amms 0 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Reading some of this stuff is like re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird - Boo Radley is about to jump out on us. I fear hysteria is taking hold of us and preventing us from exercising common sense. Some appear to have forgotten Pinsent Masons have undertaken an in depth investigation into allegations of links between Whyte & Green and found them to be totally without foundation. Furthermore the SFA' date=' who had the option of launching their own investigation into these allegations, decided the Pinsent Masons enquiry was satisfactory. Now when I raised these points on a message board this morning, not for the first time when dealing with this subject the allegation that Charles Green failed to co-operate with this enquiry was thrown at me - thus invalidating Pinsent Masons enquiry. Now I have heard this allegation before but never had its source confirmed or substantiated. When I enquired where allegations of non co-operation were coming from no-one could provide a definitive answer - no links, no sources, nothing. The only suggestion, which appears to be the original source of this allegation, is that such an allegation was in some of the Charlotte Fakes.[/quote'] What's your point here D'Art? Don't you want to know who owns a significant and influential shareholding in the club? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 What's your point here D'Art? Don't you want to know who owns a significant and influential shareholding in the club? That some of us - particularly other message boards I may add - are jumping to conclusions when there is no rationale, in fact I would not be surprised if some encouraged it, particularly when such hysteria arrives at the conclusion Whyte is behind these investors. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I have seen a page of the PM report - authenticity unconfirmed but I choose, atm, to believe it just as I may in the future not believe it - which specifically mentioned that on several points of interest co-operation was not forthcoming. I fail to see why they would include such a line if there is no doubt at all about certain peoples' involvement. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crucible 0 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I have seen a page of the PM report - authenticity unconfirmed but I choose, atm, to believe it just as I may in the future not believe it - which specifically mentioned that on several points of interest co-operation was not forthcoming. I fail to see why they would include such a line if there is no doubt at all about certain peoples' involvement. It would depend how much credence you afford the source to believe any of their lines. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Reading some of this stuff is like re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird - Boo Radley is about to jump out on us. I fear hysteria is taking hold of us and preventing us from exercising common sense. Some appear to have forgotten Pinsent Masons have undertaken an in depth investigation into allegations of links between Whyte & Green and found them to be totally without foundation. Furthermore the SFA' date=' who had the option of launching their own investigation into these allegations, decided the Pinsent Masons enquiry was satisfactory. Now when I raised these points on a message board this morning, not for the first time when dealing with this subject the allegation that Charles Green failed to co-operate with this enquiry was thrown at me - thus invalidating Pinsent Masons enquiry. Now I have heard this allegation before but never had its source confirmed or substantiated. When I enquired where allegations of non co-operation were coming from no-one could provide a definitive answer - no links, no sources, nothing. The only suggestion, which appears to be the original source of this allegation, is that such an allegation was in some of the Charlotte Fakes.[/quote'] Funny enough it is the poster who doesn't want the shareholders revealed, who brings up the prospect of the SFA punishing the Club. If Whyte is not involved why would we be punished? I want the names revealed whoever they are. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 No I never said anything remotely like that. Then why do you think the SFA would take action against us, I don't know where you are coming from. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 That some of us - particularly other message boards I may add - are jumping to conclusions when there is no rationale' date=' in fact I would not be surprised if some encouraged it, particularly when such hysteria arrives at the conclusion Whyte is behind these investors.[/quote'] The only person I've come across on here who thinks Whyte's involved is Crucible. I very much doubt Whyte's involved but I would really like to know who is? Don't you? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 I have seen a page of the PM report - authenticity unconfirmed but I choose, atm, to believe it just as I may in the future not believe it - which specifically mentioned that on several points of interest co-operation was not forthcoming. I fail to see why they would include such a line if there is no doubt at all about certain peoples' involvement. Well ask yourself this amms - do you really believe that if that excerpt was authentic - then the SFA would have been satisfied with the investigation to such an extent that they decided not to launch their own ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 Well ask yourself this amms - do you really believe that if that excerpt was authentic - then the SFA would have been satisfied with the investigation to such an extent that they decided not to launch their own ? C'mon D'Art we're not hard to tell apart. I've an avatar featuring an astonishing sportsman who broke taboos and changed history, Andy has an Edinburgh private schoolboy on his! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted October 29, 2013 Share Posted October 29, 2013 C'mon D'Art we're not hard to tell apart. I've an avatar featuring an astonishing sportsman who broke taboos and changed history, Andy has an Edinburgh private schoolboy on his! Forgive me...that one went right over my head. 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.