Banner for Saturday

[MacK1950 2,226]

You only have to look at their "gun law" amendment to see how thick Uncle Sam's people are.

[craig 5,195]

What brought you to that line of thought? The notion that we pretend to be anything of the above? Did we ever do that, did anyone said so or actually intimated that with the Penn State or Saville stuff? If anything, we might show the Scum up for what they are. Bigotted hypocrites with a rather selective memory. No more, no less.

 

Can you explain to me how the parading of a banner of a child abuser would "show the scum up for what they are. Bigotted hypocrites with a selective memory"

 

I'm completely at a loss as to how the parading of either a Savile banner or indeed a Penn State banner would actually show them up for anything you have suggested.

 

I didn't feel defended by calscot's reply to you, thank you. But I still await your suggestion for a neat banner, point scoring or not. Just for the sake of the argument.

 

Meanwhile, a few others have argued what might be more appropriate in an age where we can do whatever we want and still get blamed. Someone mentioned that people shall stop singing certain songs, so the IRAoke and heinous stuff the Yahoos regularly air will be heard all over the planet. Honestly, that idea is a good one, yet, unless you know what they are singing, many foreigners (and even English native speakers) don't get much of the words or texts. Unless, of course, some impartial BT or Sky chap apologizes on air when certain songs are being sung ... songs supposedly "sectarian". And rest assured, the next camera image will be Rangers supporters in full voice ...

 

And THAT has been the case for the best part of a decade.

 

My choice for a banner ? Let me see, how about something somewhat remotely related to RANGERS. How about the old Herbie VW car with the racing number #55 on it and the words "going for" on the windshield of said car ? Or a very simple "you tried to kill us, and failed" or "144 years young and still going strong". Something to do with RANGERS as opposed to Celtic will do for me. These are not point-scoring but you can be sure they would get up the nose of most Celtic fans given they firmly believe we are a 4 yr old Club.

 

Or how about even a "You paid 49 quid to see a new Club - still all about the Rangers" ??

 

The issue about "doing whatever we want and still get blamed" is exactly that. We have to fight much more intelligently. If anyone thinks Savile or Penn State banners will highlight the very serious issue of child abuse then I fear they will be wrong in the worst possible way - it would absolutely be thrown back at Rangers fans as being completely insensitive to the very real and ugly abuses people have had to suffer at such beasts. All in the name of point-scoring or getting one over on them ?? Not for me, sorry.

 

The singing of songs is what it is. We also have to be more intelligent there too. I completely understand why some of our repertoire has creeped back in - because there is no balance in how our songs and theirs are handled. However, if we completely eliminate the "offensive" songs then it has a greater chance of shining the spotlight on Celtic's repertoire. Far easier for us, having cleaned up our own act to say "see, we as a Club and a support have eradicated what people are offended by - now.... how about that bi-weekly IRA-Oke at Parkhead". It is more difficult to get traction on this when we continue with the songs we have in the songbook that quickly get picked up as offensive.

 

Stop the "offensive" songs, highlight the continued IRA-Oke and it becomes tougher for the media to point the finger at us and say "see, Rangers fans still singing offensive songs".

 

Clean up our act, then go on the offensive from a position of strength, not one of weakness.

 

That said, I think the songs issue is different from the parading of banner.

[compo 6,076]

There was nothing worse than being stuck behind a banner oh aye those klaxon horns some fans brought back from Germany remember standing at Ibrox when some fan gave it a good blast almost in my ear

[cooponthewing 1,139]

I seriously hope we use common sense here!. Any banner re saville/penn state etc will be used by the media to portray Rangers fans as insensitive, vindictive and to dehumanise us further. We would just be making a their day.

We need to rise above it and hope outsiders hear the filth they sing and see the banners that they have and realise what lowlife, terrorist supporting scum they are.

We should keep our banners around Rangers. I couldn't care less about them. "Going for 55, since 1872" and "you tried to kill us, you failed, never forgive, never forget" would do me just fine.

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,470]

Can you explain to me how the parading of a banner of a child abuser would "show the scum up for what they are. Bigotted hypocrites with a selective memory"

 

I'm completely at a loss as to how the parading of either a Savile banner or indeed a Penn State banner would actually show them up for anything you have suggested.

 

 

 

My choice for a banner ? Let me see, how about something somewhat remotely related to RANGERS. How about the old Herbie VW car with the racing number #55 on it and the words "going for" on the windshield of said car ? Or a very simple "you tried to kill us, and failed" or "144 years young and still going strong". Something to do with RANGERS as opposed to Celtic will do for me. These are not point-scoring but you can be sure they would get up the nose of most Celtic fans given they firmly believe we are a 4 yr old Club.

 

Or how about even a "You paid 49 quid to see a new Club - still all about the Rangers" ??

 

The issue about "doing whatever we want and still get blamed" is exactly that. We have to fight much more intelligently. If anyone thinks Savile or Penn State banners will highlight the very serious issue of child abuse then I fear they will be wrong in the worst possible way - it would absolutely be thrown back at Rangers fans as being completely insensitive to the very real and ugly abuses people have had to suffer at such beasts. All in the name of point-scoring or getting one over on them ?? Not for me, sorry.

 

The singing of songs is what it is. We also have to be more intelligent there too. I completely understand why some of our repertoire has creeped back in - because there is no balance in how our songs and theirs are handled. However, if we completely eliminate the "offensive" songs then it has a greater chance of shining the spotlight on Celtic's repertoire. Far easier for us, having cleaned up our own act to say "see, we as a Club and a support have eradicated what people are offended by - now.... how about that bi-weekly IRA-Oke at Parkhead". It is more difficult to get traction on this when we continue with the songs we have in the songbook that quickly get picked up as offensive.

 

Stop the "offensive" songs, highlight the continued IRA-Oke and it becomes tougher for the media to point the finger at us and say "see, Rangers fans still singing offensive songs".

 

Clean up our act, then go on the offensive from a position of strength, not one of weakness.

 

That said, I think the songs issue is different from the parading of banner.

 

Post of the day mate. Bravo

[der Berliner 3,219]

Can you explain to me how the parading of a banner of a child abuser would "show the scum up for what they are. Bigotted hypocrites with a selective memory"

 

I'm completely at a loss as to how the parading of either a Savile banner or indeed a Penn State banner would actually show them up for anything you have suggested.

 

Like with some replies above, you took a different angle of viewing it. The above though is rather simple, if you take a step back from concentrating of the horrors of child abuse. For mentioning that is showing them up for their selective memories .... while declaring us being the source of all evils on this planet. If someone airs BJK, the media runs a war against us for being vile and mean and whatnot, essentially ignoring the whole context if it being cynical football fan "banter"(even though it has not much of a football context ... not that Penny Arcade has much of that either). See, they rant all their zombie, sevco and huns bile over us with not a whisper, but some amused chuckles in the media. You can soak that up if you wish and take it manfullly. But I for one would allow for some "retaliation", even if it may not strike a cord with everyone.

 

The bigotted stuff was - obviously - referring to their songbook and constant IRA-, Huns- and zombie-bile hailed at us, while we are barred from uttering words that have been taken out of context and been given a "can be offended by uttering it" meaning, such as Fenian. Which is rather peculiar, as when we sing it, as anyone would know, we do not refer to some assumed Roman-Catholic stuff, but the Fenian Brotherhood that became the IRA and the latter's members being widely known as Fenians. And from that you can come to the lovely term "sectarian", which miraculously hardly ever features when it comes to the Scum and their folk's antic (even the most vile IRA stuff), but solely our songbook and our fans' behaviour. Hence, bigotted hypocrites.

 

 

My choice for a banner ? Let me see, how about something somewhat remotely related to RANGERS. How about the old Herbie VW car with the racing number #55 on it and the words "going for" on the windshield of said car ? Or a very simple "you tried to kill us, and failed" or "144 years young and still going strong". Something to do with RANGERS as opposed to Celtic will do for me. These are not point-scoring but you can be sure they would get up the nose of most Celtic fans given they firmly believe we are a 4 yr old Club.

 

Or how about even a "You paid 49 quid to see a new Club - still all about the Rangers" ??

 

The issue about "doing whatever we want and still get blamed" is exactly that. We have to fight much more intelligently. If anyone thinks Savile or Penn State banners will highlight the very serious issue of child abuse then I fear they will be wrong in the worst possible way - it would absolutely be thrown back at Rangers fans as being completely insensitive to the very real and ugly abuses people have had to suffer at such beasts. All in the name of point-scoring or getting one over on them ?? Not for me, sorry.

 

The singing of songs is what it is. We also have to be more intelligent there too. I completely understand why some of our repertoire has creeped back in - because there is no balance in how our songs and theirs are handled. However, if we completely eliminate the "offensive" songs then it has a greater chance of shining the spotlight on Celtic's repertoire. Far easier for us, having cleaned up our own act to say "see, we as a Club and a support have eradicated what people are offended by - now.... how about that bi-weekly IRA-Oke at Parkhead". It is more difficult to get traction on this when we continue with the songs we have in the songbook that quickly get picked up as offensive.

 

Stop the "offensive" songs, highlight the continued IRA-Oke and it becomes tougher for the media to point the finger at us and say "see, Rangers fans still singing offensive songs".

 

Clean up our act, then go on the offensive from a position of strength, not one of weakness.

 

That said, I think the songs issue is different from the parading of banner.

 

Just in case, I have been advocating the dropping of any Fenian, FTP and similar stuff ever since we were fined for it by UEFA. What I don't agree to is the fact that it is only us that get any sort of treatment for some unsavioury songs. The completly cowardly behaviour of media and authorities in this respect, as they largely only target us from behind the shield of one UEFA ruling on TBB and FTP. Hypocritically again, as while they hare after us for "F@ck the Pope and the IRA" on the one hand denying us the "freedom of speech", which makes a re-appearance though when allowing large scale anti-Israel activities at and in the Scumhut whithout a snort ... but have a go at UEFA, rather than the culprits. The pendulum swings both ways, but apparently not in Scotland. It is this I have an objection to, despite wanting certain songs to vanish.

 

As for the Saville banners, see above. It is a reminder to the Scum that they haven't as clean a house as they like to portray themselves - and Scottish authorities didn't act as they might have (Yes, I think the authorities could have done similar things as the NCAA lot did, had there been any will ... which in turn was very much evident in our admin days). It is sure some cynical stuff to have, but every now and then such a reminder brings them down to earth. And perhaps the odd media chap will take up on this ... how naughty and bad and uncivilized we are. Well, tell them that we don't want to gas our players then. Much of what they write is emptyheaded nonsense anyway.

Edited September 9, 2016 by der Berliner

[pete 2,494]

Ado den Haag (Hague) have asked all their supporters to take a soft toy to their away game at Feynoord. They will all be donated to the Sofia Children's Hospital in Rotterdam.

 

Now that is a far better way to get press coverage than having a banner with Jimmy Saville on it.

[cooponthewing 1,139]

You make a very good argument DB and the way they have twisted the term "fenian" to suit their agenda. I must also say a great point RE freedom of speech.

The point I have been trying to make, I guess, it that what you are pointing out is exactly what we are up against.

A corrupt, nationalist state with sectarian leanings and connections with those who would happily see us vanish. Although I accept you make great arguments, and you do make the point well, personally I just don't see the mileage in giving them the moral high ground. We are behind the 8 ball often enough, I don't want to give them points to score or easy PR victories.

[calscot 0]

Why am I not surprised you disagree with me cal

 

Whilst I recognize what you are saying I would be absolutely flabbergasted if you actually believed that any portraying of Jimmy Savile on Saturday by Rangers fans would be treated in any way other than as an affront to his victims by the media. There is absolutely NO WAY whatsoever that the media will portray this as "Rangers fans exposing systematically covered up paedophilia". It will absolutely be portrayed far and wide in the media as Rangers fans poking fun at victims of child abuse. If you believe the former then there is no point in us continuing the debate - because we believe in polar opposites.

 

The portraying of Savile will lead to a monumental own goal on our part. I have absolutely no doubt about that at all.

 

Sorry, but I am NOT condoning doing nothing about them. That is a little offensive to be honest. Just how much does the Rangers support do to expose paedophilia every day ? I would hazard a guess at very little. But because we go to Parkhead all of a sudden we are public champions of abuse ? I don't think that is the case. Even the OP made it abundantly clear that this was nothing more than a points-scoring exercise. Completely the wrong manner in which to attempt to expose it - and just waiting for the bomb to explode in our own faces.

 

How much have YOU done to expose the reprehensible Torbett ? I know I have done nothing personally but then I also don't think that a banner on Saturday is the appropriate way of going about it. Just what would a banner showing a picture of a child abuser resolve in terms of the abuse suffered by many children at the hands of Savile and Torbet ? You could argue that it would generate public exposure - which is fair enough. However, be very, very careful of the exposure it actually brings - for it is far more likely, given the current media situation, to be portrayed as us making fun of victims rather than the intended exposure that Celtic institutionally covered-up paedophilia (and, as I already said, I even doubt that the any such banner from our fans is earnestly meant to expose those cover-ups - much more likely, as I said, to be a point-scoring exercise).

 

You can find it appalling all you want Cal, as is your prerogative. Me, personally, think that you are being more than just a touch inventive with the ACTUAL intent of such banners being paraded on Saturday and the IMPLIED intent - the intent implied is that it is some noble cause demanding justice for such victims whilst the actual intent is points-scoring. If the actual intent was to demand justice for those victims where is the continual, exhaustive, public demand from Rangers fans groups that the cover-ups at Parkhead need to be exposed ? Exactly, there are none.

 

All of a sudden we become such noble-minded defenders of justice and those unable to protect themselves..... whenever we travel to Parkhead. We are essentially talking about 90 minute defenders of justice.

 

Also, don't accuse me of brushing ANYTHING under the carpet - that is clearly nonsense. The fact that I don't wish Rangers fans to parade a banner of a child abuser is absolutely NOT the same as brushing it under the carpet. In fact, I take it that I will see you at the next Rangers fans gathering to demand justice for Torbet's victims ? Exactly, neither of us will be there because there won't be any such meeting.

 

If you think that a banner of Savile is an attempt to expose the cover-ups then that is your prerogative. I just happen to disagree and believe that any such banner is virtually nothing to do with exposing any such cover-up or demanding justice for the victims - and is almost completely about point-scoring.

 

I think we are diametrically opposed on this issue - but not for the reason you state above.

 

In your haste to defend der Berliner's Penn State suggested banner as an alternative to one of Jimmy Savile you have ignored the fact that the OP clearly suggested it as a points-scoring exercise with absolutely NOTHING whatsoever to do with justice or exposure.

 

I can't subscribe to defending the indefensible. In this instance it is all about point-scoring - no matter how loud you should that this is about demanding justice for victims I would find it very surprising if you actually believed that.

 

But it is what it is. Looks like, once more, you and I agree to disagree Nothing wrong with that

 

Once again your reply says to me that you didn't really read my post and understand it. The amount of agreements you get on your post shows that that's a malaise of the forum.

 

If you can point to the bit where I condone a banner of Savile then I'll be able to respond. As it is, you seem to have replied to something I didn't write.

 

I will say again (sigh). I think ALL our banners should be Rangers and football related - I can't make that clearer, and I've been totally consistent on that.

 

BUT I really don't agree with equating slagging off paedophiles and their cover ups with mocking innocent deaths. Both are petty point scoring but one is nowhere near as bad as the other.

 

If you want to discuss either of those two points then I'm happy to do so. Your current stance seems to be that you disagree with me and therefore both those points.

 

On a final note, I saw Celtic were applauded for highlighting the plight of the Palestinians against certain opposition, maybe the same people would applaud Rangers fans for highlighting the plight of paedophile victims against certain opposition...

 

It's the massive moral hypocrisy I was highlighting, which you don't seem to see, and just equate the two very uneven sides.

 

As for Savile, I don't really see the relevance beyond tenuous, and don't see that as part of the debate.

[der Berliner 3,219]

Personally, I wouldn't give them any amo either. I just reasoned why it would be "appropriate" to have the odd banner re Penn State. IMHO, it should be all about Rangers in song and banner. Much of their stuff is about being for something, whereas quite a few of our older songbook was against something. Which can and has been switch according to a certain agenda. This is plain to see for anyone willing to do so, only that there are very few in the places "who count" wanting to do it (perhaps on purpose).

 

On the other hand, football "banter" can take on many faces, some quite silly and amusing (Blowing Bubbles, Nakamura ate my dog), some downright vile. But in nigh all cases, not least in the more civilized countries, that hardly ever goes beyond the football fan context. And the latter is being violated in our case ... while the Yahoos get away "with murder" ("Where's you head, Sgt. Rigsby?" (can't remember his name right now) and all their IRAoke.