Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[flyingrodent]

The RTC blogger is a Celtic hero, even when all his predictions were found to be a crock of shite and tucked tale and ran away, of course Rangers fans would celebrate if he was exposed and made to pay for breaking the law, of course Celtic fans will continue to brush it under the carpet and hope he is never caught.

What, this again? Okay, I'll repeat myself -

I couldn't give a fvck whether the RTC blogger is named or not. Almost nobody does - he's plainly nobody, and a nobody with a very high opinion of himself at that.

He put a lot of information into the public sphere that turned out to be correct, which is about ten times more than most of the major papers did. He made many predictions that turned out to be right, and many that turned out to be wrong. In that, he's in the same boat as 100% of us who made predictions about Rangers' death and zombification, including you, me and every other joker who posted on this thread.

Beyond that, who cares? Near the entire country has forgotten about some guy with a blog, except for a bunch of hilarious mentalists determined to make him "pay for breaking the law".

Ironically, these zoomers are the same ones who keep getting their frilly knickers in a twist and yelping about "obsessives" whenever they take offence on websites. Ironic, really.

[The_Kincardine]

I looked at the newspaper stand in the shop on the way home. The giant, unmissable front-page headline on the Record says that Craigy Whyte is selling part of his shares to an infamous capital-hungry pirate who loots everything he can grab out of every company he touches. And I know he is one, because I've read about him before, in the broadsheets.

As for why care, why wouldn't I? Everything about Rangers' catastrofuck is hilarious and if the LOLs are fewer and less astonishing these days, that doesn't stop them being funny.

I'm so good that you quoted me twice, eh?

What you said was this:

I looked at the newspaper stand in the shop on the way home. The giant, unmissable front-page headline on the Record says that Craigy Whyte is selling part of his shares to an infamous capital-hungry pirate who loots everything he can grab out of every company he touches

This just is not credible. I'll send £20 to charity if the Record said anything like, "Craigy Whyte is selling part of his shares to an infamous capital-hungry pirate"

Honestly, why do you and your fellow plastics make stuff up?

[Monkey Tennis]

Are you a poof?

Apart from being laughably juvenile and revealing about the person that wrote it, is the above actually acceptable?

I dunno. It's certainly done nothing to lower the opinion I already held about the poster.

[Monkey Tennis]

I think we all know the answer to that one

What are you getting at here No8?

Casting aspersions on my education seems a little ungentlemanly.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Apart from being laughably juvenile and revealing about the person that wrote it, is the above actually acceptable?

I dunno. It's certainly done nothing to lower the opinion I already held about the poster.

There's at least one rangers-supporting poster on here I'd have expected to take offence - it's his normal MO, after all. Strangely silent on this, mind....

[Henrik's tongue]

Apart from being laughably juvenile and revealing about the person that wrote it, is the above actually acceptable?

.

Yes. In 1974.

[flyingrodent]

I'm so good that you quoted me twice, eh?

What you said was this:

I looked at the newspaper stand in the shop on the way home. The giant, unmissable front-page headline on the Record says that Craigy Whyte is selling part of his shares to an infamous capital-hungry pirate who loots everything he can grab out of every company he touches

This just is not credible. I'll send £20 to charity if the Record said anything like, "Craigy Whyte is selling part of his shares to an infamous capital-hungry pirate"

Honestly, why do you and your fellow plastics make stuff up?

A simple error, now corrected - I meant "Charlie Green". Apologies, but the older I get, the more difficult it's getting to remember which of your conman ex-directors is which.

And you are, of course, correct to say that the Record don't call him an "infamous capital-hungry pirate". I called him that because that's what he is - see In The City in Private Eye, various issues over the last five years or so.

Now the Record, they call him a "finance shark" then note his previous company-looting behaviour. I'd see this as very bad news if it was my club but thankfully, it isn't.

But again, here we are with you parsing some guy on the internet's comments... while a giant, toothy predator circles your season ticket money.

"Some MFs are always trying to ice-skate uphill", as the great philosopher Wesley Snipes once said.

[The_Kincardine]

Apart from being laughably juvenile and revealing about the person that wrote it, is the above actually acceptable?

I dunno. It's certainly done nothing to lower the opinion I already held about the poster.

Monkey, I didn't see the post wherein the guy asked "Are you a poof?" but I'll scroll back and report it. Aye it's juvenile but also we shouldn't be using homophobic language.

[flyingrodent]

I think you will find there is hardly a Rangers fan that has forgotten the tax blogger.

You think that anyone that wants to see him punished for breaking the law is a mentalist? nice job at defending a criminal then.

I imagine you're right - he is, after all, a convenient distraction from the enormous shite-sandwich on your plate.

And I think that anyone - Rangers fans especially - who give even the vaguest of fvcks about the Rangers Tax Case blogger is a mentalist, and I find your highly selective demands for justice hilarious.

[bennett]

I wouldn't report it, i'd leave it where it is and everyone can judge it for themselves.

[bennett]

I imagine you're right - he is, after all, a convenient distraction from the enormous shite-sandwich on your plate.

And I think that anyone - Rangers fans especially - who give even the vaguest of fvcks about the Rangers Tax Case blogger is a mentalist, and I find your highly selective demands for justice hilarious.

You seem to be caring quite a bit about the blogger thou...

[The_Kincardine]

I wouldn't report it, i'd leave it where it is and everyone can judge it for themselves.

OK good shout. I'm happy to agree.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

So you use the word 'cuntpany' and expect a reasonable reply?

To be honest it was a rhetorical question, but yes. Yes I do.

[Monkey Tennis]

Monkey, I didn't see the post wherein the guy asked "Are you a poof?" but I'll scroll back and report it. Aye it's juvenile but also we shouldn't be using homophobic language.

If you like Kincardine. Reporting things isn't really my style, but what he put is indeed pretty poor form.

When you find the context, I don't think you'll see that it vindicates him any.

As Bennett says though, the evidence of his post is there, and we can all judge it (and him) for ourselves.

[flyingrodent]

Correct me if I am wrong here;

this giant toothy predator owns 1%?

this giant toothy predator has a history of putting pressure on companies to pay dividends?

Dividends can only be paid when a company is profitable?

So are you now suggesting Rangers are turning a profit and this giant toothy predator wants his 1% of said dividend?

Well, maybe he's turned over a new leaf and won't spend every waking hour kicking up as much shit as possible while trying to extract as much cash from you has he can, like he does everywhere else he goes.

Maybe he's only there to see the Rangers? Probably nothing to worry about.

[bennett]

Can someone explain in laymans terms how a share holding of 1% could give someone that much influence?

[The_Kincardine]

A simple error, now corrected - I meant "Charlie Green". Apologies, but the older I get, the more difficult it's getting to remember which of your conman ex-directors is which.

And you are, of course, correct to say that the Record don't call him an "infamous capital-hungry pirate". I called him that because that's what he is - see In The City in Private Eye, various issues over the last five years or so.

Oh aye and you just happened to catch those headlines in Private Eye in a newspaper shop on the way home too?

Forgive me for not believing you since you've already made one c**t of yourself.

[wunfellaff]

I wouldn't report it, i'd leave it where it is and everyone can judge it for themselves.

Quite right.

If we report it that makes us worse than poofs !

[The_Kincardine]

If you like Kincardine. Reporting things isn't really my style, but what he put is indeed pretty poor form.

When you find the context, I don't think you'll see that it vindicates him any.

As Bennett says though, the evidence of his post is there, and we can all judge it (and him) for ourselves.

I'll go along with Bennett. Pretty poor form from us. We shouldn't be using casual homophobia.

[flyingrodent]

What we are not capable of wanting justice for someone who has broke the law alongside wanting what is best for our club?

You morals are flying high on this one.

Given that the two are generally mutually exclusive, as has been repeatedly shown, then of course you're incapable of doing both.

As has been repeatedly proven on this very thread, you have to be prodded and poked and provoked into remembering that you're a bit annoyed with Craig Whyte and Sir Dave, and even then it's not a very convincing performance.