Jump to content

Scottish Protestants Against Discrimination protest Sat 27 Apr 10am

Bad Robot

By Bad Robot
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 574
  • Created
  • Last Reply
ritchieshearercaldow

ritchieshearercaldow 22,137

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, backup said:

Susan Aitken offers apology for Frank McAveety Facebook post

By Stewart Paterson  @PatersonHTPolitical Correspondent

 

The leader of Glasgow City Council has offered an apology for a remark and picture she shared about a rival politician in a private SNP Facebook group.

Susan Aitken also branded the leak of the private group post as a “betrayal of trust”.

Ms Aitken was reported by Labour group leader Frank McAveety to the Standards Commissioner for posting a picture last year amid a controversy about the council refusing a fanzone at Ibrox.

The picture was of Mr McAveety attending a Rangers match in 2015 in the directors’ box.

Ms Aitken commented: “Oh and if anyone fancies getting these nice photos of Frank McAveety enjoying hospitality in the Rangers directors’ box out there.”

The post in a SNP group closed Facebook page was leaked last month.

The council leader was accused by Labour of attempting to stir up a sectarian divide the city is trying to move away from.

Mr McAveety said at a meeting of Glasgow City Council today that he was disappointed in the remark as the leader represents a local authority where football affiliation represents a “challenge”.

At a meeting of Glasgow City Council, Ms Aitken repeated the post was “just a joke” and not related to sectarianism.

She said: “It was a joke. It was nothing to do with sectarianism or football.”

She said it was made in private and was not shared by anyone at the time.

She said the SNP, like other parties, had been the “victim of a leak”, adding that political groups are entitled to have private discussions.

For all your breaking Glasgow news, click here, or head to our Facebook, Twitter and Instagram pages

She said: "If I had wanted to do as Frank McAveety suggests, then I could have tweeted it. I chose not to. I had no interest in continuing the unpleasant narrative.”

She added: “It had nothing to do with sectarianism.

She said the leaker had “betrayed the trust of the SNP Group” by putting it in the public domain.

She added: “If Councillor McAveety is genuinely offended, then I apologise.”

However, she said she shouldn’t have to apologise as “there was never any sectarian motive.”

Gritted teeth comes to mind.

However if it was said as a joke,(as I said at the time) she could have intimated it at the time, she could have added a wee LOL.

She’s been found out for what she is a hateful bigot.

People vote for these cunts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bobby Hume

Bobby Hume 13,039

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, ritchieshearercaldow said:

Gritted teeth comes to mind.

However if it was said as a joke,(as I said at the time) she could have intimated it at the time, she could have added a wee LOL.

She’s been found out for what she is a hateful bigot.

People vote for these cunts.

👍

They misguidedly vote for the SNP mate .... thinking it is being patriotic and that the country would be .... again misguidedly .... "free from political dominance" from Westminster .... resulting in  the yoke of English oppression being removed. 

What they are actually getting when they vote for the SNP .... is similar to releasing a large basket of deadly venomous reptiles into their homes ...... courtesy of scum minded officials like this pathetic woman who would happily do more damage to The Rangers and Protestants in this country .... than Westminster could ever do to Scotland.

 A fake apology ... from a political party founded on lies ..... Yeah! ..... People do actually vote for these cunts ..... unfortunately mate ..... :p:

:UK:

Link to post
Share on other sites
gmcf

gmcf 34,152

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, backup said:

 

She said: "If I had wanted to do as Frank McAveety suggests, then I could have tweeted it. I chose not to. I had no interest in continuing the unpleasant narrative.”

 

Nah , you just tried to get someone else do your dirty work for you . 

Daft bint must think we're all zipped up the back . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
backup

backup 4,724

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, SonOfLuther said:

Offers an apology, doesn't say sorry.

She's more gutted about the leak and sorry it got out.

Sorry for herself.

Susan, you're a fat, repulsive cunt.

And on she goes, not giving one Presbyterian fuck about anything anyone has said, as does her bigoted little coterie, who continue to pish all over us at will.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLuther

SonOfLuther 3,400

Posted
Posted
Just now, backup said:

And on she goes, not giving one Presbyterian fuck about anything anyone has said, as does her bigoted little coterie, who continue to pish all over us at will.

3 more years of this for Glasgow.

She will have to be voted out, she sure as shit won't be sacked.

Promotion beckons for this vile slob.

Link to post
Share on other sites
backup

backup 4,724

Posted
Posted
Just now, SonOfLuther said:

3 more years of this for Glasgow.

She will have to be voted out, she sure as shit won't be sacked.

Promotion beckons for this vile slob.

The club/board could have destroyed her at a stroke, seems some wanted to wait, well the wait is over and the club/board shat it !

Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLuther

SonOfLuther 3,400

Posted
Posted
Just now, backup said:

The club/board could have destroyed her at a stroke, seems some wanted to wait, well the wait is over and the club/board shat it !

That could apply to one other organisation also but you keep on gunning for Rangers in this.

They could've been attacked from many angles at a stroke.

Maybe there is more to come from this yet..

Link to post
Share on other sites
backup

backup 4,724

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, SonOfLuther said:

That could apply to one other organisation also but you keep on gunning for Rangers in this.

They could've been attacked from many angles at a stroke.

Maybe there is more to come from this yet..

"you keep on gunning for Rangers in this"........ you're taking the piss, the club put 1872 in the vanguard to challenge aitken, that worked out well, maybe not.

Fuck maybe's go for the throat, I am well auld enough to remember the days when these fuks would never have dared challenge The Rangers on anything, JL and those before him would have thrown the fuks overboard without a second thought.

Seems the Cry below has been ditched by some !   

Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLuther

SonOfLuther 3,400

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, backup said:

"you keep on gunning for Rangers in this"........ you're taking the piss, the club put 1872 in the vanguard to challenge aitken, that worked out well, maybe not.

Fuck maybe's go for the throat, I am well auld enough to remember the days when these fuks would never have dared challenge The Rangers on anything, JL and those before him would have thrown the fuks overboard without a second thought.

Seems the Cry below has been ditched by some !

Calm down dear.

You want a knee jerk reaction.

Will you ever answer regarding the OO?

It's 'crie' btw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
backup

backup 4,724

Posted
Posted
Just now, SonOfLuther said:

crie : calls out

cry : shed tears, typically as an expression of distress, pain, or sorrow.

battle cry

noun

a word or phrase shouted by soldiers going into battle to express solidarity and intimidate the enemy.

I will now leave you to it, I have a sense of Trojan Horse stirring.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLuther

SonOfLuther 3,400

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, backup said:

battle cry

noun

a word or phrase shouted by soldiers going into battle to express solidarity and intimidate the enemy.

I will now leave you to it, I have a sense of Trojan Horse stirring.....

Care to explain yourself?

Link to post
Share on other sites
backup

backup 4,724

Posted
Posted

The below was allowed to slide with a feeble whimper and bullshit from SR, do we really expect anything else now as acquiescence is the norm. 

POLITICAL pressure was applied to block plans for a proposed Rangers fan zone, emails released by Glasgow City Council have confirmed.
The Ibrox club’s bid to use a community complex opposite the ground for a fan zone was blocked on August 2, just 10 days before the first was due to be held after Glasgow Life ruled the club did not have sufficient community backing.

City chiefs released a huge cache of conversations between councillors, club bosses and Glasgow Life earlier this week in response to calls for transparency, although names were redacted.

And we can reveal that on June 25 this year, a city councillor contacted Glasgow Life, claiming to be under “political pressure” to oppose the use of the Ibrox Football Complex for four pilot fan zones.

The following day, in an email from a councillor named “David” to Glasgow Life, it was claimed at least three of the four Govan members opposed the fan zone – which has since been denied.

In another email exchange on July 2, a councillor demanded answers from colleagues, insisting that if the fan zone plan went to the licensing committee, it would likely be approved.

And in a further note, sent from a Glasgow City Council email address, it was suggested members of the Ibrox and Cessnock Community Council should give their view on the fan zone in a private meeting or over the phone, instead of at their public meeting in August.

Rangers were initially granted an “occasional licence” on June 15 this year, in an email to Glasgow Life 10 days later, a city councillor said: “I’m getting a lot of political pressure from local members to oppose the use of the Ibrox Complex for these ‘fan zone’ events…”

But while Stephen Dornan objected and John Kane supported Rangers’ plans, Ricky Bell and Allan Young have both since denied being in outright opposition.

The revelations come as it emerged an SNP councillor has been accused of antagonising Rangers and Glasgow Life representatives during key talks over the proposed Ibrox fan zone.

Stephen Dornan, who has openly opposed Rangers’ plans to use the Ibrox Football Complex, was branded “offensive” over his behaviour at a community council meeting in July.

It comes amid claims that in June, the community council formally objected to the fan zone proposals without a debate, following a suggestion by Mr Dornan.

And in a hastily arranged poll, taken in private during a tea break at a meeting in August, community councillors voted 4-3 in favour of upholding an objection to the plans – which was key to Glasgow Life’s withdrawal of the licence.

Labour councillor John Kane said: “This boiled up at the meeting in June where one elected member suggested the community council should oppose. There was no great discussion on it and it was right at the end of the meeting. The community council then put in an objection.


“After the first objection went through I organised to have people from Rangers and Glasgow Life talk about the plans at a meeting of the community council.

“I thought the attitude of one elected member was incredibly antagonistic. I felt that member was unfairly rubbishing Rangers’ contribution to the community.”

Those claims were backed by a source who attended the July meeting.
The source said: “Mr Dornan was antagonistic towards the Rangers representatives, but he was particularly offensive towards a young officer who was representing Glasgow Life. His behaviour was awful.”

Mr Dornan was the only Glasgow City councillor to lodge an official objection to the fan zone plan.

Mr Dornan did not respond to requests for comment.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
rabc10000

rabc10000 5,061

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, backup said:

 

Passing the buck now? I'm sure they were the ones who originally backed down and now they realise the councils will take advantage they are not sure what to do?? 

 

Obv correct me if I've got this wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad Robot

Bad Robot 21,149

Posted
  • Author
Posted
17 minutes ago, rabc10000 said:

Passing the buck now? I'm sure they were the ones who originally backed down and now they realise the councils will take advantage they are not sure what to do?? 

 

Obv correct me if I've got this wrong

Seemingly lawyers are now taking the rerouting to court. I never opened the ET link as they are everything which is anti PUL/ Rangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Upcoming Events

    • St Mirren v Rangers
      28 April 2024 11:30 Until 13:30
      0  
      St Mirren v Rangers
      The SMiSA Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Main Event and Sky Sports Football
×
×
  • Create New...