amms 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 No, other than a skip through it in a book shop one day, where I spotted some untruths, but putting that to one side, if part of it reads as a work of fiction, written by a fantasist then I still fail to see how it can be an excellent book. C'mon, are you really criticising a book you've not read? Off the top of my there are something like 20 contributors, some are brilliant, some are good, some are average and one, Speirs, is poor. But if you take the book as a whole then it is excellent. If you read it you might not enjoy it of course, I don't know you well enough to be sure. But on the whole it's a well written, thoughtful collection, at times informative, at times challenging indeed uncomfortable reading at times, but worth the effort. From the little I know of you I think you would enjoy it. I should write a review of it.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuznetsov 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Especially if they're allowed to hog all the headlines uncontested in the mhedia. i am including those writing those headlines! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 i am including those writing those headlines! Clearly that's one of the biggest challenges we face here. With a majority of the articles it's obviously agenda driven with the headline already written before the interview even takes place. We're up against it in this regard. That's why I find it difficult to understand why anyone on our side would question informed comment in our defense. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuznetsov 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Clearly that's one of the biggest challenges we face here. With a majority of the articles it's obviously agenda driven with the headline already written before the interview even takes place. We're up against it in this regard. That's why I find it difficult to understand why anyone on our side would question informed comment in our defense. sorry if i came across that way, i never intended that to be the case. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinker 887 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Clearly that's one of the biggest challenges we face here. With a majority of the articles it's obviously agenda driven with the headline already written before the interview even takes place. We're up against it in this regard. That's why I find it difficult to understand why anyone on our side would question informed comment in our defense. The more people who come out and say, "No-one at the club has wittingly breached any rules or laws, or tried to conceal anything.", the better. It cannot be said often enough or loudly enough. Otherwise we get idiotic, poorly informed statements like the one made by the Morton chairman (I think it was) who stated something along the lines of, "they've admitted they've been cheating for years". He was completely wrong, but his words were still published, and some simple folks believe every quote they read. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 (edited) The more people who come out and say, "No-one at the club has wittingly breached any rules or laws, or tried to conceal anything.", the better. It cannot be said often enough or loudly enough. Otherwise we get idiotic, poorly informed statements like the one made by the Morton chairman (I think it was) who stated something along the lines of, "they've admitted they've been cheating for years". He was completely wrong, but his words were still published, and some simple folks believe every quote they read. I think part of the problem there has been statements coming from those at the club in recent weeks have fallen into the trap of admitting guilt without going into specifics. CG and MM have both made no shortage of comments about crimes of the previous owners while our management team have held up their hands and declared we've done wrong and deserve to be punished as they suggest we've been punished enough. Quite probably some quotes have been used out of context as ammunition for the SPL inquisition, but we're not exactly making it difficult for them to twist our words when clubs own website has presented press conferences which are equally damning. We really should have been a lot more concise when commenting on the crime and punishment of our situation Edited August 6, 2012 by UCF2008 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 This all seems to be pointing in the one direction to me: Timothy wants the titles, is using dodgy tactics to get them, while the club past and present are united in saying absolutely no way - plus, we have Murray and McLeish (and earlier Dodds) explicitly stating there was no illegality. Plus, all of a sudden, and out of the blue, another poster reports that Tayside nonce on the Bheeb claims we are off the radar. What a coincidence! Fancy that! I can't imagine why he's suddenly steering clear of the topic. If there's as solid a defence as Rangers figures have been putting up - and if McCoist and Green stand firm - I hope we can finish this nonsense off once and for all, with a clear name and the cleansing finger of exposure firmly exploring celtc's colon. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted August 6, 2012 Share Posted August 6, 2012 Has anyone made a complaint to the Law Society for Scotland over this clear conflict of interest? 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.