Jump to content

 

 

barca72

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,356

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by barca72

  1. barca72
    What has happened to Celtic's support of this rhag now that they have untold millions to spend? From Quinty on RM, http://t.co/IDysjpkfvH THE Daily Record and Sunday Mail newspapers are seeking applications for voluntary redundancy – on ‘enhanced terms’. Confirmed a spokesperson at publishers, Media Scotland (a division of Trinity Mirror): “Media Scotland has the country’s biggest combined print and digital audience. “While print circulations and advertising revenues are declining, we are seeing positive growth in digital. We need to restructure our business so we can invest and take advantage of that growth. “I am keen to ensure this is done in the most open way possible so we are announcing a voluntary severance scheme which will allow those who wish to apply the opportunity to request to leave their employment on enhanced terms.” There is no official word on numbers or types of posts that the newspapers might most want to dispense with. It is understood Media Scotland manager director, Allan Rennie, is to address staff at 2pm today, and there is to be a NUJ chapel meeting tomorrow at 3pm. * * * from TrueAzure on RM, "The Father of Chapel (FoC) and Mother of Chapel (MoC) are the titles in the United Kingdom referring to a shop steward representing members of a trade union in a printing office or in journalism. The FoC or MoC is assisted by the Clerk of the Chapel or by a Deputy FoC/MoC. In the printing trade, a Chapel was the traditional name given to a meeting of compositors. The name originates in the early history of printing in Great Britain, when printing offices were controlled by churches (hence "chapel"). The name also honours the origins of British trade unionism, where non-conformist churches often acted as covers for trade union activity, which was illegal at the time." I guess we should help them out by not clicking on their online versions !!
  2. barca72
    He's still a 'shit-stirrer'.
  3. barca72
    Bluebear that was not directed at you. You were asking if there was any reduction on the 1000 words , and that was my answer. It was directed at Andy's threat to write 3000 words deprecating Sandy Easdale. In my opinion it is time to unite and move on.
  4. barca72
    Keep your pen in your holster and save the rest of us from exposure to your drivel. Do you know Sandy Easdale personally? Do you know the man's literary capabilities, not just this misleadingly construed comment? Are you prepared to impinge on Sandy Easedale's sharpness, with or without a wormtongue association? Did you ever consider that your attempt at deprecating humour is unpalatable, and tiresome, to some bears? Dave King is introducing a kernel of optimism among the Rangers' support that finally this continual trial of fear and mistrust can come to an end, and you wish to grasp an opportunity to denigrate further the present board and/or its occupant(s). If Dave King is prepared to accept that Sandy Easdale's words were a misunderstanding, why can't you leave it at that and allow the process to heal where it can?
  5. barca72
    Not a great fan of young Bill, but I think he has the rights of it here ... March 4, 2014 by billmcmurdo Lullabies And Battlecries Well, it is the month of March and mad hares. Which perhaps explains the stern statement from Celtic Football Club lambasting the Scottish Government over the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act of 2012. Celtic just don’t like this legislation because it prevents their fans from behaving in the fine traditions of the club. Presumably this means singing songs glorifying cowardly terrorist murderers and other revelry of an anti-British nature. The temerity of Celtic is breathtaking. Not content with running Scottish football and the Scottish media, now the club is seeking to dictate the law of the land and put the Scottish Government in its place. Perhaps Big Peter has mistaken his recent appointment to the ECA and thinks he has been appointed to the EC instead. The irony of Celtic’s complaint will not be lost on many of my readers. It is the adoption of mock offence taken by the Celtic support that ramped up the issue of sectarianism in the first place. Now we have what Dr Stuart Waiton calls a “snitch culture” where people trawl through voluminous scribblings on and offline so they can report “hate crime” to the authorities. The offended bus has become a fleet which would be the envy of Scottish bus tycoon Brian Souter. Not unsurprisingly in this secular age, more than a few of those convicted of religious hate crimes are avowed atheists, which kind of defeats the whole point of the Act which is designed to nail religiously-motivated criminality. This means that Celtic’s complaint has some validity in that the Act was a hasty and ill-thought response to a problem which certainly exists but has not been properly defined i.e. what sectarianism actually is. The perma offended fans of Celtic FC may have started driving the bus but now that it has been taken over by the politicians and social engineers, they don’t like that their own activities are proscribed by law. There seems to be an obsession on both sides of the Proddy-Kafflick divide in Scottish society to legitimise their own songs and slogans, while outlawing those of the opposite side. Claims of legality over certain songs and the perceived right to sing them trumps the notion that anybody might be offended by them. This leads to an arrogant mindset at football matches where uber fans are more interested in their “right” to sing songs than in what consequences such singing could potentially have that could damage their club. I have to say that Rangers fans have responded to this in terms of self-policing far more than Celtic fans. I find it sad and a little sinister that Celtic FC would make such representations about what is essentially the law of the land and protest for the right of their fans to sing songs and shout slogans that are illegal. In doing so, the club has shown it shares the fans’ blind spot in seeing the issue as one of the mere right to sing. It isn’t just about rights; it is also about responsibility. And it is also about offensiveness. In case anyone at Celtic is in any doubt, let me make it clear: Regardless of the legalities, decent people in Scotland don’t want an IRA love-in inside or outside any football ground.
  6. barca72
    I don't know how popular they would be with their IRA-loving support in England. The Hyde Park bombing, the Birmingham bombing, the Downey OTR revelations, Lee Rigby etc. I think that the English have long memories too.
  7. barca72
    Well now, Rosie C. and her cohorts were in the forefront when this legislation was being pushed through Holyrood. The impression at the time was that this was anti-sectarian legislation designed to curb the Rangers' fans. What happened here Rosie? You and your esteemed leader Mr. Salmond were lobbied by such as Cardinal O'Brien and your friends in the east, and were led to believe that by introducing such 'Rangers-baiting' legislation you would garner the 'celtic-minded' vote in the referendum. Why would your friends in the east publicly berate and oppose you now? It looks like they are being disloyal to the clique. They are showing you that they will be nice and supportive as long as you do what they want, but should you adversely affect their agenda then they will turn on you. Their agenda is to put bums on seats at the scumdome and show their support, especially to the GB, that they are dominant in all aspects of Scottish football. Rosie C., what will you do? How can you win the referendum without the 'celtic-minded' vote? I mean, you have just about pissed-off the majority of the Rangers' support. Oh well, dear Alec can no doubt depend on the Hearts'support. Oh my ...
  8. barca72
    They're hurting alright.
  9. barca72
    Looks like someone else, other than PZJ, has reported Celtic to UEFA and the EC ... http://vanguardbears.co.uk/
  10. barca72
    You get what you pay for.
  11. barca72
    Celtic strategy exposed in the latest revellation ... http://footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/nhs-advisers-thought-celtic-had-a-strategy-for-greenbelt-lennoxtown-and-lennoxtown-initiative-were-working-for-celtic/
  12. barca72
    Are Celtic determined to take the sport out of football altogether? Are they unable to sustain a defeat without gingersnap bleating that the referee ruined the game? http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/461845/Aberdeen-2-Celtic-1-Lennon-rage-as-Dons-end-Hoops-unbeaten-run Here are the highlights for anyone who may have missed them ... How can anyone say that that is not a penalty and the player does not deserve to be sent off? Further the handball was very iffy. Now they want to appeal the red card. http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/462248/Celtic-appeal-Van-Dyke-dismissal I would say that if they get away with this appeal then they are just killing the game. They have a 21 point lead and yet they want to dominate every aspect of the game. This is just tiresome. Have they no 'sporting integrity' at all?
  13. barca72
    Best we are going to get for now.
  14. barca72
    We'll see what the SFA think when sales plummet.
  15. barca72
    What do the hoops tell you? Next step is the pink goes and we end up with green, white and gold.
  16. barca72
    Didn't know that. Oh well.
  17. barca72
    I have watched the replay 4 or 5 times now and I still don't see where Cribari fouled anyone. This picture shows the fact that the Stenny guy that falls down is caused by Little pulling Jig back on to him. The penalty is gone, forget that. I don't want the referee disciplined, let the referee's supervisor deal with him. I do, however, think that Ally should fight the yellow against Cribari if for no other reason than the poor guy did nothing.
  18. barca72
    Pot, kettle.
  19. barca72
    Talk about being hoisted on your own petard. No wonder there was so little support for Rangers in our time of need. I guess some people have long memories. Look at the teams that assisted the Rovers to survive and who were also in the vanguard opposing our league reconstruction proposals.
  20. barca72
    Of course !!! I'll leave you with the last word, son.
  21. barca72
    Is Dingwall still connected to you or have any influence on decisions made by you as an organization?
  22. barca72

    aye ready

    barca72 replied to compo's topic in Rangers Chat

    I found this post but my browser won't open the jpg picture, maybe yours will ... http://www.followfollow.com/sngl/ed23/ibrox_stadium_section/index.shtml Picture below shows Edmiston Drive and Main Stand façade. The main façade on Edmiston Drive is in redbrick with art deco and neo-classical features. On each corner in blue and gold mosaic is the Club Crest with the motto "Aye Ready". Beside this at either end is a set of wrought-iron gates in blue and white, which include the club name. The whole façade exudes prestige and power even to this day and has become a listed building such is its importance and position within the city of Glasgow.
  23. barca72
    1. Right back at you,insult and all. 2. Fair enough, an opinion is an opinion. 3. The original discussion was on disinterest of one's own position leads to one's own apathy, but hey what's a little diversion to win a point. 4. When you consider where the attacks on Rangers have come from both past and present, and from both clubs and MSM, that question was not embarassing but highly pertinent. If you wish to stick your head in the sand go ahead. Your last line just reeks of snobbery.
  24. barca72
    Forgive me, I don't know how to split up the quote and asnwer each part in turn, so I have to do it this way. I think it's inaccurate to put the detestation of Rangers, as seen in our implosion, down to bigotry. There are plenty of people who absolutely hate to their marrow our club because of our fans and their repertoire, mainly of years gone by it's true but the enmity remains. It doesn't make you a bigot to have no time for people you consider bigots - it doesn't make me a bigot to object to the CoS's stance on equal marriage laws, for example. ... Being the bigger of two bigots doesn't make you a bigot? Irish/Catholics in politics, certainly there are plenty but the drive is slacking and has been taken up in recent years by women, who were of course discriminated against heavily in that very community until they/their families moved to Scotland. That's something to be proud of, not freak out over. ... Female catholic politicians can be just as vociferous in supporting catholic institutions and less supportive of non-catholic institutions, as their male couterparts. Still worrisome. It's not voter apathy which sees Catholics elected, it's voter disinterest in their religion. Again, not something to fret over but a positive. ... disinterest doesn't lead to apathy? Far from positive. Whoever is most powerful in Scottish football will run the show: it's the same reason why Puerto Rico hangs on the US's coat tails. You don't have to look further than that for explanations over the state of the game. But even if you were right (which you're not) and Scotland was chock full of football clubs owned by Irish Catholics - would that not make it a bit dumb of us to make a point of putting the boot into said community? ... Puerto Rico is an Unincorporated territory, almost but not quite a state, so it doesn't have to, as is your implication, suck up to the big guy. Now I didn't say Scotland was chock full of Irish catholic owners, I asked how many owners and their fans had Irish OR catholic leanings, quite different. Again, I did not advocate that Rangers stick the boot in anywhere, only that Rangers and their fans re-examine their approach to the political realities that are happening all around them, and bolster their support where they may. Once again quite different.
  25. barca72
    I've expanded the picture and the small print says that "Sportsmail understands ... ", so right there it is not yet a done deal. It continues by saying that the Easdales and Laxey Partners are in discussions at the moment. It continues saying that City of London sources say that the loan should be paid back in 12 months by shares rather than cash. If the story is true, then that should mean about 4-5 million shares ( approx 30p/ share ). Why is it bad that current shareholders invest more money in the club?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.