D'Artagnan
-
Posts
1,590 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Everything posted by D'Artagnan
-
Anti-sectarian football laws fear as fans complain
D'Artagnan replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
That would be at the unlawful protest/march they were holding. Is it surprising or sinister this fact is not mentioned ? -
Amms I am not against us knowing - in fact if you read my article in WATP on Saturday you will find I go a whole lot further - Id say Frankie & my thoughts on the matter of fans representation & empowerment are pretty similar.
-
I broached this subject recently CB - and was correctly reminded that Mather & Stockbridge did a Q & A. Also Stockbridge and JH did meet with VB - that much is true at least.
-
No that was just one of my "social observations" bud.
-
Daily Records take on Ricksen Twitter troll
D'Artagnan replied to Max Rebo's Big Blue Nose's topic in Rangers Chat
-
Thats the part which makes me laugh GS. Jack irvine the man who unites the Rangers support - only because all appear to detest him. If I was going on a charm offensive I dont think I would be giving him a call.
-
I think the difference in all of this is Zap is that youre mind is clearly made up about certain things whereas Im still not convinced by alot of the stuff which has been written or is being alleged. It may well be that you have been privy to a lot more material than me - I have steadfastly refused to read the Charlotte Fakes stuff (perhaps to my detriment but Im not going to form an opinion from material whose source is unknown and motivation appears to be to de-stabilise our club further) Im also aware that there are people out there who are misinforming the Rangers support despite the fact they sit in the "good guys" camp. The Leggat article the other day regarding the "band of renegades" - Vanguard Bears, was false, I know that because Im allowed access to their forums and their opposition to Jack irvine being at our club is as strong as anyones.
-
You are right we dont know if they are actual facts - until we ask the requistioners directly. As for twisting your words - I laid them out in the order they were originally printed M'Lord !
-
Hold on Zap.....being correct and factual is not really the point ? Surely if someone is being factual and correct then any attempt to discredit it is the actual spin doctoring ?
-
So McMurdo is telling the truth ?
-
That last comment by you is as much spin as anything which has been printed - if you are referring to this article. By whom and where are you being told it's wrong to seek the identity of those who have invested ?
-
Because they appear to be expressing concerns, now, having had such offers rejected, as to who the identity of these investors are. The issue of identity appears not to have been a concern when they were doing their wooing.
-
But thats not what he is alleging - he is suggesting they have trying to recruit their support.
-
Rangers 3 - 1 Dunfermline (Jig 70 pen, Daly 77, Mohnsi 90)
D'Artagnan replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat
I think you underestimate the opposition Frankie - I would suggest 3 up. -
Id say good corporate governance and transparency Bossy. I think if they have sought the support of the anonymous ones, and been subsequently rejected, and then engaged in a bit of scaremongering as to who these people are - then it would be transparent all right - just the wrong kind of transparency.
-
Well if they are spin Zap then they should be nailed - once and for all. But I think it weakens the case of the requisitoners if it can be proved they were happy to recruit the support of the anonymous investors, and have only raised concerns about identity since that support was not forthcoming.
-
Its probably the perfect title for a saga where truth and fable are as difficult to separate as any Arthurian Legend. In one of Camelot's famous towers we have blogger Bill McMurdo, apparently revelling in his recently acquired nickname of Merlin. In another we have the requistioners of Jim McColl, Malcolm Murray and a remnant of the Blue Knights in the shape of Paul Murray. The latest attempt to pull the sword from the stone came from the wand of Bill, who conjured up an interesting spell in his blog. It read : For those of us sitting at the round table, trying, often forlornly, to make sense of it all, it is a significant development, and without putting too fine a point on it – a serious allegation. The truth and veracity of this allegation may well be a determining factor in determining who is to be believed and who can be trusted. The identity of those behind Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita has been an issue of major concern for Rangers supporters, with some discussions even raising a fear that the dark spectre of Craig Whyte may be behind them, and the consequences of that for our club. The anonymity of these investors is an issue the requisitioners have focussed on recently : Jim McColl :- http://www.dailyreco...-murray-2665945 Malcolm Murray :- http://www.scotsman....crecy-1-3172886 The question on the minds of a lot of Rangers fans is would that big stick have been brandished Malcolm if Blue Pitch and Margarita supported the requisitioners ? In fact would the identity of these investors even have been an issue ? Perhaps if the requestioners undertake another question and answer session it is a question which should be asked of them “ Did you or have you attempted to recruit the support of the anonymous investors Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita ?” Someone somewhere is misleading and misdirecting the Rangers support. It is either Bill McMurdo or the requisitoners. All I would ask is whoever is guilty would you please do the honourable thing and fall on Excalibur – this support have been fed enough bullshit in the last few years to last a lifetime.
-
PS in case anyone is wondering what Im referring to - this is Section 98 from LNS report. [98] Meanwhile, BBC Scotland came, by unknown means, into possession of what they described as “dozens of secret emails, letters and documents”, which we understand were the productions before the Tax Tribunal. These formed the basis of a programme entitled “Rangers – The Men Who Sold the Jerseys”, which was broadcast on 23 May 2012. BBC Scotland also published copious material on its website. The published material included a table containing the names of Rangers players, coaches and staff who were beneficiaries of the MGMRT, and how much they received through that trust. It also listed the names of people where the BBC had seen evidence that they received side-letters. This event appears to have been the trigger for more activity in response to the SPL’s request "Productions" is legal speak for evidence.
-
I understand their defence when quizzed re this was "whistleblowing" It cant be - it was already in the public domain and subject to legal proceedings. More like blowing our their ass.
-
Of course they are RPB - "The Men Who Sold the Jerseys" won an award. Made with evidence stolen from the tax case - stolen evidence received and retained by BBC Scotland.
-
Thats fighting dirty AMMS - you know Waybuloos are my achilles heel.
-
Rangers FC debate at Waterstones, Glasgow (Nov 28th) - POSTPONED
D'Artagnan replied to Frankie's topic in Rangers Chat
Yeah but Frankie that was a long time ago.... -
Gets my vote
-
Thats not my idea of engagement AMMS. They are not continuing with this anti -Rangers crusade because we are not giving them stories - they are doing it because there is a serious anti-Rangers bias running through Pacific Quay. - and that is what requires to be addressed via engagement.
-
We may have differing opinions on a number of subjects - but I never forget that we are on the same side. PS The letter has been sent and served by personal courier today