• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Putin & Russia

Abramovich was rattled enough to try and transfer running of the club straight away (without even asking them) and also sounding out buyers asap.
 
Epic flip-flopping from the IOC/IPC who have now decided to ban Russia and Belarus athletes from Paralympics.
 
johnola said:
We have to operate inside our own laws and as I understand it there is legislation pending in respect of oligarchs and Russian influence.
Not sure it is the right time to do it now either we have enough poorly drafted laws.
Click to expand...

It is a matter of priority, isn't it. The party in government has been pretty extensively funded by Russian born oligarchs over the past couple of decades, and goodness knows what other deals have taken place along the lines of what was offered to Aaron Banks using offshore concerns. That was only known because someone had access to Banks emails. It is quite viable that various people in the UK establishment have benifited from association with Russian concerns. Maybe these concerns could leak compromising information and retaliate. If that was the case, what would be the best way to manage the situation so you look like you’re doing something while you’re not actually doing much?
 
SpurMeUp said:
It is a matter of priority, isn't it. The party in government has been pretty extensively funded by Russian born oligarchs over the past couple of decades, and goodness knows what other deals have taken place along the lines of what was offered to Aaron Banks using offshore concerns. That was only known because someone had access to Banks emails. It is quite viable that various people in the UK establishment have benifited from association with Russian concerns. Maybe these concerns could leak compromising information and retaliate. If that was the case, what would be the best way to manage the situation so you look like you’re doing something while you’re not actually doing much?
Click to expand...

We should be extremely protective of our democracy and democratic process first.

I understand that you have a bee in your bonnet for the Tories and Arron Banks whoever he is. But note that to my mind if Parliament has been subverted by The Russian state then the last thing we should be doing is asking them to arm themselves with executive powers to sanction individuals.

Sanctions themselves offer opportunities to profit by corruption. How’s about we stop Mr X investing in his companies and take financial positions to profit from the negative impacts to him and positive impacts to his competitors.

And this well before we ask actually have we been subverted. And what exactly is it that Mr X has done beyond running a business and how on Earth does it impact the war in Ukraine.
 
johnola said:
We should be extremely protective of our democracy and democratic process first.

I understand that you have a bee in your bonnet for the Tories and Arron Banks whoever he is. But note that to my mind if Parliament has been subverted by The Russian state then the last thing we should be doing is asking them to arm themselves with executive powers to sanction individuals.

Sanctions themselves offer opportunities to profit by corruption. How’s about we stop Mr X investing in his companies and take financial positions to profit from the negative impacts to him and positive impacts to his competitors.

And this well before we ask actually have we been subverted. And what exactly is it that Mr X has done beyond running a business and how on Earth does it impact the war in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what your point is. Maybe you are saying that Arron Banks is a Keyser Soze figure who does not really exist? "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist" Surely you can not contest that he is the UKs largest political donor, and there is quite a bit of evidence that he has been in touch with Russian concerns? Another source:

'I was informed by Banks that he had travelled to Russia and discussed with them the diamond opportunities as well as gold mining opportunities in Russia. He further indicated that he would be meeting with the Russians again during November (2015).'

I think it might be more a case of you not wanting Banks to exist, because of your own political predispositions. But he does exist. Moreover, the sweetheart gold mine deal that was offered had a couple of other Brits involved too. It wasn't just Banks. So it is no great leap to think that there are people in the UK establishment who are connected with serious Russian money often with the lines between state and private enterprise extremely blurred. In fact, it is not even speculation (never mind conspiracy theory) as everyone knows London has been home to many oligarchs who have worked (quite legally) with all sorts of partners here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
SpurMeUp said:
Not quite sure what your point is. Maybe you are saying that Arron Banks is a Keyser Soze figure who does not really exist? "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist" Surely you can not contest that he is the UKs largest political donor, and there is quite a bit of evidence that he has been in touch with Russian concerns? Another source:

'I was informed by Banks that he had travelled to Russia and discussed with them the diamond opportunities as well as gold mining opportunities in Russia. He further indicated that he would be meeting with the Russians again during November (2015).'

I think it might be more a case of you not wanting Banks to exist, because of your own political predispositions. But he does exist. Moreover, the sweetheart gold mine deal that was offered had a couple of other Brits involved too. It wasn't just Banks. So it is no great leap to think that there are people in the UK establishment who are connected with serious Russian money often with the lines between state and private enterprise extremely blurred. In fact, it is not even speculation (never mind conspiracy theory) as everyone knows London has been home to many oligarchs who have worked (quite legally) with all sorts of partners here.
Click to expand...

You are talking in riddles again.That I have not heard of this person reveals absolutely nothing about me except perhaps that I don’t inhabit the same dismally paranoid spaces you do.

But from what you imply he sounds shady and occupying a role previously occupied by Peter Mandelson when he wielded a huge amount of influence.

If either crossed any lines they can be prosecuted.That is why law comes first.
 
johnola said:
You are talking in riddles again.That I have not heard of this person reveals absolutely nothing about me except perhaps that I don’t inhabit the same dismally paranoid spaces you do.

But from what you imply he sounds shady and occupying a role previously occupied by Peter Mandelson when he wielded a huge amount of influence.

If either crossed any lines they can be prosecuted.That is why law comes first.
Click to expand...

he's just a front for the money, the amount he donated to vote leave was more than 4 times what all of his companies have made in their entire histories and he's married to an FSB agent
 
johnola said:
You are talking in riddles again.That I have not heard of this person reveals absolutely nothing about me except perhaps that I don’t inhabit the same dismally paranoid spaces you do.
Click to expand...

We were talking about Banks here about a week ago :) Or were you referring to the Daily Mail (the link to the quote cited) as a dismally paranoid space? In which case I'd agree.

johnola said:
But from what you imply he sounds shady and occupying a role previously occupied by Peter Mandelson when he wielded a huge amount of influence.

If either crossed any lines they can be prosecuted.That is why law comes first.
Click to expand...

I guess what is interesting here is that socially accepted norms evolve. Laws often evolve to back up what is acceptable today. For example, things that the police and courts would not bother with pre-metoo, are now taken extremely seriously, and the full weight of the law is applied to prosecute. The same laws were not applied with such vigor previously. Working with slightly dodgy Russians wasn't taboo as it is today. Plenty of people during the naughties worked with the new found Russian establishment with no concerns. It was initially seen as the westernisation of Russia. Few thought to question it. Few considered that former state-owned enterprises had really been pilfered by an elite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back