May set to be PM as Leadsom quits race

a reply to: bastion

Do you have a link showing Fox being convicted or even charged with fraud?

Also are you really suggesting that Hammond owes over £3 billion? Hardly good for a new Chancellor.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: bastion
Interesting blog - let me say again, blog. So, again, you aren't answering the question. You said the husband of Theresa May is in charge of G4S - it's quite simple, do you stand by that?

A blog on a national newspaper from a house of lords speech uncovering mass money kaundering and pension raids in the UK- backed up with 100s pages of evidence.

For the umpteenth time, yes. I stabnd by it,ring them up on (0)208 770 7000 if you don't beleive me.
ect in hand.
I get it, you're not going to beleive me no matter what I post so le's get back to subject and wait for Sundaypapers and FT or the big scoop.

So the husband of Theresa May is the CEO of G4S. Thanks, I'll remember I heard it from you. Strange none of your previous posts allude to you being such an undercover journalist or the colourful life of your family, in fact in 2014 you said "Disclaimer: I'm not a conspiracy type but find them interesting to read"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Disclaimer of my own - for all I know the investment fund that employs the husband of Theresa May might do all sorts of things - I know not. What I can't see any is evidence linking him to be directly responsible for anything that you have alluded to. You then gave a link to a 55 second clip from a concert that amounted to fudge all in the context of this link.


I'm not a conspiracy theorist

If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem - it's no skin off my balls.

The video is over 10minutes long and seven years of research - not the 55 seconds you claim it is. - Fatal error. Watch it it in full if you wnat any indigh to how pension fund raiding works,
I'll leave it there, don't bother responding.

en

I've made dozens of posts stating my links as a journo - I'm an investigative journalist raed my post history instead of making stuff up. Ring up UCLan and ask to verify me or ring up strobes or John Morgan from the THE or BBC North to see y credentials.

As I stated on this page I' not a conspiracy theorsist - same as back in whenever you dug thhat post out.

EDIT I'm an investigative journalist not an 'uncover journalist' whatever that means - retract your coment or be sued for libe same with you claiing I said he was CEO, I never didl : Major apologies here's the video I meant to post of the lords uncovering 15 trillion of laundrered money - sorry for mistake - that mistake was mine and is embarasing - here;s the one I meant to post
Lord James of Blackheath $15,OOO,OOO,OOO,OOO FRAUD EXPOSED February 16 2012
www.youtube.com...

You said he is 'in charge' of GS4 - that means he runs the company and is therefore the Chief Operating Officer. I asked you if you stood by your claim that he is in charge of G4S and you said you stood by all you said although it was contradictory. You might want to sue yourself.

Anyone who uses phrases such as "If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem" is almost always saying they don't have anything to back up their claim. But you don't really care do you?

I see I'm not alone in noting your habit of making claims with nothing to back them up, just various non sequitors that ultimately don't mean anything of substance to substantiate what you say.

We've already been through this, a company has to work in the interests of its share holders, that's where the real power lies. The CEO works on behalf of the shareholders interests, which May is. The CEO is subservient to him. I never said he was CEO, I said he was head/in charge which is correct.

Admittedly I could have worded it clearer but finance and big business is a complex matter and the comments were intended for the public, not for finance experts.

What % of shares in G4s does May hold?

At the present moment I don't know the exact figure as Legal and General haven't published percerntages since June and G4S are refusing to comment.

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: bastion
Interesting blog - let me say again, blog. So, again, you aren't answering the question. You said the husband of Theresa May is in charge of G4S - it's quite simple, do you stand by that?

A blog on a national newspaper from a house of lords speech uncovering mass money kaundering and pension raids in the UK- backed up with 100s pages of evidence.

For the umpteenth time, yes. I stabnd by it,ring them up on (0)208 770 7000 if you don't beleive me.
ect in hand.
I get it, you're not going to beleive me no matter what I post so le's get back to subject and wait for Sundaypapers and FT or the big scoop.

So the husband of Theresa May is the CEO of G4S. Thanks, I'll remember I heard it from you. Strange none of your previous posts allude to you being such an undercover journalist or the colourful life of your family, in fact in 2014 you said "Disclaimer: I'm not a conspiracy type but find them interesting to read"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Disclaimer of my own - for all I know the investment fund that employs the husband of Theresa May might do all sorts of things - I know not. What I can't see any is evidence linking him to be directly responsible for anything that you have alluded to. You then gave a link to a 55 second clip from a concert that amounted to fudge all in the context of this link.


I'm not a conspiracy theorist

If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem - it's no skin off my balls.

The video is over 10minutes long and seven years of research - not the 55 seconds you claim it is. - Fatal error. Watch it it in full if you wnat any indigh to how pension fund raiding works,
I'll leave it there, don't bother responding.

en

I've made dozens of posts stating my links as a journo - I'm an investigative journalist raed my post history instead of making stuff up. Ring up UCLan and ask to verify me or ring up strobes or John Morgan from the THE or BBC North to see y credentials.

As I stated on this page I' not a conspiracy theorsist - same as back in whenever you dug thhat post out.

EDIT I'm an investigative journalist not an 'uncover journalist' whatever that means - retract your coment or be sued for libe same with you claiing I said he was CEO, I never didl : Major apologies here's the video I meant to post of the lords uncovering 15 trillion of laundrered money - sorry for mistake - that mistake was mine and is embarasing - here;s the one I meant to post
Lord James of Blackheath $15,OOO,OOO,OOO,OOO FRAUD EXPOSED February 16 2012
www.youtube.com...

You said he is 'in charge' of GS4 - that means he runs the company and is therefore the Chief Operating Officer. I asked you if you stood by your claim that he is in charge of G4S and you said you stood by all you said although it was contradictory. You might want to sue yourself.

Anyone who uses phrases such as "If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem" is almost always saying they don't have anything to back up their claim. But you don't really care do you?

I see I'm not alone in noting your habit of making claims with nothing to back them up, just various non sequitors that ultimately don't mean anything of substance to substantiate what you say.

We've already been through this, a company has to work in the interests of its share holders, that's where the real power lies. The CEO works on behalf of the shareholders interests, which May is. The CEO is subservient to him. I never said he was CEO, I said he was head/in charge which is correct.

Admittedly I could have worded it clearer but finance and big business is a complex matter and the comments were intended for the public, not for finance experts.

What % of shares in G4s does May hold?

At the present moment I don't know the exact figure as Legal and General haven't published percerntages since June and G4S are refusing to comment.

If by refusing to comment you mean stated that he doesn't own shares...

Besides which you claimed he was a major shareholder. I assume you therefore no how many he owned at one point. Roughly will do nicely.

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: bastion
Interesting blog - let me say again, blog. So, again, you aren't answering the question. You said the husband of Theresa May is in charge of G4S - it's quite simple, do you stand by that?

A blog on a national newspaper from a house of lords speech uncovering mass money kaundering and pension raids in the UK- backed up with 100s pages of evidence.

For the umpteenth time, yes. I stabnd by it,ring them up on (0)208 770 7000 if you don't beleive me.
ect in hand.
I get it, you're not going to beleive me no matter what I post so le's get back to subject and wait for Sundaypapers and FT or the big scoop.

So the husband of Theresa May is the CEO of G4S. Thanks, I'll remember I heard it from you. Strange none of your previous posts allude to you being such an undercover journalist or the colourful life of your family, in fact in 2014 you said "Disclaimer: I'm not a conspiracy type but find them interesting to read"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Disclaimer of my own - for all I know the investment fund that employs the husband of Theresa May might do all sorts of things - I know not. What I can't see any is evidence linking him to be directly responsible for anything that you have alluded to. You then gave a link to a 55 second clip from a concert that amounted to fudge all in the context of this link.


I'm not a conspiracy theorist

If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem - it's no skin off my balls.

The video is over 10minutes long and seven years of research - not the 55 seconds you claim it is. - Fatal error. Watch it it in full if you wnat any indigh to how pension fund raiding works,
I'll leave it there, don't bother responding.

en

I've made dozens of posts stating my links as a journo - I'm an investigative journalist raed my post history instead of making stuff up. Ring up UCLan and ask to verify me or ring up strobes or John Morgan from the THE or BBC North to see y credentials.

As I stated on this page I' not a conspiracy theorsist - same as back in whenever you dug thhat post out.

EDIT I'm an investigative journalist not an 'uncover journalist' whatever that means - retract your coment or be sued for libe same with you claiing I said he was CEO, I never didl : Major apologies here's the video I meant to post of the lords uncovering 15 trillion of laundrered money - sorry for mistake - that mistake was mine and is embarasing - here;s the one I meant to post
Lord James of Blackheath $15,OOO,OOO,OOO,OOO FRAUD EXPOSED February 16 2012
www.youtube.com...

You said he is 'in charge' of GS4 - that means he runs the company and is therefore the Chief Operating Officer. I asked you if you stood by your claim that he is in charge of G4S and you said you stood by all you said although it was contradictory. You might want to sue yourself.

Anyone who uses phrases such as "If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem" is almost always saying they don't have anything to back up their claim. But you don't really care do you?

I see I'm not alone in noting your habit of making claims with nothing to back them up, just various non sequitors that ultimately don't mean anything of substance to substantiate what you say.

We've already been through this, a company has to work in the interests of its share holders, that's where the real power lies. The CEO works on behalf of the shareholders interests, which May is. The CEO is subservient to him. I never said he was CEO, I said he was head/in charge which is correct.

Admittedly I could have worded it clearer but finance and big business is a complex matter and the comments were intended for the public, not for finance experts.

Don't be so pathetically patronising. Most people know what 'in charge' means. What you actually mean is the husband of Theresa May works for an investment fund and you are trying to suggest that fund includes shares in G4S and therefore in your mind he is magically in charge of G4S. We have already been through this, you keep prevaricating. You have now fairly much admitted lying. Sheesh, and you say you are a journalist? Easy trade to get a job in, obviously.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: bastion
Interesting blog - let me say again, blog. So, again, you aren't answering the question. You said the husband of Theresa May is in charge of G4S - it's quite simple, do you stand by that?

A blog on a national newspaper from a house of lords speech uncovering mass money kaundering and pension raids in the UK- backed up with 100s pages of evidence.

For the umpteenth time, yes. I stabnd by it,ring them up on (0)208 770 7000 if you don't beleive me.
ect in hand.
I get it, you're not going to beleive me no matter what I post so le's get back to subject and wait for Sundaypapers and FT or the big scoop.

So the husband of Theresa May is the CEO of G4S. Thanks, I'll remember I heard it from you. Strange none of your previous posts allude to you being such an undercover journalist or the colourful life of your family, in fact in 2014 you said "Disclaimer: I'm not a conspiracy type but find them interesting to read"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Disclaimer of my own - for all I know the investment fund that employs the husband of Theresa May might do all sorts of things - I know not. What I can't see any is evidence linking him to be directly responsible for anything that you have alluded to. You then gave a link to a 55 second clip from a concert that amounted to fudge all in the context of this link.


I'm not a conspiracy theorist

If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem - it's no skin off my balls.

The video is over 10minutes long and seven years of research - not the 55 seconds you claim it is. - Fatal error. Watch it it in full if you wnat any indigh to how pension fund raiding works,
I'll leave it there, don't bother responding.

en

I've made dozens of posts stating my links as a journo - I'm an investigative journalist raed my post history instead of making stuff up. Ring up UCLan and ask to verify me or ring up strobes or John Morgan from the THE or BBC North to see y credentials.

As I stated on this page I' not a conspiracy theorsist - same as back in whenever you dug thhat post out.

EDIT I'm an investigative journalist not an 'uncover journalist' whatever that means - retract your coment or be sued for libe same with you claiing I said he was CEO, I never didl : Major apologies here's the video I meant to post of the lords uncovering 15 trillion of laundrered money - sorry for mistake - that mistake was mine and is embarasing - here;s the one I meant to post
Lord James of Blackheath $15,OOO,OOO,OOO,OOO FRAUD EXPOSED February 16 2012
www.youtube.com...

You said he is 'in charge' of GS4 - that means he runs the company and is therefore the Chief Operating Officer. I asked you if you stood by your claim that he is in charge of G4S and you said you stood by all you said although it was contradictory. You might want to sue yourself.

Anyone who uses phrases such as "If you're too lazy to do your own research that's your problem" is almost always saying they don't have anything to back up their claim. But you don't really care do you?

I see I'm not alone in noting your habit of making claims with nothing to back them up, just various non sequitors that ultimately don't mean anything of substance to substantiate what you say.

We've already been through this, a company has to work in the interests of its share holders, that's where the real power lies. The CEO works on behalf of the shareholders interests, which May is. The CEO is subservient to him. I never said he was CEO, I said he was head/in charge which is correct.

Admittedly I could have worded it clearer but finance and big business is a complex matter and the comments were intended for the public, not for finance experts.

What % of shares in G4s does May hold?

At the present moment I don't know the exact figure as Legal and General haven't published percerntages since June and G4S are refusing to comment.

If by refusing to comment you mean stated that he doesn't own shares...

Besides which you claimed he was a major shareholder. I assume you therefore no how many he owned at one point. Roughly will do nicely.

I've a funny feeling the answer will be he isn't a major shareholder but he may work for a an investment company that has a hedge fund that may (or may not) hold a large amount of shares in G4S which for someone who claims to be a journalist is good enough to call guilty by association.

I'm also amazed though that someone who says they are a journalist and says that his/her comments are 'for the public, not for finance experts' doesn't check grammar or spelling before posting................ I know that sounds petty, but little things add up.

a reply to: uncommitted

My pension has a fund in it that owns G4S shares. I guess I can now claim to run the company.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: uncommitted

My pension has a fund in it that owns G4S shares. I guess I can now claim to run the company.

Oooooh, I'm just channelling the evil from you right now, get ready to be the subject of the next expose.