Would You Support A Protest Of The Bbc

[RM Monitor And Standards Officer 112,935]

mass: 1. a large coherent body of matter without a definite shape. 2. a collection of the component parts of something. 3. a large amount or number, such as a great body of people. 4. the main part or majority. 5. blah-blah-blah... 6. more examples of this......7. see points 1 through 36 and beyond....etc, yaddah and so on......

Mass: (capital 'M') A Tarrier event with lots of smoke and swinging Jimmy's in abundance.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[marmalade1872 40]

no because it could turn nasty and that would be playing into the hand of the timmy lovers we dont need any more bad press

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

no because it could turn nasty and that would be playing into the hand of the timmy lovers we dont need any more bad press

What makes you think a peaceful and legal protest would turn nasty?

Self-policing would make sure of this.

[marmalade1872 40]

What makes you think a peaceful and legal protest would turn nasty?

Self-policing would make sure of this.

it just takes one eejit why dont we just stop buying the licence buy your telly through a third party

[TravelingWilBEARy 4,319]

Absolutely not. What would it achieve? The reasons for it would no doubt be based on petty paranoia and selective criticisms rather than the reasons Whyte has withdrawn co-operation. No way would the club support us in any protest.

[Adoniram 1,919]

Sorry D'art there is only one 'fact' and that is they badly edited that McCoist interview which is not enough for me to take to the streets, there are a lot bigger issues affecting us more worthy of my angst. The rest of the 'facts' that the BBC are against us are supositions and opinion that people try to pass as 'fact' and that delving and fear comes across as paranoia.

(This statement has nothing to do with the BBC debate just a reflection on the creeping paranoia within our support) There is even a thread on here about the Judge in the employment cases that is looking into the 'fact' he was apointed by Jack McConell, and looking at his schooling etc. The BBC are biased threads are full of that type of implied bias and that to me border on, if not is, leading to a sense of collective paranoia.

I dont know what the BBC programme on Thursday will be like, I can guess and I suspect we will not be happy, but there are many, even on here who would like to know more about Mr Whyte, and the threats facing Rangers. We can guess at some of the content (IF we lose the case we go bust ya da ya da) but I for one would like to know more about Mr Whytes record of dealing with 'financially troubled' companies. Asking questions we are asking ourselves (Frankie has a pretty good post about the same subject Frankie Post) is not a reason to go to war with the BBC and for me, not every critisism of the club is invalid.

That thread proves once and for all how little you actually read or know about the previous form of the BBC.

I'll give you one example from the Trust who had a meeting with the BBC circa 2004 where they were given assurances that the gratuitous use of the word h** to describe Rangers fans would be dropped. They paid lip service to this request and continue to use it to this day.

And if you care to research this FACT..you will also find that Talksport and Real Radio banned the use of it and stuck to their promise.

So that blows your argument right out the water...as per usual on issues like this you are always short on facts.

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

it just takes one eejit why dont we just stop buying the licence buy your telly through a third party

Third party telly ownership?

Fuxsake!!

This sounds like a dodgy Dave type of scheme.

Tell me more of this wheeze.

[Adoniram 1,919]

no because it could turn nasty and that would be playing into the hand of the timmy lovers we dont need any more bad press

There were no incidents in the previous two and i can only say from a personal point of view that with the people organising and attending i would doubt very much that anyone would dare kick anything off.

The Police complimented us on both occasions for adhering to the laws and for giving them an "easy" couple of hours

[marmalade1872 40]

Third party telly ownership?

Fuxsake!!

This sounds like a dodgy Dave type of scheme.

Tell me more of this wheeze.

when you buy a telly every shop has to give your details to the licence mob ,so you get one of your friends/family who have a licence and its dink-doo i have not had a licence since 1985 fuck them

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

when you buy a telly every shop has to give your details to the licence mob ,so you get one of your friends/family who have a licence and its dink-doo i have not had a licence since 1985 fuck them

Do you live in Outer Mongolia?

Here in Inner Mongolia they have such things as TV detector vans and hand-held detector kit which, ironically, is held in the hand of the door-to-door snoopers they hire (at our expense).

I'll protest at Paciofic Quay if it's alright with you - I will send you food parcels though when they stick you in the 'Big House' for unpaid Licence Fee back taxes.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

That thread proves once and for all how little you actually read or know about the previous form of the BBC.

I'll give you one example from the Trust who had a meeting with the BBC circa 2004 where they were given assurances that the gratuitous use of the word h** to describe Rangers fans would be dropped. They paid lip service to this request and continue to use it to this day.

And if you care to research this FACT..you will also find that Talksport and Real Radio banned the use of it and stuck to their promise.

So that blows your argument right out the water...as per usual on issues like this you are always short on facts.

A few percieved injustices over a number of years does NOT make a conspiracy. I have NO doubt that the BBC do, on occasion get it wrong, or have even portraited us in a bad light. Rangers are one of THE major institutions and stories in Scotland and we appear in the news a lot and we have had a lot to contend with. Like it or lump it we are a big news item - issue abound that are news worthy about us from Manchester, UEFA Bans, Finance, Takeovers, impending destruction, winning titles, getting to the UEFA final and not all of it can all be shed in a purely positive light, and add to that the fallibility of a major employer such as the BBC then I am sure some fans can find some things that the BBC have done wrong. However the question posed was would I protest - I answered no and have given MY reasons for not doing so. I dont buy into the feeling that there is a corporate culture within the BBC to degenerate Rangers at every turn. Those that see it that way, IMHO, are showing paranoic tendencencies that are best left (IMHO) to those over the city! Hence, as is my right, I will not join is a protest at the BBC.

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

A few percieved injustices over a number of years does NOT make a conspiracy. I have NO doubt that the BBC do, on occasion get it wrong, or have even portraited us in a bad light. Rangers are one of THE major institutions and stories in Scotland and we appear in the news a lot and we have had a lot to contend with. Like it or lump it we are a big news item - issue abound that are news worthy about us from Manchester, UEFA Bans, Finance, Takeovers, impending destruction, winning titles, getting to the UEFA final and not all of it can all be shed in a purely positive light, and add to that the fallibility of a major employer such as the BBC then I am sure some fans can find some things that the BBC have done wrong. However the question posed was would I protest - I answered no and have given MY reasons for not doing so. I dont buy into the feeling that there is a corporate culture within the BBC to degenerate Rangers at every turn. Those that see it that way, IMHO, are showing paranoic tendencencies that are best left (IMHO) to those over the city! Hence, as is my right, I will not join is a protest at the BBC.

Maybe for the best if you stayed away.

Methinks you may be watching us from within the building though.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Maybe for the best if you stayed away.

Methinks you may be watching us from within the building though.

Actually if its before a game I am usually at the bar in the Crowne Plazzs just across the bridge. I'll give you a wave as I enjoy my pint!

[debear 603]

Can I still listen to 6Music?

[Adoniram 1,919]

A few percieved injustices over a number of years does NOT make a conspiracy. I have NO doubt that the BBC do, on occasion get it wrong, or have even portraited us in a bad light. Rangers are one of THE major institutions and stories in Scotland and we appear in the news a lot and we have had a lot to contend with. Like it or lump it we are a big news item - issue abound that are news worthy about us from Manchester, UEFA Bans, Finance, Takeovers, impending destruction, winning titles, getting to the UEFA final and not all of it can all be shed in a purely positive light, and add to that the fallibility of a major employer such as the BBC then I am sure some fans can find some things that the BBC have done wrong. However the question posed was would I protest - I answered no and have given MY reasons for not doing so. I dont buy into the feeling that there is a corporate culture within the BBC to degenerate Rangers at every turn. Those that see it that way, IMHO, are showing paranoic tendencencies that are best left (IMHO) to those over the city! Hence, as is my right, I will not join is a protest at the BBC.

I suspect you are so entrenched in your views that even when the evidence is presented you would rather argue against it than admit there may be some truth in what we are saying.

And the irony is obviously lost on you because your standard reply is that we are paranoid all the time.

Perhaps you should look at each case/incident (as i do) and decide if there is a basis for taking it further or not. Contrary to what you think of me i do not see paranoia in every anti Rangers article or rant or story.

However i have seen over the years a systematic failing in the so called high standards that the BBC in Scotland allegedly strives for. And the basis for my suspicion and mistrust is that if these incidents were happening to both sides of the Old Firm then i would agree with your point of view. However it is clear they are not and these incidents only appear to focus on one side of the divide...us.

If you do not agree with that point of view then back it up with examples from the BBC where they have edited Celtic footage incorrectly. Or where they have changed pictures to include derogatory comments about Celtic players or fans. Or where they use words like Tim or Taig to describe Celtic fans or players.

Or where they have highlighted their Sectarian singing and chants with the same karaoke styling as used against us.

You show me parity then i will take your point of view more seriously.

[Frankie 505]

I think it is pretty obvious that BBC Scotland have been in breach of their obligations when it comes to our club.

Some fans have been saying as much for a good couple of years now (VB in particular) and Rangers' actions yesterday lends weight to such claims.

I respect others may disagree but the evidence is too numerous for it to be considered 'paranoia' alone.

PS: I'd support any protest.

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

Actually if its before a game I am usually at the bar in the Crowne Plazzs just across the bridge. I'll give you a wave as I enjoy my pint!

Better yet - don't bother.

[Adoniram 1,919]

I think it is pretty obvious that BBC Scotland have been in breach of their obligations when it comes to our club.

Some fans have been saying as much for a good couple of years now (VB in particular) and Rangers' actions yesterday lends weight to such claims.

I respect others may disagree but the evidence is too numerous for it to be considered 'paranoia' alone.

PS: I'd support any protest.

I have a sneaky feeling i'll be in touch shortly about this Frankie

[keithgersbear 3,225]

Boycott the BBC!

[joker69 60]

I'm fully behind a protest and to all Bears involved you make me feel proud to be called a fellow Bear.

Wish I could get to Glasgow more often and show my support.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I suspect you are so entrenched in your views

:lol: Pot - Kettle - Black

I have given my reasons for NOT attending the protest - you may not agree or like my reasons but I have no need to expand on them further after all "I" am entrenched in my view !! :lol:

[Adoniram 1,919]

:lol: Pot - Kettle - Black

I have given my reasons for NOT attending the protest - you may not agree or like my reasons but I have no need to expand on them further after all "I" am entrenched in my view !! :lol:

Yup..your reasons are a pile of shite. Here was me thinking you may have had the intellectual capacity to counter my points thus validating your viewpoint.

Obviously not.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

I think it is pretty obvious that BBC Scotland have been in breach of their obligations when it comes to our club.

Some fans have been saying as much for a good couple of years now (VB in particular) and Rangers' actions yesterday lends weight to such claims.

I respect others may disagree but the evidence is too numerous for it to be considered 'paranoia' alone.

PS: I'd support any protest.

The bit in bold I find a bit strange after your own thread about Rangers / Whyte - the timing of this action does make me wonder (and I thought you shared that view). Being an inquisitive sort I would like to know more about Mr Whyte's background etc. - whether the program will help in that respect or not I dont know but even Mr Whyte is predicting a rocky road for us and I suspect if 'we' didn't have such a downer on the BBC we would be wondering why there was not a program explaining what the rocky road is likely to be?

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Yup..your reasons are a pile of shite. Here was me thinking you may have had the intellectual capacity to counter my points thus validating your viewpoint.

Obviously not.

My opinions may be shite in your eyes but as you are entrenched, no matter what I say, nor how intellectual or not I am about my points you will not listen, for you its seems to be YOUR way or NO way! and I voted NO.

(Oh and thanks for crediting me with maybe having the intellectual capacity to debate)

[Frankie 505]

The bit in bold I find a bit strange after your own thread about Rangers / Whyte - the timing of this action does make me wonder (and I thought you shared that view). Being an inquisitive sort I would like to know more about Mr Whyte's background etc. - whether the program will help in that respect or not I dont know but even Mr Whyte is predicting a rocky road for us and I suspect if 'we' didn't have such a downer on the BBC we would be wondering why there was not a program explaining what the rocky road is likely to be?

Clearly, I want to know more about Craig Whyte and his intentions for our club. If this programme manages to ask some credible questions in a fair/balanced manner, then I'll be happy with that.

I also do concede that any ban may well be suitably timed from the view of the club in that it gets the fans onside before any further controversy and/or adverse publicity. We won't know until we see the programme.

Nevertheless, BBC Scotland have been less than fair in recent times when it comes to their coverage of our club. To that end, I cautiously welcome the ban and, in principle, back any fan protest of the BBC.