VanguardBears are to join protests against Glasgow City Council

[Gonzo79 15,292]

They should just re-name Call It Out 'We Hate H*ns".  

 

Because that's exactly what it is.

Edited April 23, 2019 by Gonzo79

[Gaffer 1,665]

9 hours ago, Bill said:

Never ever trust the SNP. If they say it, they're lying. If they do it, it's deceit. 

I think you've described politicians in general there though.  I've noticed over the past 10 years in particular that politicians can now blatantly lie about serious issues and get away with it.  Wars, tuition fees, and BrExit are prime examples, and there's no end in sight.  I do appreciate you've got a particular problem with the SNP, but who can we vote for that would make a difference?  I have honestly no idea, and neither do many people I speak to.  I think that's a wider issue though.

[compo 7,030]

1 hour ago, Gaffer said:

I think you've described politicians in general there though.  I've noticed over the past 10 years in particular that politicians can now blatantly lie about serious issues and get away with it.  Wars, tuition fees, and BrExit are prime examples, and there's no end in sight.  I do appreciate you've got a particular problem with the SNP, but who can we vote for that would make a difference?  I have honestly no idea, and neither do many people I speak to.  I think that's a wider issue though.

There's always the raving loony party ?

[Bill 13,717]

4 hours ago, Gaffer said:

I think you've described politicians in general there though.  I've noticed over the past 10 years in particular that politicians can now blatantly lie about serious issues and get away with it.  Wars, tuition fees, and BrExit are prime examples, and there's no end in sight.  I do appreciate you've got a particular problem with the SNP, but who can we vote for that would make a difference?  I have honestly no idea, and neither do many people I speak to.  I think that's a wider issue though.

I have absolutely no problem with the SNP. I've always thought it was entirely transparent what they were up to and it's been fully reinforced by the failure of 12 years in government in Scotland.

 

I do take your point about politicians in general and find it hard to argue with it but the SNP runs Holyrood and sets the political agenda in Scotland, not the tories or labour or libdems. No amount of whataboutery can change that. My political position aspiration isfirmly for "small state - large personal freedom" but I'd feel safer voting for Corbyn than the SNP.

[JohnMc 2,750]

On 21/04/2019 at 16:28, Bluedell said:

There's been other marches and demos in the city where people have been assaulted and the Council don't seem to care.

 

If there were some level of consistency then that would go somewhat to reducing the conspiracy theories.

 

I wonder if I stand with a UJ and Rangers top on in the middle of George Square during the next pro-independence rally and I get assaulted, will the council ban all future pro-independence rallies? I think that we all know the answer to that.

It's not an exact comparison though BD, is it. If you were standing outside your Orange Hall for example and some sort of Independence march went past and someone following it spat on you then I think you could in all reasonableness request no more of that type of march go past your premises, and the police would probably back you on that.  

All future 'walks' haven't been banned as far as I know. 

 

I think Glasgow Council, indeed most councils and the police, would probably be quite happy if there was a complete ban on Orange walks. That's the direction of travel currently, bams spitting on priests will only speed that up. 

[JohnMc 2,750]

On 21/04/2019 at 11:26, buster. said:

In the wake of 'spitgate', some of the statements to come from the O.O. were actually very good, politically enlightened even (IMO). 

 

One specific being, IIRC was a suggestion, an offer to come together and stand against bigotry whilst on the march. It was an olive branch of sorts that didn't seem to be talked about or considered. I thought it the exact line they should be taking and that they should have pushed it further, forcing a conversation on it.

 

 

 

That's interesting. It was more around doing more to discourage the 'hangers-on' at these events and then the creation of organisations like "Scottish Protestants Against Discrimination" which is hyperbolic and viewed as such by a good number of people who might otherwise have some sympathy towards organisations like the OO. Holding rallies and demonstrations tends to inflame and annoy, rather than get the 'not bothered' onside. 

[JohnMc 2,750]

On 21/04/2019 at 19:20, barca72 said:

No doubt you are a popular fellow but like most people you will have a finite group of friends and acquaintances. As such I would refute your right to purport such statements to be true and factual. You have no way of knowing if either statement is true without showing published data.

Pushback is a harsh reality.

Fair enough. 

Membership of the Orange Order in Scotland is put at around 50,000, although the last 'big' walk in Glasgow had around 10,000 participants. The population of the city of Glasgow is around 600,000. It seems to me that most people in the city have no direct connection, I don't think I'm spreading falsehoods by stating that Barca. 

 

I'm not particularly popular on here, or in 'real life' either Barca, but it's kind of you to assume otherwise. You are correct, my statement was entirely anecdotal and based on what I see and hear among my finite group of acquaintances. 

I don't think it's stretching credibility to state that organisations like the Orange Order are less popular today than 10 years ago far less 30 years ago. That's not just here but in Northern Ireland too. For a variety of reasons fraternal organisations have become less popular in the last 30 years, be they trade unions, youth organisations, churches or the Orange Order. I'm not trying to slander them, it's just the way it is, I think. 

[Walterbear 557]

I think we all know anecdotally that the council is discriminatory but there is a lack of clear evidence. Evidence generally needs to be presented in a statistical form and the objectives of the protest need to be clear. For example if there is employment discrimination (which I think there is) and that is what people are motivated by, it needs to be clearly demonstrable and then clarity offered on what is the action and outcome required to remove discrimination.  

 

If it is about marches then it is difficult to present a case for discrimination against Protestants in this instance if a march attracts trouble eg spitting on a priest (I get this is being exploited by callitout). It is surely a public order issue? I am far from being a supporter of the Catholic Church and the more marches against organised religion the better but the real culprit in all of this is the numbskull who was convicted for assault.  If the priest had not been spat on there would have been a subsequent march. These people feel threatened (possibly exaggerating the threat) but the debate from an OO perspective has to be about removing numbskulls. 

 

How would we all feel if a republican band marched up Edmonton Drive and the followers misbehaved and for example vandalised the stadium or spat on officials at the stadium? We’d be calling for a ban on future marches 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Walterbear

[Gonzo79 15,292]

11 minutes ago, Walterbear said:

How would we all feel if a republican band marched up Edmonton Drive 

Assuming you mean Edmiston Drive, I'd hope we'd all be there waiting for them.

[Walterbear 557]

26 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

Assuming you mean Edmiston Drive, I'd hope we'd all be there waiting for them.

Well I’d be pretty tempted!