wabashcannonball 0 Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 If there was any will to address perceived sectarianism, a secular outlook would have been law in this country many moons ago, there isn't and there hasn't been, so why anyone gives a flyin' fuk about anything to do with religious power beats me, all to do with money and fuk all to do with good and Godly works by any persuasion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 I recieved a phone call this evening from a John Mclellan who I believe is the editor , this muppet not only stated he is a lifelong Rangers fan , but also that he doesn't find the term offensive and also doesnt accept a judges ruling on it being sectarian , no amount of arguin would change his mind , then he finishes with a wee " sorry it took me so long to get back to you but I have been at Holyrood meeting the pope" . He also accepted he had been inundated with complaints . prick 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,354 Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 I recieved a phone call this evening from a John Mclellan who I believe is the editor , this muppet not only stated he is a lifelong Rangers fan , but also that he doesn't find the term offensive and also doesnt accept a judges ruling on it being sectarian , no amount of arguin would change his mind , then he finishes with a wee " sorry it took me so long to get back to you but I have been at Holyrood meeting the pope" . He also accepted he had been inundated with complaints . prick What a complete tosser. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 I recieved a phone call this evening from a John Mclellan who I believe is the editor , this muppet not only stated he is a lifelong Rangers fan , but also that he doesn't find the term offensive and also doesnt accept a judges ruling on it being sectarian , no amount of arguin would change his mind , then he finishes with a wee " sorry it took me so long to get back to you but I have been at Holyrood meeting the pope" . He also accepted he had been inundated with complaints . prick Lifelong Rangers fan - if he's a Rangers man then it's in his dreams alone. I can't find the words to describe how I despise the self-loathers who have tried to make Rangers their home in recent years. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 I imagine he accepted the judges ruling (think it was a sheriff actually, but never mind) about the Famine Song? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,182 Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 The Scotsman have apologised this morning. http://news.scotsman.com/letters/Letter-39Hun39-is-an-offensive.6536288.jp?articlepage=2 Editor-in-chief John McLellan writes: "At risk of now alienating Celtic supporters, I was brought up in Glasgow supporting Rangers and, unlike the letter writers, I have never found the term 'H**' offensive. I've lost count of the number of times I've been called it and I've never taken it as anything other than gentle ribbing. Celtic supporters I know find no offence in being called a 'Tim'. "All that being said, we have obviously underestimated the sensitivity of this particular word to some and apologise for the offence caused. But perhaps it is a mark of the distance Scotland still has to travel when football nicknames whose origin is almost lost in the mists of time can still arouse such passions." One notes the disingenuous attempt to compare it to 'Tim' which is completely wrong. Perhaps it is a mark of the distance the Scottish media still have to travel when editors-in-chief are not up to speed with nomenclature in a subject they regularly and deliberately sensationalise. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,182 Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 I can have a laugh about any subject - especially sectarianism and the rivalry between Rangers and Celtic which is indeed often ridiculous. However, I will not apologise for taking the issue of imbalance in the media seriously - be it tediously crass cartoons like these or more deliberately slewed coverage such as the Spiers/BBC Scotland collaboration of a few weeks past. Let's be clear here. This isn't about a lack of a sense of humour, being unable to accept criticism or taking false offence at a religious background most of us don't belong to. This is about Rangers (as a football club) and its fans (often as a majority) being unfairly singled out to blame for a social problem in Scotland. So much so, that we (and only we) are constantly tarnished in the media, reported to UEFA, reported to the SPL/SFA and censored to our conduct. To add insult to injury, we're then made fun of by our own such as McLellan when addressing the same questionable nomenclature being applied to us! Irrespective of what we think about the rights and wrongs of certain terms, that is unfair and negatively preferential treatment. Would The Scotsman have published a cartoon about Celtic fans, fen!ans and/or child abuse cover-ups? No, so why Rangers fans, h*ns and Nazis? Like the editor, I'm not overly offended about people using words like H** or even DOB. However, if I, my fellow supporters and my club are being penalised for using literally identical terms - including media coverage in papers such as the Scotsman right through to the seriousness of police prosecution then I'll protest long and loud if people doing the opposite are not highlighted in the same way. There is another reason for doing this of course and I'm surprised the ones who turn their nose up to our complaints haven't grasped this. If coverage doesn't improve and if Rangers continue to be vilified while others are not, that will only serve to increase tension and increase volatility ensuring sectarianism (alleged or genuine) will never be removed. One side will make hay while the sun shines and the other will just say fuck it, let's fulfil the stereotype. I'd contend that is happening more and more actually. Which only shows the anti-sectarianism industry (for that's what it is) to be more ridiculous than the subject it covers. I'm sure there is a cartoon somewhere which could cover that parody. Now that would be funny! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigRFC 0 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 Just a thought, why don't we just start calling them it again? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,182 Posted September 17, 2010 Author Share Posted September 17, 2010 Just a thought, why don't we just start calling them it again? It is certainly worth considering... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigRFC 0 Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 It is certainly worth considering... Well surely if we started singing the likes of 'Go home ya H***' and just kept calling them it and explaining to people why we are calling them it, it would eventually stick? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.