Not really, I don't recall him telling anyone to go **** themselves. He has shown great patience (some would say too much) with these oafs. My only criticism of him was that he failed to punish the Poppy banner mob as he promised. They took that as a sign of weakness (or tacit approval for their protest) and merely upped the ante so we have reached the current state of affairs. One of them has been identified and banned, hopefully that's just the start.
My point was that Peter Lawwell has made some calamitous decisions that have cost the club far more than €15k. I am sure he has the best interests of the club at heart too. As for telling people to go **** themselves, hasn't he just done that to these supporters?
Any mistakes Lawell may have made were not premeditaed, with flagrant disregard to the best interests of the club, and as for him telling those fans to gtf, I wish he had, because then he would be voicing the opinion of the majority of the fanbase. I wish they would all **** off, i'm sick of them but the difference is I would not attempt to carry a banner into the ground and then have my wee ****witted accomplices assist me in holding it up. The tide is turning, Scotland, like Celtic is attempting to move on and leave the baggage which has accompanied us for so many years behind. Celtic is supposed to be a club "open to all", these ******s don't want to follow that ethos therefore they should be dumped like last year's xmas tree. I don't want them and not one Celtic fan I know personally wants them tarnishing the good name of the majority.
who are these ******s precluding from following the club? The only person who has precluded anyone from supporting the club is Peter Lawwell. His policies are of course premeditated and have cost the club dearly. He is rewarded well for his role, better than the majority of the playing staff and he has continually made a **** of things time after time. But hey, he is doing a great job what with the burgeoning bank balance taking precedence over the trophy cabinet. Very deliberate policies he implemented fecked away 3 titles on the spin. 2 Automatic entries into the champions league and the chance of another. But lets "weed out" a couple of bampots with flares instead of the very very very very tiny minority who get paid handsomely to act as CE and make an unmiteigated balls of it. I see the tide is turning in Scotland. I see that. It looks ridiculous from the outside looking in to be quite honest. Idiotic, Draconian legislation being implemented.....but of course, everyone is looking to move on. Very progressive. Introducing thought crime.
I have no worries about the new legislation because i don't indulge in the actions which are to be punished under it.
I don't sing songs for starters, apart from songs about Celtic, I don't indulge in online (or real world) religious or sectarian taunts, I don't frequent Pubs during match days and if I did I would not be indulging in singalongs or Old Firm "banter". If people avoid all of the above then they should have no concerns.
That ain't necessarily so Dev. An exclamation in frustration at Samaras misplacing a pass is enough to make you fall foul of this legislation. I can sing all the rebel songs I want and I wouldn't be breaking any law. The guy next to me might be singing the same song at the same time and be facing five years in the same cell as you.
Well when the law is passed we will find out in good time. Laws are already in place for someone shouting in frustration at Sammy, swearing in a public place is already covered under Breach of The peace, I doubt anyone has been arrested and charged for it before and I doubt very much anyone would be treated any more harshly under new legislation. I don't know the words to the back catalogue of "Rebel songs" , nor do I know which songs could be classed as such but i'm sure the people who do sing them know full well what they are and therefore they shopuld avoid singing them lest they face the consequences. As you are aware, i'm old fashioned in a way, I believe the only songs which should be sung at a football match should be football songs, i'm not interested in people's political, ideological or religious beliefs when I go to watch Football any more than I am when I watch boxing, Cricket or naked mud wrestling.
Is there not a law against that sort of thing in Scotland? (If not, it's probably at the drafting stage!)
Laws are already in place to deal with offensive behaviour; S38 Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010) That hasn't stopped them inventing new legislation to deal with something they have already legislated against. That was only enacted last year. Surely they haven't forgotten about it? If they know full well what they are singing and why they are singing it then they are not in breach of any law. Paul McBride told us that “The Lord Advocate said that this (legislation)is not about people expressing robust, indeed offensive opinions sometimes” adding ”This is about people trying to cause trouble at games”. If this is true, then there is absolutely no way that any prosecution will be secured against people who know what they are singing about...Of course they will try and they probably will succeed. In which case we will know, if it isn't already abundantly clear that the principles of this legislation are to criminalise Republicans, and very little to do with its purported purpose of addressing sectarianism. I would be breaking no law if I sang any rebel song of any hue at a football match. You would be if you criticised Sammy. Now if the law is applied fairly, equitably and accurately and to its letter then you are at much greater risk than me......unless you already know that the law is not going to be applied fairly, equitably and accurately. When you are banged up under this anti-sectarian legislation, I will still be saying it is wrong. I won't let anyone come on here and say you aren't a real supporter. But that isn't going to happen under these witch trials I don't think it is particularly old or new fashioned to want for people to leave their politics at the door. I just feel differently.
I honestly don't know whether the new legislation is about targetting Republicans, but I have read many a complaint from the Rangers fanbase claiming that the legislation was designed to target them, specifically their Protestant "Heritage" and their culture. If we break it down it is in 2 distinct parts. Part 1 "The first offence deals with sectarian and other offensive chanting and behaviour likely to cause public disorder. It covers conduct around football matches, inside grounds, and those travelling to and from stadiums - as well as fans watching games elsewhere, for example in pubs or on big screens outdoors. In law, the legislation aims to take into account "expressing or inciting religious, racial or other forms of hatred" and "threatening behaviour or behaviour which would be offensive to any reasonable person". Well that covers not just Republican chanting at football matches (which as you are aware, I personally regard as offensive, me being a reasonable person and all that) but all chanting and singing which any "reasonable" person would find offensive (like people being up to their knees in blood - Fenian or otherwise). The meat of this particular part of the legislation is simple. Ask yourself, is singing about Irish Republicanism (specifically in this context, mentioning the IRA, or songs about them) "likely to cause public disorder"? I'm sure we could argue the toss about this all day but in certain circumstances/locations there is no doubt that it would cause public disorder and so too would singing about Derry's Walls etc. Part 2 "The second offence deals with serious threats - including murder - made on the internet and elsewhere, and threats intended to incite religious hatred. That would take in posts on sites such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as specific websites, and actions such as sending bullets or images depicting serious harm in the post". This was required in my opinion, some may argue it was merely "banter", and indeed, the law as it stands would perhaps deal with this under "Breach of the peace", which in certain cases may perhaps be adequate, but in other more serious cases it would be laughably insufficient and would not reflect the real gravity of the threats made. I don't happen to think that the new legislation targets any particular group of fans more than the other and I don't necessarily believe that sectarianism begins and ends with Football, it's a societal problem, but whether we like it or not, football in Scotland is the crucible in which bigotry is forged and likewise - whether or not we like it - the laws have been passed by a majority of the elected govrenment, so we will have to like it or lump it. People/fans will have to be more careful what they sing and what they say at or around football matches or merely watching football in a pub, and in my own personal view that is a good thing.
I have read similarly, One need only look at the performance of Christine Grahame, Chair of the Justice committee in questioning Tom Devine to reveal the purpose of the legislation. Rangers fans are more likely to be prosecuted under existing legislation because their behaviour is racist and sectarian whereas the actions of the Celtic support are political. So instead of prosecuting the crimes being committed, they invent new ones. The Huns will get it tight, but then they always should have under existing instruments . I did not know that you found rebel songs offensive. I knew you found them objectionable and that is fine, but offensive? The songs presently sung by a part of the support do not express or incite religious, racial or other forms of hatred. They are not threatening, nor are they offensive to any reasonable person nor are they intended to cause offense to anyone, reasonable or otherwise. Should people find them offensive, that is because they have elected to take a leap from the subject of the song to something else entirely. I cannot be in breach of any law because somebody else has an active imagination and/or a poor grasp of history. I suspect that this defence would fail in a Scottish court but succeed on appeal at a more sensible court. S38 of Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 could deal with this. If it can’t, then very simple amendments could be made to ensure it could. I do not believe resources will target any group of supporters more than any other. But it has certainly been drafted to criminalise a not insignificant number of our support. That is abundantly clear as I have already referenced. That is counter-intellectual, draconian, intolerant and intolerable.
Reb, I should point out that Republican songs (specifically ones about the IRA) offend me only on a personal level, I have no issue with republicans or IRA supporters/sympathisers but I do take offence when they try and flaunt it in my face by singing about the IRA or gloryfying them. I can see both sides of the argument so by the same logic I would understand if people took offence If I started singing the praises of The Parachute Regiment. Not that I would of course but I hope you see where i'm coming from.
Banners should be witty anyway **** UEFA wasn't funny. I really don't get the upset thought life ban for being an idiot is a bit much.
I do, but inherently the songs are not offensive and therefore should not be talked about as being illegal. By the same token, songs about the Parachute Regiment are not inherently offensive to me (as a Republican) but songs about the Parachute Regiment shooting innocent children in the back probably would be. There is a subtle difference, and where subjective legislation is concerned, a very important one. Legally, the Huns should think about their position with regards to the Sash, Derry's walls and such like but there is no argument when it comes to being up to their knees, or telling us to go home.
