TRS - Jim Spence's Rangers Jibes

[True_Ger_1872 2]

To be honest I'm surprised people are buying the deflection I alluded to.

 

Do we even have any evidence of these threats and abuse Spence is supposed to have suffered from? No, none at all. Sure, it wouldn't surprise me if a few idiots resorted to such nonsense but I'd also say the vast, vast majority of the 400 people who complained about Spence (including Rangers FC) would have done so respectfully and sensibly. And that's what we're talking about here.

 

Let's not get side-tracked onto a problem that is only being highlighted by people to deflect from the issue at hand - namely Spence's incompetence and own insulting behaviour.

 

I agree with that point, however it needs to be realised that even a single idiot resorting to that behaviour can and will be used against Rangers and the supporters. I do think that the incident that started this entire mess (Spence's incompetent behaviour to bait Rangers fans) will become forgotten in light of this so called 'abuse' given the characters that have historically proven to only write about topics with a slant that suits their agenda....hence why English and Speirs wont actually comment on Spence's behaviour and BBC Trust ruling violation....but will glady hype up the 'abuse' to raise the profile of their 'journalistic work'....if you can even call it that.

 

It is all too easy to see on Twitter some of the comments made to certain tweets, and also very obvious when folk choose and choose not to partake in any specifc lines of topics of conversation...BUT i do think that we should not be villified in the MSM until these actual emails, tweets are made visible to all. I mean the BBC were quick to 'omit' the section of contraversial narrative to suit them so surely the same applies here?

 

On another note - the NAZI reference is downright disgusting and i would be amazed if any of the supposed abusive chat would have came close to being as offensive as that was to us.

[craig 5,195]

Surely the reference to Stasi is punishable in and of itself ?

[Frankie 8,150]

Surely the reference to Stasi is punishable in and of itself ?

 

Well, that was Spiers but it really is disgraceful these chancers use this kind of language.

[craig 5,195]

Well, that was Spiers but it really is disgraceful these chancers use this kind of language.

 

That reference is disgusting and unwarranted, no matter how much Spiers tries to suggest otherwise.

 

There must be a complaints procedure ? In fact, IMHO, Spiers comparing us to the Stasi is more heinous that Spence referring to the club as dead.

[Frankie 8,150]

That reference is disgusting and unwarranted, no matter how much Spiers tries to suggest otherwise.

 

There must be a complaints procedure ? In fact, IMHO, Spiers comparing us to the Stasi is more heinous that Spence referring to the club as dead.

 

He said it on Twitter and his account is a personal one so his freelance status a bit more difficult to challenge.

[der Berliner 3,245]

Surely the reference to Stasi is punishable in and of itself ?

 

Not wanting to defend the Stasi, but it were essentially the East German "Secret Service" and did not much more wrong than any other secret service did and does nowadays. Certain aspects of their work were and are highlighted, quite a bit out of proportion. The point here is that much of what is being written about it was written by the victors and/or those who were under its scrutiny. You have to dig rather deep to get a balanced and objective view, not least when compared to the work of other secret services (working inside and outside its own country).

 

As for Spence, he likened us with Nazis and that is quite outrageous and in itself something that the BBC et al need to look at. We are sure no gilrs when it comes to meet out decsriptive titles and denominations to certain people, but he's not exactly a private person solely giving his private opinion on twitter. All the comments he received came from an interview he gave publicly on the airwaves. He was inciting this reaction and reacted inappropriately.

[andy steel 0]

AMMS:

I agree with what you say, I'm short on solutions though. How do you change that mindset, how do you convince someone you don't know that aggression online is as unacceptable as aggression in 'real life'? The anonymity afforded by the internet undoubtedly lulls people into believing anything goes. But in some cases i've seen these people do it in their own name, with avatars featuring their kids and themselves for all too see.

The club won't allow that behaviour in the ground (indeed the law won't), places like this won't allow that behaviour online but email and Twitter are ungoverned. It comes down to the law then, and prosecutions.

 

It's frustrating, what can be done about it I'm not sure though.

 

I think the club itself is going to have to do a lot more - and it has done much - to make it clear that if you are going to act like this, it doesn't want you. I don't know if it will, there's a lot of ubers who are inside Ibrox. But that's what I would hope for. I know it will piss a lot of people off and moves attention from haters to us (yet again) but we need to cleanse the temple in order to take on the moneylenders, if you'll forgive the mutilated metaphor.

 

Do we even have any evidence of these threats and abuse Spence is supposed to have suffered from? No, none at all. Sure, it wouldn't surprise me if a few idiots resorted to such nonsense but I'd also say the vast, vast majority of the 400 people who complained about Spence (including Rangers FC) would have done so respectfully and sensibly. And that's what we're talking about here.

 

And you'd be right. But:

 

Let's not get side-tracked onto a problem that is only being highlighted by people to deflect from the issue at hand

 

is exactly what will happen, like it or not. And it is SO frustrating to actually have one of our main enemies in your grasp only to see your own bloody side let him escape.

 

However, if this does go higher we still have the factual stuff to lean on: ideally we'd be able to call up a dozen regional journos from the BBC in England and ask, how do you refer to Team X which suffered the same fate as us? And they'd be obliged to reply, same as we did before, leaving it pretty obvious the only reason one team gets special treatment is to wind up that clubs' fans. But trying to get a BBC reporter to give such evidence now, since the thing has been escalted into a freedom of journalism shitstorm, will be hard. Again, an open goal missed thanks to what I believe is a thundering bad tackle by players who claim to be on our side.

[andy steel 0]

Not wanting to defend the Stasi, but it were essentially the East German "Secret Service" and did not much more wrong than any other secret service did and does nowadays. Certain aspects of their work were and are highlighted, quite a bit out of proportion. The point here is that much of what is being written about it was written by the victors and/or those who were under its scrutiny. You have to dig rather deep to get a balanced and objective view, not least when compared to the work of other secret services (working inside and outside its own country).

 

They seemed especially nasty in that book 'Stasiland', to be honest. I do not believe that any western European secret service, then or now, indulged in phsyical and psychological torture to the extent of the stasi. I know the Czech secret service were a a rotten lot too but still, I'm surprised to see you write that.

[der Berliner 3,245]

They seemed especially nasty in that book 'Stasiland', to be honest. I do not believe that any western European secret service, then or now, indulged in phsyical and psychological torture to the extent of the stasi. I know the Czech secret service were a a rotten lot too but still, I'm surprised to see you write that.

 

20 years of life in East Germany (East Berlin, as well as serving three years in the East German Navy, much of it in its HQ in Rostock where the military branch of the Stasi was located (rest assured, no connection that I know of)) as well as living amongst and speaking to hundreds of "intelligent" and objective people who lived much longer in East Germany than myself do give you some insights. The point with books like "Stasiland" is that they speak to certain people who happened unto certain Stasi-people at a certain time. What I have witnessed during these last 20odd years is that the worst period of Stasi work (say 1985 onwards) is being scrutinised and presented as if it was the status quo all along. Which is untrue. But the likening to an atmosphere like that in Germany after 1933 - with the terror regime of the Gestapo, SA and SS in full swing - is part of demonizing the East German life and society all along. As I said, you have to dig rather deep to get an objective view about life in East Germany ... as well as the work of the Stasi. Which is not to say that torture commited by the Stasi should be accepted or condoned ... or that I do that. Rather on the contrary.

 

But we divert slightly from the topic, I fear.

[54andcounting 0]

Don't mention the war....