The Anti Rangers SNP

[StuGers 477]

1 hour ago, Darthter said:

The club is registered to the SCOTTISH FA, the parent company is SCOTTISH registered and when playing abroad, represents SCOTLAND.  Therefore the club is 1st & foremost SCOTTISH, since there is no British Football Assoc. or even any cross-border initiatives etc.

 

I would say that the Club is more (officially) Royalist, than Unionist - this is shown by the various portraits of the Queen.  However, I believe that the unionism is generated by the fans and probably originates from the Royalist belief.  Many folk will believe that you can't be Royalist & Pro-Indy...which isn't true.  

 

I don’t doubt that you can be royalist and pro-independence. But there is no denying about the Union Jacks and Rule Britannia. Likewise, there is no barrier to being both Scottish and British, which I believe the majority of the suporters feel.

As for the not British thing, that is crazy! We are in Britain, hence British! You can be both Scottish and British!! Yes, the club is first and foremost Scottish but at Ibrox you will see just as many, if not more British flags. That’s a simple truth.

[StuGers 477]

1 hour ago, JFK-1 said:

What are you even talking about?  Who said what? Do you need to have the obvious pointed out to you?  What's the evidence any disruptive 'protest' that has turned into trouble in the past was potentially going to go that way?  Face masks come to mind?  That too much of an Einsteinian leap?

 

You had to learn on here that it looked sinister?  That's frankly bizarre.

 

Now present the evidence that it was just a bunch of boys marching like a sally ally band singing kumbaya even if not surrounded by cops. See how easily that is turned around? 

I think some of our own fans here are writing the biased press reports for them. So if there wasn’t a police presence they would have been on the rampage?

Again, I am against the nature of the march but to paint pictures of things that never happened is ludicrous.

[JFK-1 1,666]

8 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

You were emphasising it when you said that people who didn't find it sinister had serious problems.

So what do you think the view would be if those images were presented to a random population in any first world country?  Say if I showed them to people here in Oklahoma for example?  How many do you think would say just lads having a laugh? Any?

 

And incidentally I wouldn't show them to anyone here and the reason for that is I don't want Rangers linked with such a face and yes I think it's a serious problem if others don't see the problem with that being linked to Rangers.

[Walterbear 557]

I know plenty of Rangers fans who are on both sides of the Indy debate. I for one won’t be lectured on which football team I should support or who I should vote for. Rangers is first and foremost a football club and embraces all colours and creeds. If people don’t like that philosophy then they are the ones with the problem and they don’t understand the sporting origins of our club. I support the club set up by the founding fathers and I don’t recall any great political statements they made. It’s Rangers, it’s blue and it’s Ibrox. Nothing more needs to be said. 

[StuGers 477]

54 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

How many Celtic fans are there in Scotland? They can get crowds of 60K. Support of 10 times that, so 600K or more? That's a fairly sizeable percentage of the Scottish voting population.

Especially when trying to gain power in Glasgow, Scotland's largest population centre.

[Walterbear 557]

4 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

So what do you think the view would be if those images were presented to a random population in any first world country?  Say if I showed them to people here in Oklahoma for example?  How many do you think would say just lads having a laugh? Any?

 

And incidentally I wouldn't show them to anyone here and the reason for that is I don't want Rangers linked with such a face and yes I think it's a serious problem if others don't see the problem with that being linked to Rangers.

I agree mate. Folk bleatbabout why the club isn’t standing up for them and protecting our image but can’t see the problem with this. For me this is nothing but it’s propaganda gold for our enemies and therefore does mean something. 

[Bluedell 5,329]

4 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

So what do you think the view would be if those images were presented to a random population in any first world country?  Say if I showed them to people here in Oklahoma for example?  How many do you think would say just lads having a laugh? Any?

 

And incidentally I wouldn't show them to anyone here and the reason for that is I don't want Rangers linked with such a face and yes I think it's a serious problem if others don't see the problem with that being linked to Rangers.

I'm not a random person from around the world. I'm just a football fan who knows a (very) little about ultra culture and as such I don't find it sinister. My view on whether I find it sinister or not has nothing to do with Joe Average of Tulsa.

 

It doesn't mean that I'd prefer that they didn't do it, as I've said.

 

If you think that I've got serious problems because of that, and because I disagree with you on that then fine.

[JohnMc 2,463]

I find these threads depressing.

 

When Gersnet did an unscientific poll of members voting intentions around the referendum I seem to recall is showed around 40% planned to vote 'Yes', so pretty close to how the vote actually went. That should come as a surprise to no one. Rangers supporters are a broad church, from all walks of life, backgrounds and beliefs. The only thing we have in common is wanting the team in blue to win, that's it. 

 

If anyone doesn't know many Rangers supporters who also currently support the SNP I'm very surprised. I know lots and they seem perfectly capable of holding both views without any problem. 

 

One reason it's depressing is we used to have the same debate when Labour ruled in Scotland. Posters on various forums moaned about how Scottish Labour was anti-Rangers, how all councillors were Tims and all MSPs out to get us. 

 

I'll be frank I personally feel I've more in common with the SNP than with Vanguard Bears, and I didn't even vote SNP at the last couple of elections. That's just me, others will feel very different. That's fine too. Rangers takes up a disproportionate amount of my time and interest. I'm interested in the culture around Rangers and our support, it's been interesting watching how Scottish society has changed in the last 40 years. But other Rangers supporters don't define who I am, what I believe in, hope for or expect from my politicians. 

 

Rangers, and our support, have an image problem with some in our society. That section who work in the media and many who enter politics, who often hold 'popular liberal' views, who subscribe to much of what we currently see as 'opinion' in the media are not attracted by Union flags, 90 minute bigotry, and apparently (often wrongly ascribed) right wing views. That's how some see us. Whether we like it or not they control communication and shape popular culture. That's a problem for the club going forward. 

[StuGers 477]

6 minutes ago, Walterbear said:

I know plenty of Rangers fans who are on both sides of the Indy debate. I for one won’t be lectured on which football team I should support or who I should vote for. Rangers is first and foremost a football club and embraces all colours and creeds. If people don’t like that philosophy then they are the ones with the problem and they don’t understand the sporting origins of our club. I support the club set up by the founding fathers and I don’t recall any great political statements they made. It’s Rangers, it’s blue and it’s Ibrox. Nothing more needs to be said. 

I’ve got no problem with people choosing independence although I disagree with it. I have a problem with people who continue to vote SNP whilst a large number of them openly vilify our support in public unfairly.

[StuGers 477]

7 minutes ago, Walterbear said:

I agree mate. Folk bleatbabout why the club isn’t standing up for them and protecting our image but can’t see the problem with this. For me this is nothing but it’s propaganda gold for our enemies and therefore does mean something. 

You can’t understand why the club, which is a business, doesn’t speak up about blatant press bais which will affect their customers?