The rst

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

And where have I said anything to the contrary ?

You suggested the term religious appartheid was inflammatory...and it was inappropriate for the RST to use it. So is it inappropriate to speak the truth ?

Would you rather they said things which didnt upset people...even if they were lies ?

The term "religious apartheid" is inflammatory, as I explained above. My point is obviously not that the RST should tell lies but that it should not have a political agenda. You think it should - fair enough, I suggest we agree to disagree. I suspect Frankie will have something to say on the matter - perhaps even that the term "religious apartheid" is not sanctioned by the RST, who knows?

Placing the word "is" in bold to emphasise your point does little to support your arguement...

Is this your opinion or can you substantiate it by other means ?

Given the dictionary term is - any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc. - I would say it is fairly accurate description.

So who is being inflammed by the term ?

I explained why it's inflammatory above. Do you reckon it's a neutral term?

No you didnt.

You likened it to the South African application of it and suggested thats its use was political.

You did not explain why it was inflammatory...nor who was being inflamed by it.

[Ibroxblue 122]

And where have I said anything to the contrary ?

You suggested the term religious appartheid was inflammatory...and it was inappropriate for the RST to use it. So is it inappropriate to speak the truth ?

Would you rather they said things which didnt upset people...even if they were lies ?

The term "religious apartheid" is inflammatory, as I explained above. My point is obviously not that the RST should tell lies but that it should not have a political agenda. You think it should - fair enough, I suggest we agree to disagree. I suspect Frankie will have something to say on the matter - perhaps even that the term "religious apartheid" is not sanctioned by the RST, who knows?

Placing the word "is" in bold to emphasise your point does little to support your arguement...

Is this your opinion or can you substantiate it by other means ?

Given the dictionary term is - any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc. - I would say it is fairly accurate description.

So who is being inflammed by the term ?

I explained why it's inflammatory above. Do you reckon it's a neutral term?

No you didnt.

You likened it to the South African application of it and suggested thats its use was political.

You did not explain why it was inflammatory...nor who was being inflamed by it.

The term comes from South Africa and has very obvious allusions to that horrific regime. People who send or have sent their children to faith schools, for example, will find it offensive. Many people with no strong views either way on faith schools will undoubtedly see it as an extreme way to describe faith schools. Even quite a few people who oppose faith schools will see it as distasteful to allude to the apartheid regime. Do you think it's a neutral term?

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

I repeat....

"any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc"

Not exclusive to South Africa...

But seeing as you keep banding about the word "offensive"

I find it offensive that my taxes are being used in education to prop up a morally corrupt church..... the brainwashing of children....and which operates a discriminatory recruitment policy.

[Ibroxblue 122]

I repeat....

"any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc"

Not exclusive to South Africa...

But seeing as you keep banding about the word "offensive"

I find it offensive that my taxes are being used in education to prop up a morally corrupt church..... the brainwashing of children....and which operates a discriminatory recruitment policy.

Well, you are of course entitled to that opinion but that's still not the point here. The word "apartheid" obviously conjures up images of the repugnant South African regime.

It's just about time for me to hit the hay now. If you think the term "apartheid" is a neutral one, so be it.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

I repeat....

"any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc"

Not exclusive to South Africa...

But seeing as you keep banding about the word "offensive"

I find it offensive that my taxes are being used in education to prop up a morally corrupt church..... the brainwashing of children....and which operates a discriminatory recruitment policy.

Well, you are of course entitled to that opinion but that's still not the point here. The word "apartheid" obviously conjures up images of the repugnant South African regime.

It's just about time for me to hit the hay now. If you think the term "apartheid" is a neutral one, so be it.

The point is you have taken a general definition and applied it solely and exclusively to one of the most publicised proponents in recent times.

The fact that the word apartheid by definition...has wider usage appears to be eluding you.

[Ibroxblue 122]

I repeat....

"any system or practice that separates people according to race, caste, etc"

Not exclusive to South Africa...

But seeing as you keep banding about the word "offensive"

I find it offensive that my taxes are being used in education to prop up a morally corrupt church..... the brainwashing of children....and which operates a discriminatory recruitment policy.

Well, you are of course entitled to that opinion but that's still not the point here. The word "apartheid" obviously conjures up images of the repugnant South African regime.

It's just about time for me to hit the hay now. If you think the term "apartheid" is a neutral one, so be it.

The point is you have taken a general definition and applied it solely and exclusively to one of the most publicised proponents in recent times.

The fact that the word apartheid by definition...has wider usage appears to be eluding you.

There's a lot more to what words mean to people than what appears in the dictionary. A living language is an awful lot more complex than a series of definitions in a book.

"Apartheid" unarguably brings to mind the awful South African regime.

Night night.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

So the dictionary is wrong....and your "living language" is right ?

Where is this living language ?

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

Actually IB...dont bother answering that one...

Just tell Frankie....next time the RST issue a statement...dont bother making sure is factually and grammatically correct according to the English Dictionary...instead send the draft to you to re-write in "living language"

[Airdriebear 0]

dont you think he has a point with the rst though why are they getting involved in political ideas about eduacation of roman catholics?

they are meant to be a trust for the members

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

dont you think he has a point with the rst though why are they getting involved in political ideas about eduacation of roman catholics?

they are meant to be a trust for the members

And such segregation and separating of children in no way contributes to the sectarian problems we have ?

[THEFISH 0]

Has the RST ever advised members to take the course of action which Is mentioned below and also few weeks ago on here......we have to try all options and get attention like never before or do they prefer to go it alone and blow their own trumpst as Ive said several times....READ ON !

Yes several weeks ago I advised most of the guyz on here who are complaining about their treatment with all theses issues to visit their local MPs weekly surgery

Thats the best course of action if they think their civil liberties are being abused......if plenty of the boys go then the big knobs will sit up and take notice

Your local MP is obliged to listen to you and get feedback for you, or you can wait months or so and get a response form some rep party like RST but that will only be done a collective party...

Stand up for yourself and visit the local MP...you will be surprised by his response I was, he is there to be used so use him or just keep coming on forums and wasting time with your complaints

WE ARE THE PEOPLE NO SURRENDER

[Frankie 505]

Fish, we've suggested that many a time when it comes to the political issues.

However, that won't fix all the problems many fans have with the club and that's where the RST do a fine job (IMO) of representing our members to that end.

As for the term 'religious apartheid' well it's certainly isn't offensive nor is it inflammatory. It's simply the truth; maybe a sensationalist way of speaking the truth but we're not playing by conservative rules. The media, the RC church and the polticians speak in a 'living language' every day - why can't we?

From a personal point of view, I'm not a big politics person. In saying that I do appreciate the effect the politicians have had on the sectarianism debate - one minute using it to their gain, the next minute ignoring the people affected by it when they ask for clarity.

As such, I don't have a problem with Rangers fans being urged to be more politically active. Yes, it's not a prime concern of the RST but we have to be versatile when it comes to approaching the whole debate. This is one example of such versatility. As are our vibrant media functions, GersPride and our reports into supporter security.

Arguably none of those latter subjects are related to our primary aim but considering RFC and the other fans' groups are not contributing in that regard and our members often ask us to be flexible, it might be worth dipping a toe into the water. Certainly, Celtic and their fans use the politicial trenches to support their viewpoint effectively. Why can't we?

Some issues and terminology may be controversial and might not interest the common fan. Arguably, that's partly why we find ourselves on the back foot in 2007.

[THEFISH 0]

Fish, we've suggested that many a time when it comes to the political issues.

However, that won't fix all the problems many fans have with the club and that's where the RST do a fine job (IMO) of representing our members to that end.

As for the term 'religious apartheid' well it's certainly isn't offensive nor is it inflammatory. It's simply the truth; maybe a sensationalist way of speaking the truth but we're not playing by conservative rules. The media, the RC church and the polticians speak in a 'living language' every day - why can't we?

From a personal point of view, I'm not a big politics person. In saying that I do appreciate the effect the politicians have had on the sectarianism debate - one minute using it to their gain, the next minute ignoring the people affected by it when they ask for clarity.

As such, I don't have a problem with Rangers fans being urged to be more politically active. Yes, it's not a prime concern of the RST but we have to be versatile when it comes to approaching the whole debate. This is one example of such versatility. As are our vibrant media functions, GersPride and our reports into supporter security.

Arguably none of those latter subjects are related to our primary aim but considering RFC and the other fans' groups are not contributing in that regard and our members often ask us to be flexible, it might be worth dipping a toe into the water. Certainly, Celtic and their fans use the politicial trenches to support their viewpoint effectively. Why can't we?

Some issues and terminology may be controversial and might not interest the common fan. Arguably, that's partly why we find ourselves on the back foot in 2007.

Fair enough keep up the good work old chap......Eh can ye give me a couple of hours aff the board the day I need to go somewhere on biz, disappearing so to speak

[Frankie 505]

Funny, I'm still waiting on your alternative suggestions to the RST given your personal abuse and criticism of yesterday?

Contacting MP's and RSCs seem your only suggestions. Anything else?

[THEFISH 0]

Funny, I'm still waiting on your alternative suggestions to the RST given your personal abuse and criticism of yesterday?

Contacting MP's and one's RSC seem your only suggestions. Anything else?

Thats it nothing else but I would like to see RST turning the screw in all directions with authorities etc and being a feckin nuisance to everybody in every position from Murray but that is a waste of time as I said he will just ride the storm with RST.... and with local MPs police the whole feckin lot

Be a thorn in everybodys side the way that scum mob have been for 20yrs plus and we know the results fae that...they are getting their way at every turn

I sincerely hope and my friends sincerely hope that every meeting with Murray is not of the cozy sort...never give him or anybody else the opportunity to soften their opposition up......

Jimmy Reid Union rep for Govan Shipbuilders in the early 70s, take a leaf out his book its all down to business no wee cups of tea or anything like that, just get all the important details thrashed out and dont take no for an answer, we are not here to make freinds but we are not here to make enemys either but thats up to the other side

RST MUST BE RELENTLESS WITH THEIR QUEST

[Ibroxblue 122]

Fish, we've suggested that many a time when it comes to the political issues.

However, that won't fix all the problems many fans have with the club and that's where the RST do a fine job (IMO) of representing our members to that end.

As for the term 'religious apartheid' well it's certainly isn't offensive nor is it inflammatory. It's simply the truth; maybe a sensationalist way of speaking the truth but we're not playing by conservative rules. The media, the RC church and the polticians speak in a 'living language' every day - why can't we?

From a personal point of view, I'm not a big politics person. In saying that I do appreciate the effect the politicians have had on the sectarianism debate - one minute using it to their gain, the next minute ignoring the people affected by it when they ask for clarity.

As such, I don't have a problem with Rangers fans being urged to be more politically active. Yes, it's not a prime concern of the RST but we have to be versatile when it comes to approaching the whole debate. This is one example of such versatility. As are our vibrant media functions, GersPride and our reports into supporter security.

Arguably none of those latter subjects are related to our primary aim but considering RFC and the other fans' groups are not contributing in that regard and our members often ask us to be flexible, it might be worth dipping a toe into the water. Certainly, Celtic and their fans use the politicial trenches to support their viewpoint effectively. Why can't we?

Some issues and terminology may be controversial and might not interest the common fan. Arguably, that's partly why we find ourselves on the back foot in 2007.

So "educational apartheid" is a "sensationalist" phrase. Not all that far from inflammatory.

No doubt others will disagree but I don't see it as part of the purpose of a football supporters' organisation to encourage fans to approach politicians and say inflammatory/sensationalist things about highly-sensitive issues like faith schools (which include Jewish and Episcopal schools).

It has long been one of my concerns about the RST that some people deeply involved in it might be trying to use it as a vehicle for a particular political agenda. This discussion lends weight to those concerns.

[Frankie 505]

I only said it was maybe sensationalist or that some may view it that way - not that it was per se. It is also accurate and I also said others use that language in the debate. Are you prepared to concede that or only use one part of my post to further your claims?

Are you a member of the RST? I doubt you are given the concerns you have - inaccurate I may add. Who and what makes you think the RST may have a particular agenda. The release you posted specficially mentions we have no such agenda but are only asking for Rangers fans to perhaps become a bit more politically savvy so we can consult with the politicians to further our aims and highlight our concerns.

At this moment in time RFC, our fans and RST members are being targetted (and arguably discriminated against) because of a specfic political agenda. Of course we have to take such an interest although I can assure you (and anyone else) that it takes a backseat when it comes to our primary aims.

[Frankie 505]

Funny, I'm still waiting on your alternative suggestions to the RST given your personal abuse and criticism of yesterday?

Contacting MP's and one's RSC seem your only suggestions. Anything else?

Thats it nothing else but I would like to see RST turning the screw in all directions with authorities etc and being a feckin nuisance to everybody in every position from Murray but that is a waste of time as I said he will just ride the storm with RST.... and with local MPs police the whole feckin lot

Be a thorn in everybodys side the way that scum mob have been for 20yrs plus and we know the results fae that...they are getting their way at every turn

I sincerely hope and my friends sincerely hope that every meeting with Murray is not of the cozy sort...never give him or anybody else the opportunity to soften their opposition up......

Jimmy Reid Union rep for Govan Shipbuilders in the early 70s, take a leaf out his book its all down to business no wee cups of tea or anything like that, just get all the important details thrashed out and dont take no for an answer, we are not here to make freinds but we are not here to make enemys either but thats up to the other side

RST MUST BE RELENTLESS WITH THEIR QUEST

The RST are relentless in our quest.

You can see the effect we're having in every direction - from the club, from SDM, from the police, from the politicians and from more and more fans each day.

Now, if you and your friends are so concerned about Trust business - why not join up and ensure your opinions are part of the RST vehicle instead of shouting from the outside and doing nothing yourself. Not everyone has the time or circumstances to be more practically involved - but everyone can consider joining to help us achieve the very aims we obviously share.

[THEFISH 0]

Funny, I'm still waiting on your alternative suggestions to the RST given your personal abuse and criticism of yesterday?

Contacting MP's and one's RSC seem your only suggestions. Anything else?

Thats it nothing else but I would like to see RST turning the screw in all directions with authorities etc and being a feckin nuisance to everybody in every position from Murray but that is a waste of time as I said he will just ride the storm with RST.... and with local MPs police the whole feckin lot

Be a thorn in everybodys side the way that scum mob have been for 20yrs plus and we know the results fae that...they are getting their way at every turn

I sincerely hope and my friends sincerely hope that every meeting with Murray is not of the cozy sort...never give him or anybody else the opportunity to soften their opposition up......

Jimmy Reid Union rep for Govan Shipbuilders in the early 70s, take a leaf out his book its all down to business no wee cups of tea or anything like that, just get all the important details thrashed out and dont take no for an answer, we are not here to make freinds but we are not here to make enemys either but thats up to the other side

RST MUST BE RELENTLESS WITH THEIR QUEST

The RST are relentless in our quest.

You can see the effect we're having in every direction - from the club, from SDM, from the police, from the politicians and from more and more fans each day.

Now, if you and your friends are so concerned about Trust business - why not join up and ensure your opinions are part of the RST vehicle instead of shouting from the outside and doing nothing yourself. Not everyone has the time or circumstances to be more practically involved - but everyone can consider joining to help us achieve the very aims we obviously share.

Not everyone has the time or circumstances to be more practically involved...you can include me in that unfortunately but if my and other peoples points of views are disregarded from the outside then thats up to you and your colleagues

[Frankie 505]

No, we don't disregard any criticism from anyone. When it's valid and constructive. Yours isn't.

I'd have thought if someone shares the Trust's principles then they'd be eager to join and affect any changes they'd like to see from the inside as is very easy to do if enough people share your ideas.

[THEFISH 0]

No, we don't disregard any criticism from anyone. When it's valid and constructive. Yours isn't.

I'd have thought if someone shares the Trust's principles then they'd be eager to join and affect any changes they'd like to see from the inside as is very easy to do if enough people share your ideas.

When it's valid and constructive. Yours isn't.

Well I will pass the message on to my friends who think alike with me...you actually dont deserve any advice anyway, you come across as an obnoxious arrogant prick

It just goes to show I was right....you only want blow yer own trumpet and if you think my opinion is wrong you just reject as you said

Anyway I couldnt give a feck anyway this attitude will come back to haunt you.

We dont ned someone like you representing us and if all yer colleagues have this atitude you can stick the RST up yer erse

[THEFISH 0]

No, we don't disregard any criticism from anyone. When it's valid and constructive. Yours isn't.

I'd have thought if someone shares the Trust's principles then they'd be eager to join and affect any changes they'd like to see from the inside as is very easy to do if enough people share your ideas.

When it's valid and constructive. Yours isn't.

Well I will pass the message on to my friends who think alike with me...you actually dont deserve any advice anyway, you come across as an obnoxious arrogant prick

It just goes to show I was right....you only want blow yer own trumpet and if you think my opinion is wrong you just reject as you said

Anyway I couldnt give a feck anyway this attitude will come back to haunt you.

We dont ned someone like you representing us and if all yer colleagues have this atitude you can stick the RST up yer erse

The whole thing is not about me you or RST its about RFC and you just seem so stuck in yer own wee selfish world with yer pals just blowing yer own trumpets as usual

[Frankie 505]

Ah, more abuse. Thanks for that.

PS: What advice have you given us? Aprt from telling me I'm a cowboy, telling the RST to get to fuck, saying I'm arrogant and obnoxious, inferring we're dishonest and saying we suck up to SDM?

[Boab 73]

So, a wonder Fish, do you think we should have a spokesman - for us as fans - going to the press saying FTP is good and healthy and we are all proud to being a billy boy and then say No Surrender at the end of every statement?

[*Manticore* 1,893]

dont you think he has a point with the rst though why are they getting involved in political ideas about eduacation of roman catholics?

they are meant to be a trust for the members

I'm a member and I'm really glad that somebody is raising the sectarian education system as part of the 'debate' about sectarianism.

As it stands it looks to me like folk think sectarianism is something that beginsa nd ends at football, particularly RFC.

Are you a member?