Jump to content

Russian invasion of Ukraine


Sonam

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


No, his point was to continue feathering his cap with Chinese money from film sales by avoiding saying anything about the ongoing human rights issues in that country. But rather than just going "I don't know enough about it, he infantilised his whole industry and indirectly shut down critical voices from within the industry too.

That quote was from 1997 when "7 years in Tibet" came out, and he ended up being banned from China for 20 years, the film is probably still banned. Maybe he just thought it would be nice for some Chinese people to see the film and didn't want to say anything that might mess it up?

Quote

You shouldn't speak until you know what you're talking about. That's why I get uncomfortable with interviews. Reporters ask me what I feel China should do about Tibet. Who cares what I think China should do? I'm a fucking actor! They hand me a script. I act. I'm here for entertainment. Basically, when you whittle everything away, I'm a grown man who puts on makeup.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Abramovich has admitted to paying huge bribes to secure massively under priced shares in Russian state assets. His entire fortune is based on theft. He’s also highly likely to have been involved in protection rackets and to have been involved with organised crime.

He is also very tight with Putin, he was appointed a governor by Putin and was an unofficial advisor to him, probably still is.

That's a bold call to make given Abramovich's clutch of lawyers. I look forward to The ICTChris applying to join the Junior forum in a few months' time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, virginton said:

That's a bold call to make given Abramovich's clutch of lawyers. I look forward to The ICTChris applying to join the Junior forum in a few months' time. 

Probably the perfect timing in fairness - Abramovich can't pay them to go after him just now. If I was him I'd be more worried about which sushi restaurants he's visiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a bold call to make given Abramovich's clutch of lawyers. I look forward to The ICTChris applying to join the Junior forum in a few months' time. 
He made his first millions and was heavily involved in the carve-up of the Soviet Union’s industrial assets, notably through his acquisition of the large oil company Sibneft. Thanks to Russia’s controversial loans-for-shares program and Yeltsin privatising Sibneft, Abramovich with Boris Berezovsky were able to buy out the business for just $100m, despite its market value of $600m. 

That's atate-sponsored theft in anyone's book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


No, his point was to continue feathering his cap with Chinese money from film sales by avoiding saying anything about the ongoing human rights issues in that country. But rather than just going "I don't know enough about it, he infantilised his whole industry and indirectly shut down critical voices from within the industry too.

Have you met many actors? I worked in theatre for years and it genuinely amazed me that some of them could dress themselves in the mornings. That's what made the Ronald Villier's sketches so funny - it was an "in" joke poking fun at actors who are in general as thick as Airdrie fans. 

Pitt was making the point that he knew nothing about the complexities of the China/Tibet issue. He didn't actually spend seven years there. He repeats things other people write down for him, puts on makeup and plays pretendys. It's a job. The next week he's pretending to be a secret agent or a tank commander or a fitness instructor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Abramovich has admitted to paying huge bribes to secure massively under priced shares in Russian state assets. His entire fortune is based on theft. He’s also highly likely to have been involved in protection rackets and to have been involved with organised crime.

He is also very tight with Putin, he was appointed a governor by Putin and was an unofficial advisor to him, probably still is.

Aye, but apart from that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Of course, he made his money in Russia the 90's, that's taken as given. I'm just curious about the legal justification for seizing his assets in 2022.

Excellent point, if he's corrupt and it's proceeds of crime this week, then it was the same corruption and proceeds of crime 3 weeks ago and 19 years ago but nobody in power seemed to give a toss and in fact were actually sucking up to him.

It really is pretty pathetic whatever way you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

He made his first millions and was heavily involved in the carve-up of the Soviet Union’s industrial assets, notably through his acquisition of the large oil company Sibneft. Thanks to Russia’s controversial loans-for-shares program and Yeltsin privatising Sibneft, Abramovich with Boris Berezovsky were able to buy out the business for just $100m, despite its market value of $600m. 

That's atate-sponsored theft in anyone's book.
 

What 'market value'? The whole point of the post-Soviet transition was that the move towards a functioning market economy created huge opportunities for grift for the well-connected. That's why so many of the elites refused to fight to maintain the existing system. 

The 1990s looting of Russia was simply unrestricted capitalism in all its glory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Lofarl said:

 




Anyone with a bit of flight training?  The Russian airforce awaits.

I hope that's a joke as I wouldn't be overly happy about UK aid money meant for the humanitarian effort being handed to Russian pilots as some sort of sick bribe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:


No, his point was to continue feathering his cap with Chinese money from film sales by avoiding saying anything about the ongoing human rights issues in that country. But rather than just going "I don't know enough about it, he infantilised his whole industry and indirectly shut down critical voices from within the industry too.

Aye he should have came out strongly against the pre 1956 slave society. Outrageous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:


No, his point was to continue feathering his cap with Chinese money from film sales by avoiding saying anything about the ongoing human rights issues in that country. But rather than just going "I don't know enough about it, he infantilised his whole industry and indirectly shut down critical voices from within the industry too.

If the nest fits...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...