BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 BH is right. I think we should be grateful that we have a tireless campaigner for good manners, respect and polite behaviour holding the reins of power at Ibrox. Previous incumbents, who shrugged off criticism, especially of a personal nature, to demonstrate by their actions what they could do, were men of straw compared to this lad. Those who would repeatedly highlight such issues as being jailed for tax fraud really do need to see the bigger picture. Just because you have demonstrated in the past that you are an untrustworthy criminal who ended up slopping out your own shite on a daily basis doesn't mean that you can't, at some point in the future, take control of a multi-million pound business or strike deals with 30% rates of interest for sharegolders. How on earth is he supposed to get on with the business of creating a successful Rangers when people harp on about his criminal past, when he was jailed for 27 months for tax fraud? It's really most unfair. Just because he was jailed for 27 months for tax fraud is no reason for this bad manners on the part of posters here and elsewhere, it really isn't. It ought to stop right away! No need to keep highlighting it all. It should also be pointed out that just because you were a convicted criminal in 1997 does not necessarily mean that you were untrustworthy at that time and it certainly should not be implied or suggested that you would be untrustworthy 17 years later. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTinMan99 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 That was 16 years ago, BTW. If you read some of he stuff you could get the idea it was rather months ago. Do people change? Who knows. I sure don't know him and out of principle I'd give him the benefit of the doubt today (sic!) rather than drone constantly about this stuff and thus force him into action against freely-flak'ing people essentially hiding behind usernames on boards owned by others. And the icing on that cake is that people have a go at him because he reacts to the flak. How dare he! A real man would use his spying account to defend himself, not threaten Bears with lawyers letters. I can see why Frankie has bowed to the pressure, but he would probably stand a decent chance in court against him. It's nothing short of financial bullying and a disgrace to the club. If he can't handle a bit of mild criticism, he shouldn't be in his position. The fact we have people trolling our forums is beyond pathetic. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 BH is right. I think we should be grateful that we have a tireless campaigner for good manners, respect and polite behaviour holding the reins of power at Ibrox. Previous incumbents, who shrugged off criticism, especially of a personal nature, to demonstrate by their actions what they could do, were men of straw compared to this lad. Those who would repeatedly highlight such issues as being jailed for tax fraud really do need to see the bigger picture. Just because you have demonstrated in the past that you are an untrustworthy criminal who ended up slopping out your own shite on a daily basis doesn't mean that you can't, at some point in the future, take control of a multi-million pound business or strike deals with 30% rates of interest for sharegolders. How on earth is he supposed to get on with the business of creating a successful Rangers when people harp on about his criminal past, when he was jailed for 27 months for tax fraud? It's really most unfair. Just because he was jailed for 27 months for tax fraud is no reason for this bad manners on the part of posters here and elsewhere, it really isn't. It ought to stop right away! Quite so. We're lucky to have him. Who knows how much interest we may otherwise have had to pay on this loan if we hadn't had Mr Easdale fighting our corner. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Yes, quite right. And I dread to think what the public perception of the financial competence of Rangers would be. We'd probably end up having to take 'internal' loans and struggle to raise outside finance, although since we have enough money to see us to the end of the season there's no prospect of that happening anyway. Der Berliner speaks eloquently for all of us, I think. What's past is past! I'm surprised that Mr Easdale feels the need to take legal steps when surely, he can see that we are all delighted with his tenure: the excellent financial performance, the industry standard setting public relations we've seen, that je ne sais quoi which says 'class' at every turn, the ground breaking levels of transparency (to say nothing of the splendid bus service at Bellahouston Pk after the game) and are 100% behind him. Well, 30% anyway. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 No need to keep highlighting it all. Have you actually read what you typed in post #108 by any chance? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Yes, quite right. And I dread to think what the public perception of the financial competence of Rangers would be. We'd probably end up having to take 'internal' loans and struggle to raise outside finance, although since we have enough money to see us to the end of the season there's no prospect of that happening anyway. Der Berliner speaks eloquently for all of us, I think. What's past is past! I'm surprised that Mr Easdale feels the need to take legal steps when surely, he can see that we are all delighted with his tenure: the excellent financial performance, the industry standard setting public relations we've seen, that je ne sais quoi which says 'class' at every turn, the ground breaking levels of transparency (to say nothing of the splendid bus service at Bellahouston Pk after the game) and are 100% behind him. Well, 30% anyway. There's a part of me that says we could be better served by dropping all of this and moving on. I'm pretty sure that everyone who matters in Scotland is very aware of Sandy Easdale's background, and it could be perceived that to continue with name calling is on the childish side. With regards to being pro or anti Board, I'm probably as anti as they come. However, I've got my tin hat on, and I'm sure there will those who disagree with me. For the time being, and for the dignity and safety of the forum - and respect for Frankie and admin - I think we should retain the higher moral ground. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Course it's childish. That's why I called for it to stop. On the second point, Mr Easdale will never be on the same moral ground that I stand on. End of, no debate. Debt to society paid or not, view of rehabilitation liberal or punitive (I would lean to the liberal side, generally), I've never been to jail and I have never defrauded the exchequer. The question of maintaining higher ground doesn't arise - I don't have any interest in being thought of as holier than thou, but I certainly stand higher in the rather arbitrary ladder of merit that is 'morality' than someone with a criminal record. When the Conservatives came up with the hilarious concept of 'Caring Conservatism': they had to invent it because they were widely recognised as uncaring. It's uncertain how many people bought into the concept. Game's nearly on, I shall leave it at that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 Course it's childish. That's why I called for it to stop. On the second point, Mr Easdale will never be on the same moral ground that I stand on. End of, no debate. Debt to society paid or not, view of rehabilitation liberal or punitive (I would lean to the liberal side, generally), I've never been to jail and I have never defrauded the exchequer. The question of maintaining higher ground doesn't arise - I don't have any interest in being thought of as holier than thou, but I certainly stand higher in the rather arbitrary ladder of merit that is 'morality' than someone with a criminal record. When the Conservatives came up with the hilarious concept of 'Caring Conservatism': they had to invent it because they were widely recognised as uncaring. It's uncertain how many people bought into the concept. Game's nearly on, I shall leave it at that. I guess that means that a person's 'debt to society' can never be paid, no matter what the society itself deems to be proper. It brings to mind a quote from the immortal Robert Burns from 'To a Louse' ... " O wad some Power the gift tae gie us To see oursels as ithers see us! " 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 I guess that means that a person's 'debt to society' can never be paid, no matter what the society itself deems to be proper.It brings to mind a quote from the immortal Robert Burns from 'To a Louse' ... " O wad some Power the gift tae gie us To see oursels as ithers see us! " In the eyes of the law a spent conviction = no conviction, so we'd better avoid c***k as well. C**k may be alright though! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted March 17, 2014 Share Posted March 17, 2014 In the eyes of the law a spent conviction = no conviction, so we'd better avoid c***k as well. C**k may be alright though! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I mean "cook" of course. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 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.