Dorset Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) Has Matthew Syed gone too far this time? Seemingly determined to broaden his recent vitriolic assaults, this self-styled crusader against the Chels infidels has launched himself wholeheartedly into battle once again with his latest Times article entitled ’It is Abramovich who shames Chelsea’. Rather than subject you all to a full regurgitation of this neurotic diatribe [i’ll leave it to others to reproduce it if they feel so inclined] my preference here is to concentrate on the closing paragraphs, which typify his fixation, born of a decade of frustration [suffered by his own club Arsenal] that he sees as being directly attributable to the arrival of Roman Abramovich at Chelsea and which, more importantly, will surely form the basis for any further action the club, or its owner as an individual, may wish to take… “There is nothing anti-Chelsea about condemning Abramovich. Indeed, many of those who love the club are the most outraged that it should have been tainted by him. Even if it is difficult to figure out how to obtain redress for the Russian people from the swindle they suffered in the 1990s, it is surely obligatory to resist the way that Abramovich has been so seamlessly integrated into British cultural life. Certainly, the fawning coverage has got to stop.” Absurd as the statements of fact made in both the first and last sentences of this paragraph are, it is the central themes that stand out as being both incredibly assumptive and phobic. I fear, where Chelsea is concerned, Syed’s gross indignation and sense of injustice suddenly spills over into a manic behavioural tendency bordering on the delusional and concern for the state of his mind proves well-founded on reading the next paragraph… “Berezovsky died on March 23, 2013, alone in a locked bathroom with a ligature around his neck. Professor Bernd Brinkmann, an expert in asphyxiation, told the coroner that the marks on his neck could not have been brought about by hanging and suggested that he had been strangled and then hanged from the shower rail in the bathroom. The coroner delivered an open verdict. Was the oligarch yet another victim of the so-called aluminium wars? There has never been any suggestion that Abramovich was in any way involved.” Up until now, maybe, but these words clearly make that suggestion, connection, implication, call it what you will. Indeed, it is very likely that any lawyer worth his salt could argue a case for defamation built on the very firm intention behind placing these recollections at this specific point in the piece and, if pursued, the rest of the article would hardly argue to the contrary. Indeed, supportive evidence such as the recent ’cultural terrorist’ narrative aimed at Jose, might also be produced to show Syed’s undoubted intent to not only to defame the individual, but also do it with impunity. And if any further verification were needed of the journalist’s insatiable desire to encourage and lead some sort of anti-Chelsea religious crusade, with the full support of his newspaper, I give you this, his final parting shot of a sentence… “It is not just the Russian people, who have endured so much over the centuries - at the hands of self-appointed elites of all political colours - who have the right to feel a sense of outrage.” Feel inclined to rise up and join the Syed revolution, thereby embracing the outrage he 'senses' with such paranoid zeal? No, thought not, but I’m guessing you do feel, as I do, that the time has come for some action to be taken before fanaticism sees a bloody storming of the Bridge and an overthrow by the proletariat, no doubt led by their self-appointed leader, Matthew the Lionheart. Seriously though, he needs to be restrained and litigation may well be the only solution. As in the past, the mere threat of it might illicit a small-ad sized, well-hidden apology somewhere in the newspaper, but a far better outcome would be the suing of Syed’s employers for every penny possible, with the resultant substantial damages donated to a charity of Roman’s choosing. He has experience in this field, as the following quote from a Bloomberg Business article in 2013 confirms… “Roman Abramovich, Russia’s eighth-richest person, is the country’s most charitable billionaire. The 46-year-old owner of London’s Chelsea Football Club donated about $310 million of his $12.7 billion fortune to philanthropic causes from 2010 through 2012, more than any of Russia’s 15 richest citizens, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.” Incidentally, the news outlet also stated the following:- “Alisher Usmanov, Russia’s wealthiest man [and Arsenal’s second largest shareholder] gave $247 million to charity in the period, a Bloomberg survey of the country’s richest people shows. He controls a $19.4 billion fortune, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.” Perhaps Matthew Syed might chew on those figures for a while before making such a fool of himself next time… that is, of course, if his employers afford him ’a next time’ in the wake of this character assassination. Edited October 28, 2015 by Dorset Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkw Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) Doesn't he was work for the mirror? You know, the paper owned by Murdoch, dead girls phone hacking, altering photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse etc. Wonder if he's equally ashamed of his own employers the hypocritical twat. Edited October 28, 2015 by dkw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardCFC Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 I don't think he works for the Mirror, I think it's just the Times. I fully agree with Dorset though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PloKoon13 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Not that this justifies anything, but more or less everything that went on in the Yeltsin-era mass privatisation was absurdly dodgy. I'm not going to pretend to be in any way an expert on Abramovich's rise to power nor the Berezovsky case; even if I sought to I imagine my judgement would be so fatally clouded by cognitive dissonance that it would hardly be worth me giving my opinion. I will say one thing though about parts of Abramovich's history which never get mentioned. I remember reading an article about Roman's tenure as Governor of some impoverished Oblast or other in North-East Russia. Apparently he invested over a billion dollars of his own money into the region's infrastructure, leading to a massive increase in lifespan, quality of life, a doubling of the region's GDP, and achieved something ridiculous like a fivefold increase in average salaries. Again I don't pretend to be anything like an expert on this, but I thought it might be worth mentioning another side of Roman's past which doesn't seem to attract much attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mez Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) Would be great if Abramovich sued the pants off this guy for defamation. Some of these disgusting journos (opposition fans with an education and access to the media like The Times) need a good kick up the a****. People read this rubbish mistaking it for objective analysis which it is not. Mez Edited October 28, 2015 by mez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkw Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 I don't think he works for the Mirror, I think it's just the Times. I fully agree with Dorset though. Sorry, the times. Which is also owned by Rupert Murdoch. Who makes a nine Bob bit look straight as a ruler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHELLY Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) Tin foil hat for Mr Syed...What a nut job. Having said that click bait whoring is all the rage, so I daresay his employers are more than happy with this pile of sh*te. Syed is just Katie Hopkins with a thesaurus. Best to just ignore him, much as I'd love to see him get sued, I think he'd relish the attention. Edited October 28, 2015 by SHELLY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM7 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 It would be nice to hear from Roman once in a while but I have massive respect for his ability to stay quiet and keep his privacy. It's refreshing in a world that is constantly wanting people to talk and big themselves up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backbiter Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Syed is a tosser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Bridges Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) I for one have been dumbfounded by the tolerance of our club, and it's wealthy benefactor, from this type sh*t for so long and have long wondered why an army of lawyers have not laid seige to certain media outlets/individuals in a manner of Russian attrition not seen since the Battle of Leningrad. Win or lose, make them feel it in the pocketbook in a such a manner that any sort of victory for them will be Pyrrhic. Make them chose between profit margins or driving certain narratives they can not substantiate. The media get more leeway than most regarding libel/slander, but I feel it's been taken too far for a while so I am not sure this will have much effect save for that it seems to suggest a direct link between Abramovich and a specific death/murder. Then again, and call me coward if you will, but if I honestly believed I lived in the same city as a foriegn multi-billionaire who had elite death squads doing their bidding and setting people up to look like suicide or just dissappear..... well I'd probably wait until I had enough proof for arrest before I started calling them out in a public newspaper. Minimum. Lawsuits would be the least of my concerns, especially if I had family. Edited October 28, 2015 by Barry Bridges Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjd Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 It's pretty much just the same article he's written for the past decade. Why are people even shocked or outraged anymore. I could've written that on behalf of him word for word. Honestly, he wouldn't have a job if it wasn't for Chelsea FC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drogba11CFC Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 The problem is, if we do sue him, he becomes a martyr. We ban him...martyr. Chelsea fan gets the last chocolate doughnut ahead of him in the queue at Greggs...martyr. He has to move seats on the train because he's sitting in a Chelsea fan's reserved seat...martyr. Chelsea-supporting ticket inspector catches him travelling without a valid ticket...well, you get the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevo Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 He's a journalist. This automatically makes him a c**t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluegraham Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Just shoot the d**khead lol only joking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedrake55 Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 cluck that c***! how come he doesn't go after the muslim 'slaughter own in arab spring' owned club who is going around bribing the people of manchester to accept them or the american slags who have no interest in football!! just realise i'm ranting! totally agree with dorset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nichollz Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 He writes the same article or appears to say this somewhere every 18 months. His journalistic weight is pretty low though so I assume that's why he has to keep repeating the same thing because no one cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePeaLauncher Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 He's at it again read todays SUN Page 67 headline "SHADY ROMAN EMPIRE" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celery1989 Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 I swear Syed publishes something every 6 months about Abramovich. If he what he is saying about Berezovsky is true then surely he ought to be a bit more careful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now