Scotland's Weak or Unwilling Media

One of the greatest disappointments in this referendum campaign has been the unquestioning attitude of the mainstream media to challenge the propaganda from the Yes campaign.
I’ll be clear, that this means the BBC, STV, The Daily Record and The Sun, who command the largest audiences and circulation figures.

The BBC have been accused by both sides of being biased, when it’s probably more accurate to say that they are just weak, hopeless and wringing their hands of any controversy, despite a large percentage of them probably at risk of redundancy in an Independent Scotland, and working for a UK wide organisation. Glen Campbell’s weak performance during the BBC TV debate is a great representation of an organisation in Scotland that has no direction or idea how to conduct itself.

STV’s referendum coverage has been particularly slanted, with an appearance on Scotland Decides on Monday night by the notoriously extreme owner of Wings over Scotland. Legitimising his views is unacceptable, and one wonders if the management of STV are hoping that they can become the national broadcaster rather than the SBS, in the event of a Yes vote.

With the Sun being owned by right wing Rupert Murdoch, it’s a relationship that the SNP aren’t shouting from the rooftops about, given their recent overtures to the Scottish left

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/10799027/Alex-Salmond-Rupert-Murdoch-is-a-remarkable-man.html

http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/independence-referendum/independence-on-trial/anger-over-salmond-s-secret-meeting-with-murdoch-1.328172

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/apr/25/alex-salmond-rupert-murdoch-ties

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-leader-alex-salmond-faces-referendum-rethink-as-sun-sets-on-alliance-with-rupert-murdochs-news-international-8556199.html

It seems the refusal the Sun to back the Yes campaign outright is in tune with a historical tendency of the Sun to try and reflect public opinion rather than shape it. After all, it’s a commercial operation.

So, the Sun has remained neutral so far ,and hasn’t wished to rock the boat for either side

That leaves the Daily Record, who, as a traditional Labour newspaper would be expected to reflect the views of labour voters. Instead it comes across as confused and contradictory, with reasonable coverage from David Clegg countered by aggressive and provocative propaganda from disgraced SNP politician Joan McAlpine.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2568325/Alex-Salmond-aide-six-month-affair-axed-party-worker-used-public-money-pay-cheated-wife.html

While any Government or newspaper of integrity would have kicked her out after that affair, these two organisations continue to allow her a platform to abuse and denigrate non nationalists in this country.

Her rhetoric has previously accused non nationalists of being Anti Scottish and today’s column suggests that the No campaign is well named because it “has no plan..strategy..ambition”, before launching in to a load of waffle about how a Yes vote will generate 27,000 jobs, while deftly avoiding the fact that 600,000 jobs in Scotland depend on UK trade, or that the UK defence orders provide work for upwards of 12,000 skilled engineers and workers.

http://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/what-impact-would-independence-have-on-scotlands-defence-industry/


The Yes case is largely built on waffle, emotion and hatred, and those responsible for the campaign have probably set back the cause of Independence for a generation. Lessons have not been learned during this process with regards to tone, and the real need for solid promises and solid financial information. Dishonesty, aggression and ambiguity above all else have turned many voters off.

It is astonishing, but not unexpected, that such comment is unchallenged, from a media who have expressed mock anger over many years about “Old Firm” troubles, while deliberately stirring it up.

There are mixed messages from the No campaign suggesting that, while a No vote will guarantee further devolution, the Westminster government will have to assert at least some level of leadership in Scotland to try and build the bridges that have been burned by the extremists within the Yes camp ,while also reminding us that many key decisions are made at Westminster, such as defence and foreign policy.

The building of bridges will be very important, and one should not underestimate how dignified the No campaign have been, while the opposite has been true of the Yes campaign.

The sight of Jim Murphy MP being shouted down and abused on his 100 Streets campaign by nationalist rent a mobs opposed to democratic free speech has been shocking, and should have been front page news to shame the nationalists to reign the mob in. Instead the hatred of the mob is there for all to see, and the Yes campaign are not discouraging it, or the people involved.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/jim-murphy-negative-campaigning-kicking-in-1-3520001

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3LeeGx1baU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJmWOLlI--E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVM0Rllhw2A

Until we have someone in the mainstream with the kahunas to ridicule this kind of small minded paranoia in Scotland, the 19th of September will not be the end of the division, but just another date in the calendar.

http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/8744-massive-increase-in-british-themed-tv-shows-on-bbc-since-snp-came-to-power

That is not a parody, or satire. That is real.

There needs to be a shift in mindset after the referendum, no matter what way the vote goes, as the lack of control and the irresponsible rhetoric of some is stirring something quite distasteful here that may well evolve in to something akin to civil unrest, from both sides.

The elephant in the room that no one wants to discuss is the presence of Irish Republicanism within the Yes campaign. Those that deny it or dismiss it are either misleading us, grossly naïve over what is going on, or in denial.

The support of many associated to Celtic’s Green Brigade, aswell as prominent republicans like Angela Haggerty and Jeanette Findlay, should indicate that the Yes campaign has, at the very least, been infiltrated by IRA Supporters wishing to destroy the union.

Support for Yes is also being shown within IRA pub “The Rock” in Belfast https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BwDCseCIUAA1lbA.jpg:large

I don’t believe that the conduct of the Yes activists over the last few months, and the support of Irish republicans, is a coincidence.

It is the responsibility of our political leaders to step in and remind all that this is a civilised country not a rabble, and they should look to the agitators first, unless they actually wish Scotland to be divided.

---

I note that Celtic fans’ depression today after being knocked out of the Champions League for the second time in a month is being lifted by HMRC announcing that they will lodge another appeal against the Upper Tier Tribunal judgement on the EBT scheme operated by David Murray on behalf of Rangers’ former holding company.

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.

Bill.

Canny Scots to say NO

Last night’s televised debate between Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling, was very illuminating, despite the big questions remaining unanswered.

After the previous debate, where Salmond’s tactic was to appear statesmanlike, this one revealed the true Salmond, the man of anger who doesn’t respect the right to reply.

While the bullish performance may have saved his position as First Minister and leader of the SNP, and surprised Alastair Darling, his comments will be scrutinised and analysed in the cold light of day, and cause him more damage.

Answering questions with questions, lying, shouting over Darling, and interrupting were just few of the tactics used last night.

After a fairly predictable debate two weeks ago on STV, where the big hitter topic of currency left him flummoxed, Salmond attacked the man rather than the ball on several occasions, rebuking Darling’s personal record while in office.

You’d be forgiven for actually forgetting the purpose of these debates was to inform voters of their options in the referendum; what a Yes vote will do, and what a No vote will do, as Salmond attacked Labour, and the coalition government about poverty, in a clear attempt to appeal to the left, and to tug at the heartstrings, despite him offering no tangible and costed way to address the issue.

While we’ve come to expect less than courteous dialogue in this debate, Salmond’s approach to threaten the rUK to default on our share of the country’s debt unless we get a currency union will not have endeared him to those he would expect to engage with, should he succeed in getting a Yes vote.

Essentially he has threatened to hold the rUK government to ransom over debt to maintain a formal currency union with the UK. It is clear he is confident that the rUK would come to that table, in order that an iScotland pays it’s share.

Despite Darling asking what the other options were, and Ed Balls stating last night that there would be no currency union, Salmond continued to steamroller the question, with emphasis on forcing a currency union, and trying to bully rUK with a Yes vote being seen as a mandate of the Scottish people that should not be ignored.

Despite their being 57.8M people in the rest of the UK, to 5.3M in Scotland, he failed to recognise that the needs and desires of that 57.8M cannot be ignored by the Westminster government because that’s the way Salmond wants it.

When Darling pressed him on his Plan B if no currency union was agreed Salmond wittered about the “mandate” again, and brazenly stated that he was getting 3 plan Bs for the price of one, despite his options actually being 2 variations of one plan (currency union and sterlingisation), and a plan B that he didn’t want to call a Plan B, which is using sterling until either creating a new currency or joining the Euro. The long term Plan B in the event of there being no currency union was still never answered.

With one day before postal ballots get delivered, there is still no clear Plan B for the very foundation of everything we would do in an iScotland.

With Nationalist assertions also that rUK will order warships from Scotland, one can only deduce that Salmond also thinks Westminster will fold on this also.

It’s clear that he just wishes to steamroller all in Westminster to roll over and accept his demands, and then stir up resentment and anger when it doesn’t happen. It’s a dangerous game, to stir up tensions and engineer division, but that would only be an escalation of what is already happening in Scotland.

Any mandate that Salmond is seeking is built on false promises that have no substance, and a steadfast belief that the rUK government will ignore the wishes of 90% of its population, in the event of a Yes vote.

The NHS lies got an airing again last night, and Darling quite rightly pointed out that this political opportunism, preying on the fears of voters was not a priority of the SNP until last week, when they believed it would shift hearts and minds towards them.

Salmond also failed to clarify the position clearly on pensions (and how they could be funded long term), the set up costs of an iScotland, how much it would affect Scotland leaving the EU, or the public funding gap, not to mention how the country would deal with a refusal to be accepted to the EU, or NATO.

Salmond was on comfortable ground with strong soundbytes in areas of interest but very light on detail, and while Darling failed to capitalise on this, Salmond also failed to make a positive compelling case for Independence, nor tackling Salmond on the Better Together’s promises for further devolution.

All in all, it appeared that Salmond’s strength of personality, and his decision to shake off previous attempts to appear statesmanlike have deflected from the areas of concern, and I doubt if any undecideds will have now chosen Yes, on the basis of an aggressive performance that told us nothing.

My belief is that canny Scots will see past the superficiality of the TV debate, and deduce that they have not been given enough confidence that Independence will make any of us better off in any sense, in the short, medium or long term.


Bill

Big Bad “Westminster”

Day after day a historic “fact” will be brought up by a yesser near you.

Today’s fact being promoted by seperatists is that the MOD cherish English lives more than Scottish ones, harking back to an article by Joan McAlpine in January 2013.
In her Daily Record column, McAlpine ranted about a freedom of information request by SCND, stating that the MOD had a disregard of Scottish life

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scottish-lives-considered-cheap-by-uk-1523923

“Why then does the MoD insist it’s fine to keep these killers anchored just 40 miles from Scotland’s biggest city and centre of population? Put starkly, Scots lives are worth less. Back in 2000 the MoD envisaged a hypothetical accident involving Trident in Faslane. It concluded “societal contamination” resulting from such a disaster was OK.”


In her haste to cherry pick the FOI request to further her own agenda, she ignored the crucial factor in to the MOD’s finding that Devonport was not a viable option to re-house Trident

The FOI request response quoted advice from the Defence Nuclear Safety regulator that moving to Devonport was not feasible, and also a previous report in 2000 that is misquoted by McAlpine, where it is very clear in stating that Faslane presents far less of a risk to the public in the worst case scenario than Devonport.

It states: “There are about 166,000 people living within five kilometres of the Devonport base, compared with about 5,200 within that distance of Faslane.”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/04/mod-nuclear-submarines-scotland-plymouth

With Alastair Darling and Alex Salmond debate the future of the nation on television tonight, one can only hope that Salmond sticks to the facts if this subject comes up, because the rhetoric from McAlpine that is being pushed by supporters today is disingenuous at best, and downright dishonest at worst.

Big Bad Bill

The City Council - Glasgow's Shame

Over many years, labour run Glasgow City Council (GCC) has been an authority that does not serve its people, but serves itself, and serves the interests of a minority of close associates.
It’s just a coincidence that so many of them have sympathies for Celtic Football Club, and for causes close to the heart of the extremist element of the Celtic Support.

While there are blogs out there that allege State Aid to Celtic, or allege corruption it seems that there is little shame or accountability within the City Chambers as evidence mounts up of what some would say is morally wrong, and without a shred of integrity.

http://www.corruptglasgow2014.com

http://powerincommunity.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/following-publication-of-our-community.html

http://footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com/2013/12/13/celtics-option-on-primary-school-had-lapsed-or-glasgow-city-council-extended-it-as-favour/

http://www.scotsman.com/news/council-threatens-to-throw-the-book-at-author-1-1434097

This council apparently has no shame, and either stalls and avoids answering questions via Freedom of information requests, or sends lawyer’s letters to intimidate those challenging the council.

Understandably, much of the criticism of the GCC group comes from those with the closest links to them, with inside knowledge of the people and practices they have issues with, and also a sizeable nationalist presence in Glasgow, that are ignored by their own party leadership who appear to have very little desire to act or to do anything in Glasgow.

Because the Labour run city council treat the people of Glasgow with contempt, and the SNP don’t care about Glasgow, it appears to be left to bloggers and activists to challenge the council.
For their part, Scottish Labour is also run by many MSPs and MPs who share roots, offices and donors with the councillors, aswell as an affiliation to Celtic, so they too are uninterested.

While I count myself as a proud unionist for a number of reasons, that should not be interpreted as a support for Glasgow’s Labour group, or indeed, the further devolution that appears to be part of the sweetener that the Better Together campaign believe is required to achieve a No vote.

GCC, coincidentally, are in “solidarity” with the people of Gaza, and will fly the flag of HAMAS tomorrow.

"In solidarity with Bethlehem and Palestine, Glasgow City Council will raise the Palestinian flag on Friday 8th August. We hope that peace can be found to ensure the human rights for the people of Palestine."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28682483

While the killing of children, and apparently indiscriminate bombing in Gaza by the IDF is indefensible, both from the tactics of Isreal and Hamas allegedly using children as human shields, it is not the place of Glasgow City Council to “take sides” in the matter, particularly when that side is one of terrorism. I’d be just as disgusted if they commented approval of IDF action.

Neither side seems to be participating in a particularly humane way, but choosing the side of terror gangs trained and supported by the Provisional IRA, and supported in Scotland by extremist republican groups is not an acceptable standpoint, no matter how they dress it up. Flying the flag of terrorism should see heads roll, and begs the question what other flags they will fly high above the City Chambers, if they decide it’s appropriate.

For some time the overly tolerant Jewish communities in greater Glasgow have stayed silent, and turned the other cheek, while extremists set up pasting tables on city centre streets, and preach their distasteful invective at anyone within earshot. At last it appears the Jewish community have had enough, with the Glasgow Jewish Representative Council president Paul Morron stating it was "angered and hurt" by the council's decision.

He said: "Flying the flag is the worst kind of gesture politics."
He also said such a move "does nothing to alleviate the suffering on either side of the conflict, nor does it bring peace closer by one single minute".

Just two weeks after Gordon Matheson embarrassed Glasgow on the world stage by conducting himself like Rab C Nesbitt at the Commonwealth Games opening ceremony, you’d think the city council hierarchy would have been advised that they are not cut out for the world stage. They have no class, no dignity and no shame, and it’s high time that Glasgow residents forced them out of office, no matter what political views they may have.

Bill

Nationalist Agitators Terrorise Scots

As Alistair Darling was stating in the Scotsman that the Nationalists would become increasingly desperate in the weeks leading up to the referendum, he wasn’t joking, although it is probably worth expanding on the type of desperate measures that they will take to bully their way to a Yes vote.

While the more streetwise unionist may be able to read between the lines, I’d say that the upcoming referendum is far too important to dance around the edges of what needs said, so here’s my plain English interpretation of Darling’s message, with the added bonus of my own warnings from personal experience, and experiences of other unionists.

-You will be lied to. OK, many of you will say that’s nothing new, but you should take absolutely everything with a pinch of salt, and double check any assertion made by any nationalist.

-Do not assume that “cybernats” are an out of control minority of extremists that the SNP have zero connection to. While the most offensive of the apparently full time agitators are a small number, a surprising number of SNP MSPs and councillors have little or no decorum online (including John Mason and John Menzies), and the party itself does little to distance itself from agitators such as Wings over Scotland’s Stuart Campbell, or Chris Darroch.

-If you have a paid job, and are openly unionist and pro active in debate and discussion on social media, such as Facebook or Twitter, some of the more hate filled nationalists are trolling personal information, and will have no issues with threatening yourself or your family. They are contacting employers. Just last night one well known Unionist on Twitter was thrown to the wolves by a nationalist who published said unionist’s employment information, with a plea for his twitter followers to contact the employer
You will probably find that those cyber bullies either do not have obvious employment, and are either “self employed”, or are mysteriously funded. You should be very careful with your personal data across all social media and networking websites. Don’t let any bully try and force you out of employment.

-As seen in the protest against the BBC on Sunday, the bullies and agitators have moved on from unionists to neutrals or undecideds. Apparently, because the BBC has the audacity to use some English presenters on its network coverage of the Commonwealth Games, and hasn’t fully jumped in to the Yes camp it is biased. Normal people will see that the BBC is a British organisation, with hundreds of Clyde based employees at risk from an iScotland, and it’s presenters and guests on the Games showcasing Glasgow to the world in a manner we should all be proud of. So, the agitators will try and bully broadcasters to be less neutral and less likely to tell you the truth. Heaven forbid the BBC make Glasgow look welcoming and progressive. Perhaps the extremist bullies would rather the event be held in a nationalist stronghold* and broadcast by STV to 3 men and a dug.

-While you may play along with the spirit of not politicising Commonwealth events, don’t be surprised when numbers of attendees are mysteriously seen circulating around events wearing not just Yes attire, but Saltires adorned by Yes.

If you do find yourself the victim of cyberbullying, real bullying and intimidation, or vandalism, please do not suffer in silence. Shout it from the rooftops.
If you don’t know how, contact me, and I will assist.

*I would name a stronghold, but there isn’t one. The nats have a real hatred for Glasgow as it is seen as a Unionist stronghold, but cities such as Aberdeen and Edinburgh are not nationalist hotspots either. Notably, the three cities of Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen are Scotland’s most diverse, and Scotland’s financial powerhouses.

Bill

#Glasgow2014

I never thought I would find myself writing about the Commonwealth Games Opening Ceremony at Celtic Park, but the spectacle last night was one of the most bizarre pieces of both “entertainment” and broadcasting I’ve ever seen.

The aerial shots of Celtic Park by an over excited BBC team, offered a stark reminder that Glasgow City Council have demolished thousands of people’s perfectly good homes over the last 20 years, bringing us to the point that they can enable a vision of a Celtic Village to become reality.

I was half expecting a commentary of “That’s where London Road School use to be, that’s where Janefield Street used to be, that’s where Rangers legend Ian Ferguson was brought up, and that’s where London Road and Springfield Road used to have tenements. They were fully renovated in the 80s, and mysteriously demolished less than a decade later”


Then I woke up, and realised that it was the BBC, so instead we got treated to a helicopter flyover with the BBC’s Chris McLaughlin, who proceeded to fly over all games venues except Ibrox, and tell watching millions that the East End of Glasgow was where millions of Irish famine refugees settled.

Chris, who spent the best part of his sports reporter role in front of Ibrox while reporting on “sectarianism”, somehow couldn’t find Ibrox, despite the helipad being approximately 10 seconds away from the south side home of Scotland’s most successful football team.

Then we had the spectacle of the baton arriving up the Clyde, to the BBC just 5 minutes from Ibrox, and mysteriously appearing at Celtic park at the other end of the city.

Make no mistake, Ibrox was never going to feature on this BBC broadcast

When the actual ceremony started, chins dropped across Scotland as we realised that BBC Scotland must surely have been involved in it too, as Z list BBC celeb Karen Dunbar proved that not only can she not act, she can’t sing either. Perhaps John Barrowman chose her to try and make him look better.

Of course, when the stick started to fly at the twee tartanfest from social media, it wasn’t the appalling Dunbar that took the brunt, but the openly unionist Barrowman. Perhaps that was just a coincidence. Just like someone forgot to put the Celtic FC lights off that kept appearing on the panoramic shots.

As Rod Stewart took to the stage, to be followed by Subo, I decided that perhaps miming isn’t so bad after all.
Rod should stick to Vegas. If they’ll have him.

With Primal Scream set to do the closing ceremony, perhaps the “big” acts all have to be Celtic supporters too.

So, with Rangers fans challenging Glasgow City council over a stunning set of questionable decisions and transactions, the organisers of the £600M games had the brass neck to ask viewers to donate to charity, from a football field being replaced at a cost of £1.8M after the games. You couldn’t make this up.

In any other country the locals would be rioting. In this country we meekly accept it and buy in to the hype. If James McAvoy isn’t ashamed to stand in Celtic Park asking us to put Children First, we should be embarrassed that no-one in this country will mention both the costs of the games, and the fact McAvoy is standing in a ground of a football club that covered up the sexual abuse of children for two decades

Then we have Alex Salmond grandstanding despite claiming the games were not to be politicised, claiming Glasgow will be Freedom City after September.
News for you Alex, we became free 324 years ago.

Straight after Salmond came Glasgow City Council’s favourite Linn Park dog walker Gordon Matheson, who did his best to sound like a Glaswegian Ned Dalek. Ed Milliband must have looked on and despaired at this performance, which included a veiled Irish Republican reference that “our day has come”.

We truly have the most vile politicians possible in Scotland.

So, with the low lights out of the way, it’s on to the highlights, with the Queen enjoying a rousing rendition of the national anthem, and the red Arrows billowing their trademark red, white and blue trails.

With the highlights out of the way, we find out today that numerous nationalists and republicans are incensed at the National Anthem getting an outing at Celtic Park, and that the Red Arrows ignored nationalist intervention to ditch the red smoke.

It is clear indeed that Scotland is at a crossroads. The vast majority of the good people of Scotland don’t deserve to have these people dictating everything in our lives.
Once the referendum is out of the way, and the Nationalists implode, it’s up to us, the majority, to ensure that this low place we find ourselves at is ground zero, and we start to change this country from the ground up.

Bill

“Spanish Banjo” Clarification

I am informed this morning I have my fifteen minutes of fame on Follow Follow, where a poster called “Spanish Banjo” has claimed that “Vanwigs campaigned against the RST and Mark Dingwall throughout Administration in the form of two blogs. William Poole and Wee Proclaimer”


Firstly, I blog for me and no one else, and I am not a member of any fans forums.
I also do not know who "The Wee Proclaimer" is.

The only fans forum I have ever applied to join was Follow Follow, and my application was refused.

You can draw your own conclusions from that.

I may blog irregularly, but I have blogged on a number of Rangers related issues, including exposes of The SFA, the SPL, “journalists” Alex Thomson and Roy Greenslade, and the SPFA.

Before today I had done 106 blog posts, and without trolling my own blog, my recollection is that I blogged about the RST’s doomed Save Rangers “scheme” once, and blogged about issues associated to the trust on one other occasion, with the other 100 or so blog posts being about general Rangers issues, and agendas against the club.

Whatever that number of RST posts may be it is miniscule, and absolutely not the raison d'etre of my blog

I have a simple philosophy, I write about issues that I believe need written about.

I gave up the blog for some time due to other committments and semi jokingly offered via my Twitter account to write for other Rangers websites. The only offer that came in was from the owner of the Copland Road blog, which I didn't refuse, but I didn't accept either.

I have never written for anyone else other than a guest blog for a unionist site.

I like having my own blog, and I like writing independently, and actually have no interest in writing for anyone else, or handing over editorial control to anyone else.

I will continue to blog irregeularly on topics that deserve to be written about.

I would prefer not to write ever about Rangers fans, which is evident in the archives of my blog.

Unfortunately, there are some in the Rangers support more interested in their own agendas than they are about the betterment of Rangers. When they put their own agenda ahead of that of the club they should be challenged.

Bill

apology

I have deleted this morning's blog post.
Contrary to information I had used in good faith from a trusted contact, both Craig Houston and Chris Graham have denied being offered positions at Rangers.

I will trust them on their word.

I therefore apologise.

Statement Ends.

Bill.

Easdale – Call a Halt and Get Round a Table

As The Daily Record reports that Rangers Director Sandy Easdale is set to sue Craig Houston of the Sons of Struth, it serves as a very high profile reminder that the relationship between the club, and certain anti board activists is at an all-time low.

While the anti-board activists have behaved in a despicable manner through various incarnations, I believe firmly that Easdale should not be acting. Yet.
The fact he is, for me, rings major alarm bells.

While his alleged legal action is in his own name, I believe that Graham Wallace, on behalf of the club, should have persuaded him to desist. At least for now.

Wallace, after all, is nearing completion of his 120 day review of the club’s operations, and should therefore be in a position to finally offer the kind of clarity on the recent past and on plans for the future that the Anti-board activists have been asking for all along.

If the plan is strong enough to stand behind, then the whole board should be primed to do just that, and if it is a review and plan of substance and credibility then the Anti-board activists will have to accept that it is time they stood down and backed the board.

Despite bluster to the contrary, following King’s meeting with the board, the self-styled “union of fans” agreed to allow the board to complete the 120 day review.
This means that they can back down if Dave King tells them to do so.

This is all supposition of course, but if the current board’s “plan” was rock solid, and several Rangers supporting individuals persisted in attempts to destabilise the board, by whichever means at their disposal, then frankly, I would expect the club to take action.

As it stands though, the club has made no effort to communicate to fans and the 120 day review isn’t complete.

A cynic might say that the club could in theory be taking action against Houston to silence critics ahead of the publication of the review and what may be in it.

That’s why, despite me believing that Houston and several individuals pulling his strings are in some way deserving of their current predicament due to their conduct, the club, and Easdale, are not winning over friends by silencing him the wrong way. The right way, clearly, is to give all Rangers fans confidence that the club is being managed properly, and has a robust plan to build for the future.

Houston, for his part, would have a greater chance of support from the wider fan base had he not disrespected any Rangers supporter asking questions, slated other Rangers supporters in the national press, or misled supporters about the involvement of Malcolm Murray in discussions about the Sons of Struth.

The quote from him in today’s Record that “I’ve made his lawyers aware of similar posts on three other forums”, should ring alarm bells for any supporters of SoS who may have been caught up in the hype. One would hope that it is not Rangers fans on Rangers forums that Houston is grassing up to save his own skin.

Neither side are acting in a matter befitting Rangers, and I for one would be angered if some suggestions for RFFF money to be used to fund Houston’s legal defence, were approved.
This money, which was raised in good faith by the support during the summer of 2012, should not be used to support an individual fighting Rangers directors. The suggestion is absurd.

While Houston looks to have been pushed under the bus by other anti-board activists, one would expect that they personally should fund his defence, and not leave him on the streets for fighting their cause. If, for instance, the RST can raise funds of £1.5M to “loan” to the club, then they can afford to foot Houston’s legal bills.

This whole episode is unedifying but the most worrying aspect for me is the club’s apparent lack of confidence that the 120 day review and subsequent plan isn’t strong enough to silence even the strongest critics.

In some ways the legalities of some dodgy allegations on a Facebook page are an unwelcome side show and I hope they don’t’ overshadow the most important business review in the recent history of the club. That review is where all eyes should be focused.

Bill.

Don’t Be Conned

As younger voters become turned off by the Independence Referendum, this should ring the largest alarm bells with Better Together.
As BBC Scotland and STV and the Scottish media pummel the public in Scotland, the saturation of the airwaves of the “arguments” between the Nationalists and Unionists is irritating enough for me as someone with a keen interest in both maintaining the union, and challenging many of the lies u-turns and misleading statements from the SS (SalmondSturgeon) Party.

My view is that the Yes campaign are not only trying to con the public in to voting for them, but also trying to con Better Together to change their campaigning strategy.

Quite rightly, the Better Together Campaign has challenged many of the Yes Campaign’s lies and u-turns, and shown that there is no sensible basis for separation at all.

After months of disproving and dismantling every “yes” argument, the Nat whiners have decided to change tact and deflect from this by complaining that the “No” campaign is too negative.

While some unionists appear to have accepted that assertion and are set to focus only on selling the good things about the Union, I believe firmly that they cannot stop also challenging the relentless Yes campaign’s questionable claims and assertions.

Take this example of one of the latest opinion polls, from the Panelbase website inaccurately reporting that the Yes campaign are now polling circa 40%.

This is a report in the Scotsman

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-panelbase-poll-boosts-yes-1-3347389

“A total of 40% of Scots say they will vote Yes, according to the poll conducted by Panelbase for Newsnet Scotland. That figure is just 5% behind those who say they will vote No. There are still 15% of Scots who are undecided, according to the poll.

The five-point gap is down from 12 points on a previous Panelbase poll last month which had Yes on 37%, with No on 49%.

The latest poll suggests that excluding ‘don’t knows’, support for Yes has reached 47% with No on 53%. The results suggest a swing of just three points is needed to put Yes ahead in September.”


Actually the Panelbase poll did not say that in the slightest

The actual poll percentage for “Yes” was 38%, but the results show a Raw figure, and also a weighted figure. Guess which figure was issued in the Press Release to Reuters from the nationalist website newsnet Scotland? Yes, that would be the weighted one.

http://www.panelbase.com/media/polls/NewsnetScotlandPollv3.pdf

It should also be noted that excluding “don’t knows” skews the figures

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-dont-knows


Notice that the Panelbase poll also suggest that of those interviewed 35% voted SNP at the last election. Remember that the SNP actually returned 22% of the vote at the last election.
Note also that Panelbase have conducted polls for nationalist leaning websites, including extremists “Wings Over Scotland”.

The polls are not random, and are asked of the same skewed audience each time

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/panelbase-bans-new-members-from-independence-polls-1-3080830

I’d suggest that the relatively static 35-38% Yes figure returned in most polls is far more accurate, but the electorate in Scotland should be made aware of facts and facts only, negative or not

Bill

It’s all about The Rangers

Sometimes I think that its Rangers who are keeping the fires burning of the Scottish media.

Of course, they are also joined by Channel 4 stooge Alex Thomson, who seems to be intent on sacrificing his own diminishing credibility to keep some bloggers tarred with a sectarian brush happy, and Graham Spiers, who has done a complete u turn against the Offensive Behaviour at football Act, despite being one of the main driving forces for it happening, and indeed advocating that thought crime should be punished.

In theory, I’d like us Rangers fans to be in a position to ignore these two cretins, and focus on the very pressing matters with the Rangers board, Dave King, and various supporters groups keen to gain a shareholding backed voice within the club but I have to say it gave me great pleasure to see Thomson ridiculed on Twitter on his latest claims that Rangers were set to announce Administration yesterday.

Spiers has largely escaped the wrath of the support and can count himself lucky that Thomson won clown of the day and deflected attention away from the disgusting move by Celtic to rescind the Act, now that the Act has shone a light on the dark republican underbelly of the Celtic support.

After decades of campaigning against “bigotry” and “sectarianism” it seems that the campaigners didn’t sit on some moral high ground at all, but were instead only seeking a licence for Celtic fans to do as they wish, while Rangers fans get jailed for challenging Irish Republicanism and support for racist terrorist groups.

Elsewhere the club’s financial woes keep the Daily Record in business as Dave King prepares to fly to the UK amidst some smoke and mirrors from the Rangers boardroom in a propaganda battle for the hearts and minds of the Rangers support.

While I noticed a poll on Vanguard Bears that only 3% of their members polled supported the current board, the relatively high percentage willing to give Graham Wallace a chance was something I agreed with, probably until this morning, when it became apparent that Sandy Easdale had misled supporters on Sky Sports News by claiming that Dave King had not offered to invest in the club.

Graham Wallace is a very credible board figure, who has a very impressive CV of the kind of level a Rangers CEO should have, but he must feel that he is surrounded by sharks and piranhas in murky boardroom waters, and he will need to assert his authority in that boardroom before his very impressive CV becomes tarnished.

I suspect that Wallace will need to bring forward his 120 Day review if he has any chance of maintaining the levels of confidence that many have in him,

Let me be clear, I have no agenda for any of the competing fan groups, or even for King, but for the club to be stabilised by someone capable of doing so, and structured in such a fashion that trust is earned and maintained in those running the club, and that we have a believable plan to return to the top of the Premier league within 3 years.

Will that happen under Wallace? Will it happen under King?

Frankly, until either of them tell us in detail how they will get there I can’t judge.

All I do know is that there needs to be a relatively quick resolution to this battle in order for the fans to believe the club are on the right track – whether it be through one side gaining control, or through some happy medium where both “sides” join forces for the good of the club.

Time will tell.

Bill

The Time is Now

As the battle for hearts and minds of Rangers fans steps up this morning between Dave King and the current board, it is still mired in smoke and mirrors, which makes any decision from the Rangers support over what to do very difficult.

I suspect that Rangers fans will need to keep a record of the public proclamations and statements from both the current board, and from Mr King.

The problem for independent supporters is that there are so many Stakeholder groups claiming to represent the best interests of the club, from the current board, to King, to the Rangers FiRST movement, to the newly formed Union of Fans, that claims to represent the Rangers Supporters Trust, Assembly, Association, Blue Order, Union Bears and Sons of Struth.

The fact that the substantial groups in that “Union of Fans” here have not yet consulted their members before asking them to support a campaign not to re-new Season Tickets is largely overlooked by those pushing their agenda to force the current board out and force Dave King/Paul Murray IN.

The latest move by King is in response to the loans provided by Sandy Easdale and claims from Rangers CEO that the club had been in dialogue with King

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/graham-wallace-qa-rangers-chief-3181015

To be absolutely precise, these are the quotes from Wallace in the interview with Keith Jackson

“KJ: Haven’t you created a potential problem with other shareholders or would-be
investors who might ask why they weren’t invited to make a similar loan? And I’m talking here specifically about Dave King.

GW: The board has had a dialogue in recent weeks with Dave King. He has not been rebuffed by the board. He is not currently a shareholder. He has indicated he’d be an interested participant in a future equity raising at the appropriate point in time. Our shareholder base has also expressed willingness to invest in fresh equity.

Dave King has not come to the club with an offer, other than an interest in participating in a future equity.

KJ: Just to be clear, are you saying Dave King has not offered the club short-term funding?

GW: He has not done that, no. Dave is not a shareholder and he has not made the club any offer of financial assistance. That’s not a criticism of Dave King. I have not met him but as a board we have had some dialogue to try to understand his intentions because there has been a lot of talk about his interest in investing. There has been no other proposal made by him at all.”

Note that Wallace only mentioned King when challenged specifically about him by Jackson

While King released an official statement, and was quoted in The Scottish Sun as saying “Mr Wallace has never spoken to me or even attempted to communicate with me in any form whatsoever”

The Sun reported that King would release a statement that would detail him offering a £1M interest free loan to Rangers that was rebuffed by the current board
Note that in his official statement, King never claimed to have offered any such loan

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/dave-king-official-statement-rangers-3185424

Rangers then released a statement on their website stating that the claims within the Scottish Sun were inaccurate. All the evidence would suggest that The Scottish Sun’s report of events bears little resemblance to either King’s position, or the position of Somers’ statement, which simply re-stated what Wallace said in the interview with Jackson.

The General perception across the support is that King offered an interest free loan that was rebuffed by Rangers in favour of the Laxey loan, due to the Sun’s reportage, and some hints on Twitter from prominent supporters close to Paul Murray.

While the usual suspects that head up various fan groups cover the well work ground of demanding board change, the response from the club to the support has been weak, and not of the substance that the wider fan base needs to make an informed judgement to continue to support the team by renewing Season Tickets, and to ignore calls for change.

Frankly, the longer they leave it the less credible they look, and the more credible King looks, whatever fans’ movement he chooses to further his aims.

Even if fans’ groups conduct themselves in a manner that doesn’t befit the Rangers way, and resort to lying, smearing and propaganda about the current board, frankly, if the Board cannot convince the whole support that the small band of activists are barking up the wrong tree, then we should all be joining the Anti board movement and demanding change.

It really is that simple

The concept of listening to fans via the “Ready to Listen” banner promoted by the club recently should be the reverse. The club should be ready to talk.

If the club is being managed properly, has proper governance in place, and has a plan to both be lean and be able to grow income streams, then the time to tell us in detail is right now

If the current board have run out of ideas and are struggling to create a workable business plan that will return Rangers to the top of Scottish football, then they should resign and make enough noise that Blue Pitch, Margarita and company have no option but to sell up to King

This constant battle and negativity is damaging the club and impacting our ability to recover as quickly as we need to.

Those custodians of the club have it within their gift to tell us.

What’s stopping them?

Bill

Saved

As Celtic prepare themselves to celebrate 3 in a row, with Rangers absent from the top league for two of them, imaginations are running wild amongst their supporters that they are now on the road to ten in a row.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/every-empire-can-crumble-but-make-no-mistake-10-in-a-row-is-on-for-celtic.23525085

Of course, Rangers don’t have our troubles to seek, but we are on course to return to the Premiership in August 2015, shortly after it is expected that Celtic will have secured their 4th title on the bounce.
No Rangers fan I know expects that we will win the title in 2016 on our return to the Premiership, as Celtic have been able to call on Champions League riches, and some astute dealings by Neil Lennon, to paper over the financial cracks at Celtic Park.

We do however, believe it is slightly presumptuous by Celtic fans that the biggest club in Scotland (that’s Rangers) will not be able to recover our rightful place at the top of Scottish football until 2023.

It strikes me more that those indulging in such conjecture are more likely to be trying to kick the Rangers support while we are down than actually believing it.

It may be that Rangers have more important fish to fry in the coming months than bother about retorts to this kind of nonsense, but Michael Grant can be assured that this article has been saved for a rainy day

Bill.

What Next?

Some Rangers fans may feel comfortable that the club has entered in to loan arrangements with Laxey partners, and Sandy Easdale, however, I will categorically state now that I am not one of them.
Following news last week that this was likely, it’s only this morning that some detail has been announced

While last week’s coverage suggested that the loans were investments in to the club in return for shares, the announcement this morning makes it clear that the facilities are indeed loans, with no option of shares for Easdale, meaning the club (we) are due to pay him back £500k before the season has even started.

Laxey have an option on Shares, but, given the sheer volume involved (Approx 304,750 shares at current prices) this would require an EGM to approve such a substantial issue of shares, and increase in voting power to Laxey, with an EGM facing a dilemma of accepting this, or saddling the club with a £1.12M Debt to Laxey at the start of the season.

On the face of it, while Easdale has been cute in presenting his loan as interest free, it is still a loan, and by no means an investment.

While Jack Irvine might try and bullshit the support on to believing that Easdale/BPH/AN Other have oodles of cash to “invest”, this deal proves once and for all that no such thing will happen.

Other investors have a right to be aggrieved, if reports are accurate that they were not consulted about these loans, nor given an opportunity to make their own proposals

It looks to these untrained eyes that Laxey are running the club, and have us over a barrel.

Like many supporters, I do not wish for many more months of the current movers and shakers at the club being at loggerheads with forces associated to Paul Murray as that conflict itself is damaging, but I feel that this current situation is unacceptable.

The problem is, while Dave King has been lurking in the background, it appears unlikely that he will launch a hostile takeover, as that would require significant purchases of shares from those very same groups who are in control of the club at present.

Unless King has a change of position and decides that lining the pockets of Easdale, Laxey and company is a necessary evil, then there looks to be few painless options for other shareholders and supporters.

Some will use this as an opportunity to drive Fan Ownership, however, the RST’s scheme is still being administrated by the same individuals who have repeatedly failed to communicate to their members about upheaval to their own board, so they cannot be trusted, while the alternative scheme being championed by some former RST board members is still in it’s infancy, and far from capturing the imagination of the levels of support it would need to make inroads in to the club’s shareholding.

So, where does that leave the normal supporter and minor shareholder?

In a pickle.

Firstly, we need some detail from Graham Wallace as to the “120 Day Review”, and what the current burn rate of spend at the club is per month, and the basis for these loans.
The level of communication is just not good enough.

Secondly, unless we get a credible and confidence building explanation from Wallace, we need to pick what option from those available to us, is the one we should lend our support to, whether it be the Rangers (Fi)RST movement, which some may think is just the RST without Mark Dingwall and Gordon Dinnie, The Remaining Supporters Trust, or pressuring King to invest.

Doing nothing does not look to be a feasible option.

If anyone has any brighter ideas, then I’m all ears

Bill

These People are NOT liberal

I’ve seen a lot of anger over Graham Spiers’ latest attention seeking column defending the Official Celtic fan groups campaign to chart the IRA anthem “Roll of Honour”

This vile song has been described in great detail on The Rangers Standard, and to a lesser extent on Vanguard Bears, so I certainly won’t be repeating the lyrics here, but I will stress that it is a song that praises Republican terrorists

http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/309-roll-of-dishonour-celtic-s-shame

Spiers surprises no one with his defence of such a disgusting homage to the Anti British Racists, bigots and killers of the “Brits Out” era of the Provos and INLA.

Of course, he dresses up his defence of The Green Brigade, and “Fans Against Criminalisation” as some kind of uber liberal approach to free speech, with some disingenuous waffle about “The Irish Question” thrown in to try and justify not being able to take up a stance against murdering bigots and gangsters.

Taking up a liberal stance inconsistently though exposes him as having an agenda following years of distinctly non liberal posturing and campaigning against Rangers songbook

He’s as transparent as cling film

He’s also presumably free to write whatever provo-cative filth riles decent thinking people in Scotland, therefor The Herald is equally culpable for allowing publication, just a few days after reporting Celtic fans “success” at having Roll of Honour charted.

I monitored a number of Rangers fans challenging Herald editor Magnus Llewellin last week on that disgraceful front page and he failed to reply.

This further insult to the Rangers support from Graham Spiers in the same newspaper, should serve as a reminder to Rangers fans, and to decent people across Scotland that this newspaper should be shunned, and it’s editor told why it is being shunned. If you are going to stop buying the newspaper (better late than never), then you have a duty to tell the editor why. For good measure you should tell the regional MD of Newsquest Tim Blott why you are no longer buying his product.

This is not a job for someone else. This is a job for me, and you. All of you.

During Llewellin’s time as Deputy Editor and then Editor he has overseen a drastic reduction in circulation and income. The Herald’s circulation is in the region of 40k, down by 7k in the year, and only further reductions will reverse their disregard for decent people in Scotland.

Magnus.llewellin@heraldandtimes.co.uk

Tim.blott@newsquest.co.uk

As Spiers was writing his piece, Glasgow University students were celebrating the election of Edward Snowdon as Rector. It seems that joining the military, then putting your colleagues and your country at risk of terrorist attack is something to celebrate in Glasgow

There is something fundamentally wrong that the University can accept such a candidate, but I for one was not surprised. If they can employ and defend Jeanette Findlay, for her outspoken support of Irish Republicanism, then they too are worthy of scrutiny.

I don’t doubt there are increasing numbers who feel that the wrongs in this country need to be addressed, and are of the view that none of Scotland’s political elite or media establishment represent the majority

It is for this reason that I have started writing some non football content for http://thescottishunionist.wordpress.com/, and I’d suggest my readers pop over to a site that I feel could be the beginnings of something very special

Bill.

What Happened To This?

From the Herald

13 Dec 2013

Perhaps it's just the headline that was misleading.

Rangers investor to crack Blue Pitch and Margarita mystery

Greig Cameron
Deputy Business Editor
Friday 13 December 2013
A RANGERS shareholder with decades of experience in fund management has begun high-powered moves to reveal the identities of the people behind the secretive Blue Pitch Holdings and Margarita Funds.

The investment professional, who asked not to be named, is a long-standing season ticket holder at Ibrox, said he has consulted a "mainstream" law firm in London to investigate the options available.

He intends to take the matter further down the legal route if the board at Rangers International Football Club (RIFC) are unable to provide answers.

He said he wanted to know what exact efforts the current board (RIFC) has made to uncover who is behind Margarita and Blue Pitch.

He said: "I am getting a bit irritated with this obscurity about Blue Pitch and Margarita.

"If [the board] say we don't know then I want them to make a public report saying that. If they do know who is behind it they should be telling us.

"I think the fans really need to know the identities of the people behind these holdings. That is only fair."

Blue Pitch has four million shares in RIFC, equivalent to more than 6% of the share capital, with Margarita holding 2.6 million, or 3.6%.

Both are believed to be backing the current regime at the RIFC annual general meeting on December 19.

Shareholders are being asked to vote at the AGM whether to retain chairman David Somers, chief executive Graham Wallace, finance director Brian Stockbridge and non-executive director Norman Crighton.

Along with several other resolutions there will also be votes on whether to accept Malcolm Murray, Paul Murray, Alex Wilson and Scott Murdoch.

The fund manager indicated he will pursue the identities of Blue Pitch and Margarita regardless of how the AGM turns out.

He said he would like to have access to the latest financial incomings and outgoings at RIFC and see details of commercial contracts.

The possibility of disenfranchising secretive shareholders was raised last month by former RIFC chairman Malcolm Murray.

That option is thought to relate to a section of the Companies Act 2006 which states a company has the right to know the beneficial owners of shares held in nominee accounts.

A company has to maintain a register of such interests which must be available for shareholders to see.

If that is not made available one possibility is for the voting rights of the shares to be suspended

R.E.S.P.E.C.T

One of the most irritating aspects of Rangers troubles in the last 2 years has been a culture within the club, and of people who should know better, to fail to communicate the truth to the Rangers support.

I’m sure most Rangers fans will join me in asking that senior officials at the club embrace a new dawn, and endeavour to tell us the truth at all times. That should also apply to footballing management, and friends of the footballing management.

With the recent departure of Brian Stockbridge from the club, there at least is hope within the Rangers support that the business end of the club is being cleansed with a new transparency on its way under the leadership of Graham Wallace.

Is it too much to ask that the footballing side apply the same approach?

As Rangers players trundled off the field on Saturday, lucky to have secured three points against part time Arbroath, I’m told that Manager Ally McCoist welcomed the players back in to the tunnel with words of congratulation for a great performance.

Bear in mind please that his friends in the media have for the last week been telling us how good he is, how good the coaching staff are, and how good their preparation is among many superlatives.

Are they delusional, or are they knowingly lying to us, to support their friend?

Loyalty is an admirable trait, and something sadly lacking in modern day football, however, is loyalty to Ally McCoist more important than loyalty to the Rangers support? Is loyalty to an agenda to attack the board more important than telling the truth?

This Rangers side is an expensively assembled one, and is in fact the second most expensive in Scottish Football

Therefor we should expect that the football be of comparable or superior quality to all Premiership sides and far superior to anything in our division

Can any Rangers fan put their hand on their heart and state they believe this is the case?

I know the events of the last three years have been distressing and that they can cloud the memory somewhat, but can any of us really look at this expensive side, and see any of these players controlling matches in the Premiership as Rangers trounce Celtic to the title?

After all, haven’t we been told that the reason the squad is so expensive is so that we can compete on our return to the top table, and compete for the cups?

If this current squad is only a transitional one that has to be bolstered by significant investment once again on return to the top flight, it begs the question – Will Ally McCoist need to spend multiple amounts more than Celtic just to compete with them?

I’m sorry I’m just not buying any of the superlatives, or even the seemingly reluctant approval of Richard Wilson in the Herald, or the loyalty to McCoist on Follow Follow from those who just happen to be part of the “Spivs Out” movement.

Rangers have missed a golden opportunity to shape a young (and inexpensive) exciting side who could have had a wealth of experience on Rangers return to the top. Much of that is attributable to Ally McCoist, who has chosen to fill his squad with numbers, “experience”, and dodgy foreigners, then leave the supporters under no illusion about what his footballing outlook is by picking sides full of the same. Every week.

Of course, he will point to Rangers scouting being cut, and blame Charles Green or Craig Mather, but ignore the fact that perhaps they could have allocated more resource to it if he demonstrated a real desire and ability to build his squad using youth, and spent less money on “experience”.

As Graham Wallace works his way through the legacy of decades of mismanagement throughout the whole Rangers business, he would be foolish to ignore the beating heart of the business that drives everything else, ie the football side.

If he doesn’t then he’s firefighting and missing a golden opportunity to make changes while we still can.

Bill

The Fog Reappears

Just when you think there is light at the end of the tunnel in this Rangers saga, the fog has once more enveloped the club, as much needed cost cutting measures within Ibrox have been resisted by Ally McCoist and his squad, and yet another propaganda war started between the current board, and prominent Rangers shareholders including Alex Wilson and Dave King.

It’s now the world’s worst secret that one of the ideas mooted by CEO Graham Wallace to Ally McCoist and Lee McCulloch at a meeting was that the 1st team squad accept a 15% cut in wages.

Unsurprisingly, “the players” , who were represented at the meeting by McCulloch, are believed to have rejected the idea out of hand

Sadly, in this circus we call Ibrox, that confidential discussion was reported in the Daily Record the next day, triggering a new wave of leaks from the club clearly released to undermine McCoist, including a copy of the training schedule for this week, which I won’t reproduce here but showed that there is a fine line in football between “professional” and “part time”, if time on the training field is anything to do with it

Next up was the embarrassing revelation that the players were lording it up in a hotel as preparation for the Forfar match.

With McCoist defending the decision shortly after, it was clear he was at loggerheads with the board

This board, or at least someone connected to it, obviously has little respect for McCoist, and the next leak, if true, detailed what appeared to be an internal Rangers email from in 2012 discussing McCoist’s salary demands, suggesting some rather distasteful manouvering over a suggested cut from former CEO Charles Green and current FD Brian Stockbridge, where McCoist is described as accepting a pay cut to 600k, then asking for a shortfall to be paid back to him.

It certainly didn’t show McCoist in the best light, and I’m sure that many other Rangers fans hoped that McCoist’s media offensive against the board this week would include a denial of the suggestions in the email, or an apology if the contents were true. To date we’ve had neither.

With the board’s offensive done, it is now the turn of defenders of McCoist, and attackers of the board to return with two different angles.

Defeated board nominee Alex Wilson has attacked the board for not leading by example and cutting the inflated executive salaries, while addressing the financial outgoings of the non- footballing side of the business. While I may have had issues with some of the vague statements from the nominees in the lead up to the AGM, this statement is incisive and fully justified.

Graham Wallace was asked the question by Tom English why the Executives weren’t leading by example, and Wilson asks the question again, because Wallace’s answer to English was disingenuous. He suggested that the salary review was across the business, however it is noted that there is no detail of any suggested cuts in other areas

Wallace, and the board, if embarking on a business wide cost cutting exercise have been cack handed and naïve in their approach, and are at this point, looking distinctly blindsided in their decision to discuss players’ salaries before concluding (or embarking on) the review of the non-playing business.

They should have been aware that with players and media friendly staff still friendly with those viewed as Anti board, it would not have been kept secret
They have not been helped that their own leaks, particularly about McCoist’s alleged salary manouvering, or the players’ training schedule have been confined to blogs and Rangers fan sites, rather than mainstream media.

Jack Irvine may be vindictive and “not to be messed with”, but if he is charged with blackening Ally McCoist’s name and turning the support against him in this latest propaganda war, then he is failing miserably.

As Dave King steps in with his own view this morning that the club should not be cutting costs, but should be investing in the team to compete in the Premiership when we get there, you begin to wonder if the credibility he has, given his genuine financial capability, is in danger of collapsing as he fails to recognise the deficit the club is facing with no additional revenue or investment to fill that gap,

Wallace has spoken previously about establishing sustainability before seeking investment, while King believes the investment is more urgent.

The issue of King’s investment proposal relying on existing shareholders diluting their shareholding if not investing more cash, while someone else invests in to the club is a sticking point, as my understanding is that current major shareholders are not keen to have their shareholding diluted. To those who paid 70p a share, or market value, rather than 1p per share, this and share value matters.

I’m no expert, but having the board at loggerheads with King, and having the manager conspiring against the board, and them conspiring against the manager is not a good place to be.

Meanwhile the club is still in deficit, with reserves dwindling, and no immediate signs of investment

My view is that this is the time for compromise between King and the current board, to ensure that there is a hybrid approach that suits everyone.

Perhaps the only reservation I have is that the size of the Rangers squad, and the size of our players budget to turnover ratio may be in the region of 30% as widely reported in McCoist’s defence, but that does not include a not insignificant sum for approximately 30 other registered players at Ibrox. 56 players is too much, and there is evidence of quantity over quality, so McCoist has to accept that his forays into the transfer market on behalf of the club are not returning best value for money, and he must show that there is both an acknowledgement of that, and a willingness to remedy it, or he is not the man to take the club forward

There is talking to be done at Ibrox, and some of it needs to be done privately, but if there is no “hands up I made an error” moment from any of the parties involved, then I fear for the future.

Bill.

The Wonderful World of Propaganda

As Rangers fan David Limond contemplates his actions in prison, he will no doubt regret pissing so many Rangers fans off over the last couple of years with his antics.
With a mouth bigger than the Clyde tunnel, and a bizarre idea that the laws of the land didn’t apply to him it was inevitable that he would land himself in trouble with the law.

So, as Rangers fans have decided against taking on various journalists and their hangers on due to his toxicity, the great shame is that his stupidity has allowed the Rangers support to be tarnished by his actions.

While I have little sympathy for “Limmy”, I have to take issue with some of the nonsense written in the last couple of days, in the Scottish media, and also the Press Gazette in London about Angela Haggerty, Phil MacGiollabhain, and Alex Thomson of Channel 4. I also have to take issue with the Scottish media’s ignorance of abuse on social media of Rangers players, and the apparently different sentencing used in social media abuse cases.

In the Daily Record’s first report of Limond’s indiscretions, it quotes both Haggerty and Phil Mac Giollabhain, with absolutely no recognition of Mac Giollabhain’s bigoted past mentioned.
It should be noted that the book Haggerty edited was not an objective analysis of Rangers financial troubles, but a hate filled book written in a vile tone.

Did Limond overstep the mark with his sectarian comments? Absolutely.
Was his target an innocent shrinking violet without a sectarian bone in her body?

With Haggerty yesterday promoting Sectarian IRA publication An Poblacht I’d suggest that you can draw your own conclusions

http://i43.tinypic.com/5m0o6s.jpg

This blog highlights why the IRA were and are sectarian

http://truthonsectarianism.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/ira-are-sectarian.html

MacGiollabhain of course was a writer for said IRA publication, and also co founder of another IRA publication the talfanzine. Unforgettably MacGiollabhain’s book serialisation was pulled from the Sun after some Rangers fans sent copies of some of his previous blogs to the newspaper. A shocked Editor pulled his serialisation and ran an editorial stating that MacGiollabhain was “tarred with a sectarian brush”

As Haggerty and co line up to have a kick at the whole Rangers support for the behaviour of Limond, it is noticeable that Macgiollabhain’s friends Thomson, De Long of the NUJ, and Roy Greenslade are all actively promoting the tired old Rangers are Racist line, despite Haggerty being as Scottish as Limond. It certainly raises questions as to how the judge could decide calling Haggerty a “taig” was Racist. Sectarian? Yes. Racist? How?

MacgiollaBhain has unsurprisingly got in on the act of attacking the wider Rangers support, calling in some quotes and favours from long time collaborators Alex Thomson and Roy Greenslade

Greenslade, is not an objective voice on anything Rangers related

http://williampoole.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/wp-archives-mar-12-2012-roy-greenslade.html


Alex Toxic Thomson is hardly the most reliable “journalist” to comment, given his constant support for MacGiollabhain. How far removed from Phil do you need to be to not be tarred with a sectarian brush?

http://williampoole.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/wp-archives-14-oct-2012-toxic-thomson.html

http://williampoole.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/wp-archives-april-12-useful-idiots.html

http://williampoole.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/wp-archives-april-12-glasgow-toughest.html

http://williampoole.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/wp-archives-14-aug-2012-alex-thomson.html

http://williampoole.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/wp-archives-05-oct-2012-toxic-tomos.html

The Press Gazette report is being widely touted as a voice of reason on the subject, and presumably Dublin born writer and news editor Darren Boyle is another friend of the toxic network of Rangers haters.

The simple fact is that Limond has been punished, and while the sentence is harsh, he can have no complaints about the verdict.

What is most interesting is that the type of provocative language and prose written by MacGiollabhain goes unpunished, while Limond finds himself in the clink.

The same week that Limond was sentenced to 6 months for some online abuse, former Celtic player Paul McGowan was sentenced to 130 hours community service for assaulting a police officer, despite it being his second conviction for such an offence. It seems that calling people names is now worse in Scotland than assaulting people.

Fact is, the mainstream media in Scotland wouldn’t touch MacGiollabhain or Haggerty with a bargepole, despite the sympathetic tone of the reports attacking Limond. They know only too well that employing either of them would significantly damage their circulation, and damage their already fragile reputations.

Darren Boyle also finds himself on the fringes of meaningful employment working for the Press Gazette, although journalists who read the publication should be made aware of the type of company he is keeping

Frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me if Roy Greenslade of the Guardian website found himself in a Brian McNally redundancy situation. McNally displayed all the same traits with an added cockiness of thinking he had a mainstream platform for his agenda. He didn’t. Maybe Republican Roy will learn the same lesson. The people of Britain don’t want to be force fed extremist propaganda, no matter what “side” it comes from.

The People of Scotland should not tolerate that Limond can get 6 months in prison, while vile filth like Ciaran Wallace walks free, or Paul McGowan punches police officers without jail time, and they shouldn’t tolerate that the press won’t point out that imbalance, but will instead be part of it. Either they should all get jailed, or none of them should.

The only people who can affect change are you and me. Make your feelings known and write to your MSPs, MPs and newspapers.
If you think that is futile, then you underestimate the power you have.

Bill.