1 Dec 2009

'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!



264 comments:

  1. "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. 

    ReplyDelete
  2. "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. 

    ReplyDelete
  3. "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. 

    ReplyDelete
  4. "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. 

    ReplyDelete
  5. "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. 

    ReplyDelete
  6. "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. 

    ReplyDelete
  7. I silently always read, most of the articles that Jamie writes. 99.9% of the time fellow fans express what I usually feel, but I have to say this today "Jamie please give it a rest mate" In regards to your last post, The owners already bit Rafa like a snake when they tried to sign Klinsmann, a Snake sheds it's skin, but it will always be a Snake. The only reason they have kept Rafa is because they know, all hell will break loose if they got rid of him, creating catastrophe on all diferent situations and view points.

    I am really tired of reading your articles.

    If the SOS need to give anyone a warning, then it should be you mate.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I silently always read, most of the articles that Jamie writes. 99.9% of the time fellow fans express what I usually feel, but I have to say this today "Jamie please give it a rest mate" In regards to your last post, The owners already bit Rafa like a snake when they tried to sign Klinsmann, a Snake sheds it's skin, but it will always be a Snake. The only reason they have kept Rafa is because they know, all hell will break loose if they got rid of him, creating catastrophe on all diferent situations and view points.

    I am really tired of reading your articles.

    If the SOS need to give anyone a warning, then it should be you mate.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 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. 

    SOS do not even need to pay a finger on H+G - if they apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force that will be enough.

    If a  mob of antagonistc fans are balocking them from exercising their legal right to enter the stadium, I can see some form of assualt taking place.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Jaimie,

    I think that the problem you have is that not everyone who comes here and reads your articles actually reads the content. Your Title is obviously designed to cause the potential reader to read. Later in the article you actually define assualt, however, I would like to correct you but back you up. Criminal Law definition of Assualt is not to touch someone but the threat of violence and often judged on how the reasonable man would perceieve it. So your title in that respect is spot on. I am not sure I would have used the word yobs but that is your artistic discretion.

    I am was not the greatest fan of the owners due to their public show of discontentment and disharmony in the club. I think they underestimated or did not realise the consequences of that and in all honesty since then have not heard so much as a major peep from them which shows they are learning. They have released enough funds to buy players for the club and improve contracts. The criticism of them is why they are not taking bigger financial risks and the reason is preventing us from being the next Leeds.

    The SOS group were set up in the aftermath of the early stages of the owners regime and sometimes you have to give credit where credit is due. The owners are not the best but not the worst. Had DIC taken over us where would we be today in terms of finance since Dubai are close to being bankrupt as a Govt and cannot at this moment repay their debts.

    We cant all have the Man City and Chelsea style owners and both have found that it does not ensure all players come for just money. Even Man Utd are not able to compete with them but have greater revenue due to the stadium capacity. We will defo have a new stadium just it will take a little longer due to the GLOBAL financial situation which is affecting most businesses and Governments.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is it and the response from Jamie k will be so what, but I will never visit this site again let alone make a response. the reasons.....
    The owner of this site must be being paid by H and G.... THEY DID LIE, HAVE LIED AND ARE STILL LYING. I am not a supporter of SOS I support the club and my team. I am also not saying H and G have not done anything positive during there tenure of the club. Benetiz has made many mistakes in his purchases and sometimes in his tactics. I am not blind to either of these points I do have a balanced view. But for Jamiek to insist that H and G havent told lies however else he dresses it up honest errors etc. They Lied about the levels of investment, they lied about the ground issues (in fact the redit crunch provided them with a way out) they lied about Klinsman, they lied about the state of there relationship and they lied about trying to gain further investment/selling the club.
    What the club needs are owners who are supporters, someone who loves the club as much as i do someone who knows the Liverpool way. We also need a manager whounderstands the same things. If its not going to be Rafa then thats ok but give us someone who could do it the right way dont bring out the same barrel load of names that really are managerial has beens i.e Martin Oneill etc and anybody who thinks our great institution should be placed in "the safe hands of Morino are sadly deluded. However until Jamie K wakes up and admitsthe americans did lie this is the last anyone will hear from me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Case to support:

    1) The Headline you have written directly contravenes anything said in the comment on the SOS website and accuses SOS of using physical attacks to prevent entry into the stadium.
    2) 'has hatched a dubious plan to physically restrain Tom Hicks and George Gillett from entering Anfield on their next visit'- what is your proof of this?

    There are 2 quite strong sentences that go against you there and being legally trained you should be aware of what Libel is. You only need 1 comment for the article to have problems - it wouldnt be laughed out of court by any stretch of the imagination- especially with the lawyers likely to be used by SOS in the event that this matter did reach legal proceedings and I think you would find that it wouldnt be the suing that is the problem, it would be the injunction preventing you from writing any more articles.

    As for the 'Lies' element- 'We have purchased the club with no debt on the club," said Gillett.'- Liverpool now stand over £100m in debt due to the takeover- the most fundamental lie of the lot I hope you would agree. Gillet and Hicks didnt buy Torres, Liverpool did, Liverpool sold Xabi Alonso- Gillet and Hicks took the money. It doesn't matter which way you look at it Jaimie- Liverpool is a club riddled with debt as a result of the takeover and nothing else- this comes despite assurances to the contrary that it wouldnt happen. I freely admit, Gillet and Hicks are perfectly entitled to do that, Liverpool is their asset- but how does that make you feel when all that our beloved club amounts to, all that it is, is part of a rich mans portfolio- a play thing of 2 men who seem to have no other interest than in making money out of their asset irrespective of the success on the field. SOS may go about things the wrong way but at least they care about the club, they dont criticise it at every turn. I dont want you to respond to this comment as you make me angry in everything you say due to your negative spin and claims to be a Liverpool fan. Instead of putting the boot in at every turn, try doing what you, me and every other fan can only do which is to support your team in good times and the bad no matter who is at the club.

    ReplyDelete
  13. True Red - they have not lied.

    The definition of a lie is: a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive.

    Please explain in detail how each of the alleged lies you list in your post is actually a lie within the meaning of the above.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks for comments, Jag.

    You've made some very reasonable comments about the owners, especially the point about DIC and Dubai. 

    I can understand why you and other fans would be disappointed with the owners initially; I was also.  There comes a point though where people have to objectivly and logically consider what is going on.  Do we just denigrate the owners for evermore just because of their past mistakes, or do we appreciate that mistakes were made but they have learned, and are now taking steps to do things in the right way.

    People are always going on about how Rafa needs time; how it took gerguson 7 years to win the league etc.  Despite Rafa's mistakes, and despite this season's abject performance, people STILL give him time.

    The owners have been in charge for less than 3 years yet no one is giving them any time to learn from their mistakes; and even though it is clear to anybody looking at things fairly that the owners have done many good things, people still refuse to give them the time of day.

    It's a double standard, pure and simple.

    I have no personal ellegiance to the owners; there are people who even think I'm on their payroll (!); it's not true at all - I just try and look at things fairly, and choose not to just blindly accept what SOS and all the other anti-owner factions spit out.

    Independent research is the way forward, and if more fans did that, they would have a better understanding of how everything re the owners works.

    And I agree with you -WILL have a new stadium; this is not even an issue.  Arsenal took 7 years to build the Emirates; H+G have not even been at the club for 3 years yet.

    ReplyDelete
  15. So just let the club die a slow painful Leeds-esque death then is it for you?

    ReplyDelete
  16.  A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.

    This is also a defination of a lie from oxford concise dictionary. H and G have continually made false statements and presented them as being true. Even if you take one item i.e The Klinsman Affair, they both originally said they hadnt met or spoken to him this was a lie Hicks met him and Gillett was party to a conference call with him and Hicks they lied but you are so blind in your support you will not admit it this from someone who purports to offering "critical realism" on the affairs of LFC. Do me a favour..... you accuse people of being blind in there support of Rafa and yet you are blind in the support of the owners

    ReplyDelete
  17. The fact you mention Leeds and Liverpool in the same sentence illustrated just how far you have been brainwashed by SOS and the media.

    Liverpool will not become the next Leed.  That is just simplistic press crap.  You can read the reason why in the article:

    http://mcdonaldtaf.blogspot.com/2009/11/lfc-blame-game-decisions-part-one.html

    ReplyDelete
  18. True Red - It is your opinion they have made false statements; it is not a fact.  It can be argued that they have not lied (and I will explain this in a series of articles I will post soon).

    And re the Klinnsman affair - your view on this is a prime example of how fans like you assimilate false information from various fan forums and believe it. Such misinformation is dangerous.  You state:

    They both originally said they hadnt met or spoken to him this was a lie

    No. This is not true in any way, shape or form.  Neither Hicks nor Gillett stated that they 'hadn't met him'.  That is 100% misinformation.

    If they DID say that publicly, then please post a link to evidence of what they said.

    Such a lie would've been seized upon by the press and LFC forums, so it should be easy for you to find a link.

    You won't of course, because they never said any such thing.

    This is the kind of thing that irritates me, and it's why I defend the owners.  Liverpool fans and their giant collective chinese whisper.

    The irony here is that it is the fans who are doing most of the lying, not H+G.

    So - if you could post the link, that would be great :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. If i could be bothered I could provide you with a link I think is was reported on Sky Sports at the time of the incident and I also read it on an american website. But what would be the point because you wouldnt believe it anyway you are blind to the actions of the owners it would not surprise me if they sponsered your site in some way. I would also like to assure you that I do not tell Lies as you try to infer in your last response. It seems to me that everything about our club irritates you except the owners. It also seems that we are all allowed to comment and give an opinion or state a fact as long as it always accords with your point of view. The sooner you do step out of line the sooner somebody will close you down so until then .......

    ReplyDelete
  20. No, True Red - you can't produce a link because it doesn't exist.

    And let's not forget that it was YOU who raised the Klinnsmann issue; thus, it is up to you to bakc up what you say.

    Like many Liverpool fans though, you deal in false generalisations and misinformation when it comes to the owners.

    If H+G lied over meeting Klinnsman, it would have been reported or referenced somewhere on the net, either in a news article or on a liverpool fan board.

    Once again, to prove you have not made up what you've said re Klinnsman, please provide evidence that H+G lied about meeting him.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Guys you are giving Jaimie a really hard time based on opionion rather than fact. If you think about ti Hicks was actually slated for telling the TRUTH regarding Kilinsman not for lying about it. Also that was earlier in their tenure not now. They have shown nothing but support and their current spokeman Mr Purslow has given his meaning the clubs unequivocal support of Rafa. Would you prefer the owners to borrown money now with stupidly high interest conditions to build the stadium and then have next to no money to spend on player recruitment or contract improvement?

    Yes they are not the best and yes they could do better but they could also do worse. They have a commercial stratedgy for LFC and so far it is working hence improved sponsorship etc. I believe whether they are here for the long haul or for money the commercial benefits will stay with LFC for good.

    The Owners from one point misled the supporters but on the other hand made reasonable statements based on the facts available to them at the time. Subsequent information and market conditions changed and as I posted earlier you only have to look to Dubai and Lehman Brothers bank which was a massive financial institution to see how market conditions went against them.

    I think righlty people can be dissapointed as the Chelsea takeover led to the raising of expectations that every take over would be of that nature and it is not. We have made massive strides as a club on all levels and that has been due to Rafa (On the pitch nous) and the Owners (off the pitch nous). Yes Hick was part of a consortium that failed at Corinthians but he also has many successful sports franchises along with Gillett. I think they were naive about their public show of negativity and intially excitement for their projects but since then we have been fine. They have not said anything just like the Liverpool way so why the current criticism?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I told Mr. Kanwar several times how they damage the club! What about the debt for example... I will list a few points, because you can obviously not see the damage:
    Debts on the club, the actions of G+H have definitely harmed the image of LFC, if the two people, who manage a company constantly work against each other the company can and will not make any progress!, speak with other managers behind Rafas back - that will not attract a lot of people to work for LFC,...
    Then if you say: "It's the same as before, so there's no problem!", that is just stupid... If everybody would think like that, we still lived in caves!!!
    With sentences like "Such uneducated, uncorroborated statements are to be discouraged." you act exactly like your friend Mr. Kanwar. Just ignoring and slashing other people's opinions, without any justified reason, is really UNEDUCATED!!! Don't throw words around you, when you don't know what it means!
    If you really wan't to say Benitez is lying about Aquilani, then you really have no idea of football and are only searching for "reasons" to argue against Rafa Benitez! Ever heard of the difference of fitness and match fitness???

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sorry Jaimie again you're incorrect, I see you've ignored my general point: A peaceful protest such as the ones I've given as examples do not constitute thuggery.

    You've called SOS "thugs" which infers physical violence by it's very definition, or are you now going to suggest the english language is wrong and you're still right in the face of your accusation?!

    "SOS do not even need to pay a finger on H+G - if they apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force that will be enough."

    Yeah Jaimie, I can see what you've tried to do but you've completely misused this quotation (surprising for somebody with alleged "legal training"). In laymans terms, you've said:

    "SOS do not even need to put a finger on H&G, if they stop another person/persons from inflicting harm that will be enough"

    Basically if you enter a fray to break up a fight, you're guilty of assault if you use physical force, I suggest you don't use legal references unless you have the education to understand their meaning (which I do), I doubt any of the protesters will be jumping to H&G's rescue should they come under attack but I could be wrong!

    YOU'VE PURPOSELY MISSED OUT POINT 1 OF SECTION 39 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICES ACT AS IT NEGATES YOUR ARGUMENT!

    Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act; Common Assault (point 1):

    "An offence of common assualt is comitted when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery"

    Both instances require physical inclusion, otherwise I could be arrested for "assault" by standing in somebody's way in the street, do you see how absurd your suggestion is?
    <span></span>
    <span></span>

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sorry Jaimie again you're incorrect, I see you've ignored my general point: A peaceful protest such as the ones I've given as examples do not constitute thuggery.

    You've called SOS "thugs" which infers physical violence by it's very definition, or are you now going to suggest the english language is wrong and you're still right in the face of your accusation?!

    "SOS do not even need to pay a finger on H+G - if they apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force that will be enough."

    Yeah Jaimie, I can see what you've tried to do but you've completely misused this quotation (surprising for somebody with alleged "legal training"). In laymans terms, you've said:

    "SOS do not even need to put a finger on H&G, if they stop another person/persons from inflicting harm that will be enough"

    Basically if you enter a fray to break up a fight, you're guilty of assault if you use physical force, I suggest you don't use legal references unless you have the education to understand their meaning (which I do), I doubt any of the protesters will be jumping to H&G's rescue should they come under attack but I could be wrong!

    YOU'VE PURPOSELY MISSED OUT POINT 1 OF SECTION 39 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICES ACT AS IT NEGATES YOUR ARGUMENT!

    Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act; Common Assault (point 1):

    "An offence of common assualt is comitted when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery"

    Both instances require physical inclusion, otherwise I could be arrested for "assault" by standing in somebody's way in the street, do you see how absurd your suggestion is?
    <span></span>
    <span></span>

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sorry Jaimie again you're incorrect, I see you've ignored my general point: A peaceful protest such as the ones I've given as examples do not constitute thuggery.

    You've called SOS "thugs" which infers physical violence by it's very definition, or are you now going to suggest the english language is wrong and you're still right in the face of your accusation?!

    "SOS do not even need to pay a finger on H+G - if they apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force that will be enough."

    Yeah Jaimie, I can see what you've tried to do but you've completely misused this quotation (surprising for somebody with alleged "legal training"). In laymans terms, you've said:

    "SOS do not even need to put a finger on H&G, if they stop another person/persons from inflicting harm that will be enough"

    Basically if you enter a fray to break up a fight, you're guilty of assault if you use physical force, I suggest you don't use legal references unless you have the education to understand their meaning (which I do), I doubt any of the protesters will be jumping to H&G's rescue should they come under attack but I could be wrong!

    YOU'VE PURPOSELY MISSED OUT POINT 1 OF SECTION 39 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICES ACT AS IT NEGATES YOUR ARGUMENT!

    Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act; Common Assault (point 1):

    "An offence of common assualt is comitted when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery"

    Both instances require physical inclusion, otherwise I could be arrested for "assault" by standing in somebody's way in the street, do you see how absurd your suggestion is?
    <span></span>
    <span></span>

    ReplyDelete
  26. Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

    ReplyDelete
  27. Your breadth of misunderstanding is astounding.
    1. I have not misused that provision s39 at all. If someone reasonably believes that they are going to be the victim of immediate physical violence, that is assault.
    I did not suggest...
    Ah, f**k it. I can't be bothered!
    Anyone with sense can see the point.
    Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

    ReplyDelete
  28. Jaime, I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and on occasion I've even agreed with some of yours (for example I wholeheartedly agree with you about Dirk Kuyt having a good attitude but still being a lousy player) but your arguments in favour of Hicks and Gillett are absurd.  What good is it negotiating a big sponsorship deal if all the money is going towards Hicks and Gillett's debts ??  For the last two consecutive transfer windows Rafa has had to generate a surplus from player sales so that H & G can repay their debts.  Rafa may have his flaws but on virtually every financial comparison (wage bill, and net transfer budget being the main ones) Liverpool are now well outside the top four behind Man Yoo, Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal and Spurs and yet Rafa is somehow meant to challenge for the title on the field.  Its no good saying Rafa has money to spend if he has to sell players like Alonso to generate that money.  H & G are not giving him any money to spend because all of the Club's income goes on paying H & G's debts.  All H & G eve do is talk vague general shit about sponsorship deals etc but fail to deliver the cash to Rafa or fund the new stadium.   Purslow may well be a decent CEO but H & G we can do without.  They are a millstone around the clubs neck and it is not xenophobic to point this out.    

    ReplyDelete
  29. Sorry Jaimie, once again I disagree.

    You can be guilty of "menacing behaviour" which would include  shaking your first infront of a persons face for example, but it would be very hard to prove an assault was going to take place.

    Once again however, you have ignored my initial point, because SOS plan to hold a demonstartion and prevent H&G from entering Anfield this does not constitute thuggery or assault.

    It's only assault if there is physical provocation and SOS have not suggested this, they can by their rights, stand in the way of H&G and refuse to move.

    If they did (through their doing) touch H&G then you'd be correct but let's face it, that's probably not going to happen. In fact I'd imagine H&G simply won't turn up!

    ReplyDelete
  30. simple really.....kuntawar is in the pocket of H&G.

    ReplyDelete
  31. KANWAR IS A FAKE.

    He gives his time to Republic of Mancunia, a Manchester United supporters forum which OPENLY sells merchanise calling us (liverpool fans) murderers. I've asked him to explain why he does this, he deleted my comment but asked me to pose the question to him in the general forum which I did...at 1.30pm this afternoon.

    He's found the time to respond to a VAST number of comments at the forefront of his site yet he's not answered my question.

    Republic if Mancunia is also linked to this site! Check for yourselves in the drop-down menu at the top-right of the page!

    They print merchandise that reads under three stars (to depict european cups) "without killing anyone".

    Kanwar is only to happy to give them interviews and has done on more than once occasion.

    The reason is simple...

    He's more interested in promoting himself and getting his views heard than he is Liverpool FC or our fans. Why else would he give those scumbags at ROM a second thought when they unashamedly sell such merchandise?

    He's been banned from a vast number of LFC forums which is why he started his own site - it's the kind of "it's my ball and I'm going home" mentality we see in most self-obsessed egomaniacs. A fundamental need to be paid attention to.

    I felt I needed to get this out, no doubt it will be deleted immediately but ho-hum.

    ReplyDelete
  32. KANWAR IS A FAKE.

    He gives his time to Republic of Mancunia, a Manchester United supporters forum which OPENLY sells merchanise calling us (liverpool fans) murderers. I've asked him to explain why he does this, he deleted my comment but asked me to pose the question to him in the general forum which I did...at 1.30pm this afternoon.

    He's found the time to respond to a VAST number of comments at the forefront of his site yet he's not answered my question.

    Republic if Mancunia is also linked to this site! Check for yourselves in the drop-down menu at the top-right of the page!

    They print merchandise that reads under three stars (to depict european cups) "without killing anyone".

    Kanwar is only to happy to give them interviews and has done on more than once occasion.

    The reason is simple...

    He's more interested in promoting himself and getting his views heard than he is Liverpool FC or our fans. Why else would he give those scumbags at ROM a second thought when they unashamedly sell such merchandise?

    He's been banned from a vast number of LFC forums which is why he started his own site - it's the kind of "it's my ball and I'm going home" mentality we see in most self-obsessed egomaniacs. A fundamental need to be paid attention to.

    I felt I needed to get this out, no doubt it will be deleted immediately but ho-hum.

    ReplyDelete
  33. KANWAR IS A FAKE.

    He gives his time to Republic of Mancunia, a Manchester United supporters forum which OPENLY sells merchanise calling us (liverpool fans) murderers. I've asked him to explain why he does this, he deleted my comment but asked me to pose the question to him in the general forum which I did...at 1.30pm this afternoon.

    He's found the time to respond to a VAST number of comments at the forefront of his site yet he's not answered my question.

    Republic if Mancunia is also linked to this site! Check for yourselves in the drop-down menu at the top-right of the page!

    They print merchandise that reads under three stars (to depict european cups) "without killing anyone".

    Kanwar is only to happy to give them interviews and has done on more than once occasion.

    The reason is simple...

    He's more interested in promoting himself and getting his views heard than he is Liverpool FC or our fans. Why else would he give those scumbags at ROM a second thought when they unashamedly sell such merchandise?

    He's been banned from a vast number of LFC forums which is why he started his own site - it's the kind of "it's my ball and I'm going home" mentality we see in most self-obsessed egomaniacs. A fundamental need to be paid attention to.

    I felt I needed to get this out, no doubt it will be deleted immediately but ho-hum.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Your agenda driven simplistic views are missing the point.

    Let me spell it out

    Berating the echol for mis-representing a statement and then your statement about not taking what SoS says at face value = hypocrisy

    As for Assault - dictionary.com defines it as:
    as⋅sault

     <span>AC_FL_RunContent = 0;var interfaceflash = new LEXICOFlashObject ( "http://sp.ask.com/dictstatic/d/g/speaker.swf", "speaker", "17", "15", "<img></img>", "6");interfaceflash.addParam("loop", "false");interfaceflash.addParam("quality", "high");interfaceflash.addParam("menu", "false");interfaceflash.addParam("salign", "t");interfaceflash.addParam("FlashVars", "soundUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fsp.ask.com%2Fdictstatic%2Fdictionary%2Faudio%2Fluna%2FA07%2FA0746700.mp3&clkLogProxyUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fwhatzup.html&t=a&d=d&s=di&c=a&ti=1&ai=51359&l=dir&o=0&sv=00000000&ip=a48ff422&u=audio"); interfaceflash.addParam('wmode','transparent');interfaceflash.write();<embed></embed><img></img> <span><span>/</span><span>əˈsÉ”lt</span><span>/</span> <img></img> <span> Show Spelled Pronunciation </span> </span><span><span>[</span><span><span>uh</span>-<span>sawlt</span></span><span>]</span> <img></img> <span> Show IPA </span> </span> </span>
    Use assault in a SentenceSee web results for assaultSee images of assault

    <span>–noun </span>
    1. a sudden, violent attack; onslaught: <span>an assault on tradition. </span> 2. <span><span>Law</span>. </span>an unlawful physical attack upon another; an attempt or offer to do violence to another, with or without battery, as by holding a stone or club in a threatening manner. 3. <span><span>Military</span>. </span>the stage of close combat in an attack.


    so tell me. How are they going to assault the owners?

    ReplyDelete
  35. "<span>We don't need ignorant Yobs representing the club or its global fanbase<span>"</span></span>

    We don't need twats like you pushing whatever agenda you've got. F**k off knutwipe

    ReplyDelete
  36. I love that kip !!!! Kuntawar will be on your case though. Do you think he has ever been to Anfield.
    Jag you make some great points also, what gets me about this Jamiek guy is the blind faith he has in the ownership of the club. Most supporters feel cheated by the americans but most decent supporters would also say they have done some resonable things especially during the last 6 months. He will not admit to any mistakes made the americans and constantly berates Rafa he must be being paid by H & G.
    It is fair to say the team is not playing well however this is not the americans fault it is the fault of the manager, the coaches and the players. The blind faith shown by supporters to Rafa is more about willing him to do better, to improve the team and tactics, he is such a character that LFC and english football in general would be poorer without him even with the mistakes he has made. Jamie Kuntwar will not accept any augument against the americans of for Rafa he is blinded by there monthly pay cheques

    ReplyDelete
  37. Jamie, any chance of you ever writing a positive article on Liverpool FC? 

    You claim to support the club, so surely you can find *something* good to say about it.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Jaimie, any chance of you ever writing a positive article about the club you claim to support?

    ReplyDelete
  39. From dictionary.com


    as<span>⋅</span><span>sault</span>
    <span>  </span> Pronunciation [uh-sawlt]
    –noun
    1. <span>        </span>a sudden, violent attack; onslaught: an assault on tradition.
    2. <span>        </span>Law. an unlawful physical attack upon another; an attempt or offer to do violence to another, with or without battery, as by holding a stone or club in a threatening manner.
    3. <span>        </span>Military. the stage of close combat in an attack.

    so tell me - where does SOS say they are going to assault the owners?

    ReplyDelete
  40. That is the US definition of Assault - the UK is different:

    An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force.  
     
    SOS do not even need to pay a finger on H+G - if they apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force that will be enough. 
     
    If a  mob of antagonistc fans are balocking them from exercising their legal right to enter the stadium, I can see some form of assualt taking place.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Jamie your scottish, so what hell as US law to do with!!

    ReplyDelete
  42. Keep it up Kanwar. You are getting your wish for notoriety. You are widely known as a crank. No doubt this will be deleted as it is a personal attack, not made by you so therefore expendable.

    The only positive thing from your unbridled arrogance is that you are getting closer to making that mistake and being sued for all you are worth.

    Then you will be consigned to history, where you belong.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Why do you fel you have to defend the owners by attacking SOS unless you have a vested interest?

    In terms of lying, off the tope of my head - Gillette claiming that they have spent over £130 million NET on transfers. Go on super investigator, prove that! Lies.

    They also said they would't go down the UTD route in their first press conference. Since then they have leveraged the club just like the Glazers. Again lies.

    You really are a pointless idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I totally disagree with you. It is still agenda driven mis-representation. Something that you constantly criticise other commenters on.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Indeed, you are Right Jamie. SOS is a disgrace for liverpool's image. And just to clarify something to Hmmm. Maybe u did not do any module of LAWS but I can tell that there is something called False Imprisonement. What is this all about.

    If somebody is unjustly imprisoned to freely move, it is called False Imprisonment.

    Here imprisonment is not GOING TO JAIL or it does not mean ONLY going to jail unjustly. 

    Example of false imprisonment:

    if somebody is in his car and he needs to go somewhere. let's say all the road are closed due to new constructions etc etc, then this man/woman has the ligitimate right to sue those who are constructing things under a FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

    Legally, assault means that you attempt to harm somebody. Meaning that u might not really touch him, but even an act to punch somebody is called assault.

    Therefore, H + G can sue SOS for both assault and false imprisonment. If SOS are doing this, then they are a group promoting illegal acts and this is intolerable.

    I completely agree with Jamie for almost all his articles.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Indeed, you are Right Jamie. SOS is a disgrace for liverpool's image. And just to clarify something to Hmmm. Maybe u did not do any module of LAWS but I can tell that there is something called False Imprisonement. What is this all about.

    If somebody is unjustly imprisoned to freely move, it is called False Imprisonment.

    Here imprisonment is not GOING TO JAIL or it does not mean ONLY going to jail unjustly. 

    Example of false imprisonment:

    if somebody is in his car and he needs to go somewhere. let's say all the road are closed due to new constructions etc etc, then this man/woman has the ligitimate right to sue those who are constructing things under a FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

    Legally, assault means that you attempt to harm somebody. Meaning that u might not really touch him, but even an act to punch somebody is called assault.

    Therefore, H + G can sue SOS for both assault and false imprisonment. If SOS are doing this, then they are a group promoting illegal acts and this is intolerable.

    I completely agree with Jamie for almost all his articles.

    ReplyDelete
  47. i cant belive these people can soil the beautiful name our club. I have supported the red men for many years now since we beat west ham in the fa cup. It's the last march i will be going on with them in charge.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ramaz,

    How can you say that about these guys, they do a fantastic job protecting us red men. When iv travelled over from Boston were iv supported the reds for many years. Im going to be there with these guys ready to do battle and hollah and spit at these phonies!

    Come Rafa your doing a great job.

    Shanks will be turning in his grave.

    YNWA

    ReplyDelete
  49. You really are a terrible hack.

    ReplyDelete
  50. It may not have been the right result on the pitch for Liverpool today, but off the pitch it was a success for the Liverpool Supporters Union, Spirit of Shankly.

    A peaceful protest took place prior to kick off, aimed at denying joint owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett access to Anfield. The protest was a success with 8 empty seats in the director’s box during the game and police turning Hicks and Gillett away on health and safety grounds.

    SOS posted a short update on their Facebook page tonight saying the protest worked. Full details will be made available on Monday.

    Tom and George were on one of their few all-expenses paid trips to Anfield, with it being against a big four club of course. Don’t hold your breathe seeing them against Wigan on Wednesday.

    It appears there were some arrests, although one in particular seems to have been a blatant targeting of an SOS leader.

    Well in SOS, the message is clear Tom and George, You’re Not Welcome.

    ReplyDelete
  51. we need to stop kidding everyone were miles behind the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Fcuk off Kanwar - You're an owner supporting cheerleader and a blind idiot to boot.  IF we'd 'assaulted' the owners back then or maybe broke ALL the rules and hired a hitman (or two) then we wouldn't have our club worrying about losing Torres or money would we? As we'd have been immediately sold to whoever could best care for us once the dust was settled and those leeches GONE - As it is now, I think ONLY (really) heavy and repeated physical assaults OR all-out boycotts of the team (maybe BOTH) will get the W*nkers out.  So maybe whoever put this 'plan' in place in December to physically assault them was RIGHT.  I'd CERTAINLY redo their face with my fists if I saw them now.  I'd probably give them a bit of help breathing with some holes punched through them by machine gun fire as well.  THAT clear enough for you you idealistic IDIOT!! IF I SAW THEM? I'D KILL THEM - AND SO WOULD MOST OF OUR SUPPORT AS WELL!!! And rightly bloody so...............................

    ReplyDelete
  53. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?

    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no?  Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?

    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us.  This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now; 

    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire.  IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?

    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge;  You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!

    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H.  We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them.  Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again................................

    ReplyDelete
  54. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?  
     
    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no?  Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?  
     
    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us.  This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now;   
     
    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire.  IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?  
     
    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge;  You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!  
     
    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H.  We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them.  Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again.......

    NB Keen to ''bring as much negative publicity to SOS as possible'' Can't even do THAT correctly CAN YOU - you idiot.  As I said earlier, WHO do we hear about now? Jaime Kanwar or SOS? Point proven. The defence rests.  Oh and what Ron the Red said about Latin hot-bloods shedding blood? He's DAMN right, H & G wouldn't have been 'physically assaulted' in Italy or somewhere by now, no - by NOW they'd have been sleeping with the fishes for at least a year.  They don't mess about out there and they have NO Jaime Kanwar style idiots either, they know how to get jobs done there.  WE should follow their examples!!!
    .........................
    Read more: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/revealed-spirit-of-shankly-thugs.html#ixzz0jPKUrkWm

    ReplyDelete
  55. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?    
       
    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no?  Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?    
       
    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us.  This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now;     
       
    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire.  IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?    
       
    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge;  You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!    
       
    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H.  We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them.  Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again.......  
     
    NB Keen to ''bring as much negative publicity to SOS as possible'' Can't even do THAT correctly CAN YOU - you idiot.  As I said earlier, WHO do we hear about now? Jaime Kanwar or SOS? Point proven. The defence rests.  Oh and what Ron the Red said about Latin hot-bloods shedding blood? He's DAMN right, H & G wouldn't have been 'physically assaulted' in Italy or somewhere by now, no - by NOW they'd have been sleeping with the fishes for at least a year.  They don't mess about out there and they have NO Jaime Kanwar style idiots either, they know how to get jobs done there.  I think WE may start following their examples soon as well as far as H & G are concerned - as they'll find out soon enough..............
    .............  
    Read more: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/revealed-spirit-of-shankly-thugs.html#ixzz0jPLuXMBa

    ReplyDelete
  56. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?

    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no? Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?

    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us. This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now;

    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?

    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge; You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!

    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H. We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them. Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again.......

    NB Keen to ''bring as much negative publicity to SOS as possible'' Can't even do THAT correctly CAN YOU - you idiot. As I said earlier, WHO do we hear about now? Jaime Kanwar or SOS? Point proven. The defence rests. Oh and what Ron the Red said about Latin hot-bloods shedding blood? He's DAMN right, H & G wouldn't have been 'physically assaulted' in Italy or somewhere by now, no - by NOW they'd have been sleeping with the fishes for at least a year. They don't mess about out there and they have NO Jaime Kanwar style idiots either, they know how to get jobs done there. I think WE may start following their examples soon as well as far as H & G are concerned - as they'll find out soon enough...................

    ReplyDelete
  57. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?  
     
    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no? Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?  
     
    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us. This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now;  
     
    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?  
     
    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge; You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!  
     
    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H. We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them. Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again.......  
     
    NB Keen to ''bring as much negative publicity to SOS as possible'' Can't even do THAT correctly CAN YOU - you idiot. As I said earlier, WHO do we hear about now? Jaime Kanwar or SOS? Point proven. The defence rests. Oh and what Ron the Red said about Latin hot-bloods shedding blood? He's DAMN right, H & G wouldn't have been 'physically assaulted' in Italy or somewhere by now, no - by NOW they'd have been sleeping with the fishes for at least a year. They don't mess about out there and they have NO Jaime Kanwar style idiots either, they know how to get jobs done there. I think WE may start following their examples soon as well, as far as H & G are concerned - Which is something they'll find out soon enough......
    .............
    Read more: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2009/12/revealed-spirit-of-shankly-thugs.html#ixzz0jPMt76iA

    ReplyDelete
  58. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?

    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no? Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?

    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us. This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now;

    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?

    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge; You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!

    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H. We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them. Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again.......

    NB Keen to ''bring as much negative publicity to SOS as possible'' Can't even do THAT correctly CAN YOU - you idiot. As I said earlier, WHO do we hear about now? Jaime Kanwar or SOS? Point proven. The defence rests. Oh and what Ron the Red said about Latin hot-bloods shedding blood? He's DAMN right, H & G wouldn't have been 'physically assaulted' in Italy or somewhere by now, no - by NOW they'd have been sleeping with the fishes for at least a year. They don't mess about out there and they have NO Jaime Kanwar style idiots either, they know how to get jobs done there. I think WE may start following their examples soon as well as far as H & G are concerned - as they'll find out soon enough...................

    ReplyDelete
  59. Fcuk off Kanwar, you're an idealistic idiot and a blind owner supporting stooge to boot!! IF someone had implemented this little plan and 'assaulted' the owners as they damn well SHOULD have done back then (in December) when it was first suggested - then we wouldn't be worrying about losing Torres or ALL our transfer money again would we?    
       
    Maybe if someone had instead arranged to hire a ahem 'hitman' or two then our problem would DEFINITELY have gone no? Because as soon as the dust had settled and those two leeches had GONE, then we'd have been sold to REAL owners who cared about and could look after/fund us PROPERLY yes?    
       
    Instead we're left in a position now where ONLY Really (and probably repeated) heavy duty physcial assault is ALL that will remove them - that, the hiring of the above mentioned hitmen or an all-out boycott war against them from our fans and we're in an even BIGGER mess than before now needing to find 100 million BEFORE July!!! And ALL for the privilige of those w*nkers owning us. This article wasn't wrong For heaven's sake, in fact it SHOULD have been released EARLIER!! I'd CERTAINLY redo their faces with my fists if I saw them now;    
       
    In fact I might even go a bit further and assist their breathing by punching some holes in their useless bodies via machine gun fire. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU USELESS, FAINT-HEARTED, NAMBY PAMBY, STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND OSTRICH!!! We need RID of the owners by ANY Means possible!! THEY suspended ALL the rules when they LIED and committed FRAUD to get hold of US!! So WHY shouldn't WE begin ALL-OUT Guerilla Warfare against THEM? Including if necessary, boycotts, all-out physical assaults and even hitmen if necessary or at least the threat of them!!! WHY shouldn't we do all this?    
       
    You may 'pride' yourself on the pathetic excuse for an achievement of making SOS change one of the headlines on their website (re Yank Liars) but fact is your an idiot - WHO do people hear about now? SOS or Jaime Bloody Kanwar? Need I ask - Your NOTHING and yet make out your something by supporting those disease ridden vampires we have in charge; You were wrong as well by the way, you idiot - it's not YANK LIARS anymore - It's YANK LIARS AND CRIMINALS because they are damn well BOTH!!!    
       
    Anyhow, the fact is you're a FOOL who can't see the wood for the trees - Those who Support the owners are AGAINST the fans. I suggest you remember THAT before you voice ANY more such support for G & H. We WILL take them down and by AMN (Any Means Necessary) If YOU get in our way? YOU will go down with them. Consider yourself duly warned and NEVER support the owners again.......    
       
    NB Keen to ''bring as much negative publicity to SOS as possible'' Can't even do THAT correctly CAN YOU - you idiot. As I said earlier, WHO do we hear about now? Jaime Kanwar or SOS? Point proven. The defence rests. Oh and what Ron the Red said about Latin hot-bloods shedding blood? He's DAMN right, H & G wouldn't have been 'physically assaulted' in Italy or somewhere by now, no - by NOW they'd have been sleeping with the fishes for at least a year. They don't mess about out there and they have NO Jaime Kanwar style idiots either, they know how to get jobs done there. I think WE may start following their examples soon as well, as far as H & G are concerned - Which is something they'll find out soon enough......

    ReplyDelete
  60. Mate,
    so what do YOU suggest we should do to tackle the clubs problems???!!!

    SOS aren`t simply moaning like you are, they are working, and they are working hard, and they have the full support of the Shankly family.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I DO hope so; Hope they go after gobshite supporters of that piece of carrion as well Kanwar - The SOONER Hicks IS assaulted and even incapacitated Physically? The better IMO and It WILL happen soon you know? He's ALREADY been physically attacked at TWO games (Arsenal and Bolton last season) and I've a feeling the NEXT person to catch him and his worthless 'son' on the streets in New York or wherever? Won't point ONLY a Camera at him. The sooner he's attacked - Heck, the sooner he's disabled the better for Liverpool FC. He NEEDS to go and go NOW.............

    ReplyDelete
  62. What a load of utter bollocks. I reject your know it all attitude and substitute it for the actual truth.

    ReplyDelete