Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

why was he appointed in the first place?

The misnomer fans representative who was appointed by the new board. Might be better if they were allowed to vote their representative but then they'd end up with the 'Big Hoose must stay open !' chap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris Graham's Diary:

Monday 9th March - Had a long lie after partying all weekend due to regime changes.

Tuesday 10th March - Sat in directors box with "the good guys". Proud as punch.

Wednesday 11th March - Deleted some tweets then hid under bed all day.

Thursday 12th March - Stayed under bed. Avoided phone calls.

Friday 13th March - Logged onto twitter...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes perfect sense.

'A person in the position he is simply cannot be so careless'

He was not in that position when he made the tweet, nor did he expect to be.

He seems to have misjudged the amount of bed wetting and faux outrage that fans of offended fc (your club) were capable of.

Sometimes I think you're the most stubborn man on the internet.

Even Chris Graham gets why it's wrong. And to be fair his apology was pretty good. No deflection, held his hands up, and apologised unreservedly.

You, on the other hand, are still attempting to downplay the content, while inferring that sending it to a bad man means other Muslims shouldn't be offended, and simultaneously excuse it because it happened before he was appointed.

"It's a wee cartoon sent to a bad man before he became a director". Even Alastair Campbell would blush at such spin.

Does your other half have similar issues ever trying to change your mind??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am happy to take this on. Not because your points are at all cogent or interesting but that they represent the brain-dead fuckwits of Diddydom and they deserve a reply, even if they wouldn't recognise what that was.

1. You said, "Lets put it in a way you'll understand as morality seems bereft amongst you all".

Hark at you with yer lack of apostrophe and playing the 'morality' card. The CG incident has hew haw to do with morality.

2. You said, 'Free speech' has considerations that means you don't make inflammatory comment that are deliberately offensive.

I haven't said anything about 'free speech'. Furtherm linguistic ore, I haven't a single issue with making "inflammatory comment(s). Why would I?

3. You said, "were you not part of the offensive terminology about an Ancient German tribe? "

I was not at all. OK so I know you're thick but I can see the point you're making. I have no personal issue with The H Word. I am simply amused that the diddies play linguistic somersaults in their desire to use a board-proscribed term.

4. You said, "You keep telling us you are not a diddy club"

I don't. That doesn't need to be told.

5. You said, "your revenue streams could be effected by adverse publicity."

Feck. I didn't think of that. Given our good character and brilliant publicity of recent years this yin is a right fucking bummer.

6. You said, " Good governance by the present and future boards was CG the best person amongst you to carry out this important role."

The rest of your post has been utter hogwash. Moreover, partial, diddy, brain-dead hogwash. Not singling you out but you're part of the diddy problem.

You do raise a good point (though I suspect you didn't realise it) when you said, "was CG the best person amongst you to carry out this important role".

For me? There are 3 problems. 1. I'm better-looking that CG. 2. I look better in a blazer. 3. I know how to use a fucking razor.

So the answer has to be 'no'...even if I'm shite at drawing cartoons.

I knew exactly the last comment was valid and if you think the rest isin't valid well his departure says I am right or the club would have defended him and he wouldn't have made an apology to defuse the issue.

Not about drawing the cartoon, he didn't, he searched for it and published it via Twitter . I have no doubt Choudry is an extremist but it is offensive to Muslims, he would /could have used it to further propagandise his cause.

I suppose if the context was Jesus and Mohammad fighting with light sabres and Tom Cruise as a Thetan in a star wars parody as a critique on organised religion I would have defended it as free speech but directly he sent it to offend, that is the difference.

I do hope you get a suitable replacement as I think you'll need a diligent individual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...