comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know, not everyone thinks of Cleopatra as beautiful. But that’s how Julius Caesar.
Getafe are in talks with him over a move in January
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Just seen this on Twitter re:Antony now. Even a piece kind of defending him doesn't paint a pretty picture!
here are perhaps reasons to be a little skeptical — of the reporting — on Antony right now.
A.
1. The “second” women who have been reported to file charges against Antony is a girl who rode in the back seat of a car which Antony was driving. This girl got into a fight with another girl in the passenger seat of the same car, who Antony defended/supported. The altercation was brief. There where at least four people in the car.
[“According to the influencer, at a certain point, she ended up falling out with Mallu because she didn't want to continue with the three to "continue the fun", as described in the document. In addition, the ex-wife of Dudu do Palmeiras would have accused Rayssa of being too drunk. A fight broke out while still inside the car.”]
To imply that this is showing that Antony has a “pattern” of domestic abuse is definitely misleading.
2. The “third women” claims that Antony approached her to “have a relationship with her”, she turned him down, and Antony pushed her against the wall. There it ends. Disturbing if true. But it’s not more or less, as of now, at least. More could come out on Sunday since an interview will air then.
[“He tried to have a relationship with me and I didn’t want to. He pushed me against the wall, and I hit my head,” she said. “My purpose was just business. Arriving there at his invitation, I realised that he had ulterior motives. I’ve never been anyone’s lover.”]
3. The allegation from the first of the three women is the most serious. There is no allegation of sexual abuse, but of domestic violence. They mainly consists of:
(a) threats,
(b) a scratch in the head from a watch,
(c) a dislocated breast implant after a push,
(d) a cut in the finger after a thrown bowl, and
(e) Antony allegedly on one occasion not letting the women leave his apartment.
B.
If these allegation are true, it’s of course very serious. But you already is starting to see tendencies to turn them into something they are not.
Let’s see how this plays out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think we can take too seriously anything that comes out of a country with men named "Dudu" living in it. That's the main thing I got from this.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Talking of the Ched Evans case I was in school with the security guard who gave evidence in court.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fooking hell diafol after your revelation about another ex school mate the other day
Where did you go to school? Belmarsh prison?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was that the schoolmate who killed his Dad in a fight over a pig?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Something like that
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
Just seen this on Twitter re:Antony now. Even a piece kind of defending him doesn't paint a pretty picture!
here are perhaps reasons to be a little skeptical — of the reporting — on Antony right now.
A.
1. The “second” women who have been reported to file charges against Antony is a girl who rode in the back seat of a car which Antony was driving. This girl got into a fight with another girl in the passenger seat of the same car, who Antony defended/supported. The altercation was brief. There where at least four people in the car.
[“According to the influencer, at a certain point, she ended up falling out with Mallu because she didn't want to continue with the three to "continue the fun", as described in the document. In addition, the ex-wife of Dudu do Palmeiras would have accused Rayssa of being too drunk. A fight broke out while still inside the car.”]
To imply that this is showing that Antony has a “pattern” of domestic abuse is definitely misleading.
2. The “third women” claims that Antony approached her to “have a relationship with her”, she turned him down, and Antony pushed her against the wall. There it ends. Disturbing if true. But it’s not more or less, as of now, at least. More could come out on Sunday since an interview will air then.
[“He tried to have a relationship with me and I didn’t want to. He pushed me against the wall, and I hit my head,” she said. “My purpose was just business. Arriving there at his invitation, I realised that he had ulterior motives. I’ve never been anyone’s lover.”]
3. The allegation from the first of the three women is the most serious. There is no allegation of sexual abuse, but of domestic violence. They mainly consists of:
(a) threats,
(b) a scratch in the head from a watch,
(c) a dislocated breast implant after a push,
(d) a cut in the finger after a thrown bowl, and
(e) Antony allegedly on one occasion not letting the women leave his apartment.
B.
If these allegation are true, it’s of course very serious. But you already is starting to see tendencies to turn them into something they are not.
Let’s see how this plays out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Damning.
You know you are seriously fekkkked in the head if you get upset over being rejected in Brazil.
The place is filled with beautiful and feminine women always smiling.
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Diafol GPT strikes again 👽
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wiki actually. #OldSchool
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aw, fᴜck.
250 years of her family living in Egypt and the poor lass probably still had to listen to the old "If you don't like our perspective, go back to where you came from..." line.
comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 18 minutes ago
I don't think we can take too seriously anything that comes out of a country with men named "Dudu" living in it. That's the main thing I got from this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dick Friendly says hello.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah? Cleopatra's parents were step siblings. She had the same grandparents and great grandparents on both sides of the family. However, one of her parents was borne out of a concubine and another out of a wife so there is still uncertainty and debate around her.
These decisions really come down to the club's assessment of public perception and the impact of it, not the truth unfortunately.
This will probably end up costing United £100m assuming he’s still being paid.
Same as Mendy, he’ll end up leaving on a free transfer whatever the results of an investigation/ court case reveal.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
For those forum members already upset about the Woke Mob ending the career of a man on the basis of accusations that may not lead to conviction:
- Please note that the majority of posters here who couldn't reconcile themselves with Greenwood's return to United (on the basis of what we heard him say) are being much more cautious in this case because we don't have first-hand evidence and respect the need for the appropriate authorities to objectively assess the available evidence.
- I think our discourse needs to be more nuanced in general when we talk about the women who have made accusations of rape or domestic abuse. Yes, we have to assume innocence until guilt is proven. But we also know that a miniscule % of these cases result in successful convictions because it's so hard to prove. This means we can be fairly confident that there are *legally* innocent footballers who in reality did rape their accusers. There's not much we can do about that, I'm not saying they should be driven out of the game - unless there's undisputed evidence which doesn't meet the threshold to convict but does tell us the individual treated a woman horrifically. I am saying we should be nuanced when talking about these cases, especially when talking about the alleged victims. Not just with their feelings in mind, but because our online speech is also visible to other people who may have been victims of rape and abuse, and who have not felt that the people around them or the legal system will believe them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry but though I agree with most of your points, again you seem to be in a round about saying(and I could be wrong here)
Just because you don't have proof someone did X doesn't mean they didn't do what they've been accused off so lets just say even if after a cortt of law finds them not guilty... it's most likely since its soo hard to prove Rape/DA/Etc we can say more than likely they did do it and cancel them anyway?
At what point do we actually draw the line? If we are now saying at point of someone being accused they are dropped from the team. Then should they go to court and be proven guilty of course lock them up for as long as you can but if they are found not guilty... well its likely they did actually do it so they should never play again?
And that is why I made the comment. In my mind the standard has now been set with Greenwood, Chad Evans,Mendy and others that the outcome of the trial(if it even gets that far) the fans don't care about it, they want that player never to wear their clubs shirt again.
With that said Anthony will never play again most likely.
I’m sure Rachel Riley has something to say about it
She seemingly has something to say about us every day
This is what happens when you have Giggs doing the on-boarding to the club.
comment by AlwaysUnited (U4063)
posted 18 minutes ago
These decisions really come down to the club's assessment of public perception and the impact of it, not the truth unfortunately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the same bungling football club that thought it was okay for Harry Maguire to appeal a suspended sentence in Greece.
The coming retrial should be fun.
comment by UmaThurmans_BigToe (U22864)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
For those forum members already upset about the Woke Mob ending the career of a man on the basis of accusations that may not lead to conviction:
- Please note that the majority of posters here who couldn't reconcile themselves with Greenwood's return to United (on the basis of what we heard him say) are being much more cautious in this case because we don't have first-hand evidence and respect the need for the appropriate authorities to objectively assess the available evidence.
- I think our discourse needs to be more nuanced in general when we talk about the women who have made accusations of rape or domestic abuse. Yes, we have to assume innocence until guilt is proven. But we also know that a miniscule % of these cases result in successful convictions because it's so hard to prove. This means we can be fairly confident that there are *legally* innocent footballers who in reality did rape their accusers. There's not much we can do about that, I'm not saying they should be driven out of the game - unless there's undisputed evidence which doesn't meet the threshold to convict but does tell us the individual treated a woman horrifically. I am saying we should be nuanced when talking about these cases, especially when talking about the alleged victims. Not just with their feelings in mind, but because our online speech is also visible to other people who may have been victims of rape and abuse, and who have not felt that the people around them or the legal system will believe them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry but though I agree with most of your points, again you seem to be in a round about saying(and I could be wrong here)
Just because you don't have proof someone did X doesn't mean they didn't do what they've been accused off so lets just say even if after a cortt of law finds them not guilty... it's most likely since its soo hard to prove Rape/DA/Etc we can say more than likely they did do it and cancel them anyway?
At what point do we actually draw the line? If we are now saying at point of someone being accused they are dropped from the team. Then should they go to court and be proven guilty of course lock them up for as long as you can but if they are found not guilty... well its likely they did actually do it so they should never play again?
And that is why I made the comment. In my mind the standard has now been set with Greenwood, Chad Evans,Mendy and others that the outcome of the trial(if it even gets that far) the fans don't care about it, they want that player never to wear their clubs shirt again.
With that said Anthony will never play again most likely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you raise a reasonable question.
The uncomfortable truth is this is one of those dynamics where we can't take an unequivocal stance that doesn't leave people badly treated. Quite rightly, in the eyes of the law, you must have proof of a crime beyond reasonable doubt. At the same time, we know that the majority of rapes and instances of domestic abuse do not lead to prosecution, which means there are men who are both legally innocent and rapists / serious domestic abusers. How do we deal with this? First of all, by understanding it's a messy situation, in which both people accused of abuse and people who have been abused have legitimate rights - and moreover there are tensions between those legitimate rights. What I think is dangerous is if we focus exclusively on the rights of one over the other.
So I'm not advocating the cancellation of any man accused of something (i.e. the rights of the accuser take precedence over the rights of the accused). We can't have a world in which an accusation is enough to end a career. At the same time, I'd don't feel comfortable in a situation where only the rights of the accused are considered. To give an example, where there's a failure to secure a prosecution (if it can't be actively proved that the accusation was malicious and false, just it's a he-said-she-said situation), I'm not comfortable with triumphantly proclaiming innocence / exoneration and the associated narratives that always accompany this that imply women lying about rape and abuse, whether for attention or money, is a commonplace phenomenon. I think this is tremendously damaging both to the individual accuser (who, we know statistically, in many cases was actually telling the truth). It's also, as I said, tremendously damaging to our discourse, and to the sense of isolation and disempowerment of any woman who is raped, or any person trapped in an abusive relationship.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 53 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you're not though
Scat Nav is like a moth to the light. Always trying to ‘improve’ Red Russian when all Navvy is is a Ben Shapiro copy and paste merchant.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than what? What is it that you find objectionable about what he's said or how he's said it?
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than what? What is it that you find objectionable about what he's said or how he's said it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on IOAG you’re better than that
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on IOAG you’re better than that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
come on robb, you're....no, actually, you're not
Sat Nav likes being a condescending tw-t to Russian.
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
Sat Nav likes being a condescending tw-t to Russian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That means he speaks down to you RR
In Sat Nav's defence, I think he meant it as a joke this time.
Sign in if you want to comment
Antony
Page 3 of 5
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know, not everyone thinks of Cleopatra as beautiful. But that’s how Julius Caesar.
posted on 8/9/23
Getafe are in talks with him over a move in January
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Just seen this on Twitter re:Antony now. Even a piece kind of defending him doesn't paint a pretty picture!
here are perhaps reasons to be a little skeptical — of the reporting — on Antony right now.
A.
1. The “second” women who have been reported to file charges against Antony is a girl who rode in the back seat of a car which Antony was driving. This girl got into a fight with another girl in the passenger seat of the same car, who Antony defended/supported. The altercation was brief. There where at least four people in the car.
[“According to the influencer, at a certain point, she ended up falling out with Mallu because she didn't want to continue with the three to "continue the fun", as described in the document. In addition, the ex-wife of Dudu do Palmeiras would have accused Rayssa of being too drunk. A fight broke out while still inside the car.”]
To imply that this is showing that Antony has a “pattern” of domestic abuse is definitely misleading.
2. The “third women” claims that Antony approached her to “have a relationship with her”, she turned him down, and Antony pushed her against the wall. There it ends. Disturbing if true. But it’s not more or less, as of now, at least. More could come out on Sunday since an interview will air then.
[“He tried to have a relationship with me and I didn’t want to. He pushed me against the wall, and I hit my head,” she said. “My purpose was just business. Arriving there at his invitation, I realised that he had ulterior motives. I’ve never been anyone’s lover.”]
3. The allegation from the first of the three women is the most serious. There is no allegation of sexual abuse, but of domestic violence. They mainly consists of:
(a) threats,
(b) a scratch in the head from a watch,
(c) a dislocated breast implant after a push,
(d) a cut in the finger after a thrown bowl, and
(e) Antony allegedly on one occasion not letting the women leave his apartment.
B.
If these allegation are true, it’s of course very serious. But you already is starting to see tendencies to turn them into something they are not.
Let’s see how this plays out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think we can take too seriously anything that comes out of a country with men named "Dudu" living in it. That's the main thing I got from this.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Talking of the Ched Evans case I was in school with the security guard who gave evidence in court.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fooking hell diafol after your revelation about another ex school mate the other day
Where did you go to school? Belmarsh prison?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was that the schoolmate who killed his Dad in a fight over a pig?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Something like that
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
Just seen this on Twitter re:Antony now. Even a piece kind of defending him doesn't paint a pretty picture!
here are perhaps reasons to be a little skeptical — of the reporting — on Antony right now.
A.
1. The “second” women who have been reported to file charges against Antony is a girl who rode in the back seat of a car which Antony was driving. This girl got into a fight with another girl in the passenger seat of the same car, who Antony defended/supported. The altercation was brief. There where at least four people in the car.
[“According to the influencer, at a certain point, she ended up falling out with Mallu because she didn't want to continue with the three to "continue the fun", as described in the document. In addition, the ex-wife of Dudu do Palmeiras would have accused Rayssa of being too drunk. A fight broke out while still inside the car.”]
To imply that this is showing that Antony has a “pattern” of domestic abuse is definitely misleading.
2. The “third women” claims that Antony approached her to “have a relationship with her”, she turned him down, and Antony pushed her against the wall. There it ends. Disturbing if true. But it’s not more or less, as of now, at least. More could come out on Sunday since an interview will air then.
[“He tried to have a relationship with me and I didn’t want to. He pushed me against the wall, and I hit my head,” she said. “My purpose was just business. Arriving there at his invitation, I realised that he had ulterior motives. I’ve never been anyone’s lover.”]
3. The allegation from the first of the three women is the most serious. There is no allegation of sexual abuse, but of domestic violence. They mainly consists of:
(a) threats,
(b) a scratch in the head from a watch,
(c) a dislocated breast implant after a push,
(d) a cut in the finger after a thrown bowl, and
(e) Antony allegedly on one occasion not letting the women leave his apartment.
B.
If these allegation are true, it’s of course very serious. But you already is starting to see tendencies to turn them into something they are not.
Let’s see how this plays out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Damning.
You know you are seriously fekkkked in the head if you get upset over being rejected in Brazil.
The place is filled with beautiful and feminine women always smiling.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Diafol GPT strikes again 👽
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wiki actually. #OldSchool
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aw, fᴜck.
250 years of her family living in Egypt and the poor lass probably still had to listen to the old "If you don't like our perspective, go back to where you came from..." line.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 18 minutes ago
I don't think we can take too seriously anything that comes out of a country with men named "Dudu" living in it. That's the main thing I got from this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dick Friendly says hello.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 25 seconds ago
Apologies if this is a bit too intellectual for the conversation at hand, but I believe Cleopatra was Egyptian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scholars generally identify Cleopatra as essentially of Macedonian Greek ancestry with some Persian and Sogdian Iranian ancestry. This is based on the fact that her Macedonian Greek family – the Ptolemaic dynasty – had intermarried with the Macedonian Greek Seleucid dynasty that ruled over much of West Asia.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah? Cleopatra's parents were step siblings. She had the same grandparents and great grandparents on both sides of the family. However, one of her parents was borne out of a concubine and another out of a wife so there is still uncertainty and debate around her.
posted on 8/9/23
These decisions really come down to the club's assessment of public perception and the impact of it, not the truth unfortunately.
posted on 8/9/23
This will probably end up costing United £100m assuming he’s still being paid.
Same as Mendy, he’ll end up leaving on a free transfer whatever the results of an investigation/ court case reveal.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
For those forum members already upset about the Woke Mob ending the career of a man on the basis of accusations that may not lead to conviction:
- Please note that the majority of posters here who couldn't reconcile themselves with Greenwood's return to United (on the basis of what we heard him say) are being much more cautious in this case because we don't have first-hand evidence and respect the need for the appropriate authorities to objectively assess the available evidence.
- I think our discourse needs to be more nuanced in general when we talk about the women who have made accusations of rape or domestic abuse. Yes, we have to assume innocence until guilt is proven. But we also know that a miniscule % of these cases result in successful convictions because it's so hard to prove. This means we can be fairly confident that there are *legally* innocent footballers who in reality did rape their accusers. There's not much we can do about that, I'm not saying they should be driven out of the game - unless there's undisputed evidence which doesn't meet the threshold to convict but does tell us the individual treated a woman horrifically. I am saying we should be nuanced when talking about these cases, especially when talking about the alleged victims. Not just with their feelings in mind, but because our online speech is also visible to other people who may have been victims of rape and abuse, and who have not felt that the people around them or the legal system will believe them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry but though I agree with most of your points, again you seem to be in a round about saying(and I could be wrong here)
Just because you don't have proof someone did X doesn't mean they didn't do what they've been accused off so lets just say even if after a cortt of law finds them not guilty... it's most likely since its soo hard to prove Rape/DA/Etc we can say more than likely they did do it and cancel them anyway?
At what point do we actually draw the line? If we are now saying at point of someone being accused they are dropped from the team. Then should they go to court and be proven guilty of course lock them up for as long as you can but if they are found not guilty... well its likely they did actually do it so they should never play again?
And that is why I made the comment. In my mind the standard has now been set with Greenwood, Chad Evans,Mendy and others that the outcome of the trial(if it even gets that far) the fans don't care about it, they want that player never to wear their clubs shirt again.
With that said Anthony will never play again most likely.
posted on 8/9/23
I’m sure Rachel Riley has something to say about it
She seemingly has something to say about us every day
posted on 8/9/23
This is what happens when you have Giggs doing the on-boarding to the club.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by AlwaysUnited (U4063)
posted 18 minutes ago
These decisions really come down to the club's assessment of public perception and the impact of it, not the truth unfortunately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the same bungling football club that thought it was okay for Harry Maguire to appeal a suspended sentence in Greece.
The coming retrial should be fun.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by UmaThurmans_BigToe (U22864)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
For those forum members already upset about the Woke Mob ending the career of a man on the basis of accusations that may not lead to conviction:
- Please note that the majority of posters here who couldn't reconcile themselves with Greenwood's return to United (on the basis of what we heard him say) are being much more cautious in this case because we don't have first-hand evidence and respect the need for the appropriate authorities to objectively assess the available evidence.
- I think our discourse needs to be more nuanced in general when we talk about the women who have made accusations of rape or domestic abuse. Yes, we have to assume innocence until guilt is proven. But we also know that a miniscule % of these cases result in successful convictions because it's so hard to prove. This means we can be fairly confident that there are *legally* innocent footballers who in reality did rape their accusers. There's not much we can do about that, I'm not saying they should be driven out of the game - unless there's undisputed evidence which doesn't meet the threshold to convict but does tell us the individual treated a woman horrifically. I am saying we should be nuanced when talking about these cases, especially when talking about the alleged victims. Not just with their feelings in mind, but because our online speech is also visible to other people who may have been victims of rape and abuse, and who have not felt that the people around them or the legal system will believe them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry but though I agree with most of your points, again you seem to be in a round about saying(and I could be wrong here)
Just because you don't have proof someone did X doesn't mean they didn't do what they've been accused off so lets just say even if after a cortt of law finds them not guilty... it's most likely since its soo hard to prove Rape/DA/Etc we can say more than likely they did do it and cancel them anyway?
At what point do we actually draw the line? If we are now saying at point of someone being accused they are dropped from the team. Then should they go to court and be proven guilty of course lock them up for as long as you can but if they are found not guilty... well its likely they did actually do it so they should never play again?
And that is why I made the comment. In my mind the standard has now been set with Greenwood, Chad Evans,Mendy and others that the outcome of the trial(if it even gets that far) the fans don't care about it, they want that player never to wear their clubs shirt again.
With that said Anthony will never play again most likely.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you raise a reasonable question.
The uncomfortable truth is this is one of those dynamics where we can't take an unequivocal stance that doesn't leave people badly treated. Quite rightly, in the eyes of the law, you must have proof of a crime beyond reasonable doubt. At the same time, we know that the majority of rapes and instances of domestic abuse do not lead to prosecution, which means there are men who are both legally innocent and rapists / serious domestic abusers. How do we deal with this? First of all, by understanding it's a messy situation, in which both people accused of abuse and people who have been abused have legitimate rights - and moreover there are tensions between those legitimate rights. What I think is dangerous is if we focus exclusively on the rights of one over the other.
So I'm not advocating the cancellation of any man accused of something (i.e. the rights of the accuser take precedence over the rights of the accused). We can't have a world in which an accusation is enough to end a career. At the same time, I'd don't feel comfortable in a situation where only the rights of the accused are considered. To give an example, where there's a failure to secure a prosecution (if it can't be actively proved that the accusation was malicious and false, just it's a he-said-she-said situation), I'm not comfortable with triumphantly proclaiming innocence / exoneration and the associated narratives that always accompany this that imply women lying about rape and abuse, whether for attention or money, is a commonplace phenomenon. I think this is tremendously damaging both to the individual accuser (who, we know statistically, in many cases was actually telling the truth). It's also, as I said, tremendously damaging to our discourse, and to the sense of isolation and disempowerment of any woman who is raped, or any person trapped in an abusive relationship.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 53 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
you're not though
posted on 8/9/23
Scat Nav is like a moth to the light. Always trying to ‘improve’ Red Russian when all Navvy is is a Ben Shapiro copy and paste merchant.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than what? What is it that you find objectionable about what he's said or how he's said it?
posted on 8/9/23
comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 54 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
posted 2 minutes ago
Im old enough to remember when the worst thing our players did was feed poor children
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on Robb, trying to prevent child hunger is much more distracting from the task of maintaining elite athletic performance. Decades of experience tell us that athletes can quite comfortably nurture abusive relationships alongside high output in their professional sporting activities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on RR you’re better than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than what? What is it that you find objectionable about what he's said or how he's said it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on IOAG you’re better than that
posted on 8/9/23
comment by Am-Robb-at (U22716)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on IOAG you’re better than that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
come on robb, you're....no, actually, you're not
posted on 8/9/23
Sat Nav likes being a condescending tw-t to Russian.
posted on 8/9/23
comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 1 minute ago
Sat Nav likes being a condescending tw-t to Russian.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That means he speaks down to you RR
posted on 8/9/23
In Sat Nav's defence, I think he meant it as a joke this time.
Page 3 of 5