D'Artagnan

Not in particular Andy - I have noticed something of a shift in a number of articles appearing on a variety of websites, not necessarily The Rangers Standard. I would also suggest there is a considerable difference between brainwashing and conditioning.

I think what bothers people Gazza is the fact that our national game is in crisis, lumbering from one to disaster to another, and yet the government in this country have done absolutely nothing to attempt to resolve it. The Westminster government so often criticised by the SNP as being out of touch with Scotland, have a least convened a committee to look into the crisis.

(Bluetiful â?? Vanguard Bears Forums) I have yet to see a better piece of prose anywhere which so succinctly summarises the situation besetting our club. It serves to re-enforce that age old adage that â??Adversity does teach you who your true friends areâ? And we should heed that adage well. Events over the last few months, and in particular the animosity and hatred towards our club have given rise to some in depth soul searching amongst the Rangers support. There has been a significant rise in articles asking searching questions about our identity as a support. For anyone visiting Rangers websites and forums it is clear that our support is indeed a â??broad churchâ?. The once default position of a support which was characterised as Protestant, Unionist, Pro-British, Pro-Monarchist, now includes supporters who neither support the Union nor the Monarchy, and in a increasingly secular society, care little for upholding Rangers Protestant heritage or traditions. And I have absolutely no problem with that. I have always said, and I continue to say it â?? each to their own. But what I do have a problem with, is those articles which not only carry out a critical self-examination, but actually appear to seek to apologise for who we are and what we are as a support. I am of the opinion that some of our support has become conditioned to the propaganda emanating from Holyrood regarding sectarianism. I use the word â??propagandaâ? because that is exactly what it is. Sectarianism is not â??Scotlandâ??s Secret Shameâ?. Scotlandâ??s Not So Secret Sham would be a far more apt description. http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/National/article/19162/scottish-government-allocates-9m-to-anti-sectarianism-effort.html Itâ??s no surprise that respected academics such as Dr Stuart Waiton are so critical of the SNP and their anti-sectarian agenda. Dr Waiton and Prof Steve Bruce have undertaken years of credited academic research, the findings of which demonstrate Scotland does not have a sectarian problem. I contacted Strathclyde Police recently with a freedom of information request with regard to sectarian offending. They were unable to provide me, or anyone else for that matter, with statistics due to the manner in which sectarian offences are recorded â?? they are recorded as an â??aggravatorâ? of the original offence and not a stand alone crime in itself. As new research reveals 1 in 4 children in Scotland are living in poverty, this Scottish government are apportioning huge funds to a problem which our countryâ??s leading academics have demonstrated via credited research, does not exist. Its not a Secret Shame â?? Its utterly Shameful. Football is a form of tribalism. At times the expression of that tribalism can be particularly unsavoury. But it does not follow that such unsavoury behaviour by football supporters is motivated or caused by sectarianism. The most recent Liverpool Man.Utd game, which, despite efforts and pleas on both sides prior to the match, saw the behaviour of football fans decline to a new low. The unedifying sight of 2 sets of rival football supporters taunting each other, with the dead of the Munich Air Crash and Hillsborough their respective weapons of choice, demonstrates that tribalism can degenerate into unacceptable standards of behaviour. Had that been Rangers and Celtic fans involved you can bet your bottom dollar the word â??sectarianâ? would have been in every political soundbite criticising such behaviour. Therefore if we are to carry out such self-examination of ourselves as a support we should not do it against the backdrop of the fraudulent political football which sectarianism has begun. Nor should what James Traynor described as the bloodfest of hatred against our club be a catalyst to self-examination either. If any Rangers fan out there believes that changes to our song repertoire, our banners, our flags, and our symbolism will bring a change of attitude towards our club, then I personally think you are very much mistaken. Charles Green very publicly stated that bigotry, hatred and jealousy were the motivating factors behind the attempts to punish our club. If he is correct, and there is considerable evidence out there which supports his assertion, then perhaps itâ??s not the Rangers support who should be undertaking self-examination, but others.

Have they not been doing that anyway with no ban in place ?

Some fair points there AMMS. However I would imagine that there are far more people who work there that you do not know. In my original article River Runs Through It I fully accept there was evidence which was included that was merely circumstantial and relied purely on inference ie the hugely contrasting no. of BBC Scotland employees who attended the UEFA cup finals. However there was also evidence of blatant mischief making (at the very least) as evidenced by the Ally McCoist interview. The incident has been dismissed as "inappropriate editting" by BBC Scotland chiefs. We have still never been informed just what was the motivation behind it. You know its bad when even Keevins is calling it "a character assassination" on our manager. Several months on, and following several protests at Pacific Quay, we still have this organisation besmirching our club. Its not as if we are jumping on the easily offended or paranoia bus - even the Samaritans have felt moved to criticise the Mad Men sketch. One would have thought that given all the foregoing, BBC Scotland editorial staff would have at least tried to apply greater sensitivity to the their Rangers coverage, given that there is a perception of bias or an anti-Rangers agenda from within our support. That has clearly not happened given the 2 recent incidents. It was also be interesting to know, why BBC Scotland, who have set themselves up as something of a flagship against sectarianism (1) Were the only major news outlet in Scotland who did not report the Hartson/Pearson IRA singalong (2) Seemed to be so reluctant to censure their employees for use of the word "Hun" when the major anti-sectarian charity in Scotland has, for a number of years now, confirmed the sectarian nature of that word on their website. I confess I do not know enough about how the BBC operates, and you could be right that such a ban (though my understanding is that they just didnt get an invite) will be of little consequence. Notwithstanding whether there is a bias or anti-Rangers cluture or not, I dont see why our club should be welcoming a media organisation who has treated both our club, its employees and its support with absolute contempt over the last few years.

I have to disagree AMMS. Particularly when we are talking about an organisation with regional representation such as the BBC. Can you imagine the reaction of the London bosses if BBC Scotland was banned from Ibrox ? They would want answers as to why. But perhaps it all boils down to whether you believe or not there is an anti-Rangers culture within BBC Scotland. Do you ?

I wrote this article way back in August 2011, if you add what has transpired since then with regards to the BBC it makes a pretty conclusive case of anti-Rangers bias. A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT My apologies to those who opened this article, who having read the title, hoped to find a discourse into the Robert Redford directed film of the same name, starring Brad Pitt and Tom Skerritt. The story revolves around a Presbyterian minister raising his 2 sons in Montana in the early 1900's and their love of fly fishing on their local river. Instead we will deal with a different kind of river which I hope will become apparent to you all in due course. Before I start however I would like to acknowledge the remarkable work undertaken by members of the Vanguard Bears Rangers website in not only compiling but also allowing me to freely use the fruits of their labours in this piece of writing. Our story starts much closer to home than Montana, on Pacific Quay, Glasgow in fact, home of BBC Scotland where only last month the Rangers manager, Ally McCoist was subjected to what BBC Scotland bosses attempted to play down as â??inappropriate editingâ?. However that really is only half the tale, and experienced broadcaster Hugh Keevins summed it up far more aptly when he suggested that those involved at BBC Scotland were guilty of a â??character assassinationâ? on the Rangers manager. Further evidence of Auntie Beeb's desire to play down the incident came in both the speed and platform for their apology â?? issued on the BBC Website/BBC Scotland Sportsound and ,Five Live â?? thus negating the need to issue such a public apology on the national BBC news networks. Despite such attempts to play down the incident and minimise damage to the BBC, it is widely reported that BBC bosses in London have launched an investigation into the whole fiasco. Perhaps not entirely surprising when you consider this is the second such apology the BBC have been forced to issue to Rangers football club in recent months, following of course Nicky Campbell's ridiculous suggestion that the Hearts supporter who attacked Celtic Manager Neil The Bigot last season, â??could be a Rangers supporter in disguiseâ?. But of course if they concentrate their probe around the most recent set of events then they will be merely skimming the surface of something far more deep rooted within this organisation. Despite setting itself up as something of a flagship in the war on sectarianism, BBC Scotland has over the years chosen to ignore use of the term â??Hunâ? to describe Rangers supporters by its employees, most notably Tam Cowan and Stuart Cosgrove. But use of the word was not confined to comedians and sport shows with current affairs presenter Lesley Riddoch apparently furious that her use of the word consequently forced her to issue a public apology. Perhaps this â??anti-sectarian flagshipâ? should remind itself of the Anti-Sectarian Charity Nil By Mouth comments on the word :- â??Offensive sectarian language is still used in Scotland on a daily basis, with abusive terms such as â??Hunâ? and â??Orange bastardâ? being used negatively against Protestantsâ? In the interests of consistent Policing one can only hope that the new Anti-Sectarian Police Unit, formed to tackle sectarianism and bigotry in Scotland, will not confine their powers to those attending football matches, but also to those who think they can flout the law safely from behind the doors of Pacific Quay. If it does not then we clearly have one law in Scotland for some and a completely different one for others. However its not just the spoken word which should concern those BBC bosses in London. In 2002 the launch of a new Rangers kit saw model Nell McAndrew modeling the ladies version of the strip. A BBC report into the launch was supported by a picture which had been saved under the file name â??Hunc*nt1â?. It would not be unreasonable to assume that such an embarrassing public gaffe would result in clear guidance been issued to all BBC Scotland staff. Either it wasn't, or if it was it was completely ignored for in 2007 when Kevin Thomson joined Rangers from Hibs. A BBC Scotland report into the signing was accompanied by a picture of Thomson. This picture was saved under the file name â??Kevin c*nt Thomsonâ?. This is an organisation which sets its own standards which include among other guidance documents:- "The BBC must apply generally accepted standards so as to provide adequate protection for members of the public from the inclusion of offensive and harmful material." "The use of strong language must be editorially justified and appropriately signposted to ensure it meets audience expectations, wherever it appears." Employees of BBC Scotland are continually breaching the standards the BBC has set for itself. How long is this going to be allowed to continue? But it's the area of imbalanced and biased reporting which is undoubtedly the most insidious and concerning aspect in all of this. The examples cited within the Vanguard Bears dossier are too numerous to reproduce in this article, however those BBC investigators should be able to avail themselves of its contents, as it has already been submitted to BBC Scotland. If they are in any doubt it's the one which highlights the example of a BBC Scotland report which claimed that Arthur Boruc was cautioned by Police for blessing himself due to the anti-catholic nature of the Ranger's support. The truth of course was that Boruc was not cautioned for blessing himself, but (and not for the first time) for making inflammatory gestures towards the opposition support. Recent events at BBC Scotland have only served to confirm the suspicions of many Ranger's supporters that there is a hidden agenda within the organisation towards our club. Some have even used the word â??conspiracyâ?. I don't think there is a conspiracy. I don't believe that BBC weathergirl Kirsty McCabe, who thought it was funny to refer to Ibrox as Castle Grayskull, is in cahoots with the editorial BBC Scotland news team who appear to have a penchant for using pictures of the Rangers support whenever an item on sectarianism is published. What I do believe however is that a river runs right through the organisation which is BBC Scotland, and that river has varying depths of anti-Rangers bias which has manifested itself in the examples presented in this article, and the numerous additional instances contained in the Vanguard Bears dossier. The question is no longer if an anti-Rangers bias runs through BBC Scotland, but more importantly why? Maybe those London bosses should examine the financial accounts for BBC Scotland over the last few years. Perhaps they could ask the question why 88 BBC Scotland employees were required to go to Seville at the licence payers expense, but only a handful were needed for Manchester for the respective coverage of the 2 Old Firm UEFA Cup Finals. Or why they dispatched a film crew to cover the ill fated Celtic Convention in Benidorm (which they reported as a success) yet they have never seen fit to cover a similar event involving Rangers Supporters. It was French writer Comte de Mirabeau who uttered the words â?¦... â??I know you will guess all I left unsaidâ? And BBC Scotland have certainly left a lot unsaid. Video images recorded on a mobile phone showing Celtic players Stephen Pearson and John Hartson indulging in sectarian chanting at the Jackie MacNamara testimonial dinner in Donegal was apparently not newsworthy for the flagship of anti-sectarianism which is the BBC. Nor was the Neil Lennon â??Dirty Orange Bastardsâ? outburst towards the Rangers support. Apparently a convicted IRA terrorist painting a banner for the â??Jungle Boysâ? which was part funded by Celtic FC was......yes you've guessed it â?? not newsworthy. Perhaps however those BBC bosses will chose to ignore the considerable evidence which suggests that BBC Scotland has a significant anti-Rangers bias meandering through its organisation. If they do it is reasonable to forecast it will not be long before they are forced to issue yet another humiliating apology. Particularly with the new regime at Ibrox who have stated this club will no longer be the whipping boys. Of course those BBC bosses would do well to reflect on recent events at News Corp, where those at the top are being brought before parliament committees to explain and justify the actions of their employees, as well as the pending prosecutions of those involved at all levels. If a private company can be brought to account in such a manner, what awaits a publicly funded organisation who can be shown to have flouted the law, broken their own codes of ethics and breached numerous ethical standards of journalism? We have come a long way since my opening paragraph and mention of Montana, which incidentally houses the historic site of the Battle of the Little Bighorn. It was here of course an arrogant and ego inflated General Custer totally underestimated the strength, determination and resolve of his opposition. Perhaps BBC Scotland will find, to their cost, that history has a habit of repeating itself.

Yes but the same organisation denied their reporter Andrew Gilligan had done anything untoward until the Hutton enquiry gone in about his mince.

I would reject it SA even if they don't strip titles. Funnily enough CG is on record a few weeks ago saying that even if we gallop through the SFL divisions there is no guarantee we will return to the SPL.

Latest in a long long line of vindictiveness against our club. Good to see we are at last standing up for ourselves.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/sfa-hunt-for-grass-after-steven-1342478 I finish off the week with, surprise surprise, another story highlighting SFA hypocrisy. What is perhaps surprising about this story however is that it has not been greeted with the same media silence we have become accustomed to. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/sports-hotline-wednesday-september-26-1344219 For us as Rangers supporters there are striking similarities between the conduct of the SFA and our manager when he suggested the identities of the panel members imposing the transfer embargo on Rangers be revealed. Conduct I may add resulted in the latter finding himself on SFA charges, charges which were subsequently dismissed at his hearing. Of course Ally was severely criticised by a considerable number of Scottish journalists for his conduct as it was felt he was merely doing the bidding on behalf of the the â??internet lunatic fringeâ?. It will be interesting to see whether those same moral guardians in the press are equally as critical of the SFA and their demands that who ever is responsible be identified. Furthermore will we see SFA compliance officer Vince Lunny as resolute and tenacious on this case as he was in respect of McCoist ? At least in terms of cost cutting he will only have to nip along the corridor at Hampden to serve his papers. However whilst the double-standards discussion rages it perhaps deflects from a more serious and fundamental issue at hand here. The Scottish Football Association are charged with the responsibility of governance of our game and the following is a verbatim quote from their website.. FIFA have informed the SFA that they are probing the conduct of one of Scotland's players. The SFA's response is to demand the identity of who â??grassedâ? their player up and why it has taken FIFA so long to act. The words pot kettle and black spring to mind. And whatever happened to protecting the reputation and integrity of the game ? Surely all people, but in particular those with a remit of governance of the game, should be concerned about ensuring that a player involved in a violent off the ball incident is brought to justice irrespective of the colour of top he is wearing ? It would be a great pity if the double-standards issue, of which the SFA are clearly guilty, overshadowed sensible discussion over this matter because there is a more serious issue at play here. Once again those in charge at the SFA have made our country a laughing stock by their action only this time it is on a world rather than just a domestic stage. Their conduct in this matter is quite simply an affront to any principle or notion that they uphold fair play. I was going to finish by saying the only surprise in all of this is that someone has not tried to put the blame for this on the Rangers support. But then I was reminded from a scene from the film City Slickers and a conversation between Billy Crystal and bad guy Jack Palance. â??Killed anyone today Curly ?â? â??Nope....................but the day's not over yetâ?

http://dartagnanthe4thmusketeer.blogspot.co.uk/ Yeah here bud but I always put my articles in the forum first and there wont be anything on there thats not on the forums. Whats shared with friends is no loss.

It would be considerably remiss of me, in what has been a remarkable week, not to mention the considerable support for our club from Celtic FC and their fans, in particular The Green Brigade, by way of their zombie related banners. A zombie of course by definition is undead or not dead depending on your preference. Considering some have depicted the Green Brigade as the hardcore element of the Celtic support, only adds to my appreciation. That they have taken the time for such a public display of solidarity with the Rangers support is quite simply staggering. Their banner which depicts Rangers as zombies, and thus not dead, finally puts to bed once and for all any accusation that our clubs history and heritage has died. In fact I've been so impressed with it it may well be the basis for a future article â??Rangers - the club who would not dieâ? so on a personal note I must thank them for their inspiration. But I would not be doing our friends in the Green Brigade justice if I was to stop there. For the banner depicts a lone gunman, which I presume is Stewart Regan, forlornly trying to kill of these zombies to no avail. How good of them to acknowledge that despite the best attempts of the SFA Rangers will not die. But it would even more remiss of me not to mention the contribution of Celtic FC and their stewards with regard to these banners. For not only did they ensure that these banners were displayed on more than one occasion they allowed them to remain on display. To such an extent in fact that they have incurred the wrath of the SFA. What an honourable sacrifice. But special mention must be reserved for the Parkhead stewards, whose syncronised turning of the backs as the banner was unfurled was quite simply drilling of the highest order. Iâ??m sure they wont be offended if I say such a synchronised display of drill was on a par with anything I have seen from the best Royal Marines or Guards drill squads. In fact it would come as no surprise to me if an invitation to the Edinburgh Military tattoo was not forthcoming. But the support from our friends in the east does not end there. For a further banner demanded "Justice for zombies". Even the supporters of our greatest sporting rivals are acknowledging that there is a lack of fairness and balance by those in authority towards our club. Amazing. But it would appear this may not be the end of it. For the plethora of empty seats at Parkhead last night perhaps suggests some are busy making further banners. In these difficult times for us as Rangers supporters it is particularly heart warming that rather than support your own team you would spend your time making banners displaying your support for ours. My sincere thanks to all who have shown their support for our club by way of these banners.

Ask Gordon Waddell - he compares our club to something you would like to punch so much that your hand hurt. But as to your point...thank goodness CG is at the helm and not one of the dignified silence brigade. I know which one keeps the pressure up.

I'm probably showing my age by revealing my admiration for TV Detective series Columbo. A Columbo episode had no “whodunnit” element, but the case was constructed slowly but surely around circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial or Indirect evidence is inferior to direct evidence – the latter being an eye witness account for example. Nonetheless in the absence of direct evidence, indirect evidence can be sufficient. Perhaps its best summed up by the following definition.... :- evidence that establishes immediately collateral facts from which the main fact may be inferred . What am I inferring ? That the SFA and SPL are guilty of breaching Scottish and European Law, of gross negligence and gross malpractice, of conduct unbecoming of their positions of governors of the Scottish game and acting with both malice and prejudice towards Rangers Football Club. Lieutenant Columbo's first clue surrounds the events following Rangers going into administration and the conduct of the Scottish Football Association and SPL. Contrary to obeying not only the timeless Scottish principle of law, or more recently the European Human Rights Legislation, rather than presume Rangers innocent until proven guilty, without even being charged let alone tried, the SFA presume Rangers guilty and attempt to impose upon them a package of sanctions which will see the club stripped of honours in return for a place in the Scottish First Division. A second clue is to be found in the fact that this package of sanctions is far in excess of any sanctions imposed on a football club, even those who have been tried and convicted for far more serious crimes such as match fixing. A quick check of the punishments imposed during the 2006 Italian football scandal serves to underline this. A third clue reveals that when the Scottish Football League became aware of what the SFA were doing they quickly distanced themselves from any involvement, their spokesperson later telling the press “We were given a first draft of proposed sanctions on June 25 — and we sent it back the same day saying we wanted no part of it. That was the unequivocal SFL stance for a very simple reason — in this country you’re innocent until proven guilty.” Columbo's fourth clue lies in the conduct of the accused. During a series of meetings with the chairmen of Scottish Football League, Stewart Regan of the SFA conducted himself in a manner which the aforesaid chairmen later described was characterised by bullying, threatening and intimidating behaviour. Furthermore these chairmen later provided documentary evidence in the form of an e-mail which demonstrated that Regan lied during this series of meetings. A further clue surfaces when the SFA try to impose a transfer embargo upon Rangers. A Scottish Court subsequently rules such an embargo as outwith their remit of sanctions and thus unlawfully imposed. But the trail of circumstantial evidence does not end there. The team appointed to carry out the investigation into Rangers, Harper MacLeod legal firm, enjoy a favourable business relationship with the club who would be the sole benefactors from the excessive stripping of Rangers titles – Celtic FC. Of course its also entirely circumstantial that a personal testimony on the Harper MacLeod website, from the Celtic Chief Executive praising the firm for their stalwart service to Celtic FC, was mysteriously removed around the time questions were being asked about this firms suitability. But even then the trail does not go cold for our Lieutenant. Because the SFA then seem to get confused about the role of Harper MacLeod – in one newspaper article they claim the company is leading the investigation, but as questions are raised as to this company's suitability their role seems to change, according to the SFA, to one of “low level” information gathering. But alas, no coffee and doughnuts for our intrepid detective yet. For the legal expert appointed by the SPL, Lord Nimmo, then attempts to clarify why the SFA and SPL have a legitimacy to bring Rangers to account as a non SPL club, when their articles and regulations seem to indicate otherwise. In doing so the very learned Lord Nimmo inadvertently confirms that the conduct of his paymasters, the SFA & SPL was wrong in how they treated Rangers membership of the SPL. While many of us will forever associate the late Peter Falk with the role of Columbo it was actually an actor called Bert Freed who first appeared in the role. And it's purely circumstantial that one of Freed's first appearances as Columbo was in a teleplay entitled “Enough Rope”

I was going to say that CG continues to make the SFA/SPL look like absolute numpties. The truth is of course ...they are absolute numpties...CG is just highlighting it. This though really has to be the icing on the cake. The commissions chair making a statement which totally contradicts the actions of the SFA & SPL.

Joined today. Hello to all. Sure I recognise a few monikers.

I would sincerely hope Pete that it goes far further than just allowing them to tender their resignations.