sorry you didn't get a chance to read the article, perhaps the link didn't workthe playing mantis wrote:so what, the torygraph reports he changed his wiki page to remove offensive and unfounded stuff that murray alleged, so what?
here's what (against wiki policy) was changed:
"a Soviet-era criminal conviction that was later overturned by the Uzbekistan Supreme Court and a description of the disappearance of a former Megafon shareholder, reports the newspaper.
The PR business replaced those sections with text outlining Mr Usmanov's philanthropy and art collection. Mr Usmanov had hired the PR firm to neautralise reports of his colourful past."
It might well be offensive but 'unfounded'?
No, quite the opposite actually. These things are a matter of public record.
If accusations are unfounded you challenge them,
you don't get a PR firm to try and surreptitiously replace them with the work you do fer charidee...
these were facts, the only 'unproven' element: that he's a "gangster and racketeer" was an image he aggressively pushed in Uzbekistan in order to terrify business rivals, journalists, police and politicians. Now that he's too big for the Uzbek pond he wants the genie back in the bottle. Within the parameters of crowd source platforms it's easy to change lies about a famous individual for the truth: you don't need to spend millions on PR and law firmsthe playing mantis wrote:im sure if you had unproven allegations against u and were in the public eye and had a wiki page, you would want them removed too.
the rich hiring companies to sue anyone who tells the truth about them and replace reality with revisionist lies is a serious freedom of speech issuethe playing mantis wrote:boo hoo what a shame hes so nasty for doing that.
really?the playing mantis wrote:i shouldnt have flown off the handle before.
I was worried my cowardly surrenderish Polly ?


still not got to grips with the personal agenda... is it to do with my favourite Upper St restaurant of the 90s?the playing mantis wrote:however its ridiculous to be so anti him based on a personal agenda
I really like Trullo now, does that change things?
could see why Murray would have an axe to grind with Jack Straw and Tony Blair. Can fathom no reason why he would have irrational issues with Jabba?the playing mantis wrote:and axe to grind by craig murray.
my opinion is that he actually IS the worst. But it's not really the point. I don't want any single person taking our club as a plaything. Especially not a mineral theif oiligarchthe playing mantis wrote:as long as hes not burning kittens or a mass murderer hes no worse than any other bilionaire football owner out there.
yes. That, and the war effort.the playing mantis wrote:i want what is right for arsenal.
it's not a binary choice. I want a Bundesliga based fan driven model. That said there's no reason whatsoever to believe Usmanov would do anything differently. He could make a serious legal proposal, guaranteeing specific funds available. He never has.the playing mantis wrote:Kroenke is completely wrong. usmanov is the only alternative and is 100% prefarable to wiggy in terms of geting the club back amongst the best.
I don't want
a) a single owner
or b) a thieving scumbag
and I would see bankrolled success as tarnished
but quite apart from those issues I don't even believe Jabba would be a white night benefactor
speak for yourself... I hope we retain some vestige of former class. It's recoverable at least.the playing mantis wrote:as for tarnishing the repuatation of arsenal, oh come now, we are no longer a class act
I do agree
were embarrassingthe playing mantis wrote:the whole badge issue, the spanish shop etc
Kroenke got most of his dosh one of the most old fashioned way - married it. Not too dishonourable. Danny boy dealt diamonds - skeletontastic. If there was something easy our gutter press would have dug it up by now. But its hardly a field famed for corinthian spirit and fair play...?the playing mantis wrote:likewise im really sure fizman and kroenke are squeaky clean and have no skeletons in the closet.
on a slight tangent
loath to go down the 'who's a bigger fan' pathArsenal Till I Die wrote:Just because I don't have a season ticket does that make me any less of a fan? Just because I and probably many can only go to a handful of games a year does that make me any less of a fan?
but surely attending is a factor? Or can we extrapolate out forever..?
"Just because I don't know who any of the players are and have never watched a whole game on TV... does that make me less of a fan?" gets laughed out of court - there must be a sliding scale here
of course this
is mostly true.Arsenal Till I Die wrote:Does that also make our views on the club invalid? No! It doesn't.
and I can prove it - I can tick off a million super fan credentials.
And my view was Wenger and the players basically couldn't lose v Norwich no matter what..
There were old blokes behind me at Highbury who seemingly had sat there since before the war (they had virtually worked at Dial Square)and they didn't even agree with themselves from the season before