Michael Kelly (who had zero right being on there given that he nearly oversaw our club vanishing into old-fashioned "recievership" - nae admin or newco for us) basically played right into his hands by suggesting titles should be stripped when they were talking about other things. Enabled Graham to say "well, you'd have to prove it first" in relation to the double contracts. The only person who got him a little riled was "Odious Creep". Just one decent tim on those programmes (Dungwall was on one as well) would've destroyed them. I believe that the guy presenting the programme even referred to Rangers as "we"
Kelly asked him what "Punishments" Rangers had received so far but the presenter saved him answering. Kelly is a twat though.
There was a Celtic bloke on one of the shows with the Obese Confirmed Bachelor but he was nervous as **** and mumbled a lot of the time. Can't remember his name.
Just read this in response to the article by Chris Graham, I will be interested to read his response to this. Not long ago I held such high hopes for this site. A place where reasonable debate, discussion etc. could take place in a welcoming environment. I'm no debater though feel compelled to respond to Mr Graham as I feel for too long now we have simply ignored important revelations from certain bloggers and reporters for the simple reason that they are seen to be anti-Rangers or pro Celtic. For too long posters have been vilified for daring to raise issues that have first been raised by Celtic minded bloggers or journalists. Why do we do this? Do we all believe that if someone comes from a certain persuasion then that is enough to dismiss their views or ignore their points, however much these points are backed with irrefutable evidence? I have registered with Rangers forums in the past, I now no longer try getting past the moderators of these sites as it is blatantly obvious that only certain views are allowed to be heard on these sites. This worries me for a number of reasons but this post is probably not an appropriate place to expand on those issues. Don't shoot the messenger. You do understand what that means in a Rangers context Chris? Because your article is all that has been wrong with our fan base for some time now, we have chosen the best defence is to shoot the messenger, if that messenger happens to be someone that is instantly recognised or perceived as being anti-Rangers. We then bury our heads in the sand no matter what we are hearing from others on these issues as they were first broadcast by our enemies. Phil has undoubtedly written things that have been objectionable, to say the least, he has also brought some issues that previously we were unaware of to our attention. Whether we like it or not Phil has exposed, at various times, issues that should have had Rangers fans outside Ibrox in our droves demanding answers. Does this make me an apologist for Phil? Would we be aware of Martin Bain receiving money from RFC through an EBT, then covering up the trail by asking for the evidence to be shredded if it wasn’t for the C4 news item from Alex Thomson? Chris states “However, the alarm bells really started ringing when I spoke to several people in the media who, by sheer coincidence, have viewed the full, unedited tape of Thomson's interview with Adam.” Who are these people Chris? Why didn’t they make a complaint to their editors about the shameful bullying they witnessed? How did these journalists, presumably not C4 or ITN employees, obtain access to these tapes? Chris did get some things right, Thomson’s interview with Adam was neither an exclusive nor new. Adam first made these accusations in 2002 in an article in the Scotsman. “Thomson then embarked on a series of blogs. These all had a certain familiar tone of condescension, mocking and hostility towards Rangers.” I have to admit here that I never had a problem with Thomson’s blogs. I never read them as being controversial or condescending; maybe Chris could point out the multitude of inaccuracies and condescending phrases in the Thomson blogs. On the Harper MacLeod conflict of interest blog, what did Chris want? I do not for 1 minute believe that a respected journalist such as Alex Thomson is part of some complicacy against Rangers and our fans. If he had found any conflict of interest then I for one firmly believe he would have reported it. Chris has many friends in the media; I am sure at least one of them could approach the Law Society and get a second opinion on this matter. The quote from the Daily Telegraph saying “Strathclyde Police found no evidence to support Thomson’s complaint. Frankly, it was laughable”. This would be the same Telegraph that previously had to publish an apology to Thomson when it made allegations to the veracity of his claims previously? One does wonder however of the source of this particular source, its unattributed which means it’s just one person’s opinion. I would ask Chris to try and find out the name of this individual as I can hazard a guess to the person’s identity and because of this I have to add a pinch of salt to this individuals opinions on this matter as they are not neutral. (Leggo maybe?) The little digs about Thomson wanting to raise his profile don’t even deserve a reply as comments such as those have no place in an adult debate. C4 news is widely regarded as Britain’s premier news outlet, it is respected the world over, is there seriously anyone out there that believes they would risk this by conspiring with the likes of mad Phil? We all chose to ignore the RTC blog when it first appeared on the net. Even though the site disclosed numerous story’s which we should have listened to at the time. We chose to dismiss this site as nothing more than another Celtic blog which was just out to stick the boot into RFC and our fans. While it is undeniable that a significant number of the posters on this site are of the pro Celtic camp it is never the less a fact that this site is one which has blown the whole Murray/Whyte disaster wide open. Microscopic investigation into almost every aspect of the Craig Whyte tenure of our club, forensic examination of every utterance from Murray. We as Rangers fans should be applauding their efforts and offering our assistance in their efforts to unravel this whole mess. Nope not us, it’s all a conspiracy controlled by Lawell and others of his ilk. Honestly you should all take a step back and look at this whole shameful episode in our great clubs history without the blinkers on. We need leaders to step forward and address the truth without fear, we need to agitate for an investigation into the running of Scottish football under the Murray/Whyte era’s. We have to be prepared to that just maybe some of those messengers were actually right and it was us Rangers fans that got it wrong. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but is it ok to continually make the same mistakes? Whatever we all think of some of those mentioned, it has to be recognised that one or two of them have unearthed things which should have been picked up by Rangers fans, instead what did we do? Because of our loyalty we have been used by various people through the years. We have been used to enable crooks and chancers to fill their pockets while we silence the detractors by bombarding them with negative messages and barring them from our message boards. Is this the way to avoid a repeat of the Murray/Whyte era? I’m just a lone voice I accept I’ll probably get shot down but hopefully some will listen and be prepared to at least consider my points.
I think the major anger that is coming out from the Sevco ranks is they realised that they have once again been taken as idiots. Mr Charlie Green has took the money for forty thousand season tickets and shared it between Ticketus Whyte and Sevco. Mr Green thought when Rangers died their anger would die. Everybody in Scotland that knows Rangers have been cheating and conning Scottish Football and the people of the UK in general for the last ten to twelve years and the Huns don't want the rest of the football world or the rest of the UK inhabitants know. The three Rangers "amigos" Cambell Og (ex recepitent of EBT) Regan and Doncastor did everything in their power and more to ensure that Rangers were neither punished or forced to make do their wrongs. They even allowed Rangers/Sevco to arrange their own terms and conditions for Sevco's future. Tha tis similar to someone caught drinking and driving in a Merc, telling the judge that I will start my 12 months in December and I will only drive a Mini.
Hre's Chris Graham's response That was a very long post so forgive me if I don’t cover all your points. I’ll be honest and say I’m totally unconvinced that you are a Rangers fan. You could be of course but since you post under a pseudonym, and I don’t know you, I can only go by what you are saying and it sounds a bit familiar. Anyway I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for now and since we don’t only discuss things with Rangers fans on this forum then it probably doesn’t matter. I have yet to see the irrefutable evidence you talk about – there certainly isn’t irrefutable evidence of anything on Thomson’s blog. If any of the evidence provided by Mac Giolla Bhain, Thomson, RTC etc. is irrefutable then why is it the subject of legal proceedings? If you can link me some irrefutable evidence I’d appreciate it but what I have seen is conjecture and propaganda. Have all these so called 'side letters' (they used to be called dual contracts...) been published for example? I must have missed it. Even if they exist is that irrefutable evidence? I’d suggest not. I won’t be telling you who told me about the tape of the Adam interview but it was more than one person and has been painstakingly corroborated. If anyone has a problem with the truth of it then I assume they will take the appropriate action. I suspect that won’t be the case. The Harper MacLeod issue was given to Thomson to see if he would pursue a clear conflict with the same vigour with which he pursued other matters. I have spoken to many lawyers who are frankly astounded that Harper MacLeod took the case. Perception of conflict being something that proper, respected law firms take as seriously as a material conflict. Now that may not be enough for the law society but it is enough to cast doubt on the entire process in which they are involved. I’m sure all this will come out in due course and it isn’t my wish to dwell on it here. Either Thomson needs everything spoon fed to him (which has certainly been the case on some issues where he has mirrored the content of other blogs) or he isn’t interested in anything except harming Rangers. It could be either or both. One thing is certain – he has associated himself with and without question takes information from people whose sole purpose is to harm Rangers as much as possible. Can you link me to the Telegraph apology? I suspect not since the article is still available online. It was amended slightly because Thomson asked ITN to get the police to look at the case again. Again they dismissed it. So that is twice the police have investigated and twice they have found no case to answer. Thomson's response to this is to call them corrupt. I'm sure he has evidence of that but is just choosing not to show us it...... Thomson has been asked where the threat is – he won’t show it because he can’t. It doesn’t exist. Thomson has therefore enlisted the help of people like Mac Giolla Bhain to pursue it through the NUJ. An organisation littered with agendas. If you doubt that then stay tuned as we’ll have more on it in the future. If you find it impossible to believe that journalists are capable of pre conceived notions or bias then that is your own affair. One thing about RTC – about whom you seem oddly impressed – you are aware that at best all they have done is leak information pertaining to a confidential tax tribunal? This is not whistle blowing and it is not in the public interest. No proceedings are taking place because of the RTC – they were underway anyway. An important point often missed by their fans. Intentionally I imagine. Finally you are the one who mentions conspiracy not me. There is no question that Celtic bloggers and others have colluded to harm Rangers. Is Thomson involved? You obviously think not - as is your right. Try and find me someone who works with him who understands what he is doing involved in this story. As for his profile, I can assure you that Channel 4 news may be respected by journalists but it is the least watched of any British news programs. If you think this hasn’t increased Thomson’s profile then I’m afraid you are mistaken.
"Finally you are the one who mentions conspiracy not me. There is no question that Celtic bloggers and others have colluded to harm Rangers" This guy is a ****ing riot.
"I have spoken to many lawyers who are frankly astounded that Harper MacLeod took the case" What's the betting these many "Lawyers" are either Rangers Men or figments of his imagination.
I've read a few things on Rangers Standard and been mildly impressed. Haven't agreed with everything (or even most) but there did appear to be an attempt to get decent writers to contribute and more open, honest discussion. That Chris Graham piece is only worthy of FF. Shame really.
Yes. I am told that I have a difficulty in conceding when I am wrong. Many months ago I said that Rangers would be liquidated. I said they would start a new club. I said they would pretend it was the same club. I said they would have to start the new club from the bottom......I am feeling smug. I wasn't alone. A lot of people said the same thing. It was the logical course of events. I was very wrong about one thing. I said they would never let this happen to them again. I was certain they would learn from it. Not in a patronising way or anything like that. I just thought that once bitten, twice shy. There was an advert for Carling years ago where a squirrel learned over the course of a few weeks how to navigate an assault course to get at some nuts. That squirrel learned....Supporters of the teams that played at Ibrox are dumber than squirrels and that is a fact.
There is a huge glaring hole in Graham's claim that Rangers Tax Case was all about having a go at Rangers and had nothing to do with informing the Gers fans of what would happen. If it was set up as a purely "Anti Rangers" blog then why is it no longer being updated?
I maintain they could have done something if they asked the right questions in 1986 and 2001. They could have done something about it when a Celtic Blogger asked questions about EBT's in 2005 ( I thunk it was a well known poster BarcaBhoy). They could have done something when RTC started to at least arrest the sale to Whytey and the ultimate slide into oblivion....but they didn't.
why is there "no question that celtic bloggers and others have colluded to harm rangers"? i could just as easily say there is no question celtic bloggers and others have tried to make rangers fans aware of the potentially devasting consequences of their clubs mismanagement - consequences you covered your ears to you really are the people
I maintain they could have done something if they asked the right questions in 1986 and 2001. They could have done something about it when a Celtic Blogger asked questions about EBT's in 2005 ( I thunk it was a well known poster BarcaBhoy). They could have done something when RTC started to at least arrest the sale to Whytey and the ultimate slide into oblivion....but they didn't.
