Petition To Get James Dornan Removed From Anti Sectarian Group

[barca72 440]

1 hour ago, Scott7 said:

I don’t know of any way that petitions on change.org can compel anything to happen unlke a parliamentary petition where 100,000 signatories might get you a debate.

 

Dornan’s group was set up by him under Scottish Parliament rules so complaints should be made to The Standards, Procedures and Publc Appointments Committee at Parliament along the lines that Dornan should be removed from the convenorship of the group on the ground that his own conduct has been sectarian, citing relevant examples.

 

Better still stand against him at the next election or support any party but his.

 

As an aside, how do you remove anyone “from influence“?

 

Bearger and Black Socks are right. I don’t say that often on non football matters.

You make sure he is removed from having any bearing on a committee which might attempt the following ...

 

"Social influence is the change in behavior that one person causes in another, intentionally or unintentionally, as a result of the way the changed person perceives themselves in relationship to the influencer, other people and society in general. Three areas of social influence are conformity, compliance and obedience."

 

Especially since we know of Dornan's previous actions and utterances.

Edited February 25, 2019 by barca72

[craig 5,199]

14 hours ago, Scott7 said:

I don’t know of any way that petitions on change.org can compel anything to happen unlke a parliamentary petition where 100,000 signatories might get you a debate.

 

Dornan’s group was set up by him under Scottish Parliament rules so complaints should be made to The Standards, Procedures and Publc Appointments Committee at Parliament along the lines that Dornan should be removed from the convenorship of the group on the ground that his own conduct has been sectarian, citing relevant examples.

 

Better still stand against him at the next election or support any party but his.

 

As an aside, how do you remove anyone “from influence“?

 

Bearger and Black Socks are right. I don’t say that often on non football matters.

I remember when this group was set up by Dornan and challenged him on the constituent members of the group.  He said at the time that it was a cross party group and had been open to all parties and MP's to "apply" to be part of the group but that the only people who wanted to participate were the ones now part of that group.  So, IF that is correct we can't really complain at who the members of the group are - if the group consists of CFC fans or republicans the other parties should have been asking members to participate to give balance.  That they didn't is their problem and, by extension, ours too.

 

None of that, however, should detract from the fact that James Dornan is unfit for purpose in this role when he has a biased, slanted view of what sectarianism is.  He should be removed and a campaign to remove him should be undertaken, but not by the Club, it should be something that is undertaken at a higher level.  

[Bill 13,717]

How the 'group' came to be constituted or populated is one thing - but in any case it is what it is - but for so-called Rangers fans now to be equivocal or obstructive to efforts aimed at challenging it is bewildering. It seems fair to ask, what are the motivations of fans who would rather criticise those efforts than contest such a contrived and hostile group?

 

It needs to be said - this is why I could never trust a Scottish nationalist to act fully in the best interests of Rangers. Some may but it's increasingly clear that most will look for any reason not to do so.

[craig 5,199]

3 minutes ago, Bill said:

How the 'group' came to be constituted or populated is one thing - but in any case it is what it is - but for so-called Rangers fans now to be equivocal or obstructive to efforts aimed at challenging it is bewildering. It seems fair to ask, what are the motivations of fans who would rather criticise those efforts than contest such a contrived and hostile group?

 

It needs to be said - this is why I could never trust a Scottish nationalist to act fully in the best interests of Rangers. Some may but it's increasingly clear that most will look for any reason not to do so.

You need only look at how silent Humza Yousaf has been on convicted pedophiles connected to Celtic and his lack of interest in sparking an investigation into whether this was institutionalized abuse..... and how quickly he was in front of a camera to denounce (one-way) sectarianism after Clarke's deflection from a pumping last week.

[BEARGER 1,830]

Its amazing on here at times. I asked a simple question in post 2.

 

“Can I ask a question, what is the “National Anti Sectarianism Group” ? Who is involved, runs it and financies it? I have looked at the petition and also googled, cannot find anything about this organisation  NASG.”

 

But according to the usual suspects and our resident captain of industry that means I’m not a real Rangers fan. If some Tim had started a petition against something that did not exist the same people would be all over it. VB have made a real arse of it, simples.

[Scott7 6,008]

Correct. Target Dornan by all means. A worthwhile endeavour. Just do it properly.

[Gonzo79 15,294]

"Combatting Sectarianism In Scottish Society" could be described as a National Anti Sectarianism Group.  

 

I don't see how anyone could suggest otherwise.  Unless their agenda is aligned with our enemies, of course.

[Walterbear 557]

7 hours ago, Bill said:

How the 'group' came to be constituted or populated is one thing - but in any case it is what it is - but for so-called Rangers fans now to be equivocal or obstructive to efforts aimed at challenging it is bewildering. It seems fair to ask, what are the motivations of fans who would rather criticise those efforts than contest such a contrived and hostile group?

 

It needs to be said - this is why I could never trust a Scottish nationalist to act fully in the best interests of Rangers. Some may but it's increasingly clear that most will look for any reason not to do so.

Sorry mate that’s ridiculous. “It is what it is”. Correct - it is what it is - it is asking someone to get removed from something they don’t belong to!

 

You are a bright guy and folk will sign the petition if it’s constituted properly. Nothing to do with the SNP. All to do with a stupidly worded petition. It honestly looks like someone just discovered change.org and did this petition sitting in the bath with a half bottle of Buckie. 

[Gonzo79 15,294]

So "Combatting Sectarianism In Scottish Society" isn't a National Anti Sectarianism Group.  

 

I'm glad we've cleared that up.

[Bluedell 5,627]

1 hour ago, BEARGER said:

Its amazing on here at times. I asked a simple question in post 2.

 

“Can I ask a question, what is the “National Anti Sectarianism Group” ? Who is involved, runs it and financies it? I have looked at the petition and also googled, cannot find anything about this organisation  NASG.”

 

But according to the usual suspects and our resident captain of industry that means I’m not a real Rangers fan. If some Tim had started a petition against something that did not exist the same people would be all over it. VB have made a real arse of it, simples.

Despite your "organised by VB, I'm out" comment, you've spent time trying to discredit their Anti-SNP petition. Why.are you even bothering with it if you don't have an ulterior motive?  

 

If you really stood by your "organised by VB, I'm out" attitude, you wouldn't have given it a second thought but you went to the trouble of searching to try and discredit it. Are you trying to suggest you would have signed it if you'd established there was such an organisation? 

 

Is it any wonder people are questioning your motives?