rbr

What chance in hell have you got when even " Reporters " like Hugh Keevins stated live on Rc last night that " Rangers have had a sectarian signing policy for over 120 years " .Tell a lie often enough .......... you reap what you sow in life , the dignified silence MUST end

I agree whole heartedly , however to some MD and the RST are one in the same

81 posts to work you out MF , you must be slipping mate lol , ahhh the joy of the good old internet banter , ye cannae whack it

yes someone posted in the thread about Rangersmedia's support about Muir , it lasted all of half an hour before it was slaughtered , look back at post 26 on this topic to see one of his answers

Craig , if you look at my history of posting , its one of the reasons I came to this wondeful oasis , because of the lack of the above , the thread Rabbit posted or was posted for him , was going along very very nicely until G_S came along and destroyed any harmony that was there , it's always the same people who cry about being hard done to , and when you look closely it's always them that have the stench of hypocrisy around them

Suck has been accused himself on several forums of laying into fellow fans and of being quick with the old mitts , as for �£�£ , I dont believe it is censored as you think because every hit counts , and thats what its all about on �£�£ ...money money money , t shirts , get togethers abroad etc etc all about the money

G_s may only be one person, but he holds great sway over the vast majority who post on �£�£ , again unfortunate but true

I think you can take it from this that �£�£'s leader doesn't agree , he also doesn't do irony I've never met therabbit and therefore can't blame him for the behaviour of others. As for those others - when you are aware of the campaign of threats and intimidation against your erstwhile colleagues it beggars belief that "Rangers fans" would ally themselves with the threateners. Nor, I would hope, should anyone calling themselves a Rangers fan hand over internal communications to which you were privy to club directors with the express intention of sabotaging the work of the Trust. Whilst therabbit's plea for unity may be genuine there are people who's behaviour has excluded themselves from the right to call themselves Rangers fans. If you tolerate and titter in the background (or allow your forum to be a platform) while people are subject to threats (ranging from being killed, to being slashed to being 'given a slap') or the vilest personal slurs (theft, sexual misconduct, informer, etc) then you can't reasonably expect to be taken seriously when you turn round and say 'aw shucks, we made a boo-boo, can we be pals?' No-one holds all the members of a forum liable for the conduct of a few, but when those few are given houseroom in leadership positions you'll understand why pious calls for unity can't be taken seriously. You've made your bed, you've got to lie in it.

It also happened to be true , but I bow to your ability to ban me ........

Cannot believe GS' comments about this article , talk about believing your own hype

EDITED - let's avoid the nonsense please - Frankie

Dont tell me , Dave King and Paul Murray have finally surfaced

Have put it up on VB as well Frankie

Frankie , there has been a whole load of rubbish written . the problem as I see it is that there are so many factions within our own club who are plotting against each other whilst the biggest snake aka Murray gets away scot free yet again ,I read Boss's article on RM as well and even that is a load of pish , deflect deflect and deflect again , we will never get to the bottom of this rotten affair , and it's getting to the stage that this takkeover is now more important than the league

It might be interesting to find out who the 2 director's who were against Whyte actually are , I believe the names widely quoted are wrong

No , not unless Murray removes him, which will only occur I believe should this take over fall through

AJ has already stated to the press off the record that his business dealings with Murray have now ceased , as off 1st april

That , Frankie , sums up the modern day Rangers support

Never mind the RST are hard at it , they have a dinner to organise

And these songs have been banned by due judicial process or because some jobs worth has been shut in a cupboard for a few days till he makes alist , absolute shite

You only need look at various sites this morning m they are more interested in " look at me " statements and "we were right about Muir " than about the bigger issue's and the biggest of all , that the charlatan Murray , who lets face it the whole sorry mess revolves around , is going to swan off into the distance with out even a by your leave ...... shameful stuff , but hey it's ok Stephen smith of the RST stated he has a moral responsibility to pay the tax bill ,,,, my good god Murray couldn't even spell moral

This whole sorry mess should at last open the eyes of even the most fervent Murrayite to the disgraceful way he has handled his custodianship of what was a once great institution , the fact that he is willing , in fact more than willing to allow this great club to be reduced to it's present level never mind where , god forbid , it might end up shows him for what he is . Like MF above I would love to be going to Ibrox today , I was a season ticket holder for over 20 years , bondholder , shareholder , bought the strips , Rangers news blah blah blah , it doesn't bother Murray one iota that guys like me no longer feel able to give him my support , some will look upon that as being unworthy of a genuine supporter so be it , but everyone must make their own stand ,this is getting to be our own last stand , we have very little room left to manouver , it's ok for Murray he can bugger off to his Chateau or his villa's where ever . He is the owner of this club and as such has a duty and obligation to look after it , however what he is doing is not only shameful but cowardly and deserves nothing more than contempt .

Whyte told to take on Rangers tax risk Published on 2 Apr 2011 BUSINESSMAN Craig Whyte will have to take on any responsibility arising from a multi-million-pound dispute between Rangers and the taxman if he wants to buy the club, The Herald understands. Mr Whyte faces the crucial decision on whether he is willing to buy the club on this basis as make-or-break takeover talks enter their final stages. The case between Rangers and HM Revenue & Customs is due to come before a tribunal within weeks. Amid reports that the liability could run into tens of millions of pounds if Rangers were to lose, the tax question appears to be a potentially major obstacle to a deal. The issue, which concerns using an employee benefits trust to remunerate players, will almost certainly have been one of the biggest areas of Mr Whyte’s due diligence work on Rangers’ books. The crux of the deal emerged on a day when the club released interim financial figures showing a retained profit of Ã?£9 million but a decrease in turnover and season-ticket sales. In an interview after presenting the results, Alastair Johnston, the Rangers chairman, was reported to have suggested the club could go out of business if it were to lose the tax ruling. But in an unusual move last night the club released a statement via the Plus Stock Exchange to “clarify that our chairman did not state that the club could go out of business”. Earlier, Mr Johnston had revealed the club’s prospective new owner had held another positive meeting yesterday before takeover talks were put on hold for the weekend. Johnston had earlier claimed a Whyte buy-out would be “good” for Rangers and it could be that an offer worth around Ã?£27m for Sir David Murray’s 85% shareholding is made in mid week. But the Ibrox chairman also admitted the dispute with HMRC over a major tax case remained “the gorilla in the room”: the cost could be Ã?£30m. Despite suggestions that Sir David Murray’s Murray International Holdings, which owns 85% of Rangers, might provide some indemnity or warranty to Mr Whyte on the tax issue, this appears highly unlikely. The club’s shares are traded on the PLUS stock market, with small shareholders, including fans, owning about 9%. Rangers declared that it continued to “vigorously contest” HMRC’s challenge and “in doing so continue to receive reassuring opinion from tax, accounting, and legal specialists”. The latest accounts of Murray International, meanwhile, reveal no provision for any potential liability. In the accounts, seen by The Herald, Murray International states: “On the basis of expert tax advice, the group continues to defend a tax query raised by HMRC into the operation of an employee benefit trust. This is scheduled for resolution by a tax tribunal in 2011. “The directors, having considered professional advice, are of the view that it is reasonable not to provide for amounts in respect of this matter.” Rangers believe there is legal precedent in favour of the club from a case involving a company called Dextra which came before the House of Lords.

By Roddy Forsyth 11:00PM BST 01 Apr 2011 It soon became clear, though, that settling accounts was more on the Ibrox chairmanââ?¬â?¢s mind when he sat down in one of the stadiumââ?¬â?¢s plush lounges to offer a candid appraisal of the clubââ?¬â?¢s situation and the progress of the takeover bid being mounted by the London-based Scottish venture capitalist, Craig Whyte. By the time he had finished, he had delivered blistering criticisms of Lloyds Banking Group and Donald Muir ââ?¬â?? one of the bankââ?¬â?¢s placemen on the Rangers board. Johnston also confirmed that, if Whyteââ?¬â?¢s takeover is not concluded by close of business on Monday, Rangers are likely to go into administration if they lose their battle with HMRC over offshore payments to players. The clue that this was not going to be a soporific drone through questions of disposable assets and amortisations lay in the text of Rangersââ?¬â?¢ interim accounts to Dec 31, 2010, released earlier in the morning. They were pretty much in line with last yearââ?¬â?¢s equivalent figures, although turnover was down by Ã?£4.1 million to Ã?£33.7 million, with the same reduction in retained profit. The downturn was accounted for by home games postponed because of severe winter weather and by a five per cent reduction in season ticket sales, ascribed to the economic climate. However, amidst a note on the extension of credit facilities it was remarked that, ââ?¬Å?while we appreciate the support of the Lloyds Banking Group ... certain provisions imposed on the club continue to compromise, in our opinion, managementââ?¬â?¢s ability to conduct its role with maximum efficiency.ââ?¬Â There was meat in that and, as soon as Johnston sat down with a small group of correspondents, it was served up in ample portion and more or less raw. Asked how Lloyds had ââ?¬Ë?compromisedââ?¬â?¢ Rangers, Johnston said: ââ?¬Å?The bank look on us as a short-term project to the extent that at every opportunity theyââ?¬â?¢re not willing to concede that there isnââ?¬â?¢t an occasion or a transaction where they might want to participate. ââ?¬Å?If we sell players, do we have any certainty that we will get all the money, 90 per cent of it, 80 per cent of it, whatever? It makes it tough for our management to understand and to plan for selling players when we donââ?¬â?¢t know how much of the money weââ?¬â?¢re getting to keep. ââ?¬Å?The management team is reluctant to sell players because they donââ?¬â?¢t know if theyââ?¬â?¢ll get enough money to replace them. So when I say they compromise us, I mean they compromise our ability to plan three-year cycles. ââ?¬Å?They [Lloyds] have been fairly assiduous at saying, ââ?¬Ë?While we are willing to look at this on a case-by-case basis, weââ?¬â?¢re never going to give you carte blanche to think itââ?¬â?¢s all your money ââ?¬â?? if you get into the Champions League weââ?¬â?¢ll want part of itââ?¬â?¢. Therefore our management team is wary of doing certain things that in the long run might come back and haunt them.ââ?¬Â But wasnââ?¬â?¢t the purpose of having Muir on the Ibrox board to ease communications between the directors and the bank? ââ?¬Å?Letââ?¬â?¢s be very clear on the situation with Donald Muir ââ?¬â?? itââ?¬â?¢s a condition of our credit facility agreement that Donald Muir is the representative of the bank on the board. "Itââ?¬â?¢s very tough to engage in conversations at board level about strategies with the bank when we know that the bank guy is sitting there,ââ?¬Â said Johnston who, when asked why it had been denied previously that Muir was Lloydââ?¬â?¢s man, had a sharp retort. ââ?¬Å?I think it was Donald that denied that. Itââ?¬â?¢s been denied by a lot of people, but Iââ?¬â?¢m telling you what the issue is right now. I decided that I might as well,ââ?¬Â said Johnston. ââ?¬Å?What happened when I got here was that the banker that was involved with us refused to talk to our chief executive or to our chief financial officer. It was one of the most stupid aberrations that Iââ?¬â?¢ve ever come across and I said that to the bank. "He had never met our chief financial officer. He had never met Martin Bain [Rangersââ?¬â?¢ chief executive], so all the communications had to go through Donald Muir and Mike McGill, the other director, although essentially it was more through Donald than it was Mike. ââ?¬Å?So a lot of stuff got lost in translation.ââ?¬Â Would it be better for Rangers, therefore, if Muir ââ?¬â?? who is understood to have left the Murray Group on Thursday ââ?¬â?? also departed the club? ââ?¬Å?No question that his presence compromises things,ââ?¬Â said Johnston, although he added: ââ?¬Å?Iââ?¬â?¢ve always got on well with Donald Muir but I deal within the context of who he is.ââ?¬Â Johnston revealed that there were two HMRC issues, the latest ââ?¬â?? and much the smaller ââ?¬â?? being a claim by the tax authority for Ã?£2.8 million. ââ?¬Å?It relates to more than two or three players, but it relates to an issue 10 or 11 years ago ââ?¬â?? I donââ?¬â?¢t know the context of doing it,ââ?¬Â said the chairman. "As the Americans say, this one came right out of left-field. It really, really is frustrating. No one knew about it a couple of months ago ââ?¬â?? and let me put on record that if we did know about it we would have had to put it in our annual report and take liability for it in the accounts. ââ?¬Å?I donââ?¬â?¢t think it is a deal breaker. It wasnââ?¬â?¢t in any plan, it wasnââ?¬â?¢t in our budgets or anything that we have been trying to do. We have a very disciplined approach and I didnââ?¬â?¢t like that appearing over the horizon suddenly.ââ?¬Â As for the Whyte bid, it is understood that Murray had set a deadline of March 31 for completion but that other delays ââ?¬â?? including slow delivery of the bankââ?¬â?¢s authorisation for the bid to go through ââ?¬â?? required an extension. Still, it is surely a case of deal or no deal by Monday? ââ?¬Å?Exactly ââ?¬â?? that is the scenario that I am expecting,ââ?¬Â Johnston said. ââ?¬Å?I have to share with you the fact that amongst my fellow board members we have different views ââ?¬â?? but the board are reflective of my view which is, if we can get this thing right it will be good. ââ?¬Å?The club is the commodity ââ?¬â?? we donââ?¬â?¢t have a seat at the deal. We have to shove ourselves into the room. Our mission has been to represent Rangers Football Club and hundreds of thousands of supporters. We have no legal right to request it ââ?¬â?? but we have a moral right to request it.ââ?¬Â And if the deal fails and the HMRC judgment goes against Rangers in a few weeks? ââ?¬Å?Thereââ?¬â?¢s a 10,000lb gorilla in the room and you donââ?¬â?¢t know what its appetite is,ââ?¬Â Johnston replied. ââ?¬Å?Even accessing all the resources we have access to, we couldnââ?¬â?¢t pay the bill.ââ?¬Â From which the only conclusion is that, if there is no Whyte knight and if faced with an adverse judgment in the main HMRC case ââ?¬â?? which could amount to as much as a Ã?£30 million liability ââ?¬â?? Rangers would go bust after 139 years of existence. Johnstonââ?¬â?¢s silent nod of assent when asked that question was even more eloquent than any of the scalding words he had just uttered.