Guest Kincardine Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Why would Phil The Social Worker as you call him being an anti-Scottish racist have any bearing on a book about Rangers or the person who writes its foreword? Have you read this book if not it's you who are left looking like a total idiot. Of course I read it. Please don't be silly. This bit of the thread is about the former-journalist who got his arse handed to him by The Sun and is now acting like a total fud as evidenced by that hilarious blog post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) Of course I read it. Please don't be silly. This bit of the thread is about the former-journalist who got his arse handed to him by The Sun and is now acting like a total fud as evidenced by that hilarious blog post. You seem to be saying because the person who wrote the book is an anti-Scottish racist the book is without merit? If this is the case Dr David Starkey should be striped of his PHD? Edited October 12, 2012 by Umbungo1874 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Many football supporters were active in this forum as Rangers crumbled under Murray and then Whyte, Then through the attempts to crowbar them back into the SPL, with relative success as Sevco had to scam their way into Division 3. A price for their previous bullying and intimidation but still needed amazing courage from some individuals who showed real character when needed. I and many others 'retired' from the campaign. But today's article by Alex Thomson http://blogs.channel...ngers-fans/2873 is a welcome reminder of the cancer that is Rangers. A cancer we tolerate and as Thomson complains is tolerated by many with more power than we do. Not least the police. With people like Green and McCoist in charge we know the way ahead will not be based on honesty, integrity and definitely no humility A club that wants to play to its own made up rules, while trying hard to ignore the rules everyone else adheres to. This is the club who scammed the taxman (= the UK public), who lied and cheated, and has a large proportion of thugs and louts amongst their support. All their protestations of loyalty to Queen and country we know is a complete sham. A web of deceit but a version that suited them as they ignored the laws and bullied their way through Scottish football. We must never forget how corrupting they are, and with regular reminders it is important to keep the pressure on those who are tempted to show sympathy and support to them, especially Government, the SFA, and EUFA. They should have no place in sport or Scottish football, and the work has to continue to remove this cancer from our midst. Bigots and cheats. Now and forever! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Please do not make that accusation against me. I have no truck with people trying to suppress news and for you to suggest otherwise is shameful. You also failed to read my post. I welcomed his investigation when he started. He came across as honest and impartial. He then got embroiled with the anti-Scots racist and all his work got unwound. Read that blog post and tell me that it's the work of a serious journalist. "Hi, I totally hate all Scottish people. BTW, Rangers cheated then they died." "Aha, you racist, Rangers are the people!!! and the bestest ever!" Is that how it goes in your head? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) You seem to be saying because the person who wrote the book is an anti-Scottish racist the book is without merit? If this is the case Dr David Starkey should be striped of his PHD? I said nothing of the sort. Edited to add, you said, "Have you read this book if not it's you who are left looking like a total idiot." I have read the book. I have read Thomson's foreword. The book is dreadful as is Thomson's foreword. Thomson has a red neck for penning what he did. His blog shows him as a total warmer. Shame on you for trying to catch me about about both. Edited October 12, 2012 by Kincardine 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 "Hi, I totally hate all Scottish people. BTW, Rangers cheated then they died." "Aha, you racist, Rangers are the people!!! and the bestest ever!" Is that how it goes in your head? Actually I think that's how it goes in your head. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinnesTON Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Please do not make that accusation against me. I have no truck with people trying to suppress news and for you to suggest otherwise is shameful. You also failed to read my post. I welcomed his investigation when he started. He came across as honest and impartial. He then got embroiled with the anti-Scots racist and all his work got unwound. Read that blog post and tell me that it's the work of a serious journalist. I don't know about the guy Phil MaeGhoolies or whatever his name is although he does seem a bit of a pie but no more so than many other attached to either side of the ugly sisters. Thomson you say he wrote a foreword to this guys book and all his work got unwound , why whether you agree or disagree with the fake Oirish guy or not but how does that blow everything that Thomson reported out of the water. So by the same token does that mean that everytime Chuckie has been wrong you believe everything is tainted. You need to explain why everything Thomson has reported is undermined. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Actually I think that's how it goes in your head. All this shooting threatening to blow up the messenger bullshit, is tedious. A lot of Sevco fans are dangerous mentalist. You have actually written some sensible stuff tonight, as has Tedi. It's interesting to see. I think a lot of people here are just waiting for the moment,you, and the other "sensible" Sevco fans realise, you are defending the indefensible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I don't know about the guy Phil MaeGhoolies or whatever his name is although he does seem a bit of a pie but no more so than many other attached to either side of the ugly sisters. Thomson you say he wrote a foreword to this guys book and all his work got unwound , why whether you agree or disagree with the fake Oirish guy or not but how does that blow everything that Thomson reported out of the water. So by the same token does that mean that everytime Chuckie has been wrong you believe everything is tainted. You need to explain why everything Thomson has reported is undermined. What school did he go to? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) Found this all CG companies some active and some dissolved. CG list of companies Sounds he needs his pension fund straight away! Edited October 13, 2012 by Bairnforever1992 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 why whether you agree or disagree with the fake Oirish guy or not but how does that blow everything that Thomson reported out of the water. Again, I didn't say that. I haven't claimed that everything Thomson reporter was bad. I do think, though, that this blog post was made in a fit of pique. He started well then came up with a diatribe that had no journalistic merit. Read the blog. Is that something what a serious journalist can justify? So by the same token does that mean that everytime Chuckie has been wrong you believe everything is tainted. Well of course not. CG talks sense and CG talks shite. We all listen to his interviews and form our own opinions. You're conflating 2 things: 1. Alex T is meant to be a serious journalist. The blog post quoted showed that he is anything but. 2. CG is looking to raise funds. He will say anything to get the punters paying. Why you draw parallels between the two defeats me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) I said nothing of the sort. The context to that abortion of a blog post is this:Thomson wrote a foreword to Phil The Social Worker's book which was due to be serialised in The Sun. Phil The Social Worker is an anti-Scots racist (despite being Scots). When this was pointed out to The Sun they pulled the serialisation.Thommo was left looking like a total idiot. You are saying because the person who wrote the book is an anti-Scottish racist the Sun they pulled the serialisation. This appears to be condemning the book because of the authors views on Scotland but not its content. Is this not is like saying Hitler's paintings are shite because he is anti semitic? Edited to add,I had not read your edit but what is it in the book he has got wrong? Edited October 13, 2012 by Umbungo1874 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 (edited) Again, I didn't say that. I haven't claimed that everything Thomson reporter was bad. I do think, though, that this blog post was made in a fit of pique. He started well then came up with a diatribe that had no journalistic merit. Read the blog. Is that something what a serious journalist can justify? Well of course not. CG talks sense and CG talks shite. We all listen to his interviews and form our own opinions. You're conflating 2 things: 1. Alex T is meant to be a serious journalist. The blog post quoted showed that he is anything but. 2. CG is looking to raise funds. He will say anything to get the punters paying. Why you draw parallels between the two defeats me. The blog post is "opinion" that's all. His opinion seems to be that a lot of Rangers fans are dangerous Neanderthals who use violence and intimidation to quash criticism of the cheating and bigotry, forever associated with Rangers. He also suggest that for whatever reason, much of this activity is accepted and/or tacitly condoned by the west of Scotland "establishment". I assume that his "opinion" piece was all lies? Edited October 13, 2012 by kildog 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 You are saying because the person who wrote the book is an anti-Scottish racist the Sun they pulled the serialisation. This appears to be condemning the book because of the authors views on Scotland but not its content. Is this not is like saying Hitler's paintings are shite because he is anti semitic? What did you think after you read the book? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 What did you think after you read the book? I have not read it, that's why I did not comment on it and asked for your thoughts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 The blog post is "opinion" that's all. His opinion seems to be that a lot of Rangers fans are dangerous Neanderthals who use violence and intimidation to quash criticism of the cheating and bigotry, forever associated with Rangers. I partly agree. There is a big problem, though. He is meant to be a serious journalist working for a major media outlet. He is meant to have respect, experience and credibility. Look at what he posted. I said earlier, "It's a simple diatribe without citation, evidence or substance." His uncorrelated meandering reads like any one of a dozen posters on here who could have trotted out the same guff. Serious journalist? My arse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kincardine Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 What did you think after you read the book? I have not read it, that's why I did not comment on it and asked for your thoughts. What you actually said was, "Have you read this book if not it's you who are left looking like a total idiot." I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I partly agree. There is a big problem, though. He is meant to be a serious journalist working for a major media outlet. He is meant to have respect, experience and credibility. Look at what he posted. I said earlier, "It's a simple diatribe without citation, evidence or substance." His uncorrelated meandering reads like any one of a dozen posters on here who could have trotted out the same guff. Serious journalist? My arse. It''s an "opinion" piece. The sources are out there. If you care to look. If this had been broadcast on the 7 o'clock news, you might have a point. Why don't you organise a boycott of Channel 4, they are obvious bigots/papal sympathisers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 I partly agree. BTW, I hope the part you agree with is the cheating bigots bit... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncolegrady Posted October 13, 2012 Share Posted October 13, 2012 Ireland are the only contry in Europe never to have oppressed the jews: never let them in!! JJ. I hate sevco!!! 0 Quote Link to comment 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.