This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Coutts VS Nigel Farage
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
  georgenorman  26 Jul 23 2.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
That was a waste of time! You have a very odd idea of the meaning of excellent. It's a cheaply made video by a third-rate comedian, spouting the garbage he has swallowed from Farage. There's nothing new or worthwhile there at all. The assertions he makes are either all well-known, irrelevant, or untrue. Which assertions are untrue?
|
|
| NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 26 Jul 23 2.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Matov
Very little of it makes much sense. Farage never made any kind of song and dance about banking with Coutts before this and even this 'political risk' malarkey holds little water really. Apparently the report he got via his SARS request listed stuff like 'liking a tweet by Ricky Gervais' and meeting with Novak Djokovic. Beyond daft. Plus they must have known he could get access to this via as SAR request (I have it on first-hand authority now that Nat West has forbidden its staff from mentioning Farages name in any kind of electronic/written communication because of fear of further SAR requests). Meaning they were either very, very stupid or else just had been given the nodd there would be no consequences. Nat West are in meltdown at the moment. And we own 39% of them so no point in even cheering that on. Now I LOVE a good conspiracy theory and will happily speculate on all kinds of nefarious motives for all kinds but on this, am rapidly having to concede it is most likely down to hubristic stupidity on a scale that seems epidemic amongst our so called 'elites' these days It’s actually a ‘ DSAR ‘ that NF made. A ‘ SAR’ ( Suspicious Activity Report ) is actually a report made by banks to the authorities on suspected Financial Crime Activity . Yours Pendantically etc etc Edited by NEILLO (26 Jul 2023 2.48pm)
Old, Ungifted and White |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Jul 23 2.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by HKOwen
You are not actually thinking this is possible surely. If you think that in this matter the board would let some PR person issue a statement on their behalf without being consulted you really have no grasp of the corporate world despite all your supposed business experience. Unlikely to be just a "PR person". More likely an agency, doing it in a rush with the approval of the Chairman to try to steady the ship. I don't know any better than anyone else and am just speculating but I bet not all the board are easily contactable at a moment's notice and action was deemed imperative.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Jul 23 2.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
Which assertions are untrue? I am not going to listen to that drivel again to specify them. Once was more than enough. You can believe they are all true if that makes you happy.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 26 Jul 23 2.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
This comment demonstrates just how effective Farage is at spreading his odious propaganda. It never ceases to amaze me how easily people fall for it. As Farage is clearly demonstrating every hour or every day at the moment the last thing this has done has impacted his freedom of speech. Nor anyone's democratic rights. He has used the stupidity of a bank's handling of a delicate decision to spread untrue ideas into the minds of those who are willing believers of conspiracy theories. Spin spin spin. You must be getting dizzy.
|
|
| Spiderman Horsham 26 Jul 23 2.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
This comment demonstrates just how effective Farage is at spreading his odious propaganda. It never ceases to amaze me how easily people fall for it. As Farage is clearly demonstrating every hour or every day at the moment the last thing this has done has impacted his freedom of speech. Nor anyone's democratic rights. He has used the stupidity of a bank's handling of a delicate decision to spread untrue ideas into the minds of those who are willing believers of conspiracy theories. I think this post establishes that your hatred of Farage is outweighing any clear thinking on the issue at hand. What untruths has he spread?
|
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 26 Jul 23 2.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Unlikely to be just a "PR person". More likely an agency, doing it in a rush with the approval of the Chairman to try to steady the ship. I don't know any better than anyone else and am just speculating but I bet not all the board are easily contactable at a moment's notice and action was deemed imperative. You ignored my post from the BBC, the Chairman issued that statement. Are you now saying that PR firms issue statements on behalf of clients without their approval. If you are correct and I was a board member I would be livid that something was issued in my name with out any consultation and I would go public. Until proven otherwise I am taken the Chairman's statement at face value that yesterday the board fully supported the CEO until latter in the day when err it didn't. As for contacting the board I believe there is a thing called the telephone. Edited by Badger11 (26 Jul 2023 2.57pm)
One more point |
|
| Matov 26 Jul 23 3.00pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by NEILLO
It’s actually a ‘ DSAR ‘ that NF made. A ‘ SAR’ ( Suspicious Activity Report ) is actually a report made by banks to the authorities on suspected Financial Crime Activity . Yours Pendantically etc etc Edited by NEILLO (26 Jul 2023 2.48pm) Always happy to be corrected. I have worked in an environment in which SAR was used for Subject Access Report but it was not financial.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell. |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Jul 23 3.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by cryrst
So have you got evidence to back up this theory that other customers may have been offended by NF having a bank account with coutts or any other banks within their brand. You know just to clarify your perception that this was a genuine decision needed by coutts from a business position to protect their reputation ! Why would I have evidence? I don't work for Coutts let alone was involved in their review. I don't suppose they have any evidence either! They don't need it. If the judgement of those responsible for this kind of assessment is that there was a sufficiently high risk of reputational damage to justify closing his account that's the only criterion that matters. It's their account. Not his. They can do whatever is deemed in their best interests. They don't have to produce evidence or justify it to anyone else.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| georgenorman 26 Jul 23 3.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
This comment demonstrates just how effective Farage is at spreading his odious propaganda. It never ceases to amaze me how easily people fall for it. As Farage is clearly demonstrating every hour or every day at the moment the last thing this has done has impacted his freedom of speech. Nor anyone's democratic rights. He has used the stupidity of a bank's handling of a delicate decision to spread untrue ideas into the minds of those who are willing believers of conspiracy theories. What has he said that is 'odious propaganda'?
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Jul 23 3.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
You ignored my post from the BBC, the Chairman issued that statement. Are you now saying that PR firms issue statements on behalf of clients without their approval. If you are correct and I was a board member I would be livid that something was issued in my name with out any consultation and I would go public. Until proven otherwise I am taken the Chairman's statement at face value that yesterday the board fully supported the CEO until latter in the day when err it didn't. As for contacting the board I believe there is a thing called the telephone. Edited by Badger11 (26 Jul 2023 2.57pm) I didn't ignore it. I haven't noticed it. I am merely speculating. The Chairman must have approved it, but who knows where all the Board are. Some could be on the other side of the world and in "do not disturb" situations, or otherwise uncontactable. It was all done in a great rush. Unwisely no doubt and in a way that could have consequences. Pausing for thought normally pays dividends.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Teddy Eagle  26 Jul 23 3.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Why would I have evidence? I don't work for Coutts let alone was involved in their review. I don't suppose they have any evidence either! They don't need it. If the judgement of those responsible for this kind of assessment is that there was a sufficiently high risk of reputational damage to justify closing his account that's the only criterion that matters. It's their account. Not his. They can do whatever is deemed in their best interests. They don't have to produce evidence or justify it to anyone else. If they deemed this situation to be in their best interest then the decisions they take on investing their customers' millions might come into question.
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Jul 23 3.15pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by georgenorman
What has he said that is 'odious propaganda'? It would take a book to answer that. Starting with Brexit and continuing up to this. His whole stance over this event is manufactured outrage designed to achieve a political advantage. That's propaganda. His freedom of speech hasn't been affected. No money has been lost. No doubt he has several other bank accounts and credit cards, so his ability to live, trade and enjoy life hasn't been diminished in any way. It's 100% bs which he is using as propaganda to further himself. That's the mark of an odious man.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 26 Jul 23 3.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Why would I have evidence? I don't work for Coutts let alone was involved in their review. I don't suppose they have any evidence either! They don't need it. If the judgement of those responsible for this kind of assessment is that there was a sufficiently high risk of reputational damage to justify closing his account that's the only criterion that matters. It's their account. Not his. They can do whatever is deemed in their best interests. They don't have to produce evidence or justify it to anyone else. Yes they do. They are a part of Nat West, and they were bailed out with tax payers money. You talk about reputations. They have destroyed theirs by allowing people with screwball ideologies to decide who can bank with them based on politics. Organisations using their power to manipulate thought and persecute 'wrong think' has gone too far and needs reigning in. As you have proven time and time again, you only approve of political freedom and democracy when it agrees with your warped mindset.
|
|
| georgenorman 26 Jul 23 3.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It would take a book to answer that. Starting with Brexit and continuing up to this. His whole stance over this event is manufactured outrage designed to achieve a political advantage. That's propaganda. His freedom of speech hasn't been affected. No money has been lost. No doubt he has several other bank accounts and credit cards, so his ability to live, trade and enjoy life hasn't been diminished in any way. It's 100% bs which he is using as propaganda to further himself. That's the mark of an odious man. There is nothing manufactured about his 'outrage'. He has been measured and calm in exposing the lies of Coutts, Nat West and the BBC.
|
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 26 Jul 23 3.31pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I didn't ignore it. I haven't noticed it. I am merely speculating. The Chairman must have approved it, but who knows where all the Board are. Some could be on the other side of the world and in "do not disturb" situations, or otherwise uncontactable. It was all done in a great rush. Unwisely no doubt and in a way that could have consequences. Pausing for thought normally pays dividends. This scandal has been going on over a week. If the board members have not been talking to each other about their position and whether the CEO had done anything wrong then they are even more useless than most of us think. They are paid a great deal of money to make big decisions but sometimes those decisions such as this are easy.
One more point |
|
| Spiderman Horsham 26 Jul 23 3.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
It would take a book to answer that. Starting with Brexit and continuing up to this. His whole stance over this event is manufactured outrage designed to achieve a political advantage. That's propaganda. His freedom of speech hasn't been affected. No money has been lost. No doubt he has several other bank accounts and credit cards, so his ability to live, trade and enjoy life hasn't been diminished in any way. It's 100% bs which he is using as propaganda to further himself. That's the mark of an odious man. I rest my case. You really are losing any semblance of clear thinking here, due to your contempt fir the person it involves. Manufactured outrage!, His personal details were given by the CEO to a journalist, possibly with the full knowledge it would be made public. Totally against all client confidentiality. Anyone would be outraged. Of course I’m not surprised you mention Brexit, I believe you have even managed to get Trump into this thread in another post
|
|
| Spiderman Horsham 26 Jul 23 3.36pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
I didn't ignore it. I haven't noticed it. I am merely speculating. The Chairman must have approved it, but who knows where all the Board are. Some could be on the other side of the world and in "do not disturb" situations, or otherwise uncontactable. It was all done in a great rush. Unwisely no doubt and in a way that could have consequences. Pausing for thought normally pays dividends. They will all have mobile phones, we don’t rely on jungle drums anymore
|
|
| eaglesdare 26 Jul 23 3.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
This comment demonstrates just how effective Farage is at spreading his odious propaganda. It never ceases to amaze me how easily people fall for it. As Farage is clearly demonstrating every hour or every day at the moment the last thing this has done has impacted his freedom of speech. Nor anyone's democratic rights. He has used the stupidity of a bank's handling of a delicate decision to spread untrue ideas into the minds of those who are willing believers of conspiracy theories. A fine example of someone who seems to be malfunctioning at the thought of Nigel Farage being right.
|
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 26 Jul 23 4.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Yes they do. They are a part of Nat West, and they were bailed out with tax payers money. You talk about reputations. They have destroyed theirs by allowing people with screwball ideologies to decide who can bank with them based on politics. Organisations using their power to manipulate thought and persecute 'wrong think' has gone too far and needs reigning in. As you have proven time and time again, you only approve of political freedom and democracy when it agrees with your warped mindset. That Nat West are currently partially publically owned makes no difference at all, other than this nonsense will make it more difficult for the government to sell the remaining shares. We don't possess a right to look into the operating policies of a bank. The government might, as a shareholder via questions at the AGM, but not us as individuals. No one argues that the bank has shot itself in both feet in the way they have handled this, but the decisions, and any changes, are theirs alone to make. That you, and others, continue to believe that this has involved a bank "using their power to manipulate thought and persecute 'wrong think'", just demonstrates completely "wrong think" itself. It's nothing of the sort. It's a commercial organisation deciding how they want to operate. You believe in freedom, yet seem determined to restrict it. Your attitude is much more socialist than mine!
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.