Uilleam

I think it ludicrous to lump the SF 49ers and Mr Cavenaugh into the same bag as cheap, barely legal, chisellers like Whyte, Green, and the rest.

We have no control over events. If we are to adopt a sceptical position, we have to base that on some investigation, or analysis. If Cavenaugh is a 'bad man', it will be clear from his previous dealings and business(es). I haven't seen anybody demonstrate anything of the kind. If the 49ers are 'bad actors', then that would have been clear from its ownership of LUFC. Again, nobody, as far as I can see, has demonstrated that they are. However, if concerned citizens snipe from the sidelines, based on no factual evidence, whatsoever, then I think that unhelpful to the Club. It plays into the hands of those who would do us down.

Well, of course it is; but we should not ignore why that is; and why it is aye the case. There isn't much to be said on both sides, here.

How very contemporary Scots.

Green and the spivs are small beer, and I don't think the kind of money they were able to make at Rangers would attract serious long term players. The Glazers bought a successful club, which generated huge -global- income. The situation at Rangers, as even you will realise, is entirely different: it has potential, but that has to be realised. Actually, we might look at the transferability of skills issue in the light of Sir Jim Ratcliffe's travails at Old Trafford. What have the 49ers done to LUFC that worries you?

You have plenty examples up your wizard's sleeve?

I'm done for now.

You've already started with the snide sniping, based on nothing. What have the 49ers done with, and at LUFC?

Your faux piety, like your 'anti-Zionism', is nauseating. I wish that the Israelis could somehow extirpate Hamas, PIJ, and the rest of them, flood the tunnels, and nullify, if not for ever, for a significant amount of time, the existential threat it faces from these groups, who are now Iranian proxies.

What we need is a group of successful businessmen, from a variety of fields totally unrelated to sports, but who are fans, to take control of the Club, and to run it. Oh!........wait.... I have no idea what the future will bring, but I know for certain that I have no influence on it. I don't really have a problem with people making a return. To make money from a sporting outfit, that sporting outfit has to be successful. To continue to generate returns, that outfit has to continue to be successful. If Mr Cavenaugh is the lead investor, then it seems to me that he acts prudently by getting in tow with people who know how to run successful sports' teams. It's the transferability of skills which is important. I think supporters sniping from the sidelines, on the basis of, well, nothing, as far as I can see, is unhelpful, and plays into the hands of those who would wish us naught but ill.

It is everything to do with what you said, in my humble, but experienced, opinion.

I don't really know. I haven't researched the guy. A college goalkeeper, who made money in the US health/health insurance industry, possibly elsewhere, as far as I know. You obviously have the inside track. If he is as bad as you seem to imply, I think you should spill the beans. One thing does worry me; post takeover, I expect there to be a campaign to blacken the new majority owners, to drive a wedge between them and the support, probably from the first hour, and probably in sensationalist style. I don't think that rumour, assumptions, and tittle tattle, with little or nothing in the way of substantiation, from ourselves, will help. If the Yanks are the black hats in this movie, let us know the why, the how, and the wherefore.

I don't think that hating Jews, because they are Jews, puts them on the right side of anything, far less history.

Explain, please. But, do be careful that you don't move into libelling the man.

...declared the banner to be 'unacceptable'. He did not, of course, explain what was 'unacceptable' about it. He really is a mealy mouthed sack of shit.

In your heart you must know that they do not have, nor have they ever had, one scintilla of self reflection.

I sense, somehow, that Mr Cavenagh does not seek, nor need, the comfort of cosplay; that he neither seeks, nor needs, the comfort of victimhood; and that imposter syndrome does not trouble him in those long Winter nights. I should not, then, expect a masquerade. May the Fourth be with you. You're welcome.

Even 'rebel scum' aren't offended, it would seem. So who in Poileas Alba, the Crown Office, or the SNP Politburo sobered up? "HH", I assume, as always, means 'Heil Hitler', which I, and many others, find offensive.

I think that they have already lost it......

Tifo - Wikipedia

Wheesht: don't exercise freedom of speech, just in case 'the authorities' decide to try to stop you doing so. And the outcome is.....

Yes. They think of themselves as 'rebels', which, really, they are not. They don't think of themselves as paedophiles, which, really, they are. (They practice child abuse, directly, by ignoring it condone it, or, by concealing it, are complicit in it.)

As I said elsewhere, the banner was offensive: offensive to rebel scum.

The 'Tifo' was offensive: offensive to rebel scum.

Yes. I know. I just can't spell his name.