Off Topic Pointless point-scoring thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Pud and Mindy's pals go for a "it was the Tims wot started it" anti-logic angle <laugh>

http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/deflect-and-deny.html

I followed closely the entire referendum campaign and I listened and watched as both sides in the debate worked their socks off to put their points across. I saw numerous reports and statements made by supporters of the "Yes" campaign stating that they had been threatened and intimidated by supporters of the Better Together campaign and my heart sank. Not because there was any truth in their allegations, because that is all they were. Unsubstantiated allegations.

The only evidence was hearsay and rumour. No, my heart sank because I knew right away what was being done.

Having been called a traitor and a "****ing hun" for having the audacity to wear a polo shirt with a small Union Flag badge on it while walking in Dumfries, by a group of people sporting "Yes" flags who were heading into town to either put up a stall or canvass potential voters, I saw at first hand who the real perpetrators of intimidation were in the campaign. I was a bit slow in getting out my phone to film them, but then I didn't expect to be abused for wearing a shirt with a small badge on.

Maybe Ralph Lauren was a "Better Together" supporter, but to be honest I was unaware of that when I bought the shirt. I actually said to them that they had no right to insult me bearing in mind they had no idea how I was going to vote, and I was told that the badge on my shirt said it all. If I hadn't had more important things to deal with at present, I would have followed the group and reported them to the police for hate crime and sectarian behaviour, but it was eight against one, and with no video evidence I would have been stuffed.

By claiming that they had been intimidated by "No" supporters, the "Yes" supporters had managed to turn the allegations of intimidation full circle. Deflect and deny, a tactic used throughout history and particularly evident during the referendum campaign as used successfully by the "Yes" supporters.

Of course events of Thursday past proved beyond doubt that the majority of the population of Scotland want to remain a part of the United Kingdom. Unsurprisingly all of the members of the Vanguard Bears were overjoyed with the result, albeit a few had probably the most nerve-wracking day of their lives while waiting on the results coming in. Members of this group were informed that there was to be a coming together of people who had voted "No" in George Square, Glasgow on Friday night. There was also a time for reflection on the campaign and this forum were quick to recognise that the "Yes" campaign had used the Saltire as a symbol of independence, whereas we had perhaps failed to highlight that the Saltire is our flag too and it is an integral part of the Union Flag.

Our group contains many people who are proud to be BOTH Scottish and British. That is our right. Members of our group were asked to take Saltires as well as Union Flags to the celebration on Friday night as a show of unity, and many did so. Members of our group were reminded that the eyes of the world were on them and that any opportunity for the anti-British media in Scotland to attack Unionists would be pounced on and used endlessly in their attempts to further vilify the Unionist people of Scotland. And so it proved to be.

Some Vanguard Bears members may have been present in George Square, but they were not involved in any of the unrest which has been emblazoned across every front page in Scotland since the event. The celebration was good natured and much in the spirit of Last Night of the Proms, until supporters of the "Yes" campaign decided to voice their displeasure at the fact Unionists were being allowed to celebrate. Members of Celtic supporters group "The Green Brigade", a group with links to the IRA, who have long championed the actions of terrorist groups around the world also turned up in numbers, solely intent on causing trouble.

The trouble appears to have been triggered by a bottle thrown from the direction of a group of "Yes" supporters who had gathered. The bottle was aimed at people celebrating the decision made by the majority of the population of Scotland to maintain the Union, and it was undoubtedly the catalyst for subsequent events. Flares were set off from both sides and at the time of writing 11 people have been questioned by Police Scotland over acts of disorder.

The Herald newspaper, a tawdry rag which has long been a home to republicans with a real and bitter hatred of all Unionists has been at the forefront of blinkered reporting of the events; blaming all Unionists, including our group, while at the same time failing to mention or recognise the guilt of the pro-independence supporters in not just inciting the trouble, but thereafter being in the middle of it.

By doing so, they have shown themselves to be nothing more than a platform for republicanism at its very worst. When accusing groups like ours, they have no proof at all.

Like the original accusations of intimidation made by "No" supporters to "Yes" supporters in the run up to the referendum, their claims amount to no more than unsubstantiated allegations made by people with a radical hatred towards the Union and our group. Any attempts made by pro-unionist members of the public to put forward their version of events on Friday night have been censored and removed. It appears that while democracy still counts at the ballot box, the same cannot be said for the Herald.

Deflect and Deny. The referendum may be over, but they will not stop in their campaign of hatred towards Unionists and the Union. Their propaganda war continues at pace, and we must be ready for it.
Click to expand...
 
George square was full of spastics... both Unionists and Yes voters.

I got a bit of verbal on the Wednesday night when walking through George Square for refusing a Yes leaflet. I told him I only like to hear Yes from his Maw.

Glasgow's full of arseholes (as shown by the Yes vote)
 
Wilma Fannyburst said:
Pud and Mindy's pals go for a "it was the Tims wot started it" anti-logic angle

http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk/deflect-and-deny.html
Click to expand...


"The Herald newspaper, a tawdry rag which has long been a home to republicans with a real and bitter hatred of all Unionists has been at the forefront of blinkered reporting of the events; blaming all Unionists, including our group, while at the same time failing to mention or recognise the guilt of the pro-independence supporters in not just inciting the trouble, but thereafter being in the middle of it."

<laugh>
 
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=274203&st=320

4-0 to Rangers, Boyd with a hat trick
Click to expand...

Easy win tonight, keep the pressure on Hearts
Click to expand...

Templeton will run these junkies ragged
Click to expand...

To

**** off McCoist you pure bastard
Click to expand...

Get tae **** ya ****ing disgusting wage stealing bastard
Click to expand...

Fat ****ing bastard is still standing arms folded get yourself to **** sally you ****ing absolute ****er
Click to expand...

Get to **** McCoist just **** off away from my club and take yer waster bastards of players with you
Click to expand...

You must log in or register to see images
 
This thread is getting highjacked into a thread about everyone's favourite Gungan Centre-Half.

You must log in or register to see images


"Meesa no get cardy reddy for flooring dee muay-muay Hye-berneasey playa.

Messa wanna go-square wid dee whole mainy standee. How wude."
 
Typical filthy bastards

Rangers' Boyd & Mohsni face SFA disciplinary charges
Rangers duo Kris Boyd and Bilel Mohsni have been charged with violent conduct against Hibernian.

Boyd has been issued with a notice of complaint for "head-butting or attempting to head-butt" an opponent.

Mohsni's Scottish FA charge relates to "striking or attempting to strike an opponent with your arm or hand".

Both players have been offered two-match bans and have until Thursday to respond to the charges, with a principal hearing set for 9 October.

Boyd's charge relates to an altercation with Jordan Forster, while Mohsni clashed with another Hibs defender, Liam Fontaine.

Both incidents took place in the second half.

Hibs won the match 3-1, having built up a 3-0 half-time lead.
Click to expand...
 
The Rangers boardroom battle looks set to get white hot in intensity. As I blogged recently, we are approaching the end game battle between the incumbent shareholders and those seeking to wrest away control of the club. My information is that yesterday&#8217;s trade of 4,265,000 shares is the first salvo in the battle &#8211; and it is a strike for the incumbents. There is a determination to rid the club of the millstone around their necks that is the rebel faction and it looks like it will come down to a simple battle of financial resources. If what I am told is correct, then Dave King has yet to provide proof of funds to those who champion his getting involved at the club. This includes Philip Nash and Graham Wallace.

The incumbents, I am told, intend to fight tooth and nail to stay in control of the club and they have much deeper pockets, combined with the will to put their hands in. They also have access to a much bigger pool of investors than the King camp. The bad news is that the next few months could be very rocky, with board members possibly getting chopped and Rangers no doubt being rag-rolled in the Rangers-hating media.

The good news is that the club is still a magnet for potential investment and so fears of Rangers going under are perhaps a bit unnecessary. That will be a relief to many, including yours truly. I would expect that Philip Nash, Graham Wallace and possibly Norman Crighton may leave the scene, with sturdy replacements being appointed. It is my understanding that some shareholders are actually seriously considering calling for an EGM to effect dramatic change in boardroom personnel immediately.

One thing is for sure. After the looming head-to-head between the two warring factions, Dave King will no longer be able to string anybody along with talk of £30 million war chests. He will have to put up or shut up and my information is that whatever he puts up will be trumped by the other side. All good news if you want to see Rangers seriously funded. It is one thing to be anxious about the club&#8217;s survival but it is quite another to see rich investors, corporate and individual, fighting to get control. Especially if the end result is that Rangers gets some serious investment that enables the club to progress.

I have said all along from my knowledge of the situation that there is substantial wealth available from investors in the club and others. People keep asking me why that money has not been forthcoming but it has to be understood that sensible investors will not invest in chaos, only in order. Those who have sought to destabilise the club know exactly what they are doing &#8211; keeping the big money away by creating the chaotic situation of boycotts, protests, card displays and the like. These investors have a simple choice &#8211; cash in and walk away with a sore face financially. Or fight and crush those who oppose them. It looks like they have chosen the latter option.
As I said, this is good news for Rangers even if it means a few weeks or months more of racy headlines. Because one way or another, Rangers will benefit financially. Someone will lose the Ibrox boardroom war and it will be a spectacular loss. But their loss could very likely be a massive benefit and win for Rangers Football Club. That&#8217;s a result every true Rangers fan will take gladly.
Click to expand...

Deluded
 
I recently read an interesting alternative take on the Referendum which suggested that Prime Minister David Cameron should have taken a radically different approach. The writer suggested that Cameron should have told the people of Scotland: If you want independence, you can have it but you are on your own. No co-operation, no negotiation. Nada. An absorbing idea, especially if this was backed up by Miliband and Clegg.

You have to wonder if such an approach would have made a big difference to the outcome. I think many of the more pragmatic Yes voters (if there are any!) would have been sent homewards to think again. It is one thing to follow Herr Salmond if you believe he would have the clout to bring Westminster and others to the negotiating table. It is quite another if you know beyond a doubt that no-one will parlay with him.

Would such a hard-noised approach have had the effect of creating William Wallaces out of some No voters? Again, it is an interesting question to ponder. What I think it would have done is provide a real look at the true thinking of Scots.

My own opinion is that the fearties in the Yes camp would have been exposed and they would have voted Union. It is one thing to do all the Braveheart stuff as a romantic notion. It is quite another when you realise that voting for independence could result in you actually living in medieval conditions.

If the indy question raises its ugly racist head again, I would hope that a much more hardball approach is adopted by the Westminster parties. Never again should we have to endure Salmond or any of his cult devotees mockingly saying they can use the pound and do what they like. The natz should be told in no uncertain terms that they are on their own in every aspect of modern society and nationhood. No co-operation on anything.

Oh, and by the way, that 20 foot high steel fence is called a border. Cross it illegally and you will be in a new lockdown prison for a 28 day minimum. I did consider deferring this article out of respect for the apparently murdered aid worker Alan Henning. Maybe it&#8217;s too sensitive a time to talk about hard-nosed Prime Ministers taking crap from nobody. Then again, maybe it is the ideal time. Challenging times call for strong leaders. As do deadly enemies. Britain needs such leaders. When did we ever not? We also need those leaders to be wise.

A wise Prime Minister would have headed Che Salmond&#8217;s revolution off at the pass, privately or publicly with some strong words.
And a wise PM would also tell the USA that Britain is done being wing man, especially on botched US imperialist ventures. Some might see this as an attempt to appease terrorists. It is definitely not, although it is questionable to what extent if any it would reduce the danger to British people working in the Middle East and other sensitive areas. People like Alan Henning. Dissatisfaction with Britain being a bully-boy imperialist power was a common feature in the indy campaign. My argument has always been that you can have this distaste for our foreign policy without having to become a separatist. That is the beauty of our Union &#8211; you can disagree without having to divorce.

David Cameron has shown he has the ability to be hard-nosed and stand strong. The problem is that he is doing this with the wrong people. His face should be like flint towards anyone who wants to break up the Union and to any American President who wants to drag us into further military interventions in the Middle East. &#8220;No thanks. No co-operation, No negotiation.&#8221; That is what our Prime Minister should be saying to these people.
Click to expand...

He gets stupider with every passing day <doh>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back