ian1964 10,416 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 By ROBERT McAULAYPublished: 1 hr ago COPS are probing chilling threats made to footie chiefs at Aberdeen in the wake of the yob attack on Celtic boss Neil Lennon. Worried top brass at Pittodrie called in detectives as soon as they received the menacing letter. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 They're like a pack of rabid dogs turning on each other. Thank fook we are out of it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 [quote=ian1964;464617 By ROBERT McAULAYPublished: 1 hr ago COPS are probing chilling threats made to footie chiefs at Aberdeen in the wake of the yob attack on Celtic boss Neil Lennon. Worried top brass at Pittodrie called in detectives as soon as they received the menacing letter. I can't read the small writing, but is the implication that the threats are being made by more Aberdeen yobs or by Celtic yobs? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I think it says "A source said: "Every club gets nutters sending in stuff, but there was more to this. It was (can't read this word). Lennon, 42, had to flee Dons thugs last week." 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 While the truth is something like... Thug Celtic manager Lennon sees opportunity to play victim card for 30th time in less than 4 years and claims he had to flee from fellow thugs. In typical retaliatory fashion, fellow thugs who are supporters of thug Celtic manager Lennon and are anti-British terrorist supporters, send threats to Aberdeen bosses in yet another case of their well known threatening and intimidatory behaviour. Scottish football will be a hell of a lot cleaner and more respectable when Lennon the thug buggers off somewhere else. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I've stayed out of this thread because I think I'm a little out of step regarding Neil Lennon. Let me start by saying that when he was a player I really, really didn't like him. It was Peter Grant levels of dislike I felt, indeed probably more so at times. I've tried to rationalise why I felt that way and I'm fairly certain it has nothing to do with his religion or place of birth. I might be deluding myself but I don't think I am. Some players just have that ability to wind you up, something about them raises the hackles. The fact Lennon was at Celtic and a fairly successful Celtic at that probably amplified that dislike. Where I struggle is with the reaction to incidents with Lennon. 'We' should unequivocally condemn physical threats and attacks on him, as we should when they happen to anybody really. It concerns me that too often Rangers supporters look to explain that 'he brings it on himself' rather than say 'nobody should be physically attacked because they're a footballer/manager'. The truth is Lennon has experienced far, far worse than anyone associated with Scottish football has ever before. That's very embarrassing. Lennon doesn't create unemployment, he hasn't sent young men to their deaths in foreign fields for oil or influence, he's not closed your local school/hospital/community centre and he's never promised to improve your life or standard of living and then failed to deliver it. I worry sometimes we're in danger of losing sight of who Lennon is. He's not a politician, he's not a soldier and he's not stood for office. Because if he was you could provide a context and an argument that 'he brings it on himself. The horrible truth is Lennon could have been killed whilst living and working in Glasgow simply because of the job he does. That's not hyperbole that's a fact. At some point I think those of us in our support who aren't mental cases need to be a little more vocal in condemning those who perpetrate 'attacks' on Lennon and less vocal in explaining why 'he brings it on himself', because I don't believe he does. This latest incident didn't involve Rangers supporters so condemning it shouldn't be hard, yet it seems it still is. Our less than steadfast condemnation allows the Angela Haggertys of this world to perpetuate her own wildly skewed world views despite no evidence to the back them up. Some of what Lennon has experienced was sectarian but most wasn't, most was simply thuggishness, we should be able to condemn that without thinking about it. The manager of Celtic should be able to talk about football, should be able to have a drink in the city, should be able to watch other sides play in the main stand without fear of physical abuse far less actual physical attack. I still dislike Lennon but I think he has a point in terms of asking why he attracts this venom and why it is sometimes explained as being his own fault. I'm afraid that's a little like blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Why does he attract such venom? Surely to Christ that is rhetorical. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 I've stayed out of this thread because I think I'm a little out of step regarding Neil Lennon. Let me start by saying that when he was a player I really, really didn't like him. It was Peter Grant levels of dislike I felt, indeed probably more so at times. I've tried to rationalise why I felt that way and I'm fairly certain it has nothing to do with his religion or place of birth. I might be deluding myself but I don't think I am. Some players just have that ability to wind you up, something about them raises the hackles. The fact Lennon was at Celtic and a fairly successful Celtic at that probably amplified that dislike. Where I struggle is with the reaction to incidents with Lennon. 'We' should unequivocally condemn physical threats and attacks on him, as we should when they happen to anybody really. It concerns me that too often Rangers supporters look to explain that 'he brings it on himself' rather than say 'nobody should be physically attacked because they're a footballer/manager'. The truth is Lennon has experienced far, far worse than anyone associated with Scottish football has ever before. That's very embarrassing. Lennon doesn't create unemployment, he hasn't sent young men to their deaths in foreign fields for oil or influence, he's not closed your local school/hospital/community centre and he's never promised to improve your life or standard of living and then failed to deliver it. I worry sometimes we're in danger of losing sight of who Lennon is. He's not a politician, he's not a soldier and he's not stood for office. Because if he was you could provide a context and an argument that 'he brings it on himself. The horrible truth is Lennon could have been killed whilst living and working in Glasgow simply because of the job he does. That's not hyperbole that's a fact. At some point I think those of us in our support who aren't mental cases need to be a little more vocal in condemning those who perpetrate 'attacks' on Lennon and less vocal in explaining why 'he brings it on himself', because I don't believe he does. This latest incident didn't involve Rangers supporters so condemning it shouldn't be hard, yet it seems it still is. Our less than steadfast condemnation allows the Angela Haggertys of this world to perpetuate her own wildly skewed world views despite no evidence to the back them up. Some of what Lennon has experienced was sectarian but most wasn't, most was simply thuggishness, we should be able to condemn that without thinking about it. The manager of Celtic should be able to talk about football, should be able to have a drink in the city, should be able to watch other sides play in the main stand without fear of physical abuse far less actual physical attack. I still dislike Lennon but I think he has a point in terms of asking why he attracts this venom and why it is sometimes explained as being his own fault. I'm afraid that's a little like blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt. I would never condone threats or attacks on anyone, but I do think he should be asking himself if he looks like a thug and also acts like a thug, then surely that makes him a thug. Maybe if he could admit that he's a thug, he could then ask himself why he's a thug. Is it in his genes? Was it his upbringing? Did society turn him into a thug? At the end of the day the man is most certainly a thug and he's a bad influence on others, both his supporters and those who dislike him. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 The manager of Celtic should be able to talk about football, should be able to have a drink in the city, should be able to watch other sides play in the main stand without fear of physical abuse far less actual physical attack. I still dislike Lennon but I think he has a point in terms of asking why he attracts this venom and why it is sometimes explained as being his own fault. I'm afraid that's a little like blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt. Every other Celtic manager in living memory has been able to do just that Amms, Lennon's arrival on the scene awoke the hither to quiet minority in the Celtic support who held their bigoted and distasteful views but were largely drowned out by the majority of fans who were more interested in Celtic than in their deadly rivals. Something changed and on a societal level.....I tend to think that it was always there, boiling just under the surface but it sure exploded in a big way. Suddenly it was alright to openly hate Rangers, to call them "dirty orange bastards", to spit and froth on scarves and blue shirts, their new manager acted that way after all. The loonballs who sent Lennon bombs and bullets are quite rightly behind bars and that's the place for anybody who behaves in such a way however they were the very extreme tip of a largely blunt sword. The question is why does he provoke such a strong reaction? It's not so much who or what he is, it's who and what he represents to most people that provokes the response. Maybe his good friend Thomas "Slab" Murphy might have a more philosophical view, something about flying with crows..... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 By his actions ye shall know him: Spitting on a Rangers' scarf Calling our bench "Dirty Orange bastards" Singing "the Rangers are Shite" etc. 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.