Rangers staff risk stoking sectarianism hints Glasgow council boss Susan Aitken

[26th of foot 5,827]

Currently, I am in France. I start my day reading through Scottish/British newspapers on line.

 

Today's Glasgow Evening Times has the headline, 'Labour Trio deny Stoking Bigotry in Rangers fan zone row'. The political correspondent, Stewart Paterson relates Glasgow City Council leader, Susan Aitken has accused Pauline MacNeill, Frank McAveety, and Anas Sarwar of, "knowingly exploiting sectarian division on this issue". The trio of Labour politicians mentioned have denied the accusation. The means utilised by Susan Aitken to make her accusations is again social media, to be precise, Twitter. The SNP Councilor criticised Rangers staff for using the same means in their allegation of bias.

 

The Convener's Deputy, Councilor David McDonald(also Chair of Glasgow Life) was subjected to abuse and threats on Twitter, with sectarian abuse and threats of violence directed towards him. Of course, Councilor McDonald's own social media feeds had long standing items of ridicule being directed at Rangers eighty year old act of remembrance for those lost in a colliery disaster, the Loving Cup ceremony. As yet, there is no criticism from Susan for David's Twitter actions.

 

Thus, lurid language, accusations of stoking bigotry fired off in a number of directions, denials, the right to Twitter usage, and further attestation from Susan Aitken that she has no objection in principle to Rangers hosting a fan zone. The Comments section contains a suggestion that Rangers should be required to purchase the ground to host said fan zone. I wonder if the Councilors involved in necessary Committee would allow the club to do so, on the same grounds that they demand of Celtic? We could crowd fund it, appears to be the way to go these days.

 

  

[Bluedell 5,329]

1 minute ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

My football team and my personal politics are separate entities. They don't effect the other. I only care if my credentials as a Rangers fan are questioned

That certainly seems to be the general feeling with SNP supporters and don't care when anything SNP negatively impacts our football team. It's just uber-defensive.

 

I've never seen a pro-independence Rangers fan say that they would get in touch with a politician or the SNP when one of them calls us a hun or suggests we're racist. The default position is ALWAYS to defend the party. It's party before team and they just don't seem to care when we're being attacked.

 

Perhaps it's unfair but it's the impression I get from the relevant posters on this site.

[Bluedell 5,329]

3 hours ago, 26th of foot said:

Of course, Councilor McDonald's own social media feeds had long standing items of ridicule being directed at Rangers eighty year old act of remembrance for those lost in a colliery disaster, the Loving Cup ceremony. As yet, there is no criticism from Susan for David's Twitter actions.  

Apparently criticism can only come if a complaint is raised through official channels.....

[Blue Moon 1,113]

5 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

I found this post interesting, mainly because you described yourself as being in the minority. Yet even a cursory glance at voting in West Central Scotland from the late 60s onwards clearly showed that the majority were at least left leaning, and voting, if not out right socialists. Despite this you clearly felt you were in a minority when mixing with Rangers supporters. Even though we pulled our support from inner-city, post industrial Glasgow, mining villages across Lothian, Ayrshire and Lanarkshire, the steel and mill towns of Renfrewshire and Lanarkshire and the docks and yards of Clydeside. 

 

So did none of the people who voted Labour throughout the 70s and 80s support Rangers? Of course they did, in their tens of thousands. I don't think you were in a minority. There have always been some people for whom supporting Rangers is an expression of their belief system. They see supporting Rangers as a box to tick along with being Orange, Unionist and right of centre politically, sometimes very right of centre. They feel all these things are interconnected, and they can be quite vocal about it. 

 

You can see it on this thread too. The thought that someone could passionately and loyally support Rangers whilst rejecting all the other aspects they feel are connected to it puzzles and angers them. You can see it in some of the posts on this thread. Comments like 'never hear SNP supporters near me at Ibrox' and 'only know a couple and they're fair weather supporters' all help fill this narrative. Only 'real' Rangers supporters need apply. 

 

I actually think it's that mindset that's in the minority now. I think @pete nailed it; 60% don't care. They only care about who is playing upfront this weekend and who we might sign in January. They care about football, and only football. 

 

Whether people like it or not the Scottish society I was born into has changed out of all recognition. The SNP are the most popular party currently. Scottish independence is a distinct probability now, one that grows daily as Labour and the Tories veer further to the extremes and the UK heads towards huge, unclear social and economic change. There is a real possibility that a united Ireland and an independent Scotland could happen in my lifetime. Neither of those events will make me support Rangers any less.

I was speaking from personal experience when I said I was in the minority.  I lived in a well known mining village and we were one of a very few families who displayed Labour posters at election time.   For the rest it was an identity thing and they voted Tory.  The same was true in the supporters club I was a member of.  

 

I will leave it there as I have to go out.

 

 

[ian1964 10,409]

[Gaffer 1,665]

12 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

That certainly seems to be the general feeling with SNP supporters and don't care when anything SNP negatively impacts our football team. It's just uber-defensive.

 

I've never seen a pro-independence Rangers fan say that they would get in touch with a politician or the SNP when one of them calls us a hun or suggests we're racist. The default position is ALWAYS to defend the party. It's party before team and they just don't seem to care when we're being attacked.

 

Perhaps it's unfair but it's the impression I get from the relevant posters on this site.

That's interesting because we have both read this thread and interpreted it differently.  Those that have expressed any sort of SNP affiliation appeared to be condemning some of the actions of the elected officials (before the thread was derailed), but were trying to explain that it wasn't a party decision.  They were claiming it was individuals in the party rather than a party view.  As someone who is truly independent (if you pardon the pun) in this debate, I can understand them making that distinction.

 

I really wish we could get back to th original issue because these officials need to be held to account.  In my opinion, this Cllr Aitken has demonstrated poor judgement in using Twitter to express inflammatory accusations and these must be tackled.  I'm just glad Club 1872 has taken this on because now I'm hoping that clarity will be provided.  If this is all above board, then answering the questions asked should be straight forward.  Until they do that, my suspicion is heightened.  We can't reduce the pressure on these people because my current perception is that they have indeed intervened in such a way that suggests bias.

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,473]

4 minutes ago, ian1964 said:

Frank McAveety sticking up for Rangers.  More like Frank McAveety using Rangers to score a political point as he's still sore at losing his cushy "job for life" at Glasgow Council. If he and his Labour chums were still pulling the strings he would have wiped his erse with the said application

[pete 2,494]

12 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

Frank McAveety sticking up for Rangers.  More like Frank McAveety using Rangers to score a political point as he's still sore at losing his cushy "job for life" at Glasgow Council. If he and his Labour chums were still pulling the strings he would have wiped his erse with the said application

Never look a gift horse in the mouth. Does it matter if he is doing it for self betterment he is in our ring at the moment. I will agree though we have to be careful he is not throwing us a herring to catch a whale.

[Gaffer 1,665]

9 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

Frank McAveety sticking up for Rangers.  More like Frank McAveety using Rangers to score a political point as he's still sore at losing his cushy "job for life" at Glasgow Council. If he and his Labour chums were still pulling the strings he would have wiped his erse with the said application

This is why I vote for "none of the party options" because it's all about scoring points no matter what party you are in.  Party politics is killing debate and progress in my opinion.  I wish there was an alternative option but for me there isn't yet.

 

On this point though, I think McAveety is enjoying being in this position.  It does appear (to me at least) that there has been an unusual intervention here and until the questions (asked by Rangers and then Club 1872) are answered, the perception will be one of bias.  To be honest, I can accept that bias creeps in now and again, but when it happens and is called out, it needs to be corrected.  Surely, this could be cleared up quickly.  I'm just hoping that the councillors and Rangers reps are now speaking directly about this instead of using Twitter.

[pete 2,494]

Another point is saying Rangers should use the car park for the fanzone when her cronies are hitting the Rangers support with parking restrictions and payments. I guess the council will make a few bob on that.

Maybe they will sell us the football field for a pound.