Ever since 606 started there has never been anything funnier on here than a WUM article where the OP ends up looking a silly and gets all angry and abusive, and here we are again!
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by The greatest thing that ever happened to humankind (U1282)
posted 7 minutes ago
"In 2012, HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion and to submit to years of heightened scrutiny after the authorities found that the bank had helped Mexican drug cartels launder money. In 2014, the French bank BNP Paribas paid a record sum of nearly $9 billion and pleaded guilty for violating American sanctions against Sudan and other countries. And two years ago, Deutsche Bank was fined $630 million for helping Russian investors secretly move $10 billion through branches in London, Moscow and New York."
To be fair, these corporates can be disgusting at times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1VF0VR/
Abu Dhabi's state owned (Dep' PM Sheikh Mansour) fined $55m for market manipulation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'False equivalence' and 'whataboutery' are the terms you used earlier despite me not even mentioning another Club.
I assume you're on the wum now, it's good to have fun though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You already opened the door for this and your whole articles is based on it. You are estopped from using this argument.
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
Ever since 606 started there has never been anything funnier on here than a WUM article where the OP ends up looking a silly and gets all angry and abusive, and here we are again!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any links?
You already opened the door for this and your whole articles is based on it. You are estopped from using this argument.
----------------------------------------
Save it for the judge, literally.
Save it for the judge, literally.
====
Why? Am I being charged with something as well?
comment by The greatest thing that ever happened to human... (U1282)
posted 5 seconds ago
Save it for the judge, literally.
====
Why? Am I being charged with something as well?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're not, you should be.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by The greatest thing that ever happened to humankind (U1282)
posted 7 minutes ago
"In 2012, HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion and to submit to years of heightened scrutiny after the authorities found that the bank had helped Mexican drug cartels launder money. In 2014, the French bank BNP Paribas paid a record sum of nearly $9 billion and pleaded guilty for violating American sanctions against Sudan and other countries. And two years ago, Deutsche Bank was fined $630 million for helping Russian investors secretly move $10 billion through branches in London, Moscow and New York."
To be fair, these corporates can be disgusting at times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1VF0VR/
Abu Dhabi's state owned (Dep' PM Sheikh Mansour) fined $55m for market manipulation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'False equivalence' and 'whataboutery' are the terms you used earlier despite me not even mentioning another Club.
I assume you're on the wum now, it's good to have fun though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did I mention another club?
It's of equal equivalence to the HSBC, BNP Paribas etc examples greatest thing.... posted
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mentioned a person synonymous with owning another club, why did you pick him?
Liverpool's Chief Sponsors are in the dock here, try to stay on topic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he's the deputy PM of the country that owns the state bank. Who else is going to be culpable.
The topic you brought up because you're concerned about illegal practice in the banking sector
That was a great read, and Boris has finally lost his last shred of dignity.
Does that bank sponsor Manchester City FC, does it facilitate money transfers for Proscribed Terrorist Groups?
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
That was a great read, and Boris has finally lost his last shred of dignity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's come back for more again today
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t answer the question or you won’t answer the question?
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t answer the question or you won’t answer the question?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Boris been binge watching Perry Mason
Still no answers, what’s the problem?
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t answer the question or you won’t answer the question?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You want the answer, you can't handle the answer!
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 54 minutes ago
Does that bank sponsor Manchester City FC, does it facilitate money transfers for Proscribed Terrorist Groups?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whoooa! We can’t possibly know until a full investigation is carried out, and then even if they’re found guilty I feel we should ignore that until there is an appeal.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Still no answers, what’s the problem?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer is in the OP you posted yesterday you dopey mef scroll up
Boris, you are doing to others what you always complain about yourself.
You repeatedly talk about the 115 charges being no more than that. Not a guilty verdict, no clear cut evidence. stolen emails, and therefore no proven wrong doing by City.
Standard Chartered have been accused of wrong doing, as a result of whistle blowers. LFC woud not be in a position to terminate their contract with them until they are found guilty...and even then, the guilt will be on Standard Chartered, and nothing to do with LFC. If guilty and LFC maintain their deal then fair enough, they are complicit in an indirect way.
If City are found guilty, then it's City and their owners in the dock, not any sponsor. That makes the 2 cases of LFC and City so widely different that they are almost incomparable.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 6 minutes ago
Boris, you are doing to others what you always complain about yourself.
You repeatedly talk about the 115 charges being no more than that. Not a guilty verdict, no clear cut evidence. stolen emails, and therefore no proven wrong doing by City.
Standard Chartered have been accused of wrong doing, as a result of whistle blowers. LFC woud not be in a position to terminate their contract with them until they are found guilty...and even then, the guilt will be on Standard Chartered, and nothing to do with LFC. If guilty and LFC maintain their deal then fair enough, they are complicit in an indirect way.
If City are found guilty, then it's City and their owners in the dock, not any sponsor. That makes the 2 cases of LFC and City so widely different that they are almost incomparable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t compared the 2 cases at any time on this article.
You’d be better off directing that statement at the Liverpool fans
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 6 minutes ago
Boris, you are doing to others what you always complain about yourself.
You repeatedly talk about the 115 charges being no more than that. Not a guilty verdict, no clear cut evidence. stolen emails, and therefore no proven wrong doing by City.
Standard Chartered have been accused of wrong doing, as a result of whistle blowers. LFC woud not be in a position to terminate their contract with them until they are found guilty...and even then, the guilt will be on Standard Chartered, and nothing to do with LFC. If guilty and LFC maintain their deal then fair enough, they are complicit in an indirect way.
If City are found guilty, then it's City and their owners in the dock, not any sponsor. That makes the 2 cases of LFC and City so widely different that they are almost incomparable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t compared the 2 cases at any time on this article.
You’d be better off directing that statement at the Liverpool fans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your concern is solely the actions of SC and ethics in banking?
Yes, I am concerned about terrorism
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Yes, I am concerned about terrorism
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211204-yemen-war-victims-file-complaint-against-saudi-uae-coalition/
"The complaint stated: “Many observers emphasised the de facto alliance with Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula against Ansar Allah forces, particularly through financial and equipment support, as well as logistic cooperation.”
According to the plaintiffs: “The coalition may have paid, especially through the First Abu Dhabi Bank, money to the terrorist Al-Qaeda organisation, in exchange for its withdrawal from the cities it controlled.”
Also worried about this?
"The lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight victims of torture or bombing carried out by the Saudi coalition. Briham also accuses the Saudi crown prince, the Abu Dhabi crown prince and the chiefs of staff of the two armies of “crimes of torture”, “forced disappearance”, “war crimes” and “forming a terrorist criminal gang”.
Or this?
Sign in if you want to comment
Standard Chartered Bank - LFC
Page 5 of 6
6
posted on 5/6/24
Ever since 606 started there has never been anything funnier on here than a WUM article where the OP ends up looking a silly and gets all angry and abusive, and here we are again!
posted on 5/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by The greatest thing that ever happened to humankind (U1282)
posted 7 minutes ago
"In 2012, HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion and to submit to years of heightened scrutiny after the authorities found that the bank had helped Mexican drug cartels launder money. In 2014, the French bank BNP Paribas paid a record sum of nearly $9 billion and pleaded guilty for violating American sanctions against Sudan and other countries. And two years ago, Deutsche Bank was fined $630 million for helping Russian investors secretly move $10 billion through branches in London, Moscow and New York."
To be fair, these corporates can be disgusting at times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1VF0VR/
Abu Dhabi's state owned (Dep' PM Sheikh Mansour) fined $55m for market manipulation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'False equivalence' and 'whataboutery' are the terms you used earlier despite me not even mentioning another Club.
I assume you're on the wum now, it's good to have fun though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You already opened the door for this and your whole articles is based on it. You are estopped from using this argument.
posted on 5/6/24
comment by Robbing Hoody - I want to play by my own rules... (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago
Ever since 606 started there has never been anything funnier on here than a WUM article where the OP ends up looking a silly and gets all angry and abusive, and here we are again!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Any links?
posted on 5/6/24
You already opened the door for this and your whole articles is based on it. You are estopped from using this argument.
----------------------------------------
Save it for the judge, literally.
posted on 5/6/24
Save it for the judge, literally.
====
Why? Am I being charged with something as well?
posted on 5/6/24
comment by The greatest thing that ever happened to human... (U1282)
posted 5 seconds ago
Save it for the judge, literally.
====
Why? Am I being charged with something as well?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're not, you should be.
posted on 5/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by The greatest thing that ever happened to humankind (U1282)
posted 7 minutes ago
"In 2012, HSBC agreed to pay $1.9 billion and to submit to years of heightened scrutiny after the authorities found that the bank had helped Mexican drug cartels launder money. In 2014, the French bank BNP Paribas paid a record sum of nearly $9 billion and pleaded guilty for violating American sanctions against Sudan and other countries. And two years ago, Deutsche Bank was fined $630 million for helping Russian investors secretly move $10 billion through branches in London, Moscow and New York."
To be fair, these corporates can be disgusting at times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1VF0VR/
Abu Dhabi's state owned (Dep' PM Sheikh Mansour) fined $55m for market manipulation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'False equivalence' and 'whataboutery' are the terms you used earlier despite me not even mentioning another Club.
I assume you're on the wum now, it's good to have fun though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did I mention another club?
It's of equal equivalence to the HSBC, BNP Paribas etc examples greatest thing.... posted
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mentioned a person synonymous with owning another club, why did you pick him?
Liverpool's Chief Sponsors are in the dock here, try to stay on topic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because he's the deputy PM of the country that owns the state bank. Who else is going to be culpable.
The topic you brought up because you're concerned about illegal practice in the banking sector
posted on 5/6/24
posted on 6/6/24
That was a great read, and Boris has finally lost his last shred of dignity.
posted on 6/6/24
Does that bank sponsor Manchester City FC, does it facilitate money transfers for Proscribed Terrorist Groups?
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
That was a great read, and Boris has finally lost his last shred of dignity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's come back for more again today
posted on 6/6/24
Answer the question
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 6/6/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t answer the question or you won’t answer the question?
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t answer the question or you won’t answer the question?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Boris been binge watching Perry Mason
posted on 6/6/24
Still no answers, what’s the problem?
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 16 minutes ago
Answer the question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t answer the question or you won’t answer the question?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You want the answer, you can't handle the answer!
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 54 minutes ago
Does that bank sponsor Manchester City FC, does it facilitate money transfers for Proscribed Terrorist Groups?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whoooa! We can’t possibly know until a full investigation is carried out, and then even if they’re found guilty I feel we should ignore that until there is an appeal.
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Still no answers, what’s the problem?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The answer is in the OP you posted yesterday you dopey mef scroll up
posted on 6/6/24
Boris, you are doing to others what you always complain about yourself.
You repeatedly talk about the 115 charges being no more than that. Not a guilty verdict, no clear cut evidence. stolen emails, and therefore no proven wrong doing by City.
Standard Chartered have been accused of wrong doing, as a result of whistle blowers. LFC woud not be in a position to terminate their contract with them until they are found guilty...and even then, the guilt will be on Standard Chartered, and nothing to do with LFC. If guilty and LFC maintain their deal then fair enough, they are complicit in an indirect way.
If City are found guilty, then it's City and their owners in the dock, not any sponsor. That makes the 2 cases of LFC and City so widely different that they are almost incomparable.
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 6 minutes ago
Boris, you are doing to others what you always complain about yourself.
You repeatedly talk about the 115 charges being no more than that. Not a guilty verdict, no clear cut evidence. stolen emails, and therefore no proven wrong doing by City.
Standard Chartered have been accused of wrong doing, as a result of whistle blowers. LFC woud not be in a position to terminate their contract with them until they are found guilty...and even then, the guilt will be on Standard Chartered, and nothing to do with LFC. If guilty and LFC maintain their deal then fair enough, they are complicit in an indirect way.
If City are found guilty, then it's City and their owners in the dock, not any sponsor. That makes the 2 cases of LFC and City so widely different that they are almost incomparable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t compared the 2 cases at any time on this article.
You’d be better off directing that statement at the Liverpool fans
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 6 minutes ago
Boris, you are doing to others what you always complain about yourself.
You repeatedly talk about the 115 charges being no more than that. Not a guilty verdict, no clear cut evidence. stolen emails, and therefore no proven wrong doing by City.
Standard Chartered have been accused of wrong doing, as a result of whistle blowers. LFC woud not be in a position to terminate their contract with them until they are found guilty...and even then, the guilt will be on Standard Chartered, and nothing to do with LFC. If guilty and LFC maintain their deal then fair enough, they are complicit in an indirect way.
If City are found guilty, then it's City and their owners in the dock, not any sponsor. That makes the 2 cases of LFC and City so widely different that they are almost incomparable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven’t compared the 2 cases at any time on this article.
You’d be better off directing that statement at the Liverpool fans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your concern is solely the actions of SC and ethics in banking?
posted on 6/6/24
Yes, I am concerned about terrorism
posted on 6/6/24
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Yes, I am concerned about terrorism
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20211204-yemen-war-victims-file-complaint-against-saudi-uae-coalition/
"The complaint stated: “Many observers emphasised the de facto alliance with Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula against Ansar Allah forces, particularly through financial and equipment support, as well as logistic cooperation.”
According to the plaintiffs: “The coalition may have paid, especially through the First Abu Dhabi Bank, money to the terrorist Al-Qaeda organisation, in exchange for its withdrawal from the cities it controlled.”
Also worried about this?
posted on 6/6/24
"The lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight victims of torture or bombing carried out by the Saudi coalition. Briham also accuses the Saudi crown prince, the Abu Dhabi crown prince and the chiefs of staff of the two armies of “crimes of torture”, “forced disappearance”, “war crimes” and “forming a terrorist criminal gang”.
Or this?
Page 5 of 6
6