rbr 1,247 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2013/04/for-charles-green-context-is-king.html?m=1 Sorry on an iPad , can't copy and paste it , or rather don't know how 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 it could have been written by green and its got some glaring inaccuracies in it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted April 13, 2013 Author Share Posted April 13, 2013 it could have been written by green and its got some glaring inaccuracies in it. Such as , I'm struggling with this whole episode , so would appreciate those inaccuracies getting pointed out 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 well it repeats one of greens lies about sevco 5088 being wound up by the time whyte was involved with it. it wasnt applied to be wound up till januray. really its just a rehash of greens take on things which are patantly untrue or half truths at best. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 (edited) well it repeats one of greens lies about sevco 5088 being wound up by the time whyte was involved with it. it wasnt applied to be wound up till januray. really its just a rehash of greens take on things which are patantly untrue or half truths at best. I wish that those crying foul of this or that "wrong" statement by Green would show the same determination with the constant media claims - be it the BBC, The Scottish Sun, or the Daily Record - that the club (sic!) "was liquidated" and "sold to Green" and "relaunched" in the Third etc. pp.. On a sidenote ... what have Green's "lies" about Sevco 5088 being "wound up" to do with the case presented by the CRO chap? Do we by default assume that Green can only tell half-truths now? That would hold true for about 99% of Earth's population. Edited April 13, 2013 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I think the writer's a Green fan. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I wish that those crying foul of this or that "wrong" statement by Green would show the same determination with the constant media claims - be it the BBC, The Scottish Sun, or the Daily Record - that the club (sic!) "was liquidated" and "sold to Green" and "relaunched" in the Third etc. pp.. On a sidenote ... what have Green's "lies" about Sevco 5088 being "wound up" to do with the case presented by the CRO chap? Do we by default assume that Green can only tell half-truths now? That would hold true for about 99% of Earth's population. he repeats the lie as fact. basically the article is just all greens statements taken as fact. ignoring the provable lies and the obvious weasel words. it is what it is. its a pro green article that takes green at this word. if you want to do that go for it. i will continue to point out his lies and wonder why he won't use the word fake or forgery as they come out people can ignore me as they please. or better still show me where i am wrong. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted April 13, 2013 Author Share Posted April 13, 2013 well it repeats one of greens lies about sevco 5088 being wound up by the time whyte was involved with it. it wasnt applied to be wound up till januray. really its just a rehash of greens take on things which are patantly untrue or half truths at best. So you keep saying but don't produce , from what I can see and have read , Sevco 5088 is in the process of being wound up and as such in the grand scheme of things just a shelf company affecting no one , it could lie dormant for years and affect no one so why the big stushie 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 The point, gunslinger, is not that you are wrong, but it looks that you pick on Green's apparent half-truths and make it look as he's only capable of telling half-truth in general. The point is that you pick upon "possible" scenarios if Sevco 5088 had bought Rangers, that Whyte "might" have had something to do with it (which we do not know for certain) and that consequently he "might" have something to do with Sevco Scotland too. Yet, as opposed to Whyte's takeover, quite a few legally bound people and institutions have checked and double-checked the information about Green, his backers and Sevco Scotland. Green and Co. knew and know full well that any connection of Whyte to the current Rangers holding company - however slim - would be their end. All these people and institutions will have covered their backsides thrice over and had somesuch been done in 2011, we might not have seen a Whyte anywhere near Ibrox. Hence, I for one do not by default assume that the stuff Green has said about Whyte's non-involvement of Rangers FC is only half-truth or indeed, as some like to call it, a "lie". Which in turn does not say that I believe him in everything he says. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 So you keep saying but don't produce , from what I can see and have read , Sevco 5088 is in the process of being wound up and as such in the grand scheme of things just a shelf company affecting no one , it could lie dormant for years and affect no one so why the big stushie yes but even green says it was applied to be wound up this january. On telling Mr Whyte ‘He is Sevco’: “This is correct but at that point I had signed a resignation letter and a stock transfer form because it was decided that a Scottish company should buy a Scottish institution. Sevco 5088 wasn’t required.” thats what the article says. it's what green said. yet you yourself know he is still a director and the company is still running and wasn't even applied to be wound up till jan. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.