One Scotland. Many Cultures & 2 Tier "justice"

[Andy2020 32]

I think its pretty pathetic that politics has reached this level.

Dredging through comments made on the internet years ago, in order to smear opponents. Who here hasn't said far worse?

What about that SNP lassie in Paisley - she called celtic supporters 'scum' on twitter a few years ago. Should bears vote for her based on that ?

How about we just accept that people support a team, get carried away sometimes, and leave it at that.

It's the same with the news and the papers. The last 2 days has been all about a handful of attention seeking fannies in Glasgow, protesting at some Labour media stunt.

Trying to make out what side has the worst twitter morons or activists. Absolutely pathetic.

There are a handful of genuine idiots on all sides. How about we just accept that, ignore them and vote for an MP on the actual important issues ?

[Getstiffed 8,863]

I think its pretty pathetic that politics has reached this level.

Dredging through comments made on the internet years ago, in order to smear opponents. Who here hasn't said far worse?

What about that SNP lassie in Paisley - she called celtic supporters 'scum' on twitter a few years ago. Should bears vote for her based on that ?

How about we just accept that people support a team, get carried away sometimes, and leave it at that.

It's the same with the news and the papers. The last 2 days has been all about a handful of attention seeking fannies in Glasgow, protesting at some Labour media stunt.

Trying to make out what side has the worst twitter morons or activists. Absolutely pathetic.

There are a handful of genuine idiots on all sides. How about we just accept that, ignore them and vote for an MP on the actual important issues ?

Their whole campaign is based on fairness and accountability mate. That is the issue mate. They are no different to the arseholes we've had to suffer for the last 2 decades.

[Andy2020 32]

You're missing the point. If I posted something similar, even on here, and it was reported to the Police I would get the jail. End of discussion mate.

No you wouldn't.

You would only get in trouble if it was judged to be made with sectarian intent. Actual religious hatred. Or in an incendiary situation that could cause fear, intimidation or a riot.

The jails would be full if every person who said h** or Fenian was arrested. It has to be more than that. There are probably a few borderline cases, but that's down to the judges to interpret.

Look at probably the most high profile case. Limmys brother. He got jailed, not because just because he called the woman a taig.

It was because he came across as an intimidating nutcase, causing fear and alarm, and his remarks implied a death threat.

[Malvern 11,329]

I think its pretty pathetic that politics has reached this level.

Dredging through comments made on the internet years ago, in order to smear opponents. Who here hasn't said far worse?

What about that SNP lassie in Paisley - she called celtic supporters 'scum' on twitter a few years ago. Should bears vote for her based on that ?

How about we just accept that people support a team, get carried away sometimes, and leave it at that.

It's the same with the news and the papers. The last 2 days has been all about a handful of attention seeking fannies in Glasgow, protesting at some Labour media stunt.

Trying to make out what side has the worst twitter morons or activists. Absolutely pathetic.

There are a handful of genuine idiots on all sides. How about we just accept that, ignore them and vote for an MP on the actual important issues ?

You go ahead and vote SNP and we will vote for important matters concerning us and how we want to be governed and in a United Kingdom. Jobs a good'un and you can stop the recruitment ad now, not gonna turn any votes this late in the day.

[Andy2020 32]

You go ahead and vote SNP and we will vote for important matters concerning us and how we want to be governed and in a United Kingdom. Jobs a good'un and you can stop the recruitment ad now, not gonna turn any votes this late in the day.

If you think I'm the only bear voting SNP you're wrong mate, although many won't admit it on here.

Most people can separate football, politics and religion. For me, I think they have done a pretty good job so far. And I want more powers for Scotland within Britain. That's far more important than what team my MP supports.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

If you think I'm the only bear voting SNP you're wrong mate, although many won't admit it on here.

Most people can separate football, politics and religion. For me, I think they have done a pretty good job so far. And I want more powers for Scotland within Britain. That's far more important than what team my MP supports.

Who cares what team an MP or potential MP supports ? Are you attempting to deflect from the original article?

We are taking about a candidate utilising hate speech to describe our club. And that candidate is standing for a party who have passed legislation which has resulted in custodial sentences for those who have engaged in the same conduct as him

[Malvern 11,329]

If you think I'm the only bear voting SNP you're wrong mate, although many won't admit it on here.

Most people can separate football, politics and religion. For me, I think they have done a pretty good job so far. And I want more powers for Scotland within Britain. That's far more important than what team my MP supports.

Don't take this personally, it is not meant to be, however I don't give a flying fuck who you are voting for. I am openly voting Lib Dems as the best chance for my area as I would vote any fucker but the SNP.

Just my own personal view of course, I just don't like their "style".

[Malvern 11,329]

Who cares what team an MP or potential MP supports ? Are you attempting to deflect from the original article?

We are taking about a candidate utilising hate speech to describe our club. And that candidate is standing for a party who have passed legislation which has resulted in custodial sentences for those who have engaged in the same conduct as him

It won't be debated D'Art as i suspect you already know. The SNP have done a fantastic job of brainwashing some people in this country but not enough for a yes vote and I thouroughly hope the silent majority come out again this election to hit them in the nuts again.

However, there is one major problem with that, as we split votes between Labour, Green, Lib Dem, Conservative or whoever it may be they will only have one form of support and will have a mass turnout. That spells bad news for our country and another referendum aroudn the corner yet again until they get a yes.

[Ibroxholm 2,276]

If you think I'm the only bear voting SNP you're wrong mate, although many won't admit it on here.

Most people can separate football, politics and religion. For me, I think they have done a pretty good job so far. And I want more powers for Scotland within Britain. That's far more important than what team my MP supports.

You are correct, there are more important things than football when deciding who to vote for. The economy, the health service, the education system certainly. More powers to Scotland, no. Your kidding yourself on if you think that will improve any of the things that matter.

[Andy2020 32]

Who cares what team an MP or potential MP supports ? Are you attempting to deflect from the original article?

We are taking about a candidate utilising hate speech to describe our club. And that candidate is standing for a party who have passed legislation which has resulted in custodial sentences for those who have engaged in the same conduct as him

I'm just saying I didn't see it as 'hate speech' and neither would any reasonable person I suspect. I'm not going to play at being offended when I'm not.

The word in question isn't enough to condemn someone. It has to be far more than that. There have to be threats involved or an element of bigoted religious hatred, or something provocative that could create a public disturbance.

So it comes down to the question - Do I think this guy is unworthy of my vote because he supports the other lot, and engaged in a bit of football banter made 7 or 8 years ago before any anti-sectarian laws came about?

No I don't. And I see his apology as genuine. There is a lot of 'faux outrage' when an election is on.

With regards to the Scott Lamont case, 4 months IS outrageous, although that really means 6-8 weeks. The judge obviously tried to make an example of him, and I suspect he had previous.

However it was on a public street before a high profile game, and there was plenty of warning beforehand that anything that could provoke violence was going to be cracked down on - with both sides.

We have to remember that most people in the country do see sectarianism as a problem that needs to be dealt with. The law is flawed but there is a lot of support for it.

[Sasa_Papac_No1_Fan 605]

I'm just saying I didn't see it as 'hate speech' and neither would any reasonable person I suspect. I'm not going to play at being offended when I'm not.

The word in question isn't enough to condemn someone. It has to be far more than that. There have to be threats involved or an element of bigoted religious hatred, or something provocative that could create a public disturbance.

So it comes down to the question - Do I think this guy is unworthy of my vote because he supports the other lot, and engaged in a bit of football banter made 7 or 8 years ago before any anti-sectarian laws came about?

No I don't. And I see his apology as genuine. There is a lot of 'faux outrage' when an election is on.

With regards to the Scott Lamont case, 4 months IS outrageous, although that really means 6-8 weeks. The judge obviously tried to make an example of him, and I suspect he had previous.

However it was on a public street before a high profile game, and there was plenty of warning beforehand that anything that could provoke violence was going to be cracked down on - with both sides.

We have to remember that most people in the country do see sectarianism as a problem that needs to be dealt with. The law is flawed but there is a lot of support for it.

How is brendan's comments banter but the boy in jail was sectarian?

[Andy2020 32]

Because rightly or wrongly, the h*** word is more debatable. To many it is given and taken as a generic insult for Rangers. Especially at the time involved - it seems to have become recognised as more offensive since then.

It's not so clear-cut as a song with that one line. Rightly or wrongly, it's seen as sectarian and provocative by most people.

The situation matters also. A private football forum where no-one would take offence, or a public street before a high profile game where violence could be provoked.

Like I said, the law is overbearing and unnecessary. Breach of the peace and some common sense from judges is needed.

But that also applies to those who would see our club getting hit with fines and sanctions.

[Sasa_Papac_No1_Fan 605]

I think there was a member from on here that got hauled up to court for writing stuff on this forum.

The fact that you don't see this law as being one-sided towards us is worrying to be honest.

[1690tamRFC 5,001]

How is brendan's comments banter but the boy in jail was sectarian?

Because Andy suspects the boy had previous, even though I doubt he knows anything about him at all.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

I'm just saying I didn't see it as 'hate speech' and neither would any reasonable person I suspect. I'm not going to play at being offended when I'm not.

The word in question isn't enough to condemn someone. It has to be far more than that. There have to be threats involved or an element of bigoted religious hatred, or something provocative that could create a public disturbance.

So it comes down to the question - Do I think this guy is unworthy of my vote because he supports the other lot, and engaged in a bit of football banter made 7 or 8 years ago before any anti-sectarian laws came about?

No I don't. And I see his apology as genuine. There is a lot of 'faux outrage' when an election is on.

With regards to the Scott Lamont case, 4 months IS outrageous, although that really means 6-8 weeks. The judge obviously tried to make an example of him, and I suspect he had previous.

However it was on a public street before a high profile game, and there was plenty of warning beforehand that anything that could provoke violence was going to be cracked down on - with both sides.

We have to remember that most people in the country do see sectarianism as a problem that needs to be dealt with. The law is flawed but there is a lot of support for it.

Hold on Andy, you are operating here with a considerable double standard and applying youre own subjective thoughts on the matter to the debate.

Surely if one of the leading anti-sectarian charities are describing the term as sectarian, and the Judicial Services such as the Police and Procurator Fiscal Service have successfully obtained convictions for use of the term, we have to accept it qualfies as hate speech, irrespective of our personal thoughts on the matter?

Furthermore you are deflecting considerably from the original point, I suspect because youre argument is particularly weak.

So it comes down to the question - Do I think this guy is unworthy of my vote because he supports the other lot, and engaged in a bit of football banter made 7 or 8 years ago before any anti-sectarian laws came about?

Allow me to clarify once and for all - the relevance of the team he supports has no bearing whatsover to this discussion. Furthermore perhaps you should have clarified that he "engaged in a bit of football banter" in 1992, 2007 and 2008.

Lets remind ourselves what SNP MSP, and Celtic Supporter, Humza Yousaf, said when he told the Scottish Parliament that in his view the term was unacceptable:

“I am a Celtic supporter and I go to some of the games where I hear hundreds, if not thousands, of people singing, ‘Go home ya h***’. If the word h** does not refer to nationality, religion or any of the other categories that are listed in the bill, on what basis is that song sung?”

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Im sad for quoting the anti-sectarian charity ?

Where is the tit for tat aspect when Scott Lamont is currenty serving a 4 month sentence and O'Hara is standing for election as an MP ?

So what your griping about is one guy got stung by the law - and another didn't - fair point - but the chap in jail did actually break the law. So are you condemning his use of the word 'fenian' in its aggravated context or campaigning against an unjust law? After all by your 'argument' if the use of h** is sectarian - then Fenian is also sectarian - are you condemning all sectarian language? - I doubt it as I never see you picking folk up on using the Fenian word on here.

Basically your gripe is just another promotion of your own PUL agenda that you would love attached to our club as a whole as it helps legitimise your own position.

[D'Artagnan 13,319]

So what your griping about is one guy got stung by the law - and another didn't - fair point - but the chap in jail did actually break the law. So are you condemning his use of the word 'fenian' in its aggravated context or campaigning against an unjust law? After all by your 'argument' if the use of h** is sectarian - then Fenian is also sectarian - are you condemning all sectarian language? - I doubt it as I never see you picking folk up on using the Fenian word on here.

Basically your gripe is just another promotion of your own PUL agenda that you would love attached to our club as a whole as it helps legitimise your own position.

Pretty much the generic response from you - "PUL agenda" blah blah blah. When you have lost the debate - and you have categorically lost this debate - lets resort to smear.

I think most people reading the original article will arrive at a different conclusion.

You still have to answer why an anti-sectarian charity, the Police and the Procurator Fiscal Service disagree with you that it is "tit for tat shite".

What particularly disgusts me about your conduct in this thread is that you are quite prepared to minimise and play down a term which is used to de-humanise our support and the wider Protestant community, in order to defend an individual who clearly harbours an utter hatred of our club.

“I reckon the point he’s trying to make is that we and the h** come from the same part of the world, share similar upbringing in terms of the influences around us and are by and large from the same demographic.

“Yet the h** CHOOSE to behave in the manner they do and we do not.”

Brendan O'Hara 2008

[heathen fish boy 8,580]

https://youtu.be/SrUDftDkH3E