Another perception on recent claims by contacts/boss

[Zappa 358]

This whole thing is a fucking fishing trip. I can only speculate that further division in the support is the desired outcome for reasons only known to the man with the rod.

[RFE 35]

Defending ££ - don't try and backtrack with this clarity bollocks.

We all know that the fans have no answers atm, especially if you're coming all the way down from 'the biggest Gers forum' to talk to us t-shirtless paupers.

Contacts posted an article with information contradicting that already in the public domain. There has been a subsequent article posted on your favourite website questioning the information in the former article. As someone who does not believe everything they read I'm trying to get these conflicts of information clarified.

There was no such article, there was a hatchet job with petty personal insults and unfounded personal allegations. Was the article maybe too close to the truth, is that why FF responded with such spiteful venom?

[Shipyard Blues 4]

Fed up with all this squabbling. RM has no agenda and a lot of FF guys on here have been able to freely voice their opinions. Would the RM members have received the same courtesy on FF? Banned by now I think.

Too much hot air being spouted all around. Let's just wait and see what contacts has to say about all this.

If he did meet with D Muir then he needs to tell us clearly what he knows unless D Muir has sworn him to secrecy/confidentiality, in which case his hands are tied.

I agree on the squabling, it's taking away from a very important debate. Also appreciate the oportunity to do so

[Guest therabbitt]

This "them and us" mentality.....certainly not coming from here.

It is coming from posters on both websites whether in an official capacity or not.

Badger said it earlier in this thread or the other RM/FF one, there has been no dialogue between the two sites yet we seem to have an agenda. There might very well be members of staff that have issue with FF people but that is their own personal business, not the sites. If anyone from FF wants to open a dialogue with me then here's my email: robert.boyle@rangersmedia.co.uk

I can promise my own opinion on anything, yet in the same way that RM can't speak for it's membership (and never would), I cannot speak for the "site" or the "staff", as we all have our own opinions on pretty much everything.

We will continue to just get on with doing our thing.

If our membership has a few people that don't like FF then that's up to them, they can write what they wish (within house rules), we certainly won't make apology for them or censor what they want to say - much in the same way that this thread has been allowed to stay here open to discussion.

I've never been more convinced of the importance of RM remaining neutral.

[laudrupforever 17]

Fed up with all this squabbling. RM has no agenda and a lot of FF guys on here have been able to freely voice their opinions. Would the RM members have received the same courtesy on FF? Banned by now I think.

Too much hot air being spouted all around. Let's just wait and see what contacts has to say about all this.

If he did meet with D Muir then he needs to tell us clearly what he knows unless D Muir has sworn him to secrecy/confidentiality, in which case his hands are tied.

I agree on the squabling, it's taking away from a very important debate. Also appreciate the oportunity to do so

Why not tell that to your superiors at ££ then?

Or does Suck just have that much of a stonner for his dictatorial site?

[Gazzas_Flute 11]

Can you answer a question that has been bugging me ? Particually over the last few days. If possible I would like a straight forward answer, please don't deflect on to anything else.

Why do follow follow and it's admin continually try to block any praise for the people on Vanguard Bears ? One poster even got banned with the message " No VanguardBears talk please "

I have no wish to discuss Vanguardbears other than their excellent efforts with regards to William McBeath.

I do not know the inner workings of FF admins.

This is bigger than all of us and the sooner some people (on ALL forums) realise this then the better.

Until then, we plough on with the protests. (and I don't mean FF/RST)

As far as I'm aware VangaurdBears never got the true recoginition they deserve regarding William McBeath. Not on ££ anyway, every other Rangers forum was more than happy to rightly mention the men behind such great work.

Infact I'm sure a good amount of posts got chopped that mentioned the VB name.

Perhaps a PM to an admin on FF might supply you with more information mate. Sorry I can't provide it for you. Sorry also, if thats me capitulating due to lack of knowledge

I wish it was that easy, I would be going round in circles for hours looking for an admin to take the blame.

Deny and Deflect; that's the motto.

Deny and Deflect is something generally flung at Celtc. I trust you're not comparing?

Generally, although I felt it summed up a few of the admin on FF pretty well.

[PhilLeotardo 0]

If you don't believe everything you read, why would you believe anything RM offered by the way of clarification? Incidentally, all of the FF-ers on here were offered by Willhelm himself his phone number via pm so you could talk about it - I doubt anyone has taken that option at all.

The point is there are several inconsistencies at the moment which, if clarified, would give the story a certain credibility. As it stands, there are conflicting stories which seem plausible ergo it is impossible to determine which are accurate.

As for Willhelm, he obviously has no interest in backing up the innuendo which tells me he doesn't know what he's got or what he's got isn't very good.

[Guest therabbitt]

This thread is going nowhere, i still want to know the who the mystery poster ''Barry 221'' is

It's Boss. He just wanted to raise RM's presence with FF.

[DavidCF2 29]

By people like you who have appeared on here to discuss one issue only.

When the issue is the very future of Rangers Football Club and information is coming directly from a source on this site why the fuck shouldn't I discuss it?

You're not here to discuss rangers though are you. You are here to get involved in the inter site arguements. These are the only threads the likes of you and OOA are interested in.

Well you're talking shit again my friend because when I was on yesterday nobody seemed willing or able to answer questions I had relating directly to contacts' article on this very subject. You went out of your way to make snide remarks and dodge questions and you have the gall to talk to me about site arguments.

I'll type this again, since you're obviously slow on the uptake, I want clarity on what's happening at Rangers. Nothing more.

That was not your reason for posting tonight and we all fucking know it.

You got your shield and your tin hat on once you saw comrades coming over here to kick off.

That was my point as well chief.

Fair do's if people arent here with an ulterior motive but the fact that they are unseen in any other type of thread bar this one speaks volumes.

[californiadreamin52 339]

Does anyone else feel cheated now with the Saviour article as so many of our Admin/Mods were so willing to climb on board and give the article credibility in order to toe the David Muir line on the strength of a nudge nudge conversation. Muir even out does SDM as a slime barstewart

How do you know contacts article wasn't credible and how do you know this one on FF is? I await contacts/boss response before i make any judgements.

Call it intuition. On reading both articles the FF answer a lot of questions

[Shipyard Blues 4]

This whole thing is a fucking fishing trip. I can only speculate that further division in the support is the desired outcome for reasons only known to the man with the rod.

OK the rest of us will just jump our heads in the sand and hope no-one has an agenda or it doesn need discussed. I had hoped we could have a real discussion on what this means for Rangers and any prominent fans being manipulated.

In hindsite, perhaps I should have edited the original post to take away the personal nature of it that have upset some but I'm sick of every fecker hiding things

[PhilLeotardo 0]

Defending ££ - don't try and backtrack with this clarity bollocks.

We all know that the fans have no answers atm, especially if you're coming all the way down from 'the biggest Gers forum' to talk to us t-shirtless paupers.

Contacts posted an article with information contradicting that already in the public domain. There has been a subsequent article posted on your favourite website questioning the information in the former article. As someone who does not believe everything they read I'm trying to get these conflicts of information clarified.

There was no such article, there was a hatchet job with petty personal insults and unfounded personal allegations. Was the article maybe too close to the truth, is that why FF responded with such spiteful venom?

Nobody knows but some of us want to know.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

This thread is going nowhere, i still want to know the who the mystery poster ''Barry 221'' is

It's Boss. He just wanted to raise RM's presence with FF.

diabolical

[laudrupforever 17]

If you don't believe everything you read, why would you believe anything RM offered by the way of clarification? Incidentally, all of the FF-ers on here were offered by Willhelm himself his phone number via pm so you could talk about it - I doubt anyone has taken that option at all.

The point is there are several inconsistencies at the moment which, if clarified, would give the story a certain credibility. As it stands, there are conflicting stories which seem plausible ergo it is impossible to determine which are accurate.

As for Willhelm, he obviously has no interest in backing up the innuendo which tells me he doesn't know what he's got or what he's got isn't very good.

I of course assume you went to such lengths to clarify the evidence from your side/££ which you've heard? Or, is it as I suspect, what you've heard from your side/££ is immune to examination/impartial critical analysis?

I'll take the latter option.

[bluedogg 0]

Am I the only person who finds the squabbling on both forums pathetic. The same as the squabbles as the RSA, RST and the Assembly have.

No

I`ve tried on other threads over by to try and convince people that division will be the biggest enemy , it appears that I`m pissing against the wind , I noticed the comment mentioning me earlier and how me posting here seemed to act like a red rag to a bull to folk over here who were pissed at FF , not something that bothers me either way . I`m a big boy ( for a dwarf ) and stuff like this will always fly over my head as I`m too stupid to be annoyed by it.

It would seem that despite some of us posting that we don`t give a shit about FF , RM , RST or RSA when it comes down to this protest that some folk believe that its a Mark Dingwall led initiative , thats their call if they believe it then there ain`t a great deal I can say to convince them otherwise .

all I`ll say is this

Like others I`ll be aware that a huge part of this is down to something that happened with regards to the RST , I couldn`t give a monkeys toss about it . I`m not in full possession of all the details as to what happened and have no interest in knowing now .

I love The Rangers FC , its as simple as that

Anyone ( and I mean anyone ) using any fight to further their own personal ambitions is a fucking half wit in my eyes , and I couldn`t give a rats arse where they post , or are members of or blah blah blah blah , etc

This article on FF means the same to me as the one posted on the night before the protest on here .

Division .

I tend to agree with you on most of what you say here, the only thing that matters is the club, feck me how can the club move on with the support so fractured, personally i've not got a clue what to believe but somethings got to give if we hope to go anywhere.

[Shipyard Blues 4]

Fed up with all this squabbling. RM has no agenda and a lot of FF guys on here have been able to freely voice their opinions. Would the RM members have received the same courtesy on FF? Banned by now I think.

Too much hot air being spouted all around. Let's just wait and see what contacts has to say about all this.

If he did meet with D Muir then he needs to tell us clearly what he knows unless D Muir has sworn him to secrecy/confidentiality, in which case his hands are tied.

I agree on the squabling, it's taking away from a very important debate. Also appreciate the oportunity to do so

Why not tell that to your superiors at ££ then?

Or does Suck just have that much of a stonner for his dictatorial site?

My superiors at FF? Feck me, it's like dealing with kids half the time of both sites.

[PhilLeotardo 0]

That was my point as well chief.

Fair do's if people arent here with an ulterior motive but the fact that they are unseen in any other type of thread bar this one speaks volumes.

Actually I have posted on other threads but that's besides the point. This information originally came from someone on RangersMedia directly so where the fuck else do you expect people to go when they want answers?

I absolutely reject any suggestion that I'm here on anyone's accord other than my own.

[laudrupforever 17]

That was not your reason for posting tonight and we all fucking know it.

You got your shield and your tin hat on once you saw comrades coming over here to kick off.

That was my point as well chief.

Fair do's if people arent here with an ulterior motive but the fact that they are unseen in any other type of thread bar this one speaks volumes.

Yeah, if they're really interested in talking about the future of the Gers on this site, then they'd be posting in more than just one thread.

It's almost like someone at school getting a bit defensive and getting their 'hawners' down to make sure they don't get too badly done.

[JTP 221]

If you don't believe everything you read, why would you believe anything RM offered by the way of clarification? Incidentally, all of the FF-ers on here were offered by Willhelm himself his phone number via pm so you could talk about it - I doubt anyone has taken that option at all.

The point is there are several inconsistencies at the moment which, if clarified, would give the story a certain credibility. As it stands, there are conflicting stories which seem plausible ergo it is impossible to determine which are accurate.

As for Willhelm, he obviously has no interest in backing up the innuendo which tells me he doesn't know what he's got or what he's got isn't very good.

Why don't you PM and ask him to back up the innuendo and you then judge whether it's good or not?

[Shipyard Blues 4]

Defending ££ - don't try and backtrack with this clarity bollocks.

We all know that the fans have no answers atm, especially if you're coming all the way down from 'the biggest Gers forum' to talk to us t-shirtless paupers.

Contacts posted an article with information contradicting that already in the public domain. There has been a subsequent article posted on your favourite website questioning the information in the former article. As someone who does not believe everything they read I'm trying to get these conflicts of information clarified.

There was no such article, there was a hatchet job with petty personal insults and unfounded personal allegations. Was the article maybe too close to the truth, is that why FF responded with such spiteful venom?

Nobody knows but some of us want to know.

Exactly!

[Guest therabbitt]

I had to laugh today, my RM email address recieved an unsolicited email with some great deals on banners...

[pcbear 10,924]

Anyone give a brief summary of this, maybe in a few paragraphs, its confusing the life out of me.

[PhilLeotardo 0]

I love your sublime obediance to the man. PM me and ask away, just like some of the other clique members.

PS Need to go out now, so you can run back and ask for more help.

PS Does threatening to expose friends to the media ring a bell?

It does ring a bell but only one that sounds like repetitive innuendo. I want to know exactly what the accusations are.

[RFE 35]

Defending ££ - don't try and backtrack with this clarity bollocks.

We all know that the fans have no answers atm, especially if you're coming all the way down from 'the biggest Gers forum' to talk to us t-shirtless paupers.

Contacts posted an article with information contradicting that already in the public domain. There has been a subsequent article posted on your favourite website questioning the information in the former article. As someone who does not believe everything they read I'm trying to get these conflicts of information clarified.

There was no such article, there was a hatchet job with petty personal insults and unfounded personal allegations. Was the article maybe too close to the truth, is that why FF responded with such spiteful venom?

Nobody knows but some of us want to know.

Yes but when FF or the protesters aired their views calling Muir the enemy within etc were they subjected to such personal attacks from elsewhere? Do you actually think the articles content and "bought for a haggis pakora" jibes were justified or warranted?

Let's be honest this was purely because it contradicted the 47 days to save the club scaremongering.

P.s as for the attacks on Boss's article months back, was the Boss not vindicated when the full details of Duffy's plans and finances came to light? Or do we sweep that under the carpet..

[PhilLeotardo 0]

If you don't believe everything you read, why would you believe anything RM offered by the way of clarification? Incidentally, all of the FF-ers on here were offered by Willhelm himself his phone number via pm so you could talk about it - I doubt anyone has taken that option at all.

The point is there are several inconsistencies at the moment which, if clarified, would give the story a certain credibility. As it stands, there are conflicting stories which seem plausible ergo it is impossible to determine which are accurate.

As for Willhelm, he obviously has no interest in backing up the innuendo which tells me he doesn't know what he's got or what he's got isn't very good.

Why don't you PM and ask him to back up the innuendo and you then judge whether it's good or not?

Why doesn't he just post it?