12/01/2009 11:40:00 am

'Spirit of Shankly' thugs planning to physically assault Hicks + Gillett?

SOS - the embarrassing and xenophobic Liverpool FC 'fan' group that shamelessly uses Bill Shankly's name to legitimise their thuggish agenda - has hatched a dubious plan to physically restrain Tom Hicks and George Gillett from entering Anfield on their next visit. Perhaps now, Liverpool fans will finally wake up and realise that SOS is doing nothing but damage to the public image of the club and its fans?

SOS Secretary, Graham Smith, posted the following on Red and White Kop yesterday:

"By the by, and not relevant for this protest, but the two owners have come to Anfield without disruption for the last time. Next time we have notice of their next visit they will not be allowed to enter the ground. No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action. Coordinated and planned using committed fans prepared to make a statement that makes it physically impossible for them to enter OUR ground with the ease they have before".


The key sentence here is this:

"Next time we have notice of their next visit they will not be allowed to enter the ground".

Not be allowed? That clearly means, does it not, that if Hicks or Gillett attempt to enter the ground they will be physically restrained? If this happens, any adversarial physical contact would constitute assault under the law, which is why I used 'physical assault' in the headline.

The sheer arrogance of SOS is truly something to behold - What right do they have to physically restrain the Owners from entering the ground?!

That's just what the club needs - lots of angry fans hanging around the stadium waiting to get their chance to make it 'physically impossible' for the owners to enter the ground.

SOS are a cmplete and utter joke, and a total embarrassment to everything the club stands for. Apart from bringing more negative attention on the club, What will this cretinous plan achieve? What are the benefits here?

Spirit of Shankly is made up of a miniscule minority of Liverpool fans yet, amazingly, they purport to represent ALL Liverpool fans. Is this how Liverpool fans want to be represented?

From my interaction with SOS members, it is abundantly clear that they only really care about the views of game-going, Liverpool-based superfans, as if they are the only fans in the world.

Like their xenophobic 'Yank Liars out' approach - which this site forced them to drop - SOS once again comes across like a group of yobs just slithered off the terraces and formed a fan group.

All fair-minded Liverpool fans should condemn this stupid plan and continue to boycott SOS.

We don't need ignorant Yobs representing the club or its global fanbase.

Jaimie Kanwar
----

Join us on Facebook!


Become a fan on Facebook!






REMINDER: COMMENT POLICY

This is a site for reasoned, adult discussion. ALL views are welcome, and if someone's football-related opinion doesn't fit your pre-conceived notion of what constitutes an LFC 'fan', then tough luck. Posts containing personal insults, belittlement, sniping, deliberate antagonism, etc will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned. Attack the argument, not the person. Ultimately, it's simple: be as vehement and passionate as you like, but please remain civil at all times.Thank you.

264 Comments :

«Oldest   ‹Older   1 – 200 of 264   Newer›   Newest»
Guest said...

Over the top.  Way over the top.

daddy2cool said...

yobs!  sos should be banned from the ground... utter plonkers

Matt said...

Good!  Hope they give em a proper hiding! 

m15hun said...

So linking arms and barring entry to the ground is 'physically restraining them', is it?

Direct, passive action is a legitimate protest and they have the right to it, the same as any one else does.

I'm afraid you're trying to milk this innocuous soundbyte for all it's worth.

Guest said...

whats the ticket then jaimie? roll over & take it from all angles from Hicks & Gillett?? i'm not a supporter of the SOS & im certainly not a supporter of hicks & gillett. i think you've blown it out of context by labelling it `planning to physical assault hicks & gillett'... a human barricade is not necessarily `physical assault'.

Guest said...

washing dirty linen in public again mr LFC fan?

Its the likes of you who don't represent anything.

mark said...

i think this is a misleading headline, as it says in the headline they plan to assault hicks and gillett


<span><span>"Coordinated and planned using committed fans prepared to make a statement that makes it physically impossible for them to enter OUR ground with the ease they have before".</span></span>

<span><span>"No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action"</span></span>

I don't know what this is, but it doesn't sound as clear cut as your headline. using words like THUGS and physically assualt is a bit sensationalist.
i'm not a SOS member or supporter. i don't have any feeling either way for them. on one hand, i think it's good that supporters are mobile and vocal against our abysmal owners, but i agree with you, in that i think SOS think they represent all liverpool fans, which they don't. and the munich songs at last years christmas do exposed them a bit as a joke.




<span><span>.</span></span>

Guest said...

have you got nothing better to write?

Matt said...

I thought it was quite ironic for you to criticise SOS for bringing negative attention to the club. 

Aren't almost all of your articles negative?

Jaimie Kanwar said...

m15hun - are you blind?  SOS say they will make it 'physically impossible' for them to enter the ground. What happens if H+G try to push through them?  Things could get ugl. Do you not see the potential for problems here? 

Jaimie Kanwar said...

The point is it could turn ugly, so don't do it in the first place.

And we all know how trustwoorthy and staid angry football fans can be....

Guest said...

Are you even a liverpool fan? Youre a joke mate.

Guest said...

YOU REALLY ARE A PATHETIC JAIMIE. PATHETIC.

TOTALLY OVER THE TOP ARTICLE WHICH I CAN ASSUME HAS BEEN POSTED TO GET A RISE OUT OF SOS.

I MUST STRESS I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SOS BUT THIS WAR OF WORDS THAT YOU INSIST ON INSTIGATING IS MAKING YOU LOOK STUPID.

Guest said...

Knock it off Kanwar.
You haven't a clue.
How long you following Liverpool? 5mins?

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Yes they are...to those with an insular POV who are incapable of seeing things fairly.

Ron the Red said...

I don't know why you are against SOS Jamie. We are seeing our great club being abused by these American bastards, they are milking the sacred cow that is LIVERPOOL FC and we are doing nothing. They are ruining OUR club. I am from Malta, but if I was a season ticket holder, I would be the first to oppose these bastards entering Anfield. They are a cancer, they don't have any respect for LIVERPOOL FC and what it stands for. Infact, I find it so pathetic, they these two enter and leave Anfield without any hassle. Maybe it's something in the blood of the English... you are so cold blooded. They two would not get away with what they are doing to OUR club, if Liverpool was an Italian or Spanish club. Latin and Mediterranean blood is more temperamental and would not stand for any nonesense.
So SOS please do us all a favour and stop these bastards from entering ANFIELD.

Carrard said...

At least someone, who realises it!!!

By criticising everybody and everything Mr. Kanvar is never going to help LFC!!!

Kopite25 said...

Jamie you muppet, if as in your response to m15hun you suggest that H&G try to physically push past the protesters that would actually in the eyes of the law be common assault on the part of H&G as by the very nature of the term you used 'PHYSICALLY' handling somebody is common assault.

Again another sensationalist headline from you you attention seeking muppet

Bored of Kanwar said...

I'm the first to admit that I'm not this sites biggest fan, and think the headline is over the top, I don't agree with the methods employed by SOS. When I first heard of the fans group I must admit it drew my attention - until I heard 2 of my mates who go to the game saying how great the meeting was "We got pissed up and were chanting down the street". I'm no fan of Hicks and Gillett, but there are ways and means and this is not it.

I would love to see new investors at the club who can speed up the process of developing a new stadium and financing a world class team. Purlsow has done a lot of positive stuff since he has been at the club, SOS are yet to do anything positive.

I've disagreed with a lot Jamie has said before but I've not threatened and have argued my point. On this occasion I'm in agreeance with you that SOS are a joke and an embarassment, however Jamie your headline needs some work!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Listen to yourself - listen to the misguided vitriol and hatred you're spitting out.  Look at the language you use to describe the owners. You and others like you who allow yourselves to spoonfed your opinions by the likesof SOS are the real problem.  You probably don't even know why you feel such anger towards the Owners. You just read what SOS say and allow yourself to be manipulated.

If you have such strong views you must be able to back them up, right?  So please explain why H+G are a 'cancer; how they don't have respect for LFC; how they're milking the club.

You are clearly xenophobic (as evidenced by you calling them 'American bastards'), and 'fans' like you are part of the reason I am on SOS's case.

*awaits the usual cliches about how a spade was not in the ground within 60 days and blah blah blah*

Carrard said...

Ah, it COULD turn ugly?!?
Did you know, you could die tommorrow... Have you therefore already bought a casket? ;)
(That is no threat, it is just possible, that for example a plane falls on your head)

ben said...

bunch of knobs...an embarrassment to the club!! it was the yanks her bought torres so go and take a very good look at yourselves and stop delaying the progression at the club!!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

The headline is sensationalised deliberately.  As I detailed in the article, if SOS do physically restrain H+G, that would constitute assault under the law.  A stretch, yes, but within the realms of possibility.

And if you read the comment above from Ron the Red, you can perhaps understand why i am keen to fight fire with fire and bring as much negative publicity on SOS as possible.

Mr S0L0 D0L0 said...

I think it's time that these guys gave George and Tom a break, the actions of SoS are counter productive. They just bring unwanted attention to the issue, fact is we are the fan's but they are the owners, they have plans in place for this club that go far beyond the short-term, they are right to run Liverpool Football Club like a business as that makes us self sustained in the long term and not reliant on a billionaire sugar daddy like Chelsea and Manchester City. As much as we dislike Manchester United, there's is an example to follow. For those who criticise Rafa, look at the benefits of long-term plans, Mr Ferguson et Monsieur Wenger are two great examples of the success playing the long game can bring.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

No it would not be common assault by H+G - they have a right to enter the stadium; SOS do not have a right to prevent them from entering.

If H+G simply try and enter the stadium - which is their right - and are manhandled by SOS Yobs, that will be assault.

Guest said...

Shame. Whilst every Liverpudlian is celebrating Shankly Week you report (as usual) on a negative subject matter. Why not spend more energy with a positive input into the wider Liverpool community with a post on celebrating our greatest manager ... oh wait you will probably debunk the Myth as Shanks being our greatest manager too.

Matt said...

Are you trying to suggest you're providing some kind of community service Jamie to those who are 'incapable of seeing things fairly'? 

You make it sound like an illness. 

Guest said...

If the muppets try to push through it will be in fact them guilty of assaulting the fans ;)

It does amaze me how you can judge an organisation that is trying to get the best for LFC when all this site is about is criticising and sniping everything about the club.   I think its fair to say its pretty obvious which is better for the club we all (well possibly not) Support

Cally said...

Your articles aren't fair, you're just a sad lonely troll who hides behind the safety net of the internet. I doubt you've ever lived a day in your life, never mind fought for something you believe in. Horrid little scrote

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Exactly. No one denies that mistakes have been made by the Owners, but things are moving forward positively all the time.  The relationship between Rafa and the Owners also seems to be good these days.  Despite the horrible run we've been on, the Owners have sown utmost faith in the manager, which is great for the stability of the club.

SOS are fighting for nothing.

Ben said...

SOS are a disgrace for their approach. They should try and reach a normal dialog with the club. I think there are somethings they just don't understand or accept. I also don't support the ambitions of the owners for their bit of financial neglect but where would this club be if it wasn't sold at all? Torres and others wouldn't be here that is for sure.  

sir bob said...

Jaimie do you work for the s*n?

No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action

 is there something about this you don't understand?

Guest said...

Absolute rubbish, You would struggle to find one positive article on this site that shows any kind of actual support for the club

Hmmm... said...

WOAH Jamie....! What do you mean by "And we all know how trustwoorthy and staid angry football fans can be....". You are starting to sound like a Sun journalist....

Look - your headline is misleading. Look at their statement.

"<span><span>No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action."</span></span>

I think that this pretty clear that they are not advocating any form of violence. In fact, there are countless examples of non-violent protests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_resistance), so your inference is not necessarily valid. 

Lastly, if you issue that something *could* happen, in terms of violence, then why doesnt your headline reflect that sentiment. How about "Spirit of Shankly action - train wreck in the making?". Right now, it is libelous.

You always ask your commenters to back up their views with OBJECTIVE evidence, but it seems that this article is lacking in this...    <span><span></span></span>

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Yes, and we can trust SOS to ensure nothing goes wrong, right?  Just like the Munich chant fiasco? 

Wake up.  it's a ridiculous idea.  Just because they say there will be no violence doesn't mean it might not end up that way.

scouse76 said...

Everytime SOS have a march to protest against the owners or similar it makes for a bigger atmosphere in the ground and EVERY SINGLE TIME we win.  This aside:

Have SOS assaulted anyone ever?  No

Worse things get shouted on the terraces than Yanks out.  Lets not be hyper sensative about what PC terminology we should use to refer to our war loving cousins from accross the pond.  I think Infidel is a worse name to call americns but that seems to be ok eh.. lad.

Cally said...

He doesn't work for the Sun, but it's his dream hence the desperation for notoriety. He'll end up alone and all bitter and twisted.

Carrard said...

The only one, who can't see things fairly is you!
If you can not see, how G+H are damaging this club, you are definitely blind!
(For example: No stadium, living from the club - why does the club have to pay their travelling expenses of about 2m £ and therefore Rafa has to buy a defender for 1.5m £?, etc.) 

Jaimie Kanwar said...

So we should just ignore this because we won a game a couple of days ago?!  get a grip.  It's a current issue, thus it should be discussed now, not the next time we lose.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

It is an illness, and for you, it's clearly terminal.

Matt said...

£30m a year in interest payments the club pays for the honour of lining the pockets of G&H.

Truly great custodians!

scouse76 said...

PS.  Headline is a lie and a joke.  Why can't anyone in the media say something like it is.  Why don't you take your wooden spoon and go and stir shit for the sun?

Jaimie Kanwar said...

yes, it's a great struggle to click the POSITIVE ARTICLES link  in the lable cloud and see the DOZENS of positive articles.

sir bob said...

but how can you say there will be ? do you have a crystal ball or are you looking for a libel suit?

Kanwar Final Solution said...

Guys, if this is posted (which I sincerely doubt), may I offer a suggestion? Rather than getting angry and posting your 10 pence worth on this chap's site (who by the way, is an absolute NOBODY with no key insight into our fine club), why dont you just ignore him? It's the only way these (I'm in media, well I run my own forum anyway) "people" will go away. Just a thought!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Change the record already.  Your list of complaints are cliches, all of which have valid reasons to explain them.  And expenses?! THEY OWN THE CLUB. THEY ARE ENTITLED TO CHARGE EXPENSES.

This is STANDARD BUSINESS PRACTICE. It is not a legitimate complaint in the slightest.

And you serioulsy try and make a link between expenses and transfer budgets?!

You really are serioulsy deluded, which is the case for most of SOS's rabid supporters.

Guest said...

Jaimie K
Please explain why the key sentence is <span>"Next time we have notice of their next visit they will not be allowed to enter the ground". and not </span>
No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action. I am no fan of SOS and its true that they dont represent all LFC Fans. However I am a supporter and most of the people I speak to want Hicks and Gillett to sell up and move on. The problem is that the pair of thick skinned muppets wont and they wont because they see a big fat profit to be had at some point in the future. I realise you are H and Gs biggest fan but as a supposed Liverpool Supporter are you happy to see them continue to a point where they make 100m each from the club, money that should be used to better the club. Also and I have read your other aticles, They are Liars they have lied to the fanbase. Now if they wont leave because of a ground swell of opinion there are bound to be some who will try to force the issue rightly (which its not) or wrongly.  But just so that I understand what do you advocate

Read more: <span>http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/revealed-spirit-of-shankly-thugs.html#ixzz0YROtlxbm</span>



Read more: <span>http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/revealed-spirit-of-shankly-thugs.html#ixzz0YROeIHEK</span>

Kopite25 said...

Errrrrrr excuse me Jamie but as a lawyer i can deffinately assure you that H&G pushing past protesters (to enter their own property or not) is common assault.

Ever heard of a thing called squatters rights? Same rule applies that a land loard can not under any circumstances force their way on to a property if they own it or not!!!!

So check your actual facts before replying as I clearly do myself.

It really is like having a battle of wits with an unarmed man!!!

tjmreds said...

As much as I disagree with their approach and the completely anti-G+H rhetoric which is largely unsubstantiated, I'm happy for SOS to protest. This is their right in this country, provided it is legal and doesn't cause public disorder.

However, Jamie, I'd leave the Police and CPS to decide whether something is 'physical assualt', you're shooting the gun with that headline and have opened your-self up for criticism. Though you're right to highlight SOS's intentions, you may be best advised to 'tone it down' abit! ;)

YNWA

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Right - so we should take everything SOS say at face value?!

Do you not see the obvious point that creating that situation (i.e. angry fans physically restraining people they dislike) could create a nasty situation?

No, that could never happen, could it?

Jaimie Kanwar said...

More brainwashed inaccuracy.

Please explain how the club is 'lining the pockets of H+G'.

And interest payments are less than 20m a year now, but don't let your ignorance get in the way of the truth :)

Bored of Kanwar said...

Ron the Red is clearly an idiot and hopefully incapable of obtaining a passport to visit Anfield!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Give over - it is not unreasonable to suggest that if you create an adversarial situation there is potential for things to go wrong.

Ogh, I forgot - every direct action protest in history has taken place without any violence whatsoever.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

No it is not common assault.

If the Police turned up, they would not be arrested.  SOS would be told to get out of the way, and if they didn't, they would be arrested for breach of peace.

You are not a lawyer at all.

r0w4n10 said...

The key sentence here is this:

<span>"Next time we have notice of their next visit they will not be allowed to enter the ground".</span>


No! the key sentence is:

No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Nah, I won't tone it down.  My article is over the top for a reason.  SOS have been completely over the top with regards to the Owners, so they'll get the same thing in return.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

So if someone is 'not allowed to enter the ground' and that person still tried to enter, what happens then?

What happens if H+ G try to push past SOS and things get rough; a scuffle breaks out; punches are thrown by one or both parties.

How does this have any beneficial efect on the club?

The fact is - whether you or anyone like it or not - H+G have every right to enter the stadium.  SOS have NO RIGHT to stop them.

Graham said...

Yet again in a week where we should be celebrating a derby victory and looking forward to getting the season back on track this website is stirring trouble, telling lies and slagging off the manager. Great support Jamie well done. Your headline claims they are planning something which they are clearly not planning?

murphym said...

Well said Carrard!!! After sundays game it could have been time for Jaimie to print a positive article about the spirit the players shown on Sunday when they didn't play well but grinded a result out. BUT no he has to go over the top a again, and blast some fans who trying to get rid of the diasease in the club which is Hicks and Gillette

murphym said...

you tell us why they have been good for our club then???

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Keep trying to deflect attention away from the issue, Graham.  YOU and SOS are stirring trouble, not me.  It is only a minority of people who post bile in the comment section of this site. The majority read, make up their own minds and move on.  And all fans should know about what kind of group SOS really is.

Aiyic said...

Even if SOS were armed with daffodils, and erected a Marcel Marceau style barrier, it would achieve nothing. I think they're watching too many movies.

I'm blue in the face saying only a total withdrawl from supporting the club would oust H&G. Total; no watching games at all (even on tv), no buying shirts, carlsberg, adidas, or anything related to the club.

Won't work? Look what happened Gerald Ratner.

Read my comments on TIA's Nov10 Q&A article with SOS, part 1 & 2, just to see unreasonable they are.


sorry for not linking - touch-screen shop computer *DONT_KNOW*

Guest said...

Um Jamie, where did I mention we should not discuss this because we won a game on the weekend? You get a grip mate. Sadly it's the usual negative bullshit from you. And your retort is basically arguing something I never mentioned. Justify that please. Whilst I do believe you have made some fair points in you article, what I was stating was that you seem to spend an incredible amount of energy in posting very negative articles.

I mentioned that the rest of us were celebrating our greatest manager and influence on our club. Why not follow suit?

Why not make a positive impact on our fans - not saying gloss over the bullshit that most intelligent fans are fully aware of that is happening at our club.

But like you I also run a very popular (and very old) Liverpool site.

This week would've been nice to see you post an indepth look at the great man who shaped our club rather than this petty SOS bullshit.

Don't you think?

Guest said...

Jaimie, you seem to think that there are more "normal" fans who don't support SOS than do, so answer me this. If you have ever set foot inside anfield, why are there more banners, flyers and chants about getting our delightful owners out of the club, than there are supporting them? I'm not going to get into an arguement about the promises they've broken because that's all there in black and white and can't be defended, but your view that SOS is only a select few falls pathetically on it's face.

I look forward to seeing you at the next match waving a banner saying something along the lines of "we love Tom and George because they're making this club great". And you have the cheek to say people responding to you are pathetic, you need to wake up fella and go and sit on a united forum rather. Oh and by the way, if SOS were so bad and didn't represent anything good, why the hell would the great mans granddaughter be a supporter of the union?

r0w4n10 said...

exactly what are you insinuating about LFC fans, that they cannot hold a peacefull demonstration? If Hicks and Gillett try and push their way through i will be very very suprised.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Hey Aiyic - here is the link to that Nov 10th Q$A on TIA:

http://www.thisisanfield.com/2009/11/10/questions-answers-session-with-sprit-of-shankly-on-hicks-gillett/

I remember reading your comments at the time, and you're spot on - SOS is completely unreasonable.

Guest said...

How much do they pay you to type this rubbish?
Their actual statement says "Non-violent." Your headline is slander.

Guest said...

ALSO, id like to add...

you have started your headline with REVEALED...
haha what the hell is this supposed to mean?

as if you have uncovered a big secret that the SOS are plotting a brawl with the yanks

come on mate, back your club
be a fan

stop trying to get noticed for your "REVEALED" articles and put some positive thoughts to your keyboard. show some heart for LFC if you are really a fan....

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Fans inside Anfield are not representative of the entire global fanbase.  Or do they not matter?  I ran a poll on this site recently re SOS, and the majority of the 5000 fans who voted were against their approach.

SOS and their views are the exception, not the rule.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Call the police.

Guest said...

You're out of order here.
Your headline is misleading.
Your facts are conjecture.

I support the idea of constructive debate but you are becoming a tabloid-style diva-like shameless self-promoter. Your latest articles have become rants. Why are you so interested in fomenting civil-war within supporters' groups? I'm an LFC fan, not an SOS fan but your interpretation and inversion of their comments leaves me incredulous. Imagine what it's like for other people to read such a poorly thought out, agenda-driven piece... not just your friends or enemies.

Take a good look at yourself Jaimie and ask yourself why you do what you do.

And be honest.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Not Liverpool fans; SOME Liverpool fans.

We've had the Munich chanting incident; the Sandon incident; the Xenophobic approach.  SOS cannot be trusted.  They do not represent all fans, and promising to make it 'physically impossible' for the owners to enter Anfield is a ridiculous idea that could turn sour.

Anyone who is not brainwashed/has not been manipulated by the SOS hate campaign can see this.

True Red said...

Jamie K you didnt reply to my post as a guest so i will try again
Please explain why the key sentence is <span>"Next time we have notice of their next visit they will not be allowed to enter the ground". and not </span> 
No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action. I am no fan of SOS and its true that they dont represent all LFC Fans. However I am a supporter and most of the people I speak to want Hicks and Gillett to sell up and move on. The problem is that the pair of thick skinned muppets wont and they wont because they see a big fat profit to be had at some point in the future. I realise you are H and Gs biggest fan but as a supposed Liverpool Supporter are you happy to see them continue to a point where they make 100m each from the club, money that should be used to better the club. Also and I have read your other aticles, They are Liars they have lied to the fanbase. Now if they wont leave because of a ground swell of opinion there are bound to be some who will try to force the issue rightly (which its not) or wrongly.  But just so that I understand what do you advocate.

Read more: <span>http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/revealed-spirit-of-shankly-thugs.html#ixzz0YRWvRXRU</span>

Joe said...

Do you not think that that by attacking SoS so aggresivly your actually giving the narrowminded fools publicity that there after.

Any publicity is good publicity!!

I really dislike the strog armed tacticts that they are trying to use but i'm sure its just because they are at the end of their teather?

At the end of the day its all about opinions yours, mine and whoever else posts on the site.

I'm not saying that we should ignore it, just dont throw any more fuel on the fire?

Joe

Tornike said...

SOS are behaving like a bunch of fans who realised people are reading their posts and now want to become a "major force" in matters related to the Club; they haven't even thought how ugly and irresponsible their primitive behaviour is.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

I have addressed that point several times over in the thread.  I'm not going to repeat myself.

Guest said...

You're out of order here.
Your headline is misleading.
Your facts are conjecture.

I support the idea of constructive debate but you are becoming a tabloid-style diva-like shameless self-promoter. Your latest articles have become rants. Why are you so interested in fomenting civil-war within supporters' groups? I'm an LFC fan, not an SOS fan but your interpretation and inversion of their comments leaves me incredulous. Imagine what it's like for other people to read such a poorly thought out, agenda-driven piece... not just your friends or enemies.

Take a good look at yourself Jaimie and ask yourself why you do what you do.

And be honest.

Mr S0L0 D0L0 said...

SoS are not tennants of the property. By your ruling I could get a group together and prevent you from entering your own property legally

mark said...

IF IF IF. while you've got your crystal ball out, let me know the lottery numbers.
when did 'critical realism' turn into 'sensationalised deliberately'?

again, a NON STORY.

True Red said...

Jamie K

please spell it out fo rme and others like me. Answer the following questions
1) Are you in Favour of H and G maintaining there ownership of the club?
2) Are you a Rafa Out supporter?
3) If the answer to question 1 is no how do you think the broader fan base should go about trying to effect change
4) If the answer to question 2 is yes who do you advocate bringing in as his replacement

SOS do not represent the broader fan base and certainly do not accord with the way i would do things however they do have a right to protest as thet see fit

Willo77 said...

Just waht we need...our 'knowledgeable', 'honest', 'football loving' 'fans', creating human shields around our stadium. Screaming abuse and Jostling these rich pensioners as they try to enter Anfield will look just great on Sky Sports and the News Networks around the world.  If this was any club but my own I would be laughing at these pathetic 'fans', maybe sky plus-ing the footage to laugh and laugh again.....but its not....its Liverpool......and its sad that some of our own are even considering it. Shame on them!!

Guest said...

But we are the ones who go and support our team no matter what. I have never once seen a banner saying "we love our owners" funny that isn't it, considering that each week it isn't the exact same 40 odd thousand people in the ground, I mean you would have thought that atleast one person of the "majority of Liverpool fans" as you put it, that were against SOS would manage to do something in support of the owners.

Nice one for avoiding the questions though! Oh and by the way have you ever thought that your poll would have only been completed by the people who come on your "fansite" all the time? Why don't you post it one a well known forum or ask the official site to post something, I'm pretty sure you would get a shock at how many people are actually against what you're saying, not what SOS are saying.

True Red said...

you have only partly addressed my questions read it all and answer it all what is the point of the site if you only half rear and half respond

Guest said...

I'm a member of Spirit of Shankly and a reader of yours (might be a rarity but I stand by it). Certainly wouldn't describe myself as a "rabid" SOS member! I don't support all of their aims but I would like to see the owners leave and I would like to see fan representation at board level.

If they were a violent group, I'd be out now. But your headline and the quote you have cited are contradictory to an extraordinary degree. "Planning to assault"? I actually appreciate your differing view on things because I'm a critical fan myself but I this is so absurdly over the top, you'd be fortunate if you're not done for libel.

Again, I think you write some interesting stuff but you really should retract this piece to regain some credibility.

Thanks,

Rob.

Mr S0L0 D0L0 said...

Is this not what SoS do for Tom and George. They attack the American's and their family aggressively (I'm not suggesting physical)

I myself right now am criticising SoS when really my criticism is of the type of people that may be part of SoS and indeed the same people may not associate with SoS. These are the extremists, the ones that make threatening phone calls and send threatening letters to Tom, Geaorge and their families, they give Liverpool Football Club and the fans as a whole a bad reputation.

I agree with Jaimie's intentional sensationalism in this article as it mirrors the way certain fans and the media exaggerate the plight of our club under the American owners. I am happy to accept peoples views and opinions but I will respect their views and opinions more if they have basis and a reasonable argument behind them.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

True Red - I have answered all those questions many times on this site via various articles:

1. I am in favour of H+G continuing with the excellent commercial improvements at the club.  And I am in favour of new investment being injected into the club.  CHristian Purslow has stated that this will take '3-6 months'.  I am willing to wait that long to see how things pan out.  And in the meantime, I have no problem with H+G owning the club.

Fans go on and on about how Benitez should be given time; how it took Ferguson 7 years to win the title etc.  Where is the same approac to H+G?  Like Rafa, H+G have made mistakes; and like Rafa, they have done some great things for the club (Fundung Torres; bringing in Purslow; getting rid of Parry etc).

2. I do not hide the fact that I want Rafa to leave at the end of the season.  I ma not a fan of his management style or approach, and I believe he has take this team as far as he can.  In 2004, I argued that he was not the long-term solution for Liverpool, and 5 years later I still feel the same.  I am NOT in favour of him being sacked mid-season.  No matter how bad things get, he whould stay till the end of the season and then he should gracefully resign.

3. Even though I am in favour of H+G being at the club, I have no problem with fans protesting against them and trying to effect chance *as long as it is done in the right way*

SOS have not done it in the right way; they have done the opposite.

I have outlined how I believe a professional group shold act in this post: (scroll to bottom of the article)

http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/10/poll-yank-liars-out-is-soss-approach.html

4. In 2004, I advocated Martin O' Neill as Houllier's replacement.  I still feel the same today, and I've explained my reasonsing here:

http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/11/why-martino-neill-is-right-man-to.html

SOS have a right to protest, but when they purport to represent all Liverpool fans they do NOT have the right to protest 'as they see fit'.

They have a duty to represent the fans in a civilised manner.

They have not done that.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Hi Joe,

In SOS's case, I don't think the 'any publicity is good publicity' applies.  I want people to think about what SOS are doing, and I want to take  the issue of their stupidity and counter-productive behaviour to a wider audience of fans who will, hopefully, condemn SOS for their stance.

Willo77 said...

Just what we need, our 'knowledgeable' 'honest' 'football loving' 'fans' creating homan shields around Anfield. Swearing, shouting abuse and jostling these pensioners as they try to enter.
How great that will look to everyone on Sky Sports and the News Networks around the world. What pride will we feel for our club then hey??? 
If this was any club but my own I would be laughing at such small time tactics. But its not....its Liverpool....shame on them!!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Spot on Mr Solo - the intentional sensationalism is very similar to the ridiculously exaggerated approach taken by some fans and the media. According to the exaggeration, Liverpool will be the next Leeds; the owners are lining their pockets and continuall lie about their intentions and blah blah blah.  SOS can have a taste of their own medicine.

True Red said...

Just Finally to be absolutely clear, you want H and G to continue there ownership of the club until they reach a point where they can sell and divert inexcess of 200m into there own pockets
I fail to understand how you can applaud the commercial acumen of these profiteers.
I have no doubt that Purslow could turn into a good signing for the club.

Kopite25 said...

Jamie i don't need to justify myself to you and you can make up your own mind about what i do for a living but what possible reason would i have to make that up?

Unlike you who loves the attention I have no need to try and big myself up to justify my meaningless existance of a life.

I can however if H&G were forcing there way past people physically then it would constitute common assault or more specifically a section 39 assault under the criminal justice act 1988.

Look it up!!!!

Rob said...

Apologies for the "guest" nickname, this should be connected to my Twitter now. No hiding here!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Thanks for your comments, Rob.

SOS's 'Yank Liar's Out' campaign was over the top.  Everything they've done so far has been over the top.  The only understated thing they've done so far was their hollow 3 line apology for the Munich chanting fiasco.

I'm not going to retract this article - I don't care whether people think I have no credibility; I'm not in this for the validation.  People will make up their own minds, and that's good enough for me.

Mr S0L0 D0L0 said...

I have no problems against the owners but when I go and watch the match I prefer to support my team, I shouldn't need to wave banners defending our owners from our own fans. People need to realise this, to be successful in the long-term we need to be run like a business and not rely on a billionaire to use us like a toy to play his game. We need to support our team. Of course Gillet and Hicks want profit, why else would they had an interest in Liverpool... The fact is that they saw potential for profit in Liverpool Football club whilst maintaining success, that is not a bad thing.

Gäst said...

You're exaggerating: SOS are not calling for violence. Why has Liverpool kop turned so negative of late, any way?

Jaimie Kanwar said...

That's not really an accurate paraphrasing of what I stated, is it?

I am happy for H+G to remain owners of the club as long as things are improving both on and off the field.

Things ARE improving off the field; things WILL improve on the field (and did at the tail end of last season.

You praise Purslow but he was appointed by H+G!  But you and others will never give them credit for that.

As I said before, Rafa's fans are always going on about seeing the bigger picture and giving him time.  Why can't you see the bigger picture with regards to the current ownershi[p of the club.

When we get a new stadium and things continue to improve, are you still going to moan about a spade not being in the ground within 60 days?!

Guest said...

I am in agreement with the sentiments of 'Bored of Kanwar'. For the record, I am neither a fan of Jaimie or the SOS. I also find Jamie's headline a bit over the top, but then I've come to expect this kind of sensationalism from him. I think he revels too much in the role of Devil's Advocate, he often seems to take the opposite view to the majority of Red's fans just to illicit a response and feed his ego. He is however, right to warn against the SOS. I think they are right to protest against Gillette & Hicks, and I have supported them on the previous 2 marches. I am however concerned that what is planned as a peaceful demonstration, may turn into a more violent situation. I do not convinced that the leaders of the SOS can guarantee that their members will behave themselves. When SOS was first formed, I welcomed the idea of an organisation that aimed to re-establish the "Spirit of Shankly', but from first hand experience I know that their ideals are not being upheld by some of their members. The infamous Munich incident at the end of season party was not a one off event. They frequently disgrace all Liverpool fans by singing the Munich song and also 39 Italians dying on a wall to the tune of 10 green bottles. It concerns me that an organisation which seems to have established a certain air of respectability and become the unsolicited voice of Liverpool fans, allows this kind of behaviour amongst their members. I want to support the SOS because I feel at heart that they embrace the true principles of all Liverpool fans, but they need to clean up their act and get rid of some of the thugs that continue to disgrace Liverpool and the great mans name. I'm all in favour of the planned demonstration, but my message to SOS would be, don't allow a few mindless idiots amongst your membership to potentially damage the club and the fans name.    

merseypride said...

Do a Poll on your website?

Are you happy with Gillett and Hicks as custodians for LFC?
Yes or No

Then Publish the Results!  You will be surprised!!!

Mr S0L0 D0L0 said...

Agreed, remember (Don't quote me) Man Utd fans chasing their new (at the time) American owners and throwing rocks and stuff at them.  When I saw that I thought "hahahaha, what a bunch of losers." We fans need to stop poking our noses in where it is not needed and just support the 11+7 that get selected for match day.  You wonder if some of these people support Liverpool Football Club or just can't resist the opportunity to hurl abuse towards American's.

Guest said...

"but when they purport to represent all Liverpool fans they do NOT have the right to protest 'as they see fit'.

SOS represents its members only NOT "all Liverpool fans". If you don't like the agenda then don't join or, better still, setup and offer people an alternative. With the amount of people visiting the site I'm sure this could be done. What better way to fight against these THUGS than to setup an organisation that does things in a more appropriate manner?

dave said...

If it is 'our' ground why do we have to pay to get in? Answer : It is not 'Our ground'.

Guest said...

SOS are typical LFC Fans! The worst fans in europe (UEFA reports)

Jaimie Kanwar said...

My apologies Kopite for suggesting you were not a lawyer.

With respect, though, you are missing one crucial detail when it comes to common assault (or indeed any criminal act): Mens Rea.

Section 39 of the criminal justice act states:

An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force.

There would be no recklessness on the part of H+G, just an attempt to exercise their lawful right of entrance into the ground.  Furthermore, as I'm sure you're aware, given the context, it would be very difficult - if not impossible - to prove that SOS members 'apprehended the immediate infliction of unlawful force'.

SOS would be the antagonists, and the force with which H+G tried to enter the ground would, in all probability, not be 'unlawful'.  

In any event, the case would be laughed out of court, and the CPS wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.

Willo77 said...

Tosser

Aiyic said...

Cheers Jamie! It's 'Yanks out, or nothing' for SOS - which leaves them with squared-route of nothing to bring to the table. Like a kid who wants to take the ball away so nobody can play - except this time they don't own the ball.

They're attitude is cringe-worthy - dropping clanger after clanger. Even having to change what the first 'S' stood for, from 'Sons' to 'Spirit'; having alienated female fans. *DONT_KNOW*

They're a toothless tiger, with comparable negotiation skills.

redman said...

well said rouman, jamie lives on a diffrent planet a wanna be do gooder. nobody cares about hicks and gillett, we all want them out. as for shame jamie look in the mirror.

giasando said...

I am final not the lawyer of these Yankees but Rick Parry is guilty first of all.
Yes, Rick Parry has broken almost ready contract with DIC and has resulted these swine.

m15hun said...

Physically impossible has many manifestations, Jamie.

SOS are not stupid, contrary to what you chaps at this site seem to think. They would not be foolhardy enough to assault people in front of dozens of police and the media, as not only would this be wrong, it would also lend so much to H&G's campaign rather than their own.

It's time that George and Tom faced up to the people who love the club, rather than communicating off-handedly through intermediaries and contrived press releases.

I see the proposed peaceful protest as just.

m15hun said...

'Physically impossible' has many manifestations, Jamie. One of which is simply standing in the way and barring the entrance.
 
SOS are not stupid, contrary to what you chaps at this site seem to think. They would not be foolhardy enough to assault people in front of dozens of police and the media, as not only would this be wrong, it would also lend so much to H&G's campaign rather than their own. 
 
It's time that George and Tom faced up to the people who love the club, rather than communicating off-handedly through intermediaries and contrived press releases. 
 
I see the proposed peaceful protest as just.

Guest said...

Funny how Jaimie only answers the questions he can talk crap about isn't it. Not addressing the main issues and just moving past them quickly. People like you make me sick, any supporter of Liverpool who has grown up learning about the history of this amazing football club, no matter where they live, can in no way want these pair of pathetic excuses for human beings to be in charge of the club. Nobody is saying we want an Arabic playboy to come in and buy us success, we just don't want more and more debt poured onto us. Oh and by the way, how can claiming expenses for flights over here and hotel stays etc be classed as ok? This is their "place of work" so why should they claim the money back for getting their arses into work, can I claim my bus fair or petrol back from my employer?? They are destroying what LFC is all about, and if you don't agree with that then you should go and support Chelsea and work for the s*n, as I'm sure you've only been supporting us since 2005 anyway.

You pathetic waste of oxygen, SOS have more about them than you could ever understand, and the sooner you stop spouting absolute BS and tarnishing Liverpool fans with your hurrendous views the better.

Guest said...

Once again you are insulting a reader simply because he doesn't agree with your point of view. Jamie, you have been called up on this many times before in previous articles. You constantly ask that posters to your site do not insult you or your writers. Please live by your own rules.

sir bob said...

Jaimie YOU say they are planning it maybe you should go to the police as you obviously have information that would help them!

Guest said...

And because they are less than 20m now does that change much? It's still 20m less available for transfers.

Carrard said...

Your view of this is really onesided!
You think, your opinion is always right and the reasoning for it is so clear, although only you (obviously) can see the reasons behind it. And if someone else is arguing about something, they are cliches, the reasons are not valid and this people are deluded, etc.
If that is your form of discussing things, you'll be soon be discussing on your own.
Is it so hard to accept other people's opinions and not just ignore them or slashing them.
Something about Expenses:
You probably know something about the financial meltdown of certain branches, like banks, etc. in the last couple of years...
The criticism there is, that bankers or managers can mismanage a company and therefore get millions of Bonuses, like our owners. And now you are saying thats "standard business practice". You know, it's because of egoistic people like you, that some people loose their whole money and have nothing now!!!
And if a company is in financial difficulties, then the first one who should tighten the purses is the owner!!!

Carrard said...

Just to let you know: I'm no member or supporter of SOS! I just want the best for LFC, which is getting rid of our owners! That is the only thing i have in common with SOS!!!

Matt said...

OK Jamie I'll explain. 

G&H bought the club without putting any money of their own in. 

They bought it purely as a business to sell for a profit at a later date.  The keyword is PROFIT.  In the meantime they'll use the revenue the club generates to repay the debt which THEY put on the club. 

Ok I'll take your word for it, it's ONLY £20m!!!!!!

In a nutshell they're draining LFC revenue to pay a debt off which will in turn increase their profit when they sell!  

Matt said...

Ben

We'd be in a far better position if we weren't sold to the the Americans. 

THEY HAVEN'T PUT ANY MONEY IN BEN!!!! 

All they've done is drain £20m a year of the profits to finance the debt. 

We'd have still bought Torres, and we'd have had more money to spend.  The club's revenues bought Torres not G&H's personal finance.  

Guest said...

Liverpool fans need some honesty from 'the yanks' regarding the long term plan, If there is one?. If Christian Purslow fails to deliver he is a failure and i hope he does deliver, we hear nothing and this is the problem, treated like mushrooms.

CB said...

So what you are basically saying is that 20m in debt every year it's ok. 20m a year to pay for THEM buying the club. Do you really understand that? Liverpool pay 20m in INTEREST every year for the solely reason of being owned by these two persons (not american persons, mind you. No xenophoby here, right?) because that's the only reason, or do you have another reason for this debt? This is a debt they created when they bought the club. Is it clear for you?

Oh, and if I call Kuyt a "Dutch hero" is this xenofobic too? Aquilani, the Italian Maestro! "Shut up you racist freak!"... Because I have to tell you this too: our owners are Americans. They really are. It's all in the context, and you, like always, are misunderstanding what's being said to promote your views.

Skuff said...

Jamie,
Are you an actual Liverpool fan? I've been reading your articles for the last couple of weeks and find your writings extremely anti benitez, anti Liverpool fans and in my own humble opinion, geered up to bashing the club and its supporters at every point.

Tell me Jamie, how would you like the club to act? Would anything make you happy or are you just happy in constantly making fans of the same team bicker and create divide in the club and terraces?

Listen, whatever he has done wrong, and yes he has his failures, he has still progressed the club more than any other manager during the premier leauge era. He has closed the gap, taken us to big finals and also given me the best day of my life in Istanbul. Get a grip of yourself, write some educated, balanced journalism about the club and support the team in a proper way rather than thrashing our club in a very public fashion on the internet!!  I know this comment doesn't relate to your most recent article but I can't stomach you anymore!!

But back to your most recent bile. SOS are only angry because of the way these people have come to the club and lied to the fans about their so called promises and pledges when they bought the club! Therefore, they are only trying to do what they see fit. Possible assault?! Get a grip mate and start writing with some consideration!! BTW, I'm not a supporter of SOS or the yanks before you try and throw that back at me.

Regards.

Matt said...

Jamie the owners might be making forward strides with shirt sponsorship, appointment of purslow, etc BUT the fact is the club is having to service this MASSIVE debt. 
Even if the owners manage to build a new stadium it will be paid for by the future revenues of the club, or the incoming new owners. 
G&H aren't GIVING us anything they're TAKING all the time. 

Moores sold the club to them because he mistakenly believed they could provide greater financial muscle when in fact the opposite is true. 

monkey said...

and while your at it give em a kick in the bollocks for good measure

Guest said...

Just a question Jaimie. Ever been on one of SOS's protests against the two yanks? So you would of seen with your own eyes that there has been no violent protests, although the way we've been screwed by Gillett and Hicks there should be.
What are you doing for our club, Jaimie, I'm a scouse, season-ticket holder of 20 odd years, and the only way for us to get rid of these leeches is through militant action.
when our club is saved and SOS are taking the plaudits what crap will you be writing then!
I know who'd I'd rather stand with and walk with, that would be SOS

You'll Never Walk Alone - although in your case, you will!

Nick said...

As I've said a few times I do generally agree with things you say re the team, Rafa etc. however I think this one may go a bit far. I do honestly think the title is misleading, as planned peaceful protest doesn't have to lead to violence, although often does.

I think reading between the lines it's fairly obvious that it would descend into chaos and violence, however they're not stating it so you can't claim that is their intention, it's just your belief (and mine).

Not the best article as it is very biased and presumptious....I think you need to remain largely fair in your arguments because you seem to be going their way in only stating your opinion and prejudices...not all the time but sometimes. Yes, it probably is their intention, but they're not actively planning to assault them are they???? At least not in public anyway ;)

Rob said...

Jamie,

With all due respect we are all Liverpool fans here whether or not you agree with the aims of SOS or not (and you certainly have the right to criticise them if you want) there are fans out there that do support them and don't want H&G at the club. Personally at the moment i'm prepared to give H&G time particularly given that it is likely any new investment will be coming into the club in the near term given the down turn in Dubai.

What surprises me is your article regarding SOS which as you have admitted is over the top. Clearly what SOS want to do is protest at H&G involvement at the club as they have a right to do as fans and the fact we live in a democratic soceiety they are not espousing the ues of violence but are merely suggesting that fans gather in front of the club to protest.

You may not like the manner in which H&G have protested i.e. Yanks out but neither you or SOS can claim to speak for all Liverpool fans. Now you're a clever guy and your articles do make me think and question what is going on at the club. BUT so are SOS but in a different way! I just think to call them thugs for seeking to peacefully protest H&G is wrong.

Rob said...

Jamie,
 
With all due respect we are all Liverpool fans here whether or not you agree with the aims of SOS or not (and you certainly have the right to criticise them if you want) there are fans out there that do support them and don't want H&G at the club.

Personally at the moment i'm prepared to give H&G time particularly given that it is unlikely that any new investment will be coming into the club in the near term given the down turn in Dubai.  
 
What surprises me is your article regarding SOS which as you have admitted is over the top. Clearly what SOS want to do is protest at H&G's involvement at the club as they have a right to do as fans and the fact we live in a democratic soceiety they are not espousing the use of violence but are merely suggesting that fans gather in front of the club to protest.  
 
You may not like the manner in which SOS have protested i.e. Yanks out but neither you or SOS can claim to speak for all Liverpool fans...

Now Jamie, you're a clever guy and your articles do make me think and question what is going on at the club which is a good thing. BUT one can view the campaign by SOS in the same light! I just think to call them thugs for seeking to peacefully protest H&G is wrong.

JK Growling said...

Another incredible revelation from Mr J Kanwar - where would us poor misguided naive fans be without your incredible insight...

The sensational headline is really rather off puting its like reading a tacky tabloid headline.

Why am I leaving this post again?  I keep asking myself this question... I won't do it again... never again.....oh you are a clever man Jamie. :-P

Guest said...

Jamie ...you are brilliant. Can you tell me what happened to Corinthian before Hicks bought the club and after hicks left the club between 2001 and 2005. I know you are not going to research this or write about this. If you want more food for thought this week. Also if you can please point  out to our readers what are the similes between corinthain's  situation and Liverpool's. Thank you.

concerned said...

i will join them

Guest said...

It sounds like you have another agenda at hand by writing this : SOS Member 3015 living in Nashville, USA!

True Red said...

Some great posts on this topic and it seems like the site owner is in the minority. SOS may not be the fans ideal protest group but at least they are protesting. I asked for some answers to 4 questions which Jamie K did give me however i find his ramblings as much as SOS are not in accord with the majority of Liverpool FC supporters. Jamiek  is the love child of the monsters from America. He continually denies that they have ever lied to us he is a supporter of thereownership which therefore must mean he is happy for them to run off with 200m profit when the club is sold. The appointment of Purslow has yet to proved a good one but the signs are there that it is going to be a good one. How much credit H and G can take is open to debate, they hired a firm of headhunters to find there man so in theory its the headhunters whofound him. However reading his interview he has been a Liverpool Supporter a lot longer than H and G have been owners. I hope that the muppets sell and soon what a christmas pressie that would be

Jaimie Kanwar said...

A man's entire career is not defined by one event.  Yes, Corinthians was a mess, but that was years ago.  I'm sure TH has learned from that experience.  Stop looking at the past and look at what is happening now.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

So what have they taken 'all the time' Matt?  Please outline everything the Owners have 'taken' from the club.

Debating with you on this issue is pointless because you clearly have no idea about how the debt is structured against the club, where the money comes from/goes, and how Kop Holdings + Liverpool FC co-exist together.

AKKO said...

UTTER SHITE. YOU ARE THE EMBARRASSMENT TO LIVERPOOL FC.
GO AND LIVE THIS CHAMPIONSHIP MANAGER WORLD YOU LIVE IN SOMEWHERE ELSE.

JUST WASTED 5 MINS READING THIS TRIPE AND YOUR RESPONSES TO THE MANY CRITICISMS OF THIS ARTICLE SHOW YOU TO BE A SAD LITTLE MAN EMPOWERED BY SPOUTING RUBBISH ON THE NET.

WHEN WAS THE LAST GAME YOU WENT?
IDIOT.

SeaToby said...

The sixty days in the ground statement. I'm glad they decided to hire HKS to design a better stadium which will generate more revenues and has a higher seating capacity. The first Rick Parry stadium was lame in both categories. It appears within a year a spade will be in the ground. Give H&G time. Another year won't hurt the big picture long term. SOS is only concerned about short term results....  

Jamie Wan-kar said...

What a complete load of shite, this has to be the worst website I have ever had the misfortune to read.  Clearly the site owner is desperate enough to scratch a living to thrive from negative articles which are wholly inaccurate.

Pathetic springs to mind, clearly the ramblings of an insecure adolescent.

Guest said...

kanwar shi*house smash the yanks scouse power 24h

SeaToby said...

Forgive the sixty days. I'm glad they hired HKS to redesign the stadium for more revenues and more seating capacity. The first Parry stadium was lame with both categories. It also appears a spade will be in the ground within a year, they are very close to financing the stadium. 

From my view SOS is only interested in short term results, not long term planning. All they want is a sugar daddy. 

Kopite25 said...

Jamie yes the case would be laughed out of court and would as you rightly state never get there in the 1st place as the CPS would never touch the case.

BUT

Should they try & force their way past anyone then in the eyes of the law it would constitute a section 39 assault.

Guest said...

I didnt like the Munich chanting last year but joined SOS because as a lifelong LFC fan it seemed to be the only way for me to voice my dissapproval towards our owners.

I wish that all LFC fans would band together and unite under one organization be it SOS or ShareLiverpoolFC or another but we need a collective way to manage the demands of our fanbase.

Living in Nashville, apart from the term 'yank' which I dont find derogatory when directed at our owners, I have not found any of the SOS literature xenaphobic or thuggish, far from it, one of their aims is to embrase fans from around the globe.

They are an organization set up to have officers democratically elected to spread the appeal of LFC throughout the world. Perhaps you should join Jamie and get your friends to propose you as an elected official?

Kopite25 said...

So Mr Solo are you trying to say a squater is a tenant before they unlawfully break into the property???

Squaters are charged with breaking & entering but as always released. the tenancy part only becomes effective when trying to remove somebody from your property.

Do you really think a scumbag who has no value of other peoples property is overly concerned with B&E on there criminal record!!!

you sir are a tool of the highest order

Guest said...

I would be shocked by this level of shoddy journalism in the s*n...thats how utterly pathetic this article, and especially the headline, is.

Guest said...

Anyone who doesn't believe this will descend into violence is deluded. Considering our fans have no qualms for attacking their own (see the frequent attacks on "wools" each week, or the robbing of tickets in Athens etc etc)

Guest said...

i'm not a supporter of sos or any other fan group, but what I have found about this site is unless you agree with jamie or his writes, you are classed as being led by the media, a brainless benitez supporter, anti american ect. 

jamie resorts to trying to be little you for your views, he does not encourage debate. but I do like coming here, because some of the stuff he comes out with gives me a good laugh. 

Guest said...

good article, ruined by sill headline..

Guest said...

Tell me where they have been different....give me 5 ways where it shows he has learned from his experience. Same game plan. ...I want you not to dismiss this by writing one liners but to encourage debate on this. 

Guest said...

Simple. 
Calculate the revenue that has gone into interest payments. 
How xabi alonso + robbie keane> glen johnson + AA
How Sunderland has michael turner + Cattermole, while we with CC revenue and G + H have kyrgiakos + voronin
How extending contracts goes from this years budget.
How we are only linked with washouts, discipline cases and non starters in lowly clubs and rivals.

Guest said...

Kanwar - Are you a idiot? "physically impossible"... is it not physically impossible for the owners to enter if a group of fans link arms, do not touch the owners and protest peacefully? As you stated the terms of "assult" above you know the owners can't force themselfs past the protest. Therefore the fans are making it "physically impossible" for the owners to pass - As always Jamie you read into situations with your own views and twist an turn them to make a story.

The headline is what it is, because it gets people to click your bullshit link, and your bullshit site... If you wasnt so biased about everything and kept an open mind you wouldn't have to use such trickery to lure people to your site, to give your mindless drivel more hits.

take care now buhbye then

Guest said...

I'm starting to think Jamie is actually Hicks or Gillett in disguise.  Either that or you decided that you were going to be an extension of their sh*t through this shi.. sorry site.

Guest said...

What does not doing a Glazer mean jamie.
What does snoopy dog if rafa wants him mean?
Why are you taking the PR hits bro? Surely you have better use of your time?

Guest said...

You're getting shrill there Jaimie - sensationalist hyperbole, no backup to your argument, polemic, no interest in hearing any opposing view, certainly no interest in engaging it with thoughtful debate, ad hominem attacks, everything thought differently to you is cliche, anyone who thinks it is brainwashed, etc. etc. 

Could it be that there are thoughtful fans that disagree with you? That might by a point you should consider. This is the first of your articles I've clicked on in a couple of months, at least intentionally, because they no longer show critical thought, just ill thought out polemics followed by unlistening and bullying argument. Pity really, from my point of view, I initially enjoyed your articles.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

I'm not going to pass judgement on that situation right now though as I'm currently engaged in independent research of that situation to get a clearer picture of what happened.   
 
Having said that, one mistake does not define a career, does it?  That was Hicks' first foray into owning a football team, and clearly he and his partners had no idea what they were walking into.  
 
10 years have passed since that purchase - do you not think that Hicks has learned from that situation?  Do you really think he went into that cub intending to make mistakes?  
 
On top of that, Liverpool must have known about the Conrinthians situation when they sold the club, and irrespective of Moores and Parry's role in the sale, the club would not have been sold to Hicks if there was a chance that history was going to repeat itself.  
 
People make mistakes.  Corinthians appears to be a mistake; but then you have to balance that out against all of H+G successes with various businessess - sports or otherwise - since that time.  
 
You cannot just one situation to damn them forever.

Benitez finished 5th in his first season in the league; should he de damned for evermore as a result?

murphym said...

answer the question idiot!

murphym said...

an you do know where all the money is going? are you a board member? what is that you know that nobody else does!

Guest said...

So now I am stirring trouble? I buy my season ticket every year and support my team if that is stirring trouble then I am guilty, I am not a member of SOS and do not particularly support the way they are going about things but you accuse me of stirring trouble!!. All adult fans are able to see and make up their own minds without your lies clouding the issue. Try getting behind the team for once and stop being so negative!

BGfan said...

And from my point of view, i see such a powerful influence from Hicks and Gillett in this site... Articles like those, are so "pro-ownerish"...

BGfan said...

And from my point of view, there is such a powerful influence from Hicks and Gillett here, in this site. Articles like those, are just so "pro-ownerish"...

Guest said...

Don't avoid the question here, TELL US WHY ARE THEY GOOD FOR THE CLUB ????

Guest said...

i wouldnt call it faith tbh, its just that rafa has a long term contract with the club, and those money worshippers wouldn't sack him and pay a huge sum for it.

Melchett said...

Hey Jaimie, I have it on very good authority, that you are a dirty bummer.

could you please clarify your "position" where it comes to dirty darts?

ta muchly
your hero Melchett.

Melchett said...

I take it from your silence that you are in-fact a right sausage jockey.

you also probably shoot kittens in the face, you douche bag.

True Red said...

The facts are that ever since <span>George Gillett</span> and <span>Tom Hicks</span> joined the club as co-chairmen in 2007, their priority has been to build a new stadium. It has been a promise which has been broken on many occasions, most infamously when both Hicks and Gillett promised work would begin on the ground in “60 days.” Then excuses about redesigning the stadium and the credit crunch put pay to any new stadium in <span>Stanley Park</span> in the near future, and nothing of real note has happened since
Written on another established site but you still maintain the dynamic duo dont tell lies. I dont agree at all with some of SOS actions however when you read thi i understand there frustrations

Lower Centenary man said...

Are u buddies with that feller from KOP TALK? He had his own agenda too I seem to remember. Face it Kanwar your a negative loser!

Guest said...

jaimie kanwar of republic of mancunia?
WUM.

Guest said...

when was anything run by Jamie Kanwar positive in any way? 

Graham said...

So you are now accusing me of stirring trouble? You really need to grow up.

Brad Joy-Clavis said...

It is all well and good to provide 'passive resistance' but all it takes is one idiot and the whole organisation cops the flak.  This type of demonstration is just asking for trouble.

Guest said...

They are negative? maybe so, but this has to be the most negative depressing site of pointless debate ever created. Lighten up a bit, its almost christmas.

GBH said...

I think that although Jamie may have used inappropriate language in his title he is on to something. Firstly SOS do not represent all Liverpool fans nor did they when they sang 'Munich' songs at their Xmas party last year.
They also seem quite deluded because if they do prevent the club's owners from entering their stadium what could they do in return? Sell Torres to Man City?
Finally, what about those same fans that wanted the Dubai Government to take over? They are now crippled with huge debts and would have been no better than what we have now.
Perhaps a more intelligent approach is required? Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer ;-)

GBH said...

And by the way.... Just like those 'Yanks Out' mancs - no-one would give a toss if we'd won the league last season.... But we didn't because Senor Benitez was more concerned with his own contract.

phil said...

Well they have allowed us to sign players for more than 12m and they have employed Christian Purslow who has got a sponsorship deal we should have been having for years. Every body has been hit by the recession including football clubs and i am glad to see that they are being sensible. I think some fans think that money grows on trees and i get so frustrated that they blame the owners for not spending huge amounts on players and then blame them for the debt. Unfortunately football is a business these days and needs to be run as one. They have both had successful businesses so they know what they are doing. If other clubs didn't have sugar daddies i'm sure supporters wouldn't be so against Gillet and Hicks.

yanks out said...

so they bought torres did they get your facts right they borrowed money to buy torres not out of there own pocket like they said 60 days and the spade will be in the ground for a new ground ,there in it for the money they should sell and go im a member of the sos and wont rest till they leave our club

Guest said...

Kanwar nails his colours to the mast and it's anything to discredit the club, the fans, the team and the manager.

Surely Kanwar is the last person to bandying about words like xenophobic after all the anti Rafa rants he has posted. Isn't there more than just a bit of xenophobia at the heart of that? 

Rob said...

The last line there is certainly the case. I'll continue to look over your articles with interest. Thanks for an even handed response, as I tried to be even handed myself.

Rob.

Desy said...

As much as I admire the passion of SOS and i understand some of their
anger I have to say that they are working, as they say across the pond,
'ass backwards'. I mean, the Yanks have made plenty of mistakes and have been way too conspicuous in the past. Unfortunately the previous owners, in their haste to get an extra £8M in their pockets, omitted to school these guys as to how a Premiership club, let alone Liverpool, should be run. STFU and give the money to the experts. No TV interviews, no petty arguments, no 'behind the scenes manoeuvring, no Klinsmann cos he's a mate, no bullsh!t. 

However it can be said that these guys wouldn't have earned a bob or
two without the capacity to listen and learn. Over the last few months,
they have kept relatively quiet and allowed the club to growth. Yes we
have been stung with money over the summer however if Rafa isn't
complaining then I don't see why we should be. The fact is that Liverpool has been misrun for over 20 years and there's a lot of crap to wade through before we can re-establish ourselves as Britain's top club.
With the appointment of Ian Ayre and Christian Purslow as well as the
establishment of The Rafalution (if he f**ks it up though he'll only have himself to blame), the structure of the club is more solid. Maybe
we'll soon become a Barca-like club with the ability to generate talent
and income from within the club. Either way the situation has clearly
improved over the last six months. While conversely imagine if Dubai
International were in charge. 

These owners know that there won't be much money in the club if Liverpool are unsuccessful on the pitch. They will need to prioritise
performance and that can only come from investment. The fact is that we
have no other viable options at the moment and to my surprise the Yanks are actually making positive moves for the club in terms of financial and development stability. I don't want to be like Man City or Chelsea getting into spending wars with players who have no concern for our history or status. I want a real club with real talent from real places.
From Bootle or Kirby. From Toxteth and Huyton. Pressuring these Yanks to leave will end us up in a situation even worse than now. 

Let's be reasonable and close ranks instead of turning into another
episode of the most pathetic drama in football. 

Guest said...

this is the most negative website for liverpool fc in the world u make things worse jamie

Hmmm said...

Your hypocrisy is quite insulting...
1) You demand an apology from the Echo for mis-representing statements made by Ryan Babel and yet you do exactly the same
2) You insist the commenters on your website not to insult others and will remove ad hominem posts, yet this article does just that
3) You criticise others for writing 'agenda driven nonsense' (your words - 29th October), yet this article is clearly agenda driven

You regularly criticise Rafa Benitez about inconsistencies in his behaviour  (comments on Aquilani, team selection, etc) yet are guilty of doing just that.

If you believe that there is a risk of a situation being created from a non-violent protest, then write that. A headline of "THUGS planning to physically assault" is just misleading if that is your view.
<span><span>
</span></span>

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Superb post, Desy.  Excellent points :)

Guest said...

What the hell is that supposed to mean Jaimie?

I really hope you're not talking about Hillsborough or Heysel as there are a great many number of contributing factors for each event and the former of which the Club's fans were found innocent of any wrong-doing during the recent investigation.

Jaimie you're simply in this for the "hits" that's why you've printed REVEALED and THUGS in bold, in order to generate hits from your links!


Peaceful protests such as the one SOS are planning have been going on for years, remember the campaign for womens equal rights? Or how about the American de-segregation of black/white schooling?

You're an idiot Kanwar, pure and simple, you're no better than the very fan groups you set out to discredit.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Insulting?  Get over it.  Hypocrisy?  There is none. 

1. I did not demand an apology from the Echo at all.  I suggested that they should apologise to Ryan Babel for treating him so shabbily.

2. Calling SOS 'Thugs' is not insulting; it is close to the truth.  Furthermore, my article is not a 'post'; I have not insulted anyone in this thread.

In any event, my headline was deliberately sensationalised - SOS have been using 'Yank Liars Out' in their campaigns and sensationalising their accusations against the Owners; I am merely fighting fire with fire. 

Also, the headline is not misleading.  Graham smith stated that the owners will 'not be allowed to enter the ground', and that SOS members will make it 'physically impossible'.

If H or G try and enter the ground then the only way to physically stop them is to restrain them, is it not?  There is potential for assault here, especially if it gets ugly, so the headline has a sense of accuracy. 

On top of that, SOS is in cahoots with several other LFC websites, all of whom have published articles slagging off me and this site.  if they can't hack this kind of response, they shouldn't provoke it in the first place.

Guest said...

Mark my words Jaimie, we will never have a new stadium whilst H&G are in sole charge of our Club, even so it will be us the fans that end up paying for it, they won't put their hands in their pockets as Hicks has ALREADY eluded to how he runs his businesses!

You'd have to be an utter fool to think that H&G are in this for any other reason than to turn a FAT profit with MINIMAL investment.

H&g ARE USING CLUB PROFITS TO SERVICE THE DEBTS THEY HAVE PUT ON THE CLUB AND HICK'S HAS SAID AS MUCH!

The pair paid £178m for the club, borrowed from the Royal Bank of Scotland, with interest payments on the loan amounting to over £21m a year. "Hopefully the club will have extra cash flow so they can pay us a dividend to do that," Hicks said when asked how the cost of the loan would be met. "If they don't, then it will come from our pockets. But the club will have to have profits sufficient to pay those dividends."

HICKS CLEARLY STATES THE CLUB WILL COUGH UP FOR THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE LOANS BEFORE HE PUTS HIS HAND IN HIS POCKET!

HICKS AGAIN:

 "When I was in the leverage buy-out business we bought Weetabix and we leveraged it up to make our return. You could say that anyone who was eating Weetabix was paying for our purchase of Weetabix. It was just business. It is the same for Liverpool; revenues come in from whatever source and go out to whatever source and, if there is money left over, it is profit,"

WE ARE PAYING FOR THEIR PURCHASE OF OUR CLUB, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THEY ARE RAPING US FOR ALL WE ARE WORTH AND WOULD BLEED US DRY BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HAND IN THEIR POCKETS!

Guest said...

Mark my words Jaimie, we will never have a new stadium whilst H&G are in sole charge of our Club, even so it will be us the fans that end up paying for it, they won't put their hands in their pockets as Hicks has ALREADY eluded to how he runs his businesses!

You'd have to be an utter fool to think that H&G are in this for any other reason than to turn a FAT profit with MINIMAL investment.

H&g ARE USING CLUB PROFITS TO SERVICE THE DEBTS THEY HAVE PUT ON THE CLUB AND HICK'S HAS SAID AS MUCH!

The pair paid £178m for the club, borrowed from the Royal Bank of Scotland, with interest payments on the loan amounting to over £21m a year. "Hopefully the club will have extra cash flow so they can pay us a dividend to do that," Hicks said when asked how the cost of the loan would be met. "If they don't, then it will come from our pockets. But the club will have to have profits sufficient to pay those dividends."

HICKS CLEARLY STATES THE CLUB WILL COUGH UP FOR THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE LOANS BEFORE HE PUTS HIS HAND IN HIS POCKET!

HICKS AGAIN:

 "When I was in the leverage buy-out business we bought Weetabix and we leveraged it up to make our return. You could say that anyone who was eating Weetabix was paying for our purchase of Weetabix. It was just business. It is the same for Liverpool; revenues come in from whatever source and go out to whatever source and, if there is money left over, it is profit,"

WE ARE PAYING FOR THEIR PURCHASE OF OUR CLUB, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THEY ARE RAPING US FOR ALL WE ARE WORTH AND WOULD BLEED US DRY BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HAND IN THEIR POCKETS!

Guest said...

Mark my words Jaimie, we will never have a new stadium whilst H&G are in sole charge of our Club, even so it will be us the fans that end up paying for it, they won't put their hands in their pockets as Hicks has ALREADY eluded to how he runs his businesses!

You'd have to be an utter fool to think that H&G are in this for any other reason than to turn a FAT profit with MINIMAL investment.

H&g ARE USING CLUB PROFITS TO SERVICE THE DEBTS THEY HAVE PUT ON THE CLUB AND HICK'S HAS SAID AS MUCH!

The pair paid £178m for the club, borrowed from the Royal Bank of Scotland, with interest payments on the loan amounting to over £21m a year. "Hopefully the club will have extra cash flow so they can pay us a dividend to do that," Hicks said when asked how the cost of the loan would be met. "If they don't, then it will come from our pockets. But the club will have to have profits sufficient to pay those dividends."

HICKS CLEARLY STATES THE CLUB WILL COUGH UP FOR THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE LOANS BEFORE HE PUTS HIS HAND IN HIS POCKET!

HICKS AGAIN:

 "When I was in the leverage buy-out business we bought Weetabix and we leveraged it up to make our return. You could say that anyone who was eating Weetabix was paying for our purchase of Weetabix. It was just business. It is the same for Liverpool; revenues come in from whatever source and go out to whatever source and, if there is money left over, it is profit,"

WE ARE PAYING FOR THEIR PURCHASE OF OUR CLUB, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THEY ARE RAPING US FOR ALL WE ARE WORTH AND WOULD BLEED US DRY BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HAND IN THEIR POCKETS!

Guest said...

Mark my words Jaimie, we will never have a new stadium whilst H&G are in sole charge of our Club, even so it will be us the fans that end up paying for it, they won't put their hands in their pockets as Hicks has ALREADY eluded to how he runs his businesses!

You'd have to be an utter fool to think that H&G are in this for any other reason than to turn a FAT profit with MINIMAL investment.

H&g ARE USING CLUB PROFITS TO SERVICE THE DEBTS THEY HAVE PUT ON THE CLUB AND HICK'S HAS SAID AS MUCH!

The pair paid £178m for the club, borrowed from the Royal Bank of Scotland, with interest payments on the loan amounting to over £21m a year. "Hopefully the club will have extra cash flow so they can pay us a dividend to do that," Hicks said when asked how the cost of the loan would be met. "If they don't, then it will come from our pockets. But the club will have to have profits sufficient to pay those dividends."

HICKS CLEARLY STATES THE CLUB WILL COUGH UP FOR THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE LOANS BEFORE HE PUTS HIS HAND IN HIS POCKET!

HICKS AGAIN:

 "When I was in the leverage buy-out business we bought Weetabix and we leveraged it up to make our return. You could say that anyone who was eating Weetabix was paying for our purchase of Weetabix. It was just business. It is the same for Liverpool; revenues come in from whatever source and go out to whatever source and, if there is money left over, it is profit,"

WE ARE PAYING FOR THEIR PURCHASE OF OUR CLUB, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THEY ARE RAPING US FOR ALL WE ARE WORTH AND WOULD BLEED US DRY BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HAND IN THEIR POCKETS!

Guest said...

Mark my words Jaimie, we will never have a new stadium whilst H&G are in sole charge of our Club, even so it will be us the fans that end up paying for it, they won't put their hands in their pockets as Hicks has ALREADY eluded to how he runs his businesses!

You'd have to be an utter fool to think that H&G are in this for any other reason than to turn a FAT profit with MINIMAL investment.

H&g ARE USING CLUB PROFITS TO SERVICE THE DEBTS THEY HAVE PUT ON THE CLUB AND HICK'S HAS SAID AS MUCH!

The pair paid £178m for the club, borrowed from the Royal Bank of Scotland, with interest payments on the loan amounting to over £21m a year. "Hopefully the club will have extra cash flow so they can pay us a dividend to do that," Hicks said when asked how the cost of the loan would be met. "If they don't, then it will come from our pockets. But the club will have to have profits sufficient to pay those dividends."

HICKS CLEARLY STATES THE CLUB WILL COUGH UP FOR THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE LOANS BEFORE HE PUTS HIS HAND IN HIS POCKET!

HICKS AGAIN:

 "When I was in the leverage buy-out business we bought Weetabix and we leveraged it up to make our return. You could say that anyone who was eating Weetabix was paying for our purchase of Weetabix. It was just business. It is the same for Liverpool; revenues come in from whatever source and go out to whatever source and, if there is money left over, it is profit,"

WE ARE PAYING FOR THEIR PURCHASE OF OUR CLUB, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THEY ARE RAPING US FOR ALL WE ARE WORTH AND WOULD BLEED US DRY BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HAND IN THEIR POCKETS!

Guest said...

Mark my words Jaimie, we will never have a new stadium whilst H&G are in sole charge of our Club, even so it will be us the fans that end up paying for it, they won't put their hands in their pockets as Hicks has ALREADY eluded to how he runs his businesses!

You'd have to be an utter fool to think that H&G are in this for any other reason than to turn a FAT profit with MINIMAL investment.

H&g ARE USING CLUB PROFITS TO SERVICE THE DEBTS THEY HAVE PUT ON THE CLUB AND HICK'S HAS SAID AS MUCH!

The pair paid £178m for the club, borrowed from the Royal Bank of Scotland, with interest payments on the loan amounting to over £21m a year. "Hopefully the club will have extra cash flow so they can pay us a dividend to do that," Hicks said when asked how the cost of the loan would be met. "If they don't, then it will come from our pockets. But the club will have to have profits sufficient to pay those dividends."

HICKS CLEARLY STATES THE CLUB WILL COUGH UP FOR THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE LOANS BEFORE HE PUTS HIS HAND IN HIS POCKET!

HICKS AGAIN:

 "When I was in the leverage buy-out business we bought Weetabix and we leveraged it up to make our return. You could say that anyone who was eating Weetabix was paying for our purchase of Weetabix. It was just business. It is the same for Liverpool; revenues come in from whatever source and go out to whatever source and, if there is money left over, it is profit,"

WE ARE PAYING FOR THEIR PURCHASE OF OUR CLUB, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. THEY ARE RAPING US FOR ALL WE ARE WORTH AND WOULD BLEED US DRY BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR HAND IN THEIR POCKETS!

Jaimie Kanwar said...

DOn't bring Hillsborough aqnd Heysel into this; I am clearly referring to the football hooliganisn for which this country is renowned.

Guest said...

"We've had the Munich chanting incident; the Sandon incident; the Xenophobic approach.  SOS cannot be trusted.  They do not represent all fans, and promising to make it 'physically impossible' for the owners to enter Anfield is a ridiculous idea that could turn sour."

BUT WE SHOULD TRUST OR EVEN LISTEN TO YOU?

THE MAN WHO HAS GIVEN MORE THAN INTERVIEW TO AN OPENLY XENOPHOBIC MANCHESTER UNITED SUPPORTERS FORUM?

THE SAME FORUM THAT SELLS T-SHIRTS CALLING US MURDERERS?

It's ok for you to give interviews to xenophobic Manc sites but we should all steer clear of SOS?
HYPOCRITE!

Guest said...

Jainie Kanwar is from the republic of mancunia!
WUM. No wonder he types crap.

Sam said...

No Jamie- the key sentence there is 'No violence just good old coordinated non-violent direct action.' The statement also states at the end 'makes it physically impossible for them to enter OUR ground with the ease they have before'.
Bold letters suggest that they just dont want to make it so easy to get in- by causing annoyance. You are touching on libel here- and before you start questioning what offence you have caused, the legal definition of libel is 'Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.' You tick a lot of boxes there for your comments with your headline. You don't have to publish this comment, it's up to you but I wish to have it brought to your attention and also point out that I am a Solicitor.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

So sue me.

Sam said...

That's a mature response. It won't be me doing the suing though- there are plenty of others lining up though if you continue to write libellous headlines- sensationalised or not.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

Sam, I am also legally trained, and I know exactly how far I can go.  SOS would be laughed out of court if they tried to sue me.  They don't have a case.  At all. 

They reap what they sow; they have repeatedly called the Owners 'Liars', and have widely publicised this on their site and literature.

That is a lie. 

The Owners have never lied.  They have been wrong about time estimates, and honest statements of intent have not come to fruition for very valid reasons, but there has been no deliberate intent to deceive, which is the definition of lying.

SOS has not proved that they have lied about the club; and I'm not talking about Gillett mis-remembering what he said about the 60 day comment.  The owners have not lied to Liverpool fans; SOS and its supporters are trying to brainwash fans into thinking this is the case.

So - I will attack SOS using the same tactics they have used to repeatedly attack the owners, and if they, you or anyone else doesn't like it, that's too bad.

Guest said...

I've been passing Jaimie's articles to the people he's been targeting for the past week starting with his unwarranted attack on the ECHO, I sent his article to Dominic King and David Prentice - they were quite interested in some of the allegations made.

I've also sent this article to Smith at SOS, I'm going to assume he'll be quite upset at being brandished a thug, an unwarranted, unproven and personal attack - libelous.

Jaimie doesn't seem to understand the nature or internet blogging, I think he feels that from his position of anonymity as a faceless internet hack he can say whatever suites him regardless of consequence.

Jaimie Kanwar said...

I love it.

'unwarranted attack' on the Echo?  They attacked Ryan Babel in an unfair manner.  What i said was fair comment.  What are you - or they - going to about it?  Nothing.  Why?  Because there is nothing you can do about it.  It's fair comment, backed up with persuasive examples.

Re SOS - Graham Smith already knows of my article; no need to send it.  He's even responded in the comments section.

And get your facts straight: I labelled SOS members (plural) thugs; not any individual.  it's more about thug mentality than anything else.

And my articles about SOS are not libelous in the slightest.  SOS have placed themselves in the position of antagonists re H+G - if an agry mob of SOS members block the owners from exercising their rights to enter the stadium, and any physical contact is made, this could be construed as physical assault, therefore the article headline is accurate.

ben said...

tell me this....have you got mortgage on your home or do you still live with mummy and daddy?! im sooo proud that you have a membership with the sos and i hope it all goes well for you in that sense but you do have blinkers on when it comes to business. have you never borrowed money? do you get jobseekers or have you never had a loan? what about your car? (assuming you drive to sos meetings that is?) you can make a choice....support liverpool or support sos??

Phil Eel said...

How are they damaging the club ? Please be specific - David Moores took a lot of money with him when he left but is held up as a hero. Under their ownership we have negoptiated the best commercial deal the club has ever had, we have got rid of Parry and Purslow is in. These measures take the club massively forward. If it's because we cannot compete in the transfer market with Man Utd, then the situation is the SAME  as it was before. Such uneducated, uncorroborated statements are to be discouraged. And Jamie is right, if H & G are 'liars' because of the 'sapde in the ground' styatement, what does that make Benitez over Aquilani ?

Guest said...

"if an agry mob of SOS members block the owners from exercising their rights to enter the stadium, and any physical contact is made, this could be construed as physical assault, therefore the article headline is accurate."

Jaimie, if you are "legally trained" (which everbody seems to be on this site! It's like a bloody ILEX discussion sometimes!) you'll know that this isn't accurate in the slightest.

THUG - "somebody, especially a criminal, who is brutal and violent"

Is that an ACCURATE description of SOS members in general? I sincerely doubt it is. Nowhere in the planned demonstration does it allege in any way, shape or form that violence is going to be used, in fact it states the contrary.

They've even said they are seeking assistance from the Police with help in ensuring their demonstration is peaceful and law abiding.

Once again I draw your attention to many peaceful demonstrations which have used the same format as SOS' proposed action:

The campaign for womens equal rights

The desegregation of American Schools

The campaign for racial equality

Countless anti-war protests

The recent campaign at the G20 summit where the POLICE were found guilty of using over zealous force against demonstators, one police officer actually lost his job as a result of assault!

IF SOS simply go to Anfield and block the entrance, refusing to move, they have broken no laws, any force to move them then could be construed as assault.

I really don't understand why you have a bee in your bonnet about SOS, you don't like them, fair enough. I'm sure H&G aren't really that bothered about their protests, probably seeing it akin to swatting flies, I'm quite sure they're equally as dismissive of your support.

I really don't think they care. 

Guest said...

"if an agry mob of SOS members block the owners from exercising their rights to enter the stadium, and any physical contact is made, this could be construed as physical assault, therefore the article headline is accurate."

Jaimie, if you are "legally trained" (which everbody seems to be on this site! It's like a bloody ILEX discussion sometimes!) you'll know that this isn't accurate in the slightest.

THUG - "somebody, especially a criminal, who is brutal and violent"

Is that an ACCURATE description of SOS members in general? I sincerely doubt it is. Nowhere in the planned demonstration does it allege in any way, shape or form that violence is going to be used, in fact it states the contrary.

They've even said they are seeking assistance from the Police with help in ensuring their demonstration is peaceful and law abiding.

Once again I draw your attention to many peaceful demonstrations which have used the same format as SOS' proposed action:

The campaign for womens equal rights

The desegregation of American Schools

The campaign for racial equality

Countless anti-war protests

The recent campaign at the G20 summit where the POLICE were found guilty of using over zealous force against demonstators, one police officer actually lost his job as a result of assault!

IF SOS simply go to Anfield and block the entrance, refusing to move, they have broken no laws, any force to move them then could be construed as assault.

I really don't understand why you have a bee in your bonnet about SOS, you don't like them, fair enough. I'm sure H&G aren't really that bothered about their protests, probably seeing it akin to swatting flies, I'm quite sure they're equally as dismissive of your support.

I really don't think they care. 

Guest said...

"if an agry mob of SOS members block the owners from exercising their rights to enter the stadium, and any physical contact is made, this could be construed as physical assault, therefore the article headline is accurate."

Jaimie, if you are "legally trained" (which everbody seems to be on this site! It's like a bloody ILEX discussion sometimes!) you'll know that this isn't accurate in the slightest.

THUG - "somebody, especially a criminal, who is brutal and violent"

Is that an ACCURATE description of SOS members in general? I sincerely doubt it is. Nowhere in the planned demonstration does it allege in any way, shape or form that violence is going to be used, in fact it states the contrary.

They've even said they are seeking assistance from the Police with help in ensuring their demonstration is peaceful and law abiding.

Once again I draw your attention to many peaceful demonstrations which have used the same format as SOS' proposed action:

The campaign for womens equal rights

The desegregation of American Schools

The campaign for racial equality

Countless anti-war protests

The recent campaign at the G20 summit where the POLICE were found guilty of using over zealous force against demonstators, one police officer actually lost his job as a result of assault!

IF SOS simply go to Anfield and block the entrance, refusing to move, they have broken no laws, any force to move them then could be construed as assault.

I really don't understand why you have a bee in your bonnet about SOS, you don't like them, fair enough. I'm sure H&G aren't really that bothered about their protests, probably seeing it akin to swatting flies, I'm quite sure they're equally as dismissive of your support.

I really don't think they care. 

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 264   Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment