, etc, too, or could it be they aren't?

I stood up and against the crowd and backed my training and knowledge and told you all the score on both Anderson and government procurement.

Two years later this has been proved to be spot on.

What were the chances of that if I didn't know what I was talking about?

I'm not blowing my own trumpet, I'm just stating the facts.

I'm not trying to change the world, I couldn't even if I wanted too, people believe whatever bollocks they want to, almost always for two reasons, the first being they don't want/can't be arsed to question the facts about what they are reading/being told and secondly they WANT to believe it to be true in the first place, facts or not.

I simply prefer to follow the facts rather than the fantasy myself.

Norpig

Norpig
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum