Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
I think so. The answer will be to sell quickly and abromovic not to get the money
I think so. The answer will be to sell quickly and abromovic not to get the moneyYou can't so sorry Chelsea you've gotten fat on the stolen wealth of the Russian people so you made your bed on this.
How do you sanction him without it affecting the club
Whist I do agree with you, two wrongs don't make a right here.I don't care if 5hey sanction him, what I'm saying is either Sanction them all and end their involvement in this countrys institutions or don't bother.
Same with banging on about Newcastle, the PM is off to meet the Saudis in a few days, ifour PM is doing that why should a football club be any different?
I don't care if 5hey sanction him, what I'm saying is either Sanction them all and end their involvement in this countrys institutions or don't bother.
Same with banging on about Newcastle, the PM is off to meet the Saudis in a few days, ifour PM is doing that why should a football club be any different?
Classic whatabouteryI suppose the basic answer is the global sanction response to Russia
what I find slightly odd is the general acceptance that a government can freeze a persons assets as they don’t like them very much. The much droned on about delay was clearly as the government were working out ways to ensure no legal challenge was forthcoming
I doubt we’d have been feeezing any assets of Americans here if the us decided to roll back the years and Napalm Vietnam
The general point about whether a government can arbitrarily freeze someone's assets is fair, however. tbh I don't know where I stand on that - on the one hand it's he path towards a controlling dictatorial government that we claim to be opposing, and along the lines of banning protest etc. On the other hand, when times are special, does government *have* to act of its own accord?Classic whataboutery
Classic whataboutery
You're right. Governments should have limited powers to affect private assets. But, in times of war governments give themselves special powers.The general point about whether a government can arbitrarily freeze someone's assets is fair, however. tbh I don't know where I stand on that - on the one hand it's he path towards a controlling dictatorial government that we claim to be opposing, and along the lines of banning protest etc. On the other hand, when times are special, does government *have* to act of its own accord?
Whist I do agree with you, two wrongs don't make a right here.
If someone had been murdered it wouldn't be ok for some else to steal the dead man's wallet however small their crime in relation to the first.
I suppose the basic answer is the global sanction response to Russia
what I find slightly odd is the general acceptance that a government can freeze a persons assets as they don’t like them very much. The much droned on about delay was clearly as the government were working out ways to ensure no legal challenge was forthcoming
I doubt we’d have been feeezing any assets of Americans here if the us decided to roll back the years and Napalm Vietnam
The general point about whether a government can arbitrarily freeze someone's assets is fair, however. tbh I don't know where I stand on that - on the one hand it's he path towards a controlling dictatorial government that we claim to be opposing, and along the lines of banning protest etc. On the other hand, when times are special, does government *have* to act of its own accord?
I don't care if 5hey sanction him, what I'm saying is either Sanction them all and end their involvement in this countrys institutions or don't bother.
Same with banging on about Newcastle, the PM is off to meet the Saudis in a few days, ifour PM is doing that why should a football club be any different?
its just an easy can to kick down the road
Nah this is whatabouteryHardly its a pretty direct observation - I think you confuse whataboutery with hypocrisy
Nah this is whataboutery
doubt we’d have been feeezing any assets of Americans here if the us decided to roll back the years and Napalm Vietnam
Chelski fans innitRidiculously, in the last fortnight the BBC have received the most complaints about "Bias against Roman Abramovich and/or Chelsea FC"
Taken from here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/sites/default/files/2022-03/28 February - 13 March 2022.pdf
View attachment 24194
Wow, the government really has it in for Chelsea, what a disgrace etc etc
"Chelsea is more than just its owner, it's a living organism with huge importance to its fans and community," Knight said.
"It was understandable that, at short notice, last week's game against Middlesbrough went ahead without Chelsea fans.
"But with this much notice, the FA have no excuse for excluding them. The FA must be allowed to sell tickets to Chelsea fans”
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?