cooponthewing 1,139 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 (edited) That is honestly worrying that someone finds the time for such bitterness. Carrying all that hate and bigoted resentment is truely unsettling. The poison that is inherited in many shames us all. Nothing but bile from a republican, nationalist and separatist Protestant/Rangers hating rag. I am lost for words why any Rangers fan or Protestant would vote for independence. If you think w are treated poorly now, wait until it's full blown public discrimination. We will be treated as subordinates and second class scum! Edited March 28, 2017 by cooponthewing 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 5,859 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 (edited) I am sure the story I heard about his decision to leave the cloistered existence of the priesthood is untrue? Apparently, quite a number of priests with a passing interest in the ggs, would gamble their meager remuneration and lose. Dipping into parish funds would become a temptation. Martin has been the horse racing correspondent at a number of blatts. I cannot believe he would succumb to lack of financial integrity; however, I wouldn't bet on it. Edited March 28, 2017 by 26th of foot 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,307 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 (edited) A very good point Rab. The EBT's of themselves were tax avoidance, something which is certainly allowable by law (if done right.... and indeed HMRC seemed to attempt to retroactively apply the law against Rangers). This numbnut seems to think that the finding of the EBT means that Rangers were cheating - that in and of itself isn't the case. Indeed, it also cannot be said with assurance that Rangers may not have been able to pay down the debts it had, including the EBT (if found guilty) but for an allegedly fraudulent purchase of the Club. The Club were paying down the bank debts that it had and had actually done pretty well at doing so over a fairly small period of time. So the Club may still have been able to pay those EBT debts which, in essence, means that the Club didn't cheat as it paid all debts, including tax liabilities. Rangers were operating a tax avoidance scheme which is legal. That doesn't mean they are cheating. The Tims will say "without the EBT's you wouldn't have got the players you did". True. But even with cheaper replacements we may still have won the league. It still isn't cheating by avoiding tax. It is all silly. Either way, you can't categorically state that Rangers were cheating, not logically anyway. Eight EPL clubs supposedly operated EBT's too. Did they cheat ? And Spanish clubs owe billions in tax last I read. Did they cheat ? I'd just like to know why HMRC chose to go after Rangers in the first place but that's another discussion entirely. Edited March 28, 2017 by RANGERRAB 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,507 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 WTF has the BTC got to do with King ? Maybe someone could tell Martin Hannan that the yahoos(his team by the sounds of things)were very heavily in debt in the 2000's too. Hence they had a chief exec. called Ian McLeod ( remember him?)who was a debt specialist who specialised in managing companies carrying large debts. Was it ok for the yahoos to carry debt but not Rangers ? And maybe he could look into the overdraft & borrowing facilities the RevFlowers basket case co-op bank gave the yahoos no doubt thanks to Labour MP's. He might also look into the tax evasion schemes (Films, Tech Companies, etc.) which players and management of fhilthfootballclub employed, most of which have been declared illegal. He might also question how -by what means- the fhilth employees all seemed to end up in the same/similar fraudulent manoeuvres. Because you know what, if the club was involved in setting these up for its players and staff, that would be..... what's the word?.....it's on the tip of my tongue.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Eight EPL clubs supposedly operated EBT's too. Did they cheat ? And Spanish clubs owe billions in tax last I read. Did they cheat ? I'd just like to know why HMRC chose to go after Rangers in the first place but that's another discussion entirely. HMRC want us because it could open the door to the others - in the US if that were the case you would see the others that were under threat providing legal assistance to the one going through the turmoil. Chelsea and Arsenal are two that I believe operated them. It is all pretty unfair - you see HMRC going after Rangers because "the tax man should be collecting all the tax that they are due" - and at the same time, the very same tax man is offering exorbitant tax breaks to companies like Vodafone - it is obscene in all honesty. The mantra from the East End will ALWAYS be "those clubs are still paying that debt off. Rangers didn't. They went bankrupt. That means they cheated.". They will, of course, conveniently ignore the possibility that the Rangers bankruptcy (sorry dB, but it is highly unlikely that oldco will become bankrupt) may very well have been caused by a fraudulent purchase. I know you and I have disagreed over the years over the part played by HMRC, BoS/Lloyds, Muir etc etc - and they may indeed have had their paws in it - but one reason could very well be that HMRC saw the Rangers case as the easiest one to win. Think of it like a lion looking for its dinner - do you chase the easiest of the herd or the toughest ? The easiest. HMRC were probably looking for an easy victory over Rangers which would then scare the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea, who would then settle (though, if I'm not mistaken, Arsenal settled anyway - could be wrong though). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uilleam 5,507 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 HMRC want us because it could open the door to the others - in the US if that were the case you would see the others that were under threat providing legal assistance to the one going through the turmoil. Chelsea and Arsenal are two that I believe operated them. It is all pretty unfair - you see HMRC going after Rangers because "the tax man should be collecting all the tax that they are due" - and at the same time, the very same tax man is offering exorbitant tax breaks to companies like Vodafone - it is obscene in all honesty. The mantra from the East End will ALWAYS be "those clubs are still paying that debt off. Rangers didn't. They went bankrupt. That means they cheated.". They will, of course, conveniently ignore the possibility that the Rangers bankruptcy (sorry dB, but it is highly unlikely that oldco will become bankrupt) may very well have been caused by a fraudulent purchase. I know you and I have disagreed over the years over the part played by HMRC, BoS/Lloyds, Muir etc etc - and they may indeed have had their paws in it - but one reason could very well be that HMRC saw the Rangers case as the easiest one to win. Think of it like a lion looking for its dinner - do you chase the easiest of the herd or the toughest ? The easiest. HMRC were probably looking for an easy victory over Rangers which would then scare the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea, who would then settle (though, if I'm not mistaken, Arsenal settled anyway - could be wrong though). I think that it was the swashbuckling, cavalier, entrepreneur and money machine, Sir David Murray, and MIH, that HMRC was after, rather than Rangers, per se. Rangers became collateral damage, and the focus of publicity. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 WTF has the BTC got to do with King ? Maybe someone could tell Martin Hannan that the yahoos(his team by the sounds of things)were very heavily in debt in the 2000's too. Hence they had a chief exec. called Ian McLeod ( remember him?)who was a debt specialist who specialised in managing companies carrying large debts. Was it ok for the yahoos to carry debt but not Rangers ? And maybe he could look into the overdraft & borrowing facilities the RevFlowers basket case co-op bank gave the yahoos no doubt thanks to Labour MP's. And they had ebts 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 I can succinctly sum that up: What a load of pish. Why does he not mention the scenario where the HMRC lose their appeal? Are there going to be mass apologies all round? I don't expect so. I've never heard of the guy who wrote that pish. Imo he copied and pasted from blog by the tramp who is tarred by the brush of sectarianism. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 And they had ebts And, yet, unsurprisingly, only ONE club between us and Celtic actually announced them appropriately in their financial statements/annual report/to the SFA.... and it wasn't Celtic.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Made me laugh. Wet dream stuff for non rangers fans. Everyone has a fantasy. You seem to have forgotten that their wet dreams and fantasies have been becoming our reality for a number of years now. I have read very similar comments in the past in response to articles re us going into administration, to liquidation,to being kicked out and only allowed in at the bottom level etc. 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.