A Rangers supporters fighting fund

[Guest TheWorthyEd]

(Taken from elsewhere)

 

This whole Nonce FC/Catholic Church - versus - the SFA/Dallas/Everybody-else saga and the subsequent fall-out and repercussions of same, namely the ref's strike, the sacking of Dallas and others and claims that they will sue has me wondering if GersNet and other interested parties (other websites, fanzines, RSC's etc) might consider putting together a small Protestant/Rangers Legal Aid fighting fund to assist any Bears (or supporters clubs) who have the need to defend themselves in Court in matters of trumped-up completely over-the-top and unjustifiable sectarian-related charges.

 

It could also be used when we are pursuing, legally, bodies like the BBC or one of the daily rags.

 

It would not be available for BOP charges and the like - these are criminal charges - but this whole sectarianism thing is getting out of hand (fuxsake, they are now offended by 'Build My Gallows').

 

Its use could (should) be agreed upon by a small committee of trustees (or some such) and not necessarily all from GersNet, but the workings of how and when it can be used are mere matters of detail - I feel the principle of having the fund available is more important than the fine detail itself.

 

I'm sure other "friends of Rangers" would contribute to such a good cause.

(there are a good number of well-known and not-so-well-known Rangers-minded businessmen out there who I'm sure would assist)

 

The legal system has been slowly working against us for years - now it's our turn to make it work for us.

 

 

 

 

The thoughts of GersNet posters would be appreciated.

 

 

 

PS. Count me in.

[stewarty 1,896]

Sorry mate.

 

Firstly, whilst it suits the serially offended mindset to conflate this as a religious and footballing issue, it most certainly is not.

 

Secondly, this is not our fight. Yes, we are involved by virtue of the refusal of certain officials and members of the press to outline the specific club(s) they have a problem with and thus implicate all clubs; and yes we have an interest in its outcome, but it most certainly is not about Rangers. We need to pick our fights carefully - there are those who seek to attack us for many other things.

 

Thirdly, there is an old adage about not interrupting your opponent when he is making mistakes. We should sit back and see how things unfold.

[Bluedell 5,376]

It's a good idea, given some of the decisions that the Scottish legal system has come up with recently. I'd certainly be up for it.

[Bluedell 5,376]

Sorry mate.

 

Firstly, whilst it suits the serially offended mindset to conflate this as a religious and footballing issue, it most certainly is not.

 

Secondly, this is not our fight. Yes, we are involved by virtue of the refusal of certain officials and members of the press to outline the specific club(s) they have a problem with and thus implicate all clubs; and yes we have an interest in its outcome, but it most certainly is not about Rangers. We need to pick our fights carefully - there are those who seek to attack us for many other things.

 

Thirdly, there is an old adage about not interrupting your opponent when he is making mistakes. We should sit back and see how things unfold.

 

It is about Rangers. In case you hadn't noticed, we are unable to sing TBB or WDYGH without the risk of ending up in court. You have the Catholic Church and MSPs interfering with refereeing issues, that could affect our club in the future. We even had the dreadful treatment of the Nithsdale as they attempted to stand up for our support.

 

There are a large number of varied issues on which this could help.

[rbr 1,247]

If this was properly run , then definetly ,even just to get a different opinion out into the media and get the issue's properly debated , at the moment this continual drip drip is killing us

[Zappa 0]

I'm not against the idea in principle, but do have some questions:-

 

Who would decide which "trumped-up completely over-the-top and unjustifiable sectarian-related charges" would be aided by the fund?

 

Is one of the aims going to be to attempt to overturn precedents which have already been set by previous Court cases?

 

Is the reason for doing this a stance of defiance regarding being told not to sing TBB etc? In other words saying 'keep singing lads, we've got a fund'?

 

What's to say that such a fund wouldn't be misused?

 

Would the use of such a fund to pursue legal cases just out of pure principle be seen as a misuse of the fund if such cases were realistically highly unlikely to be won?

 

Would every contributor have a vote on every single issue and if so, how could it be guaranteed that no particular votes were rigged?

[stewarty 1,896]

It is about Rangers. In case you hadn't noticed, we are unable to sing TBB or WDYGH without the risk of ending up in court. You have the Catholic Church and MSPs interfering with refereeing issues, that could affect our club in the future. We even had the dreadful treatment of the Nithsdale as they attempted to stand up for our support.

 

There are a large number of varied issues on which this could help.

 

The idea of creating a fighting fund on its own is not a bad one - particularly if it was to help the likes of Nithsdale Loyal, I just think we ought not to go down the road of including a religious element to it. I am contemptuous of the Catholic Church and its influences (and of other religions too!) but I would be very wary of any fighting fund being set up with one of its main motives to fight against it. We are tarred with the sectarian brush enough without resorting to this - it would be used as a stick to beat us with.

[Stimpy 0]

In principle it's a good idea, however, on what basis would would we define discrimination? Personally it would be open to abuse and ridicule in equal measure.

 

Along with our usual efforts in supporting the team, we should be heaping pressure on the club to defend the fans more, particularly from the media. Perhaps we should endeavor to find out if it is possible to bring about an injunction on britney writing about us. But then, that would probably infringe on his freedom of speech and we'd be ridiculed for such an action.

 

The club's silence has encouraged all in sundry to attack any man and women in royal blue.

[Zappa 0]

It could also be used when we are pursuing, legally, bodies like the BBC

 

I'm picking out this particular part of the original post as a point of discussion because I've seen it being used elsewhere as a good example of what a fund like this would (or could) be useful for.

 

Firstly, the BBC is arguably the UK's biggest and most powerful broadcasting corporation and it's operating funds of over �£4 billion are second only to BSB.

 

Secondly, the BBC is a corporation like few others in the UK. It's a massive corporate pyramid like many others, but at the top of the BBC pyramid is the British Monarchy advised by top people in the Cabinet (yes, government ministers). Below this you have the BBC Trust, who are the top level management of the BBC and are essentially 12 trustees appointed by the Queen under advisement of the government ministers. To be brief, below this you have the Operations and other departments of the corporation which form the gigantic pyramid we know as the BBC.

 

So, my point here is this:- Is it actually prudent for a group of Rangers fans to legally pursue the BBC for some perceived injustices?

Edited November 28, 2010 by Zappa
typo

[maineflyer 0]

Well I think it's a decent idea. However, as in all things Rangers, who would administer the fund and how would decisions be taken regarding which causes to pursue? Please, don't anyone mention the RST