Cohen the gimp is at it again!

[FatTony]

Not to be anti semitic or anything but isnt Isreal "at the center of almost every serious human violation of conduct".
Maybe these things should be pointed out to this cunt and I know its hurtful and spiteful but so is what he said.
I have nothing against Jews by the way, just this excuse of a human being.

lol, you've gotta mail him that as an argument, he'd go mental!!!

[redpablo]

**** him, he is a cunt. dont waster time with cunts, except the female kind

[MrMichael]

http://www.ynwa.tv/news/index.php/2009/May/2735

An open letter to Steven Cohen

Wednesday, 6th May 2009

An open letter to Steven Cohen - regarding statements made about the actions of Liverpool Fans at the Hillsborough Disaster.

It is regretful that this letter even has to be written. Roughly two years ago Mr. Steven Cohen made remarks about the Hillsborough disaster, putting the blame for it firmly on the shoulders of the Fans of Liverpool Football Club. Various emails came to light about this and other anti Liverpool comments that were made by Mr. Cohen. I took it upon myself (note 1) to contact Mr. Cohen via email and discuss the matter further with him. After a few emails back and forth we came to the conclusion that it would be better to discuss the subject over the phone and after giving my telephone number to Mr. Cohen he called me. Several phone calls followed and it lead to Mr. Cohen offering to hold a on air discussion on his radio program about Hillsborough. He also wanted to extend that conversation to Heysel and other Liverpool related incidents. I had permission from the Hillsborough Justice Campaign to represent them for the discussion but a date could not be set as Mr. Cohen was away from his program for a matter of weeks.

After much thought and discussion with other Liverpool fans I decided not to accept the invite. A moot point as, after his return from Australia, Mr Cohen did not try to schedule any meeting or debate. My primary reasoning was that the comments were made on the TV show that Mr. Cohen hosts on the Fox Soccer Channel then any rebuttal should be made on the same platform to the same audience. Other reasons included the fact that Mr. Cohen made an apology for his remarks on the show, the fact that I wished to keep the discussion related to Hillsborough and that I was uncomfortable with the person who made the original remarks also being in control of where the conversation would go rather than having a neutral mediator. I also felt that Mr. Cohen's primary reason for wanting the discussion on his radio show was to drive up the ratings for that show rather than genuinely wishing to discuss Hillsborough.

As the apology had been made on air I decided to let the matter drop and hope that was the end of it. Unfortunately I was wrong.

In the week of the 20th Anniversary of the Hillsborough Disaster Mr. Cohen regurgitated his views and opinions of Hillsborough on his radio show and yet again placed all the blame firmly on the shoulders of Liverpool fans. It was also noticeable that on the TV show the person who made the comments about the anniversary of Hillsborough was not Mr. Cohen but was instead the co-host - Mr. Nick Webster. Mr. Cohen had no comments to make.
It is my belief that the original apology he made on Fox Soccer Channel was forced upon him by the Fox network and was not anything he believed in.

Mr. Cohen was contacted by many fans of Liverpool football club (and other football fans) all expressing opinions that he is incorrect. Emails he received included one from Professor Phil Scraton - author of Hillsborough - The Truth. He did not reply to that email. He, yet again, offered to have a discussion about Hillsborough but wanted it on his terms and on his show.
Mr. Cohen's position is that Liverpool fans have never taken any of the responsibility for Hillsborough and that "thousands of unticketed fans" caused the disaster. Facts clearly mean nothing to Mr. Cohen. There are plenty around the clearly refute his position and he has had every chance to be educated about Hillsborough and has refused to do so. There is no point in reiterating the facts here. Mr. Cohen may choose to discuss the issue further with Phil Scraton or just read his book. I suspect neither will happen.

Mr. Cohen will no doubt continue to show how horrible Liverpool fans are by claiming he is being threatened by them. There will be no genuine admission that he is wrong because he is unwilling to open his mind to that possibility. He will continue to use his position as the co-owner and host of his radio show to maintain and propagate his lies about Liverpool fans and the Hillsborough disaster. He will also continue to use his right to "freedom of expression" to say whatever he likes and that it's his opinion that Liverpool fans have never shared any responsibility for Hillsborough.

You are wrong Mr. Cohen. Wrong on many points. 96 fans went to watch a game of football never suspecting that the police would fail, not even thinking that the stadium might not have a safety certificate. I'm sure they didn't suspect that the police would fail in directing the fans to all the pens, instead just leaving them to head for the one in front of them. Did the Liverpool fans think the police would use batons to stop them climbing out of the crowded death traps that were killing them, that the police would prevent ambulances reaching the injured as they lay dying on the field and that as all of this was happening the man in charge of the police operations, the one that gave the order to open the gates and let fans in, would be telling the FA that the fans forced the gate open. The blame fell on the shoulders of the Liverpool fans in the media and still does. The official enquires blamed many factors but the main one stayed consistent - the police failed in their duties.

That is why, 20 years later, when people in the media still blame the fans, many react angrily. Because it is nothing more than a lie - one that a few minutes of research would correct but the failure to do so results in the opening of old wounds that were incorrectly inflicted. You have lied Mr. Cohen.

Freedom of Expression

One of the things that has been quoted many times in our defense is that you live in America and have the freedom to express your thoughts. To an extent you are right - however there are restrictions to that freedom of expression.
"A communication is defamatory if it tends to so harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him." American Law Institute Restatement of the Law of Torts, Second, Sec. 550 (note 2)

Maybe you were unaware of this previously. You are not anymore.

Given the lack of sincerity in your previous public apology and your reiteration of your lies on Hillsborough do not be surprised that you have raised the ire of many Liverpool and other fans. Your only defense to your stance is a willful ignorance of the facts and your decision to ignore every opportunity to educate yourself about the facts of the Hillsborough disaster. You are in a unique position in being able to broadcast your position through the Media. The lack of an comparable platform to counter your views has lead to many fans calling you directly, calling your show and communicating with your sponsors.
It is my understanding that Steve Nicol, manager of the New England Revolution and a Liverpool player who was at Hillsborough, has confirmed that he will no longer appear on your shows. I also understand that a couple of sponsors are now looking to withdraw their support of your programs.

Given your use of the freedom of expression laws in the USA I am also copying this letter to various Liverpool Websites and to your sponsor in order that they can have the full facts about your stance. By publishing this letter I am also requesting that your sponsors consider the impact your stance has on the football community and reconsider any further dealings with you, shows you appear on or any programs you are associated with. I'm sure that they may not wish to see their reputations tarnished by association with you.

I, as many other fans of all clubs do, still look upon Hillsborough as mainly the failings of the police. It was a disaster that, due to the way the day unfurled, could have happened to any set of fans. Liverpool fans and the families of the 96 have received many messages of sympathy and solidarity from fans of all clubs over what happened that day and the fact that the issues still burns deeply after 20 years speaks volumes for all those who still campaign for justice.

There are many people who will still react when inaccuracies and lies about Hillsborough appear in the media and you are not exempt from that. In continuing your stance your are compromising your position as the host of the most listened to football radio show in the USA. What you do now is up to you - nobody can force you to change your mind. However do not be surprised if your current stance upsets a lot of people as your point of view is nothing more than a lie.

Yours Sincerely,
Mike

http://www.ynwa.tv

Further reading and information:

http://www.amazon.com/Hillsborough-Truth-P...n/dp/1840181567

http://www.hfdinfo.com

Note 1... I had lead and been involved with several movements to correct Hillsborough related errors in the American Media including, but not restricted to, removal of inappropriate footage used by programs on The Learning Channel, removal of footage of Hillsborough footage used by Michael Moore, apologies from Maxim in their use of Hillsborough images in their magazine and preventing BBC Worldwide from selling and profiting from footage of Hillsborough to which they have exclusive rights.

Note 2... C. Exceptions to Freedom of Expression
Defamation: Defamation consists of a publication of a statement of alleged fact which is false and which harms the reputation of another person.(1) Our right to freedom of expression is restricted when our expressions (whether a spoken slander or written libel) cause harm to the reputation of another person. The courts recognize that words can hurt us,
"A communication is defamatory if it tends to so harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him." American Law Institute Restatement of the Law of Torts, Second, Sec. 550

To:
[email protected]
[email protected]

[Darth Marty]

Good letter, wonder whether it will have any effect or whether the **** will just brazenly dismiss it.******.

[shelly]

Good letter, wonder whether it will have any effect or whether the **** will just brazenly dismiss it.******.

he will look at it, bask in the glory of the furor and publicity that his stupidity has caused, and dismiss it as scouse paranoia. Do you really think anything can get into the head of a smug ignorant moronic thick-skulled biased bigot like him?

Agree though good letter... won't do any good as far as he's concerned
Will hopefully help others learn more about Hillsborough though

[andrewces38]

http://www.spiritofshankly.com/news/SOS-Backs-LFCNY-Boycott.html

I recieved this today I thought I would share it

[Roboklopp]

Funny how this cunt is silent on the Chelsea fans' penchant for issuing death threats to refereees who give decisions against them.

[andyhanrahan]

considering fox and sky are owned by the same person I'm suprised that nobody has started a campaign to boycott sky till either cohen apologises or is sacked. I wont watch sky and have already emailed them my thoughts on the matter.

[MrMichael]

Steven Cohen: The bleat goes on

Keith Perkins, May 17th, 2009
This Is Anfield

JUST over two and a half years ago (November 2006), Kelvin MacKenzie (editor of The S*n in 1989) was giving a speech when he suddenly referred to his infamous front page “The Truth” story by saying that he would not make any apology for “telling it like it was.” He also said, in reference to his decision to publish the fabricated story, “I was not sorry then and I’m not sorry now.”

He went on to explain that the only reason he backed down from the story shortly after it first appeared was that the owner, Rupert Murdoch, ordered him to do so. It’s hard to believe that this man was the editor of a “newspaper.” The story didn’t even have one piece of evidence to support it, and has been shown many times over and over again to be false. But why let truth or facts get in the way of a good story that is intended to sell newspapers? We’d be happy to forget the whole sorry story, but some people are determined to perpetuate the lies.

It was also more than two years ago (December 2006) that I was shocked to hear reports that the host of an American television football program had lost his cool during an exchange of opinions and began ranting and raving about the “horrors” of Liverpool FC. This was of course the famous outburst by Steve Cohen, host of the “Fox Football Fone-in” which is broadcast on the Fox Soccer Channel. Mr. Cohen’s loudly voiced opinions can also be heard on Sirius Satellite radio, and is available as a podcast for those who just can’t get by without hearing the ranting of this self-confessed Chelsea supporter.

The beginning of all this was Mr. Cohen’s venomous attack, saying that he was “sick of hearing Liverpool’s constant bragging about how many trophies they have won,” or words to that effect. It could have stopped there, but he just had to say more. “There’s a disgusting side of Liverpool’s history that I’ll be happy to talk about” after which he went on to claim (loudly) that Liverpool supporters “directly caused the two worst disasters in English football history” - in reference to Heysel and Hillsborough. He went on to say that he was “sick of Liverpool fans ramming their success down his throat … there should be 39 coffins to go with the 5 stars on the badge.”

This type of misdirected attack, using falsehoods and insinuation, is exactly the same kind of “truth” that Kelvin MacKenzie believes in. That is, if you say it often enough, and loud enough, and with enough conviction, then it must be true. Of course, no discussion followed the statements from this “expert” nor was any time given for any caller to challenge the statements that were made. The only justification from this malicious ignoramus was that he was “entitled to his opinion” and he has “a right to speak freely”. If it was only an opinion, then it may be acceptable. But saying something that is plainly wrong and that goes against all of the facts is inexcusable. Freedom of speech applies to facts or opinions, not to lies. As a well respected writer once said, “Are you entitled to your opinion? No! You are entitled to your informed opinion.”

Empty apologies

A week later, he attempted to make amends for his outburst. His entire speech took about thirty seconds, during which he made a few excuses and then the supposed apology came at the end. He admits to having “made some very disparaging remarks about Liverpool Football Club and their supporters.” His excuse is that, “in the heat of the moment” he made the comments in response to some attacks against his beloved Chelsea, and claimed that “I know that I’m a passionate Chelsea fan and it takes up almost all of my waking hours.” He goes on to say “I also know that when I am wound up about comments against Chelsea that like many fans I resort to insults that can be very hurtful. As a broadcast professional I should know better and not let it get to this stage. I’ve apologized on our radio show ‘World Soccer Daily’ and I’ve also apologized to the management here at Fox Soccer Channel. But most importantly I wish to apologies to all our viewers.”

The apology comes across like it was prepared by a public relations department, who then had him read it out word for word on air. It’s exactly the type of speech that you would hear from a politician or a celebrity who has been told to make “a statement” which is then supposed to be accepted by the general public as a way of saying “sorry, I didn’t mean it”. Any of us could do the same; just take some previous statements and copy and paste as needed. It’s not exactly a sincere apology, nor are the excuses acceptable. The worst part is that in his list of those he has apologized to, he badly misses the mark - he should be begging forgiveness from the families of the 96.

At it again

Still, I was willing to forget the whole thing and ignore him and others who continue to spout lies about Hillsborough. But once again it’s not possible. Just before the twentieth anniversary, on April-13-2009, Mr. Cohen was at it again. This time he was claiming that Liverpool supporters have to take some “shared responsibility” for the disaster, and not just blame others such as the South Yorkshire Police, or the FA, or Sheffield Wednesday FC. His main point was that 6-8,000 ticketless fans had forced their way in and thus caused the fatal crush. Once again, the story continued the following week when he felt he had to respond (reluctantly) in some way to the numbers of e-mails he had received.

“People think I do it solely for a wind-up. It’s not solely for a wind-up. People think it contributes to why I don’t like Liverpool – it’s the sole reason I don’t like Liverpool. It has nothing to do with the 11 or 17 [sic] players they put on the pitch…At the very least there is a degree of depraved indifference here from the people who stormed in.”

When questioned on his assertion that it was 6-8,000 ticketless fans pushing their way in, and that he should apologise and retract his comment if that number was wrong, he replied “If what we’re arguing about here, the difference in the exact numbers, then my argument is made for me because whether it’s 25, 2500 or 25,000, it has contributed to what happened …What I am saying, and I will continue to say it, … and I’ve had e-mails from a myriad of different Hillsborough groups, all very respectful and very nice, asking me to read this or read that, blah blah blah. … The point is that if the people hadn’t been outside it never happens [sic]. This is a stadium that had no problems prior to this particular day. That’s a fact.”

When further pressed about the number of ticketless fans (he originally claimed 6-8,000), his response once again was that the exact number doesn’t matter and even if he is wrong his point is made for him: “There were people there who shouldn’t have been there because they didn’t have tickets and they were hell-bent on getting in. I’m sorry, but those are the facts … I’m telling you now that this is how I feel about it … What I am talking about is shared responsibility … It is not possible, in my estimation, for this kind of tragedy to be had, whether the number is 8,000, 800, or 80 outside, there is no way that you can say that there are not some shared responsibilities. And I don’t care what reports come out from the British government, I don’t care how early they come out, and I don’t care about the Taylor Report. This is a logical argument; a logical argument.” (Italics are his emphasis).

Well, in fact there had been problems before at this stadium (in particular in 1981, 1987, and 1988), but like Mr. MacKenzie, why let the facts get in the way of a good dishonest rant? The “logical argument” of how the exact number of ticketless fans, and whether it’s 25 or 25,000 makes his point or his argument for him, is well beyond my understanding. It must be some form of logic that I haven’t experienced yet. Clearly if 25,000 tried to force their way in to an area with a capacity of 10,100 then you’d expect serious problems. If 25 forced their way in to that same area of 10,100 then I can’t believe that it would result in 96 fatalities and hundreds of injuries. Of course, if you had read the Taylor Report you would have seen that the actual number estimated to be in that area (according to a combination of turnstile counters, eye-witnesses, and CCTV camera evidence) was in fact a range of from 9,267 to a maximum of 10,124. Also, “there was not an abnormally large number of fans without tickets on this occasion” and “… police witnesses … did not consider the number of ticketless fans to be inordinately large. This accords with two other sources of evidence.” Both quotes are taken from the Interim Taylor Report, but of course Mr. Cohen “doesn’t care about the Taylor Report.” Would that be because it disagrees with his “facts”? We can probably assume that he’s also not interested in British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s recent assessment of the tragedy when he said: “… people understood that the behaviour of Liverpool fans in helping each other was, as I think the judge said, ‘magnificent’; that it was wrong for people to blame, as some did, Liverpool fans on that day.” Mr. Cohen probably also doesn’t care that the current Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police, Meredydd Hughes, recently stated “South Yorkshire Police fully accept their responsibility for the Hillsborough disaster” and went on to explain that every aspect of policing before, during, and after a football match has completely changed as a result of the Final Taylor Report.

Considering his recent comments and continued attacks, deliberately timed to coincide with the 20th anniversary of Hillsborough, how sincere does that previous (more than two years old) apology look now? Mr. Cohen still wasn’t willing to end there either. He followed up his ridiculous rants by challenging anyone to a “debate” on Hillsborough. I put the word debate in quotes simply because I can see the type of debate that this would turn into – most likely of the Bill O’Reilly variety. He’s sometimes described as “The most powerful name in news” by some, or “One man who has raised the volume and lowered the tone of US television news” by others who are not so taken with his style. His form of discussion with a guest he disagrees with turns into a diatribe instead of a debate. In one famous episode, not long after September 11th 2001, he was interviewing Jeremy Glick whose father had died in the World Trade Center attacks. The problem was that Mr. Glick held an anti-war point of view and disagreed with the idea that the US should bomb innocent civilians in a foreign country. Mr. O’Reilly became more and more enraged that he should be disagreeing with his pro-war opinion, and instead of letting Mr. Glick finish speaking, started to yell “Shut Up!” at him and then turned to his floor staff saying, “Cut off his mic.” After the show aired, Mr. Glick revealed that he was then physically threatened by the host (O’Reilly), who said “Get out of my studio before I tear you to f…g pieces.” In another well known episode, supposedly debating with a foreign journalist, he referred to the damage that the French economy had suffered as a result of not joining the US invasion of Iraq. He claimed that according to the Paris Business Review, France had lost billions of dollars in trade as a result of US boycotts of French products. The problem with those statements is that trade between USA and France had actually increased during that period, and there’s no such publication as the Paris Business Review. It might be okay to pass this off as harmless entertainment, but when it’s presented as news (after all, it’s broadcast on an all-news channel) then it’s taken by most people to be accurate, or that they can safely assume it’s so.

Public belief

A study by the University of Maryland showed that 80% of people who watch Fox News exclusively, believed one or more of the common myths about the Iraq invasion: i.e. Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the 9-11 attacks, that the US had found weapons of mass destruction, and that most of the other countries of the world agreed with the US invasion. What was even more interesting was that the study showed that the more that people watched Fox News, the more likely they were to believe those myths. That is, the more you watch, the dumber you get! I would say that the same applies to anyone who reads Mr. MacKenzie’s newspaper “reports”, or listens to Mr. Cohen’s “opinions.”

It may be okay for some people to be misinformed or unaware of facts; but when someone who is in a position where they should know the truth but ignores it, then there is a serious problem. When those people are then given a public platform to spread the inaccuracies, then it compounds the problem even more. We rely on our newspapers and television reports to give us facts, not lies. They should take that responsibility seriously and treat us with the respect that we deserve. I’m not one to give much time to conspiracy theories, but I have to wonder about this: The Fox Soccer Channel is part of the Fox television empire, which is also responsible for the Fox News channel, all of which are owned by Rupert Murdoch. That’s the same individual who owns “that tabloid rag of a newspaper”. Is that really just a coincidence, or do I see more in it that than I should? There’s a definite pattern with all of these examples, so perhaps it’s not surprising that all of them depend on style over substance, or sensationalism before accuracy. It’s all about audience numbers, and if that means lowering journalistic standards to increase those numbers then so be it.

Marshall Mcluhan famously said that the modern methods of mass communication would replace the print media through a process of “electronic interdependence” leading to a new form of virtual society he called the “global village.” It’s easy to see that this is taking place as radio, television, internet blogs, and podcasts take the place of traditional in-depth written reporting. The sad part is that now any fool can have access to various mass media, and unfortunately many of them do. The global village is now a reality, and clearly we have more than a few global village idiots to contend with.

Debate

Finally, in response to Mr. Cohen’s challenge to a “debate”, I’ll throw down the gauntlet myself and invite him to come here to Vancouver to take part in a real Hillsborough discussion. Not a debate, because there’s nothing left after 20 years of studies and inquiries left open to debate. I’ll have a colleague or two on my side, and Mr. Cohen can bring one or two of his allies to support his side (if he has any!). We’ll find a suitable venue (one of the local colleges or universities would be ideal), we’ll find a moderator that we can both agree on to direct the proceedings and keep things in order, and then we’ll find out who has the true story and who’s spreading lies. I can’t wait to hear from him and find out more about his “logical” arguments. But I won’t be holding my breath.

[RoadEnd]

I'd prefer to meet him in a dark alley and "discuss" it that way.

[Will]

Just had a peice on this on "This is Anfield" on LFC TV and in north america all the Liverpool supporters clubs are in uproar! A petition by the LFC NY Supporters club is underway and they have got sponsors to withdraw sponsorship from his shows i think it is and also boycotting every show he does as well as the company he works for. They posted the website of the supporters club here it is www.lfcny.org

[Will]

As the LFCNY (www.lfcny.org) expected, Cohen has received some sympathetic press coverage, notably from The LA Daily News and now The New York Times. Both articles are mirror images of each other with much space devoted to the musings of noted constitutional scholar, Steve Cohen, about how Liverpool fans are infringing his 1st Amendment rights via the boycott of his sponsors.

But the fact that this boycott campaign has made it to The New York Times is proof of a few things. A soccer story has gone national in the USA - absent the WC '94 and Beckham and Pele in the 70s, this is a first. Secondly close reading of Cohen's comments show a fundamental misunderstanding of the 1st Amendment and finally Cohen is running scared. (He has taken to recording all his calls on WSD because of this).

The 1st Amendment gives Steve Cohen broad rights to say what he wishes in the public square without government interference or censorship. No, you can't shout 'fire' in a crowded movie theatre, but yes, if you are the KKK, you can march up and down 5th Avenue.

The Government has no right to tell Steve Cohen that he cannot talk about Hillsborough; they cannot force him to tell the truth about Hillsborough; they cannot fine him for knowingly lying about Hillsborough. So Cohen's lies stand or fall on whether sponsors would want to support someone who knowingly lies.

The boycott campaign of the LFCNY is based on the belief that when the sponsors know that he has been lying about a large section of their marketbase, insulting 96 dead fans, they will not support him.

Cohen's pulpit is obviously larger than ours (WSD, FFF), so we have to fly under the mainstream radar, so to speak. We have to email sponsors, post on message boards, talk to blogs. Critical mass builds, NPR, The LA Daily News and now The New York Times gets a hold of the story and suddenly Cohen has to start answering to his sponsors. Their questions have been along the lines of, 'what are you saying in our name with our money?' In the name of his sponsors and with their money, Steve Cohen has been lying, spreading falsehoods, intentionally seeking to cause pain and dividing the burgeoning soccer market in the USA all in the name of furthering his own name and career. Not those of his sponsors.

Steve Cohen is allowed by law to lie. The LFCNY and other Liverpool Supporters Clubs around the world are allowed by law to answer those lies by telling his sponsors what's being said in their name with their money. The 96 dead are part of the DNA of Liverpool Football Club. As supporters, while we might be allowed by law to answer the scurrilious lies of Steve Cohen, our calling is of a higher nature. The 96 were our fellow fans; it could just as easily have been any one of us as all of them.

Steve Cohen's lies cannot stand on any merits, they have no validity, they have no truth. They are the phantasm of a pitiful, small mind. And now he seeks a safe harbor in the 1st Amendment, wrapping himself in America. Which refuge was patriotism again?

The laws of the USA allow Steve Cohen to lie at will; the commercial marketplace might allow him to be paid for those lies. But that's the funny thing about companies who are good corporate citizens and care about their marketing, PR and image. Supporting liars who knowingly and intentionally divide their consumer base usually get weeded out. And that's how companies and consumers exercise their right of free expression.

The LFCNY campaign against Steve Cohen will answer the lies he has told about the 96. They cannot. They are dead.

Our answer, our story, our free expression is that of the truth of 96 dead. I suspect Steve Cohen is hearing the truth of the 96 dead; I know his sponsors have. This freedom of expression, it really is a great thing, isn't it?

Steve Cohen's comments on Hillsborough disaster

On the 15th of April 1989, 96 Liverpool fans died at Hillsborough due to police incompetence and inaction. It has been criminally negligent homicide. To this day, not a single person has been held responsible for this atrocity.

The death of these 96 fellow supporters is as much part of the DNA of Liverpool Football Club as any one of the 18 League Championships or 5 European Cups. These 96 were our fellow fans. Over the years, the fight for justice for the 96 has been constantly waged without much success. Over the years also, some in the media have found reason to lie about what really happened, despite the publication of the official report, The Taylor Report. The S*n newspaper in particular comes to mind.

Unfortunately there are also those in the USA who are looking to further themselves and their careers on the back of the deaths of our fellow fans. Your fellow fans.

Steve Cohen, who appears on Fox Football Phone In and on World Soccer Daily on Sirius, is attempting to make a name for himself slandering all Liverpool fans and the 96 in particular. Some years ago he made baseless claims and retracted them after protests. His apologies were all qualified. This time out he was at it again, claiming that Liverpool fans killed their own by turning up ticketless, a lie refuted by The Taylor Report. In follow up complaints, Cohen responded by linking Hillsborough with Heysel, with murdering Liverpool fans as the common theme. As Liverpool fans we cannot allow this atrocity to stand.

If Steve Cohen wants to smear all of us Liverpool fans with these lies, then let us exact a price on him. We want him gone off the air. Gone from Fox, gone from Sirius, gone from the airwaves. The LFCNY and all the North American Supporters' Branches recommend that you email Steve Cohen's advertisers, letting them know that you will not be using any of their services as long as they financially support this person. Below are a list of those advertisers.

And if you think that campaigns like this never accomplish much, we already have had success with the magazine 442 and the sportswear company 365-inc. agreeing already, before any campaign has really begun, to pull their advertising for this odious person. We want to be seen as responsive, so we also encourage everyone to email 442 and 365-inc. to thank them for supporting this campaign.

Email to sponsors of Steve Cohen:

To whom it may concern,

You advertise on either or both of Steve Cohen's shows on Fox and Sirius. Steve Cohen has, and not for the first time, told lies about the deaths the 96 fans at Hillsborough, claiming that Liverpool fans were responsible for killing their own, amongst other lies. Is this the type of person you want representing your company? Steve Cohen has done this before, apologising when the outrage grew too large. Clearly, he will not stop, so our objective is to see him being put off air permanently.

I urge you to reconsider your purchasing of advertising.

I will be boycotting all your products and services until your support for Steve Cohen and his lies ends.

Thank you,

[NeonPeon]

Hello all. Just wanted to direct you all to this website: http://boycottstevencohen.webs.com/

If any of you frequent other forums (other than RAWK, SCM etc. please feel free to spread it around).

If you ever need any motivation to do the grunt work of sending some emails about, just read the Steven's Lies sections, and especially listen to the first youtube video embedded there.

[Vermilion]

Good stuff, and about time this arrogant ignorant excuse for a human being had some sort of action taken against him, good for you, and all who contribute.

[NeonPeon]

The site has been updated with its first blog entry. This is involving our tactics being referred to as acts of terrorism.

It is linked on the homepage, which is also updated at http://boycottstevencohen.webs.com/

I hope to bring other contributors in and am querying with the organizers to involve the right people.