George Gillett - We don't believe you!

[Spirit Of Shankly]

Please find the Union's response to an impromptu meeting held between a Spirit Of Shankly member and George Gillett

 

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/George...e-you!.html

 

Spirit Of Shankly

[Tones]

Good stuff. gets to the point and shows up the lies. I like this not being nice about the owners. Im all for these talks with them as it gives us a chance to put pressure on them, make them justify their claims and lets them slip up and exposes the s*** they talk.

Edited October 6, 2009 by t1971

[Sion]

Please find the Union's response to an impromptu meeting held between a Spirit Of Shankly member and George Gillett

 

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/George...e-you!.html

 

Spirit Of Shankly

 

Great stuff.

 

Although there are about 50 superfluous commas in that piece

[Rory Fitzgerald]

They make my blood boil !!

 

They bought the club at the absolute peak of the global economic boom. Late 2006/early 2007 was the 'buzz' time in the economy.

 

Everyone has fallen on their ar$es and instead of selling and getting out, at a profit to boot !!, they are jepordising us because the banks are so f$$ked that they are turning the screw on everybody, especailly highly leveraged companies !

 

Rafa cant rub the lamp to summon the genie with his hands tied !

Edited October 6, 2009 by Rory Fitzgerald

[Rimbeux]

Top stuff. The man is a sham and an ostentatious liar who must genuinely believe people are less bright than he is and will swallow whatever crap he comes out with. It's staggering he's been able to lead men through his life to get to the wealth he has, such contempt and bare faced deceit can only work among very stupid people, he must have found a Moores a month throughout time.

[fyds]

Now that's the tone and attitude I like to see - added to the benefit it clearly gets under his skin when people stop seeing him as cuddly ickle Georgie and for the scheister he actually is.

 

Nice one, chaps.

[owenthomas]

i like that, well done lads..

[Leo No.8]

Top stuff. The man is a sham and an ostentatious liar who must genuinely believe people are less bright than he is and will swallow whatever crap he comes out with. It's staggering he's been able to lead men through his life to get to the wealth he has, such contempt and bare faced deceit can only work among very stupid people, he must have found a Moores a month throughout time.

 

Exactly right Rimbeaux - it is really shocking that transcript.

 

As I said in the other thread, seeing him speaking 'off the record' really gives the lie to this 'kindly old grandfather' image he likes to cultivate. He actually comes across as believing his own blatant lies and is quite aggressive in the way he defends them.

 

My experience is this is very much the behaviour of a man to whom lying is second nature. Frightening that he half owns LFC.

Edited October 7, 2009 by Leo No.8

[Flight]

Please find the Union's response to an impromptu meeting held between a Spirit Of Shankly member and George Gillett

 

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/George...e-you!.html

 

Spirit Of Shankly

 

 

 

Bravo !

 

 

Seriously, that is fantastic.

 

Well played SoS.

[richwilks]

Yep, good article that. What needs to be done though is for that to get press coverage and show what a pair of c**** they both are.

 

I'm really surprised that Rafa hasn't walked already with the lack of funds and the various s*** that is going on around him.

[Spike]

Fantastic and that link should be posted at the bottom of every article that the media have published regarding his recent finger pointing at Rafa, and every other article from hereonin where those clowns are mentioned.

[David Hodgson]

Please find the Union's response to an impromptu meeting held between a Spirit Of Shankly member and George Gillett

 

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/George...e-you!.html

 

Spirit Of Shankly

 

Superb.

 

I love how the denial of the 60 day thing shows the man up for the arrogant, deluded liar that he is. His lame attempt to discredit Hicks on this is all the evidence anyone could need as to how unworkable this 'partnership' is.

 

I'd also love someone to get to the bottom of this '£128m net on transfers' bullsh it. It's been trotted out by people who've analysed the accounts on various LFC forums, and it whilst it will undoubtedly represent expenditure, there is no way it represents money for what the football world would class as 'transfer expenditure'. Is it an attempt to hide something ? Transfer spend can always be classed as 'exceptional' spend or possibly capitalised, which is one way of trying to show a Profit and Loss account is better than it might at first look. For all we know they've lumped half the club's wage bill into those figures, so that they look like their operating budget is performing more efficiently than it actually is.

[Bogman]

Let's hope the media pick up on that.

 

Well played lads, time to stop playing nice.

[Gravy]

Shouldn't this have been brought up during the impromptu conversation with Gillette? The transfer figures alone everyone on here knows off by heart. He should have had them thrown at him there and then rather than put in a document which is now available and that he won't even read surely?

[PeeG]

Shouldn't this have been brought up during the impromptu conversation with Gillette? The transfer figures alone everyone on here knows off by heart. He should have had them thrown at him there and then rather than put in a document which is now available and that he won't even read surely?

 

As has been said it was impromptu meeting by an SOS member. Wasn't planned or anything, so with that he has done well. Easy not to remember something in a situation like that. I think that is also why Gillett wanted one person to talk to him and didn't allow all four of us who were there to speak with him about everything.

 

Also, the article is there as much to inform people of what Gillett is like (some people still think they are fine) and to show they need to go as much as it is to get an answer from Gillett. I wouldn't expect him to give a truthful answer anyway if he was questioned on it at the time.

[BG]

IMHO that piece (and leaking what seems to have been understood to be a private discussion) ends any chance of a sustained dialogue with one (maybe both) of the owners and possibly with Purslow too.

 

That may or may not be a good thing depending on the desired tactical approach - personally I think it's a bad thing which is likely to make SoS' desired aim harder to achieve.

Edited October 7, 2009 by BG

[Gravy]

As has been said it was impromptu meeting by an SOS member. Wasn't planned or anything, so with that he has done well. Easy not to remember something in a situation like that. I think that is also why Gillett wanted one person to talk to him and didn't allow all four of us who were there to speak with him about everything.

 

Also, the article is there as much to inform people of what Gillett is like (some people still think they are fine) and to show they need to go as much as it is to get an answer from Gillett. I wouldn't expect him to give a truthful answer anyway if he was questioned on it at the time.

 

Surely everyone knows they need to go but I am just struggling to work out how a document such as that is going to achieve this? Surely he needs to be shown up a liar face to face or via the media - prove him worng rather than writing about what a nasty man he is. Organise a mass rally against them and have a dossier ready including his lies about the spade in the ground and (more importantly) transfer spend.

 

He won't give a toss about a document circulated to LFC fans - that much is proven. What does he care what we think of him - he knows that already. You have to get the rat out of the hole into the public domain to show him up for being what he is.

[Chili Palmer]

IMHO that piece (and leaking what seems to have been understood to be a private discussion) ends any chance of a sustained dialogue with one (maybe both) owners and possibly with Purslow too.

 

thats very true, but SoS couldn't NOT say anything.

[PeeG]

IMHO that piece (and leaking what seems to have been understood to be a private discussion) ends any chance of a sustained dialogue with one (maybe both) owners and possibly with Purslow too.

 

That may or may not be a good thing depending on the desired tactical approach - personally I think it's a bad thing which is likely to make SoS' desired aim harder to achieve.

 

The meeting wasn't with any committee members, just a normal SOS member. Even then remember the meeting Jay Mc had with Gillett in the Crowne Plaza. The meetings didn't stop then. Wont affect it whatsoever. All apart from one of the meetings with Gillet have been impromptu and Hicks has never met with us, so nothing changes there because they stay the other side of the Atlantic and try to keep quiet.

[Gravy]

The meeting wasn't with any committee members, just a normal SOS member. Even then remember the meeting Jay Mc had with Gillett in the Crowne Plaza. The meetings didn't stop then. Wont affect it whatsoever. All apart from one of the meetings with Gillet have been impromptu and Hicks has never met with us, so nothing changes there because they stay the other side of the Atlantic and try to keep quiet.

 

Meetings, meetings, meetings - what good are they doing? You're just giving him an excuse to spout his bull ****. ASnd every time he does you get bad press like we have just had leaked to ther press and p133ing Rafa off more. Own goal really

[PeeG]

Surely everyone knows they need to go but I am just struggling to work out how a document such as that is going to achieve this? Surely he needs to be shown up a liar face to face or via the media - prove him worng rather than writing about what a nasty man he is. Organise a mass rally against them and have a dossier ready including his lies about the spade in the ground and (more importantly) transfer spend.

 

He won't give a toss about a document circulated to LFC fans - that much is proven. What does he care what we think of him - he knows that already. You have to get the rat out of the hole into the public domain to show him up for being what he is.

 

Unforunately everyone doesn't know they need to go. Gillett has been pulled up on things in that meeting and previously as well when it came to 60 days comment. In February he denied he said it when we said it was in the press conference, and now he says it was Hicks.

 

Those questions have already gone to him. Remember the Leaflets he gave out at Stoke and Burnley, particularly with the questions on the Burnley one. We received no reply back from him.

 

As for Mass Rally. I would be all for it, but only if I felt it would get the support. It might get a bit more now after us releasing this information but didn't do against Hull when not enough turned to protest when Gillett was actually here. Great work by some that day, especially Jay Mc ensured that it turned out well, but it could have been the case were people are saying there was 4000 last season against United but less against Hull.

[PeeG]

Meetings, meetings, meetings - what good are they doing? You're just giving him an excuse to spout his bull ****. ASnd every time he does you get bad press like we have just had leaked to ther press and p133ing Rafa off more. Own goal really

 

And we try to pull him up on that at the time and afterwards. As I said meeting was unexpected, so its like going into an oral exam unprepared and expecting to remember everything. It wasn't all bad press. This time some papers tried to twist it which I was unhappy about, but a lot of people will see through it. Our reply will help those who can't see through it.

 

Positive press after meeting with him in February

 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-f...00252-22834471/

 

And it wasn't SOS who leaked the interview, and we had even mentioned the interview before with what we told was talked about.

 

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/Direct...m-Saturday.html

[BG]

The meeting wasn't with any committee members, just a normal SOS member. Even then remember the meeting Jay Mc had with Gillett in the Crowne Plaza. The meetings didn't stop then. Wont affect it whatsoever. All apart from one of the meetings with Gillet have been impromptu and Hicks has never met with us, so nothing changes there because they stay the other side of the Atlantic and try to keep quiet.

 

Fair enough but personally I'd see whether or not someone is a committee member or not as a fairly minor detail given the way SoS have decided to run this. I suspect the media - should they pick up on it - will too.

 

Personally I think it's a mistake because, while it makes everyone feel a bit better, it makes a dialogue less likely. I also think it was a mistake - and fairly unhelpful to the manager and the players - to leak one of the owner's (frankly fairly well known) view of the manager just as things had at last quietened down on that front.

 

Bottom line for me is like everyone else I'd like to see owners I believed in and who had the club's best interests at heart (clearly these two fail on both counts). However I don't really agree with SoS' tactics as, in the absence of a viable alternative (whom proper research has been done on of the type that DM and RP should have done on these two), I'm unconvinced that they will help to achieve the endgame that everyone is seeking.

[Case]

I think SoS have grown up massively. Brilliant stuff to be honest.

[PeeG]

Fair enough but personally I'd see whether or not someone is a committee member or not as a fairly minor detail given the way SoS have decided to run this. I suspect the media - should they pick up on it - will too.

 

Personally I think it's a mistake because, while it makes everyone feel a bit better, it makes a dialogue less likely. I also think it was a mistake - and fairly unhelpful to the manager and the players - to leak one of the owner's (frankly fairly well known) view of the manager just as things had at last quietened down on that front.

 

Bottom line for me is like everyone else I'd like to see owners I believed in and who had the club's best interests at heart (clearly these two fail on both counts). However I don't really agree with SoS' tactics as, in the absence of a viable alternative (whom proper research has been done on of the type that DM and RP should have done on these two), I'm unconvinced that they will help to achieve the endgame that everyone is seeking.

 

Problem is, its some press who have twisted it a certain way and why should we withhold any information as well. If the Rafa stuff was left out and it got revealed somewhere down the line then people would complain that we are Pro Rafa which is something that has been aimed at us before, when we are Pro Liverpool.