trublusince1982

two peas in a pod.

Yesterday, Dave King told us that we're going to have a tough couple of years. After the three years we've just endured, that's like warning someone who's being hauled off a sinking ship in the middle of the ocean that the lifeboat may be a little damp. quote of the year got to agree with andy but.

bbc were also banned for a while were they not?

Not sure why you think there is a strong chance we will lose the big tax case, nothing new has been presented since we won on the last two occassions. More likely the appeal will go on and on as they do not want to pay back the clubs who came to settlements with them before the test case came to fruition. Cant critize them for Whyte! are you kidding? They were the ones who told us he had "wealth off the radar"! a snapshot of DR claims in regards to whyte "Financial whizzkid Craig Whyte stands on the brink of pulling off the biggest deal of his life... Record Sport understands self-made billionaire Whyte has entered into the final stages of negotiations to buy control of the club he loves from Sir David Murray... A deal worth around £30million is now believed to have reached such an advanced stage that sources say Whyte, a high-roller who splits his time between a home in London and the idyllic Castle Grant in Grantown-on-Spey, could even have the keys to Ibrox in time to fund a major refurbishment of Walter Smith's top-team squad in January... By the age of 26, Whyte was already Scotland's youngest self-made millionaire. Now, 13 years on, and in charge of a vast business empire, his wealth is off the radar." who needs facts when you can just claim sources ehh? you can call it petty all you like but journalism should be held to a higher standard than sensationalist crap with the sole intention of antagonising to sell. i agree they helped king and co remove the board but it does not excuse their previous behaviour, that will no doubt continue. That being said do you think that is what newspapers should do? align themselves with this camp or that camp to pursue a personal grievance? what happens next time when the camp they join is against our wishes, still okay? How about a newspaper that reports facts leaving the reader to come to their own conclusions, instead of their opinion hidden behind fake claims of unidentified sources. not seen anything on it today but I assume they have lead with the "Guidetti sectarian singing" since they have stated their disapproval of such things quite clearly when it involves our half? Long may the honest and fair treatment continue.

that is exactly what I was pointing out. guess you understood more than you realised.

okay so they didn't lie and say we were hiring a new dof while making redundancies? they didn't constantly mention the fable of £140m debt after the tax result?They never called us tax cheats after being found not guilty? They didn't publish fake stories about dogs in celtic strips being attacked? They don't consistently throw in the fact people are rangers fans when it has nothing to do with the story? they didn't publish lie after lie regarding whyte? they didn't say we had died? could go on and on but lets face it apologists will be apologists no matter what.

disgusted. lie with dogs.... well done PM nobody guessed the first priority would be to let a scum newspaper most bears avoid at all costs back into ibrox to spread more sensationalist lies. sure as fuck wasnt what we fought tooth and nail to get them in for.

thanks fs. well done mr stewart,lets hope he is the first of many to speak out.

can someone explain? whats the development fund? who is mr stewart

reading is vital too same as opinions. The reason is the only thing expressing that specific opinion will do is cause harm. What's the benefit in your opinion?

no .knowing when to talk and when not to. Unity is a two way street. Your not helping unity by arguing against the boycott being the deciding factor.A massively emotive subject that weighed heavy on every person that took part. Your constant assertions that boycotts were due to glory hunters even when near on every person you talk to who boycotted tells you otherwise. Would go as far as to say the only people to say it was mainly down to football are those who didnt take part.explain how that helps? Maybe you can explain how you expect a big upturn in sales but still assert its down to football? Are those extra sales going to be people who didn't boycott?

Not sure if easdale withheld his proxyvote or just his own, so hard to say. Could pretty much just constitute his block and his brother. Maybe Ashley didn't voteafter discussions with other investors on intention. My guess this was the likely reason. Again if not lack of customers what makes an investor doubt the ability of the board?

Yet you still think its a good idea to insert a counter opinion to those who believe their actions helped the club. How does the foster togetherness? That's why I say you have still not learned. Opinions are vital but they should also be measured against usefulness. If you want to preach unity give it ago first.

that's why boycotting was the decisive action not the only action. Who would have sold to king if fans had not left? What do you think engineered the split, if not the disagreements between Crichton and Ashley's lot on how best to move forward which centered entirely on bringing back the support?

Fair enough but its one thing to admit mistakes and another to apologise and learn from them.

You seemed happy to alienate the thousands who did boycott at the time, good to see you have changed your tune unfortunately not enough to admit their actions were vital to securing the clubs now rosier future. Nothing wrong with patting those on the back who took the horrible drastic actions needed. Especially Meare hours after victory.

nobody ever said you let the club down or anything like that same goes for stb. Infact it was those who continued to support who could not understand the position of others and denounced them through their inability to understand the hand dealt.

So why in your opinion did the investors get behind king if not to bring back the customers? Why did James easdale fling in the towel? Why did sandy abstain? Why could they not afford to continue to pull the wool over your eyes by bringing in a replacement manager or even pay off the one who quit, if not for the restrictions put in place by supporters with holding their money?

the Ashley loans where a means to an end. Do you still not get that? The loans would have happened either way, they are merely the smoke that allowed him to grab up what he wanted from the start

Is that sado masochistic type fun?!

Thought they were all boycotting because of the football? Did you not also join in on the "they ain't real fans" crap over yonder?

Hope so but would imagine he will ask for McDowall to be looked after if he does.

Nonsense. The boycott was the decisive move. It awoke all the investors to the situation and removed and brought to ahead their refusal to accept outside investment showing they were not working in the best interests of the club. It also highlighted the reduced revenue streams stolen by SD by not helping to paper over the cracks

Was the third who didn't show up not easdale? Even he couldn't vote for what they had done!

Love the horns going off in the background! The look on Gilligan'sface is one of pure joy