Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

D'Artagnan

I am what I am

151 posts in this topic

Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

The point which some of you have misinterpreted was a follow on from Dannys thread regarding the variance in opinions on forums such as these compared to what is actually experienced at Ibrox.

I would suspect that some of the things I have read on here would not go down well in establishments such as the Mermaid....but the point is that they are never espoused.....which makes me question at times the validity of the expression or in some cases whether the poster is in fact a bear. I say this given the no. of timmy imposters who have been visiting this site recently.

Furthermore Im not suggesting anyone "shut up" in the real world...Im saying that those who espouse fairly radical or unconventional views appear not to do so when they are in the company of genuine Bears....I wonder why that is ? Is it because they are imposters or to use example from Yellowcross...."cowards" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course the very notion of freedom of thought or expression is quite alien to timmy...perhaps thats why so many of them are outed so quickly.

For all his faults the Fish highlighted a very important point – that some of the opinions or beliefs expressed on this message boards were totally alien to that expressed on supporters clubs or buses. I would certainly vouch for that...if certain posters were to espouse their views or opinions in the Mermaid on a Saturday afternoon then I can assure you they would be short lived beliefs.

So is freedom of thought/expression as alien in the Mermaid for example as you suggest it is to timmy..? That is how it sounds D'Art. I am uncomfortable with that kind of intolerance.

Freedom of thought/expression is a very important principle to me and if that principle is upheld better on forums like RM than it is on certain buses/clubs/pubs etc then that is to the credit of the forums etc.

As the song goes:

Life's not worth a damn till you can shout out

I am what I am

ie life aint worth a damn without freedom of thought/expression.

I took that to mean something slightly different, in another way of putting it

* Would you Go to a mosque and tell them their beliefs and principles and ideas were wrong? (or vice versa of course)

* Would you go to a vegans meeting and expect them to serve you meat?

* would you go to a jewish bar and promote hitler as a good guy?

Would you do any of these, and NOT expect a negative reaction? Of course not, so, why would you go to a Rangers bar or bus or forum, and, promote views held, mainly by those in the mhedia and across the way as how Rangers fans should act, and NOT expect some kind of reaction?

Seems fairly obvious to me

All your examples are strangers from one culture going into it and shouting their mouth off in an aggressive and patronsing way (eg a christian going to a mosque, a meat eater going to a veggie meeting, a nazi going to a jewish bar etc) and are hardly the same thing as a Rangers fan on a Rangers forum - or in a club - expressing an opinion when asked or in an open discussion that may not be mainstream etc. You have twisted/simplified it.

And, if you are going to uphold freedom of thought or expression as a value worth having - and criticise others for lacking it - then you must always uphold it and always condemn those that don't, even your own etc - otherwise your principles count for nought.

And, ultimately - if pressed for your opinion/version of the truth then you should be man enough to state it without fear regardless of the company/situation you are in - otherwise you are a coward.

(tu) I did indeed simplify it, not twist it. It is basic common sense. Sure everyone has the right to say and believe what they like, but, essentially what you are advocating is the right to stir/cause trouble? The perfect "simple" example of that, is when Boruc delibrately stirs at old firm games! With the press/police all coming down on him, its called inciting a riot/trouble, and, just as bad as the result.

We have fans on here who DO seem to be from completely different cultures, strangers to what a huge number of Bears believe, which, in the grand scheme of things IS a good thing, however, not always, and the examples used above, were used for a reason or 2.

* the christion/mosque situation - we have some devout protestants, aethiest, catholics and muslims (and others I am sure) all in our support, however, the 1 section with the longest common knowedge association with the club is singled out for harrassment/attack/any other phrase you choose both by the press, celtic fans, and, also their fellow bears. "Dinosaurs", "unwanted" "leftin the past" etc etc? That is unfair. Also, that is what leads, in my ipinoon, to the who tim-pos-ter thing, since, it is not expected from a fellow bear.

* the Jew/Nazi part - We have Irish support, unionist support, Nationalist support, International support, all different cultures, one thing in common, a love of Rangers. However, unionist are lumped together with the protestant support, even if they are not, and, again, this is a section of the support vocally told they have no place in the support.

Now, you may not agree with those beliefs, but, they have every much right to be here, and, so they are. The less religious, PC people, which as a rule are younger, may not care about this side of things, but, they are also more vocal about "moving on" etc, which will offend everyone who doesnt believe this, and, it is not a minority

I agre with the last part, but, the facts are, If you are in a place with strong beliefs, and, you choose, as is you right, to tell them they are wrong and the complete opposite is true/right, which happens what, hourly on here?, then, what is to be expected bar a negative reaction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As SaintBob1969 says, you can't go around trumpeting freedom of thought or expression and then suggest Boab had better watch what he says around your friends.

Absolute bollocks - Boab happens to be one of my friends..

He is savvy enough to know that there are certain places and times where he would be better not to express some of his more unconventional beliefs....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with the Orangemen and practicing Protestants amongst our support, nor do I have an issue with their expression of such beliefs. However, as an atheist, I can't genuinely be as enthusiastically part of that of those fellow supporters, but that's what we are, fellow supporters. Let us not forget that although this identity has become part of our history, it did so from the 20's onward and that originally, the club had no such identity.

They can count on my support in fighting the propaganda of timmy and Spiers. I do not expect them to give up their support of their team for these ideals, but don't expect the numerous others who are non-Protestant to leave because they're not in the Orange Order. We are a broad church, more ethnically diverse than the bigots of the east end according to Glasgow City Council's own studies(bet they regret that) and that's something we should be proud of. One of my favourite tales of others supporting Rangers is (Mister) Satay Singh, promising to name his son after the next Rangers scorer. His son is called Oleg Kuznetzov Singh! I love that.

Having got UEFA off our backs, we should stand united and not bow to the media pressure for us to go further. We should not fall for the old "divide and rule" strategy. Don't be ashamed of your heritage, but don't expect me to be ashamed of my beliefs either and don't expect me to walk away from the club I love. You don't love it anymore than me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problem with the Orangemen and practicing Protestants amongst our support, nor do I have an issue with their expression of such beliefs. However, as an atheist, I can't genuinely be as enthusiastically part of that of those fellow supporters, but that's what we are, fellow supporters. Let us not forget that although this identity has become part of our history, it did so from the 20's onward and that originally, the club had no such identity.

They can count on my support in fighting the propaganda of timmy and Spiers. I do not expect them to give up their support of their team for these ideals, but don't expect the numerous others who are non-Protestant to leave because they're not in the Orange Order. We are a broad church, more ethnically diverse than the bigots of the east end according to Glasgow City Council's own studies(bet they regret that) and that's something we should be proud of. One of my favourite tales of others supporting Rangers is (Mister) Satay Singh, promising to name his son after the next Rangers scorer. His son is called Oleg Kuznetzov Singh! I love that.

Having got UEFA off our backs, we should stand united and not bow to the media pressure for us to go further. We should not fall for the old "divide and rule" strategy. Don't be ashamed of your heritage, but don't expect me to be ashamed of my beliefs either and don't expect me to walk away from the club I love. You don't love it anymore than me.

A fine post Oleg.

However I would like to clarify that my post made no mention of religious practices. If you refer back to Danny's original thread some of the contrasting themes between forums and Ibrox was about players - nothing to do with religion or heritage bud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to the thread title I cant get this song out of my head now :( Cheers D'Art !!

looking at the lyrics, they're pretty good I must admit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problem with the Orangemen and practicing Protestants amongst our support, nor do I have an issue with their expression of such beliefs. However, as an atheist, I can't genuinely be as enthusiastically part of that of those fellow supporters, but that's what we are, fellow supporters. Let us not forget that although this identity has become part of our history, it did so from the 20's onward and that originally, the club had no such identity.

Well put. What we *all* have in common is that we support the same club...nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problem with the Orangemen and practicing Protestants amongst our support, nor do I have an issue with their expression of such beliefs. However, as an atheist, I can't genuinely be as enthusiastically part of that of those fellow supporters, but that's what we are, fellow supporters. Let us not forget that although this identity has become part of our history, it did so from the 20's onward and that originally, the club had no such identity.

They can count on my support in fighting the propaganda of timmy and Spiers. I do not expect them to give up their support of their team for these ideals, but don't expect the numerous others who are non-Protestant to leave because they're not in the Orange Order. We are a broad church, more ethnically diverse than the bigots of the east end according to Glasgow City Council's own studies(bet they regret that) and that's something we should be proud of. One of my favourite tales of others supporting Rangers is (Mister) Satay Singh, promising to name his son after the next Rangers scorer. His son is called Oleg Kuznetzov Singh! I love that.

Having got UEFA off our backs, we should stand united and not bow to the media pressure for us to go further. We should not fall for the old "divide and rule" strategy. Don't be ashamed of your heritage, but don't expect me to be ashamed of my beliefs either and don't expect me to walk away from the club I love. You don't love it anymore than me.

(tu) Thats well said Oleg, I highlighted some great parts

Nah, you dont need to to be enthusiastic, in fact to do so would not be right.

2nd highlighted part - I dont think anyone has suggested that, the only suggestions have been for those you originally described to leave <cr>

Your last paragraph is great!! Nobody expects you to, likewise, nobody else should be expected to. agree?

Your views stated here are, in my opinion, how it should be! However, the intolerance is mainly shown towards the protestant/orange/unionist side, which, for me is just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(tu) I did indeed simplify it, not twist it. It is basic common sense. Sure everyone has the right to say and believe what they like, but, essentially what you are advocating is the right to stir/cause trouble?

The only thing I am advocating is everyone's right to freedom of thought/expression - and if it is upheld better on RM than elsewhere then credit to RM for its commendable tolerance.

And I said I thought you had twisted it as a Rangers fan freely expressing his thoughts (even unconventional ones) on a Rangers forum is not the same thing as a Nazi walking into a Jewish bar and shooting his mouth off about Hitler... etc - therefore your examples were a twist on the original point IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

To my knowledge, he isnt a violent fella ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problem with the Orangemen and practicing Protestants amongst our support, nor do I have an issue with their expression of such beliefs. However, as an atheist, I can't genuinely be as enthusiastically part of that of those fellow supporters, but that's what we are, fellow supporters. Let us not forget that although this identity has become part of our history, it did so from the 20's onward and that originally, the club had no such identity.

They can count on my support in fighting the propaganda of timmy and Spiers. I do not expect them to give up their support of their team for these ideals, but don't expect the numerous others who are non-Protestant to leave because they're not in the Orange Order. We are a broad church, more ethnically diverse than the bigots of the east end according to Glasgow City Council's own studies(bet they regret that) and that's something we should be proud of. One of my favourite tales of others supporting Rangers is (Mister) Satay Singh, promising to name his son after the next Rangers scorer. His son is called Oleg Kuznetzov Singh! I love that.

Having got UEFA off our backs, we should stand united and not bow to the media pressure for us to go further. We should not fall for the old "divide and rule" strategy. Don't be ashamed of your heritage, but don't expect me to be ashamed of my beliefs either and don't expect me to walk away from the club I love. You don't love it anymore than me.

oleg no one has said that you have to be in the orange order to follow rangers, i have never been a member of the orange order, but i have followed our club since i was a young boy, but its the people who tell us this tradition is no good , plus all us old bears should move forward and leave the protestant baggage behind. then we are told that we are only in the minority, again total lies, then they say in a few more years there wll be none of us left, what a shock they are in for. we will always be here and there are thousands of younger fans who will take our place once we leave this earth, and as they say no surrender and we never will, and to many protestant rangers fans have given so much for our club to allow all the do gooders try to destroy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(tu) I did indeed simplify it, not twist it. It is basic common sense. Sure everyone has the right to say and believe what they like, but, essentially what you are advocating is the right to stir/cause trouble?

The only thing I am advocating is everyone's right to freedom of thought/expression - and if it is upheld better on RM than elsewhere then credit to RM for its commendable tolerance.

And I said I thought you had twisted it as a Rangers fan freely expressing his thoughts (even unconventional ones) on a Rangers forum is not the same thing as a Nazi walking into a Jewish bar and shooting his mouth off about Hitler... etc - therefore your examples were a twist on the original point IMO.

Based on the pub aspect, really think its appropriate ;)

AS in, if one went into a bar, adorned with union flags and playing songs such as TBB etc, and, to use your phrasing, started shooting their mouth about the flags being inappropriate and offensive, as were the songs, what would be the real difference in that?

You see the reason i chose it now? (tu)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problem with the Orangemen and practicing Protestants amongst our support, nor do I have an issue with their expression of such beliefs. However, as an atheist, I can't genuinely be as enthusiastically part of that of those fellow supporters, but that's what we are, fellow supporters. Let us not forget that although this identity has become part of our history, it did so from the 20's onward and that originally, the club had no such identity.

They can count on my support in fighting the propaganda of timmy and Spiers. I do not expect them to give up their support of their team for these ideals, but don't expect the numerous others who are non-Protestant to leave because they're not in the Orange Order. We are a broad church, more ethnically diverse than the bigots of the east end according to Glasgow City Council's own studies(bet they regret that) and that's something we should be proud of. One of my favourite tales of others supporting Rangers is (Mister) Satay Singh, promising to name his son after the next Rangers scorer. His son is called Oleg Kuznetzov Singh! I love that.

Having got UEFA off our backs, we should stand united and not bow to the media pressure for us to go further. We should not fall for the old "divide and rule" strategy. Don't be ashamed of your heritage, but don't expect me to be ashamed of my beliefs either and don't expect me to walk away from the club I love. You don't love it anymore than me.

A fine post Oleg.

However I would like to clarify that my post made no mention of religious practices. If you refer back to Danny's original thread some of the contrasting themes between forums and Ibrox was about players - nothing to do with religion or heritage bud.

You also referred to Minstral's thread about the Orange Order...that was to do with religion and our heritage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

"Admiration" ?

Bit of twisting going on there Briton...I believe the expression I used was..

For all his faults the Fish highlighted a very important point

Hardly admiration...and certainly not an endorsement of violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another great post of the normal Rangers supporters thoughts, well done D'A, just the usual handwringers giving it shock, horror and telling us how much more ground we should give in the tolerance stakes ? If we are any more tolerant we'll be extinct ! :sherlock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A fine post Oleg.

However I would like to clarify that my post made no mention of religious practices. If you refer back to Danny's original thread some of the contrasting themes between forums and Ibrox was about players - nothing to do with religion or heritage bud.

Thank you.

I apologise for misinterpreting you. I shall look for the thread in question, before I clarify my points if necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

"Admiration" ?

Bit of twisting going on there Briton...I believe the expression I used was..

For all his faults the Fish highlighted a very important point

Hardly admiration...and certainly not an endorsement of violence.

OK fine. Could you answer the point then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

"Admiration" ?

Bit of twisting going on there Briton...I believe the expression I used was..

For all his faults the Fish highlighted a very important point

Hardly admiration...and certainly not an endorsement of violence.

OK fine. Could you answer the point then?

Im struggling to understand exactly what your point is....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im struggling to understand exactly what your point is....

I don't think you are. How do you see Bears in The Mermaid assuring you that the kind of views espoused on this forum (an example of the type of view you are refering to would be nice) would be 'short lived' if not through violence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(tu) I did indeed simplify it, not twist it. It is basic common sense. Sure everyone has the right to say and believe what they like, but, essentially what you are advocating is the right to stir/cause trouble?

The only thing I am advocating is everyone's right to freedom of thought/expression - and if it is upheld better on RM than elsewhere then credit to RM for its commendable tolerance.

And I said I thought you had twisted it as a Rangers fan freely expressing his thoughts (even unconventional ones) on a Rangers forum is not the same thing as a Nazi walking into a Jewish bar and shooting his mouth off about Hitler... etc - therefore your examples were a twist on the original point IMO.

Based on the pub aspect, really think its appropriate ;)

AS in, if one went into a bar, adorned with union flags and playing songs such as TBB etc, and, to use your phrasing, started shooting their mouth about the flags being inappropriate and offensive, as were the songs, what would be the real difference in that?

You see the reason i chose it now? (tu)

I can't agree that the example is appropriate given the historical background to Nazis/Hitler/Jews/Final Solution etc.

Let's agree to disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

To my knowledge, he isnt a violent fella ;)

The Fish or D'Art?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh dear oh dear oh dear......

Quite a spectacular leap some of us have made here.... to the point of physical violence !!!

Your admiration of The Fish's stance leads to the view that you meant that physical violence would be used. How else could you be 'assured' that a Bear, daring to have a 'notion of freedom of thought or expression', would see his beliefs being 'short lived'?

To my knowledge, he isnt a violent fella ;)

The Fish or D'Art?

none of the two of them are violent. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im struggling to understand exactly what your point is....

I don't think you are. How do you see Bears in The Mermaid assuring you that the kind of views espoused on this forum (an example of the type of view you are refering to would be nice) would be 'short lived' if not through violence?

I dont really care what you think.

The point is not whether I would support such action ...whether it be from being told to shut the f*** up or some idiot clattering someone.....the crucial point is the reality of it. You cant seem to grasp that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(tu) I did indeed simplify it, not twist it. It is basic common sense. Sure everyone has the right to say and believe what they like, but, essentially what you are advocating is the right to stir/cause trouble?

The only thing I am advocating is everyone's right to freedom of thought/expression - and if it is upheld better on RM than elsewhere then credit to RM for its commendable tolerance.

And I said I thought you had twisted it as a Rangers fan freely expressing his thoughts (even unconventional ones) on a Rangers forum is not the same thing as a Nazi walking into a Jewish bar and shooting his mouth off about Hitler... etc - therefore your examples were a twist on the original point IMO.

Based on the pub aspect, really think its appropriate ;)

AS in, if one went into a bar, adorned with union flags and playing songs such as TBB etc, and, to use your phrasing, started shooting their mouth about the flags being inappropriate and offensive, as were the songs, what would be the real difference in that?

You see the reason i chose it now? (tu)

I can't agree that the example is appropriate given the historical background to Nazis/Hitler/Jews/Final Solution etc.

Let's agree to disagree.

ok fair enough, but, you could argue that given the irish troubles, Scotland/England wars, reformation etc, its pretty close, but, never mind.

What I said highlighted above, is the case in point, thats similar to what happens here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.