A wizard, A knight & A round table

[D'Artagnan 173]

Is merlin claiming that?

 

 

No that was just one of my "social observations" bud.

[chilledbear 16]

Surely the problem is that the present Board will not speak to the fans, except through Irvine and McMurdo. We have had all three, McColl and the Murrays, give Qand A in the last week. If they have given an answer that proves incorrect, or is proved to be a lie, they can be held to account. We have no evidence from the other camp that anything that is said is true or false, it can all be blamed on spin by the doctors.

 

It would be worth writing a Blog, asking why the present Board do not tell the Support their plans for the future, after all it is our money they are spending every week.

[D'Artagnan 173]

Surely the problem is that the present Board will not speak to the fans, except through Irvine and McMurdo. We have had all three, McColl and the Murrays, give Qand A in the last week. If they have given an answer that proves incorrect, or is proved to be a lie, they can be held to account. We have no evidence from the other camp that anything that is said is true or false, it can all be blamed on spin by the doctors.

 

It would be worth writing a Blog, asking why the present Board do not tell the Support their plans for the future, after all it is our money they are spending every week.

 

I broached this subject recently CB - and was correctly reminded that Mather & Stockbridge did a Q & A. Also Stockbridge and JH did meet with VB - that much is true at least.

[chilledbear 16]

''Also Stockbridge and JH did meet with VB - that much is true at least.''

 

Any minutes?

[Frankie 8,151]

Unfortunately Bill McMurdo - with the direct help of Jack Irvine - has mislead and misdirected the Rangers support for several months now.

 

1. Have McCollco held discussions with various investors to gauge support? Of course they will have.

 

2. Will this have included BPH, Zeus or whoever? Of course, why wouldn't you try and find out more about such institutions and perhaps sway opinions?

 

3. Would this have resulted in 50+ calls? I doubt it because clearly McCollco distrust the names mentioned - even go so far as to suggest court action to find out who is behind them.

 

All in all, as Zappa has analysed, while Bill's 'facts' may not completely false it's how they are presented that is less than trustworthy (see misdirection). For example, by all means ask questions of McCollco but when there is a complete absence of similar criticism of the incumbents then that's where one doubts the intentions of the messenger. Especially when instead we're given stuff about £50m BPH war-chests and Ibrox leasebacks alongside language used like 'rebels' and questions about the politics of people like McColl.

 

Quite frankly McMurdo is a disgrace. And that comes from someone who has been as critical of McCollco (and e.g. Leggo) as anyone else.

[amms 0]

That last comment by you is as much spin as anything which has been printed - if you are referring to this article.

 

By whom and where are you being told it's wrong to seek the identity of those who have invested ?

 

Yeah, fair enough, you aren't saying that, I apologise.

 

My error aside I strongly disagree with your article. Wanting to know who owns our club and exerts so much influence is the minimum all Rangers supporters should demand, if McColl and Murray(s) contacted BPH and co is hardly a surprise, indeed if they hadn't that would be bigger and more disturbing story. The factionalism and schisms in our support on this subject are staggering.

[bluebear54 0]

Merlin/Toxic have certainly succeeded this time again.

Divide and rule.

We're all bickering and taking sides in a petty dispute instead of keeping our eyes on the ball.

As a support I despair we'll never learn.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

if mccoll is now trying to remove them from the vote after trying to get them onside i would say it's clear why he has done so well in business.

 

personally i have no issue with that either.

[D'Artagnan 173]

Yeah, fair enough, you aren't saying that, I apologise.

 

My error aside I strongly disagree with your article. Wanting to know who owns our club and exerts so much influence is the minimum all Rangers supporters should demand, if McColl and Murray(s) contacted BPH and co is hardly a surprise, indeed if they hadn't that would be bigger and more disturbing story. The factionalism and schisms in our support on this subject are staggering.

 

Amms I am not against us knowing - in fact if you read my article in WATP on Saturday you will find I go a whole lot further - Id say Frankie & my thoughts on the matter of fans representation & empowerment are pretty similar.

[Zappa 0]

I think the difference in all of this is Zap is that youre mind is clearly made up about certain things whereas Im still not convinced by alot of the stuff which has been written or is being alleged.

 

I'm curious to know what things you think my "mind is clearly made up about" D'Art. Is it the belief that Green & co were only ever interested in lining their pockets and I'm glad they're hopefully now gone for good? Is it that I want Stockbridge' date=' the Easdales and anyone remaining with ties or alignment to Green & co to leave Ibrox as soon as possible because I don't trust any of them? What else is my mind "[i']clearly made up about[/i]"?

 

What's this "stuff which has been written or is being alleged" that you say you're still not convinced about?

 

It may well be that you have been privy to a lot more material than me - I have steadfastly refused to read the Charlotte Fakes stuff (perhaps to my detriment but Im not going to form an opinion from material whose source is unknown and motivation appears to be to de-stabilise our club further)

 

I'm simply not willing to ignore the Charlotte Fakes stuff D'Art because I think a lot of it is extremely relevant.

 

There's been the odd bit of dross which amount to little more than attempted character assassination in what has been a lengthy PR war and I'm less inclined to pay much attention to the smear campaign stuff.

 

There's been a hell of a lot of extremely informative documents and emails leaked and that stuff gets my attention. I'm not going to ignore stuff like leaked boardroom meeting minutes which are a staggering read just because I don't know who leaked them or why they were leaked.

 

We're talking about information which is already leaked to the masses. Is dismissing it or ignoring it all on the grounds you've mentioned really a prudent approach?

 

Im also aware that there are people out there who are misinforming the Rangers support despite the fact they sit in the "good guys" camp. The Leggat article the other day regarding the "band of renegades" - Vanguard Bears' date=' was false, I know that because Im allowed access to their forums and their opposition to Jack irvine being at our club is as strong as anyones.[/quote']

 

Some of Leggo's propaganda pieces are a complete embarrassment D'Art, but I think most of our fans online are smart enough to sniff out the nonsense and propaganda war drivel when it gets peddled and I think most of us generally take certain writers with a very large pinch of salt. We just need to filter out the wheat from the chaff and as with Bill McMurdo, it's not as if the likes of David Leggat is always writing nonsense or is always wrong because there's sometimes correct facts scattered in there amongst the propaganda too.

 

What I try to do myself and I think many others do likewise, is take in as much information as possible and use it to formulate my own opinions. In order to do that properly at the moment though, we often need to read through mountains of agenda ridden PR war drivel and propaganda. Reading the odd leaked document can actually make quite a refreshing change given the volume of factual information available!