Brian Wilson article in The Herald, "What did the SNP expect in George Square"

Valley Bluenose said:
This, I think:

IT may be unfashionable to point out but football can create really joyous occasions. Take last Saturday’s FA Cup Final at Wembley with 21,500 people in the stadium, an intimation that normality is again conceivable.

There was an emotional quality to the singing of Abide With Me, dedicated to victims of the pandemic. “When other helpers fail and comforts flee; Help of the helpless, oh, abide with me”. Old words with special meaning as people came together after so long, in this way.

Then there was the game itself, turning on two acts of beauty – the goal from Youri Tielemans which won it and the save from Kasper Schmeichel that thwarted Chelsea. So Leicester, one of our cities hardest hit by the pandemic, had its morale lifted to the heavens.

The occasion was possible through a balanced approach to risk. Putting 21,500 people into Wembley’s open air must carry a scintilla of risk. But keeping them out and playing this special game behind closed doors would surely have done far more harm than good.

In Scotland, such thinking is taboo. Even before the latest Glasgow shutdown, there were to be just 600 supporters inside Hampden for the Scottish Cup Final. Now the vast terraces will be empty. To what good effect or elimination of risk, I wonder?

Last Friday I was in Glasgow Airport, a place of eerie silence these days but suddenly raucous sound announced the arrival of a flight from Belfast which disgorged a platoon of Rangers tops, clearly here for a party. I should make clear the colour of tops is irrelevant to the thrust of my argument.

If anyone had doubts, this confirmed that the following day’s celebrations were going to be a big event attracting supporters from far and near. Given that entry to Ibrox stadium was precluded, the logic pointed to a big event somewhere else – ie the streets, bridges and squares of Glasgow. Who had decided that this was a good – or at least, less bad – idea?

It seemed basic common sense – which would have applied equally regardless of which club had something to celebrate – that the thousands congregating in Glasgow should be allowed to do so in their preferred environment, their own stadium. The choice was not between whether or not people would congregate; only where.

I have still to hear any rational explanation of why it was thought preferable for this to happen in the aforementioned streets, bridges and squares where, as soon transpired, absolutely no rules would apply, than within the confines of a stadium where they all wanted to be and within which some degree of regulation would have been possible.

Then, while I was waiting for my flight, a friend in the hospitality industry phoned in despair to tell me about the latest disaster – the decision not to move Glasgow down to level 2. At this point, the contrast between what everyone knew was going to happen the following day and the latest extension of Glasgow’s lockdown moved from being merely irrational to grotesque.

I have never quite understood why it is forbidden to have a glass of wine with a meal within permitted hours. However, the idea this would continue to be banned in Glasgow on public health grounds while the same politicians and experts had put exclusion from a football stadium before all the blatantly obvious risks inherent in the alternative now appeared incomprehensible and irresponsible.

Yet who does one turn to for an explanation? Who can the beleaguered hospitality industry ask for the right of appeal, based on reason? In what respect is the public health advice in England different to that in Scotland? There are so many questions and after more than a year of this, so few detailed, satisfactory answers.

The decision makers hide behind the mantra that anyone who challenges their edicts is less interested than themselves in public health or protecting the community. That has never been true and should have been called out long before now. The longer this goes on, the more urgent the need for scrutiny.

Keeping Glasgow closed is a blunt instrument which fails to recognise vast differences within its boundaries. Concentrating on postcode areas seems more sensible than relying on boundaries which were drawn in the 1990s for entirely different reasons – primarily to keep more prosperous areas out of Glasgow.

The idea that people are not going to travel from Glasgow for a meal in Bearsden or Kilmacolm does not accord with reality. So the major impact of this blanket ban within the confines of the city is not to limit the spread of the virus but to put another nail in the coffins of good, responsible businesses that are struggling to survive.

If the politicians believe their own rhetoric, why did they not act last Friday to limit the public health damage from the Rangers party? Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf could have made a recording of his pious strictures to be released around 6pm. and then taken the rest of Saturday off. What did he expect in George Square? Community singing of Abide with Me?

Ditto the First Minister who should surely have seen the need for containment within her own constituency? The lesson is that while it is easy to ban things it is within your authority to ban, a greater talent is required for seeing a bigger picture – and that is what they made a complete mess of last weekend.
Click to expand...

A Celtic fan, but a clever guy who holds himself above the general hatred of others in his community.
 
Brick_Top said:
This is the key point of the weekend.

The SNP along with every Rangers hater in Scotland was desperate for George Square to happen on Saturday.

It was all so easily avoidable, but the SNP and GCC didn’t want to avoid it as they knew how valuable a tool it would be for political posturing when the inevitable happened.
Click to expand...
Timing is everything in politics and the weekend played right into their hands........as was the plan from the outset.
 
The other issue at play here is that Celtic are also being hammered by the SNP by blocking fans coming back.

It is also costing Celtic as much as anyone else, especially with ST renewals coming up after the season they have had as well. In the space of 18 months, they will likely have went from having tens of millions in the bank to being in debt, certainly in terms of o/s transfer payments and bank loans. And that is in small part due to the SNP.

We may not have much common ground with the Yahoos, but this is one of them, and one which should be capitalised on and used against the SNP.
 
Snakehips said:
The other issue at play here is that Celtic are also being hammered by the SNP by blocking fans coming back.

It is also costing Celtic as much as anyone else, especially with ST renewals coming up after the season they have had as well. In the space of 18 months, they will likely have went from having tens of millions in the bank to being in debt, certainly in terms of o/s transfer payments and bank loans. And that is in small part due to the SNP.

We may not have much common ground with the Yahoos, but this is one of them, and one which should be capitalised on and used against the SNP.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget that 30k of TGFFITW wanted a refund.
 
Grigo Yossarian said:
A Celtic fan, but a clever guy who holds himself above the general hatred of others in his community.
Click to expand...
He is a Prod that supports The Filth.
He was part of a huge group of West of Scotland Labour MP's nearly all of whom supported The Filth.
One got the impression that to be in that part of the Party you have to have a season ticket at the Jimmy Savile Dome.
He is no friend of Rangers, none of them were.

That said, they could only dish out their hatred in small and subtle ways, they never dreamed of launching against the club in the manner of the SNP, they couldn't dare such as there was still a huge amount of Labour-supporting Rangers fans.
The SNP have no such fears, they have nothing to lose by making us the Jewish ying to their Nazi yang.
 
Last edited:
The Club and fans have been used as a political tool by the SNP government.Sturgeon,Yousef and the rest were happy to put the police,ambulance and fans health at risk for their political ends.
What did they think the end result of 10000 mainly younger people drinking all day then marching into George Square would result in.
The SNP government and GCC facilitated this.
They wanted to show this as an example of Unionist Triumphilism and cynically compare this to a "peacefull" demonstration when the 2 Indian fellows were being detained the previous day.
I have no view on their right to be here or not as I don't know enough about the background to it all but they were also used by the SNP to make the UK government look bad and local SNP activists saviours of the day.
I wonder how such a crowd with ready made placards managed to turn up at 9,30 in the morning for this "dawn raid" as the SNP are calling it.
Surely they couldn't have been tipped off,could they?
 
Valley Bluenose said:
This, I think:

IT may be unfashionable to point out but football can create really joyous occasions. Take last Saturday’s FA Cup Final at Wembley with 21,500 people in the stadium, an intimation that normality is again conceivable.

There was an emotional quality to the singing of Abide With Me, dedicated to victims of the pandemic. “When other helpers fail and comforts flee; Help of the helpless, oh, abide with me”. Old words with special meaning as people came together after so long, in this way.

Then there was the game itself, turning on two acts of beauty – the goal from Youri Tielemans which won it and the save from Kasper Schmeichel that thwarted Chelsea. So Leicester, one of our cities hardest hit by the pandemic, had its morale lifted to the heavens.

The occasion was possible through a balanced approach to risk. Putting 21,500 people into Wembley’s open air must carry a scintilla of risk. But keeping them out and playing this special game behind closed doors would surely have done far more harm than good.

In Scotland, such thinking is taboo. Even before the latest Glasgow shutdown, there were to be just 600 supporters inside Hampden for the Scottish Cup Final. Now the vast terraces will be empty. To what good effect or elimination of risk, I wonder?

Last Friday I was in Glasgow Airport, a place of eerie silence these days but suddenly raucous sound announced the arrival of a flight from Belfast which disgorged a platoon of Rangers tops, clearly here for a party. I should make clear the colour of tops is irrelevant to the thrust of my argument.

If anyone had doubts, this confirmed that the following day’s celebrations were going to be a big event attracting supporters from far and near. Given that entry to Ibrox stadium was precluded, the logic pointed to a big event somewhere else – ie the streets, bridges and squares of Glasgow. Who had decided that this was a good – or at least, less bad – idea?

It seemed basic common sense – which would have applied equally regardless of which club had something to celebrate – that the thousands congregating in Glasgow should be allowed to do so in their preferred environment, their own stadium. The choice was not between whether or not people would congregate; only where.

I have still to hear any rational explanation of why it was thought preferable for this to happen in the aforementioned streets, bridges and squares where, as soon transpired, absolutely no rules would apply, than within the confines of a stadium where they all wanted to be and within which some degree of regulation would have been possible.

Then, while I was waiting for my flight, a friend in the hospitality industry phoned in despair to tell me about the latest disaster – the decision not to move Glasgow down to level 2. At this point, the contrast between what everyone knew was going to happen the following day and the latest extension of Glasgow’s lockdown moved from being merely irrational to grotesque.

I have never quite understood why it is forbidden to have a glass of wine with a meal within permitted hours. However, the idea this would continue to be banned in Glasgow on public health grounds while the same politicians and experts had put exclusion from a football stadium before all the blatantly obvious risks inherent in the alternative now appeared incomprehensible and irresponsible.

Yet who does one turn to for an explanation? Who can the beleaguered hospitality industry ask for the right of appeal, based on reason? In what respect is the public health advice in England different to that in Scotland? There are so many questions and after more than a year of this, so few detailed, satisfactory answers.

The decision makers hide behind the mantra that anyone who challenges their edicts is less interested than themselves in public health or protecting the community. That has never been true and should have been called out long before now. The longer this goes on, the more urgent the need for scrutiny.

Keeping Glasgow closed is a blunt instrument which fails to recognise vast differences within its boundaries. Concentrating on postcode areas seems more sensible than relying on boundaries which were drawn in the 1990s for entirely different reasons – primarily to keep more prosperous areas out of Glasgow.

The idea that people are not going to travel from Glasgow for a meal in Bearsden or Kilmacolm does not accord with reality. So the major impact of this blanket ban within the confines of the city is not to limit the spread of the virus but to put another nail in the coffins of good, responsible businesses that are struggling to survive.

If the politicians believe their own rhetoric, why did they not act last Friday to limit the public health damage from the Rangers party? Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf could have made a recording of his pious strictures to be released around 6pm. and then taken the rest of Saturday off. What did he expect in George Square? Community singing of Abide with Me?

Ditto the First Minister who should surely have seen the need for containment within her own constituency? The lesson is that while it is easy to ban things it is within your authority to ban, a greater talent is required for seeing a bigger picture – and that is what they made a complete mess of last weekend.
Click to expand...

Surprisingly decent article. The SNP are a disgrace.
 
Brian Wilson nails the incompetent SNP and Scot Govt brilliantly

The SNP are hopeless and couldn’t run this country on their own without the UK Govt

Everything they touch turns to shit

Hum Ma Bawz and Nicoliar wanted the George Square scenes. They hate us and want us gone

Also loads of videos showing PS escorting and ushering and encouraging the Rangers fans into George Square. They pro actively led them into the area

Then at some point decided to clear the square. No doubt this strategy will have antagonised the situation hence the violence.

I won’t condone fans fighting each other and that’s shocking but I’m convinced this strategy was formed by SNP and PS and the flash points occurred.

The SNP wanted confrontation IMO
 
Marstonbear said:
Rangers proposed a plan to have 10k season ticket holders inside the stadium over 4 different days to negate any gatherings after Saturday’s game.

As we know the authorities knocked this back.

Given the authorities unhappiness with events in George Square after the title was first clinched I’m minded of the below quote from Einstein

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
Click to expand...
This would have worked perfectly. It was a fantastic idea but unfortunately it didn’t fit with the primary aim of being able to have a go at big bad Rangers after the event.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
This, I think:

IT may be unfashionable to point out but football can create really joyous occasions. Take last Saturday’s FA Cup Final at Wembley with 21,500 people in the stadium, an intimation that normality is again conceivable.

There was an emotional quality to the singing of Abide With Me, dedicated to victims of the pandemic. “When other helpers fail and comforts flee; Help of the helpless, oh, abide with me”. Old words with special meaning as people came together after so long, in this way.

Then there was the game itself, turning on two acts of beauty – the goal from Youri Tielemans which won it and the save from Kasper Schmeichel that thwarted Chelsea. So Leicester, one of our cities hardest hit by the pandemic, had its morale lifted to the heavens.

The occasion was possible through a balanced approach to risk. Putting 21,500 people into Wembley’s open air must carry a scintilla of risk. But keeping them out and playing this special game behind closed doors would surely have done far more harm than good.

In Scotland, such thinking is taboo. Even before the latest Glasgow shutdown, there were to be just 600 supporters inside Hampden for the Scottish Cup Final. Now the vast terraces will be empty. To what good effect or elimination of risk, I wonder?

Last Friday I was in Glasgow Airport, a place of eerie silence these days but suddenly raucous sound announced the arrival of a flight from Belfast which disgorged a platoon of Rangers tops, clearly here for a party. I should make clear the colour of tops is irrelevant to the thrust of my argument.

If anyone had doubts, this confirmed that the following day’s celebrations were going to be a big event attracting supporters from far and near. Given that entry to Ibrox stadium was precluded, the logic pointed to a big event somewhere else – ie the streets, bridges and squares of Glasgow. Who had decided that this was a good – or at least, less bad – idea?

It seemed basic common sense – which would have applied equally regardless of which club had something to celebrate – that the thousands congregating in Glasgow should be allowed to do so in their preferred environment, their own stadium. The choice was not between whether or not people would congregate; only where.

I have still to hear any rational explanation of why it was thought preferable for this to happen in the aforementioned streets, bridges and squares where, as soon transpired, absolutely no rules would apply, than within the confines of a stadium where they all wanted to be and within which some degree of regulation would have been possible.

Then, while I was waiting for my flight, a friend in the hospitality industry phoned in despair to tell me about the latest disaster – the decision not to move Glasgow down to level 2. At this point, the contrast between what everyone knew was going to happen the following day and the latest extension of Glasgow’s lockdown moved from being merely irrational to grotesque.

I have never quite understood why it is forbidden to have a glass of wine with a meal within permitted hours. However, the idea this would continue to be banned in Glasgow on public health grounds while the same politicians and experts had put exclusion from a football stadium before all the blatantly obvious risks inherent in the alternative now appeared incomprehensible and irresponsible.

Yet who does one turn to for an explanation? Who can the beleaguered hospitality industry ask for the right of appeal, based on reason? In what respect is the public health advice in England different to that in Scotland? There are so many questions and after more than a year of this, so few detailed, satisfactory answers.

The decision makers hide behind the mantra that anyone who challenges their edicts is less interested than themselves in public health or protecting the community. That has never been true and should have been called out long before now. The longer this goes on, the more urgent the need for scrutiny.

Keeping Glasgow closed is a blunt instrument which fails to recognise vast differences within its boundaries. Concentrating on postcode areas seems more sensible than relying on boundaries which were drawn in the 1990s for entirely different reasons – primarily to keep more prosperous areas out of Glasgow.

The idea that people are not going to travel from Glasgow for a meal in Bearsden or Kilmacolm does not accord with reality. So the major impact of this blanket ban within the confines of the city is not to limit the spread of the virus but to put another nail in the coffins of good, responsible businesses that are struggling to survive.

If the politicians believe their own rhetoric, why did they not act last Friday to limit the public health damage from the Rangers party? Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf could have made a recording of his pious strictures to be released around 6pm. and then taken the rest of Saturday off. What did he expect in George Square? Community singing of Abide with Me?

Ditto the First Minister who should surely have seen the need for containment within her own constituency? The lesson is that while it is easy to ban things it is within your authority to ban, a greater talent is required for seeing a bigger picture – and that is what they made a complete mess of last weekend.
Click to expand...
So much commonsense in the one article.
 
muz73 said:
Let us be of no doubt, the whole scenario on Saturday was channelled by the SnatziP as a major propaganda stunt.

We all knew where and when our support would congregate and party, so why not simply open Ibrox?

Certainly, some would have gone to George Sq anyway to re-state our position of recovering Glasgow from the bheasts but in far less and more easily manageable numbers.

This is a very sinister state of affairs and we, as a support, must realise we are being de-humanised and politically targeted by the Roman Church appeasing Govt and their state police.

How we go about being smarter and more organised is for Bears savvier than me, but we must start fighting fire with fire and becoming far more disciplined and streetwise.
Click to expand...
As long as we have people in the mindset of, “I’ll do what I like”, without a care for the consequences then we will not move on from an endless cycle of shooting ourselves in the foot.

You don’t win a fight like this by falling in line with what your opponent wants you to do. You turn the tables on them to expose their nonsense.
 
mfgorm said:
This was Manchester all over again. The authorities knew it was going to happen and chose to ignore it. The statement Rangers put out would have been run past Useless and co, after the celebrations when we clinched the league. To me it said "your not supposed to do it but we know you are "
We now find out SNP blocked a sensible plan that would have pleased fans and would have been easier to police. Why? Because they can't make an unpopular decision to their voters. Big, bad bunch of (mainly) Unionists getting to enjoy themselves.
Click to expand...
Rangers missed a trick by not revealing that the clubs suggestion had been rejected, with no compromise offered.

Rangers FC needs to stop being so “nice” in all of this.
 
Gibraltar Loyal said:
A superb article.
The fact its by a Celtic director will have Humza's head in a spin.
Wilson has put his head well above the parapet here. But he can see what the snp are trying to do and its a bigger issue than football rivalry.
Click to expand...
Indeed.. in an article which overall is very good, I thought this point was excellent and I did LOL for real

If the politicians believe their own rhetoric, why did they not act last Friday to limit the public health damage from the Rangers party? Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf could have made a recording of his pious strictures to be released around 6pm. and then taken the rest of Saturday off. What did he expect in George Square? Community singing of Abide with Me?
Click to expand...
:))
 
silverbear said:
That's an excellent article. At last we have someone in the media spelling it all out. The madness of knowing there would be anything between 10,000 - 20,000 of our fans out in the city on Saturday. Yet not allowing them into an outdoor arena to see what it was they wanted to celebrate. Thereby meaning they had to find other outdoor places to go.
It's incredible incompetence and an example of the stupidity of the government. If thousands of people are going to gather anyway, put them somewhere that you can control better and, ultimately, the actual place they want to be.
Click to expand...
Negligence is the word to describe it.
 
Tim Hunter said:
...and how much was deliberately engineered?
Click to expand...

Well the one thing every Bear should remember is that the SNP attacking Rangers does not cost them many votes as, with a few exceptions, none of us would vote for them. We are an easy target and it plays to their core voters, who despise our Unionist leanings.
 
Tino_Col said:
The SNP and other Rangers haters were furious at the first title celebrations. Furious that there was no police battering people, furious that thousands gathered waving Union Jacks and having a good time. So they turned to "oh but what about the benches" for some uproad. They were not happy, they wanted pictures of police battering Rangers fans and something to cling onto for political points.

That's what Saturday and the aftermath is all about.

A bitter, divisive and wholly sinister political party.
Click to expand...
The same people were equally angry when a demonstration was broke up in England the following day with force.
 
dh1963 said:
Every morning on the BBC website there's an article showing the front pages of all the papers today.
I notice that Celtic Director and former Labour MP Brian Wilson has a piece in The Herald today on page 14, advertised on their front page with the line "What did the SNP expect in George Square".

I can't see it online yet. Wondering whether it's another hatchet article on our fans being bigots, or whether it might be someone finally pointing out the inevitability of there being a title party that involved a few drinking too much and getting out of hand.

Anyone buy that paper and able to give more detail?

The Herald front page is the 5th one down on this BBC website page.

www.bbc.co.uk

Scotland's papers: 'Life should mean life' and vaccine refuseniks

The sentencing of sex offender Graham McGill and Scots missing jab appointments make the front pages.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Was that the thread on it yesterday?
was that different?
 
Would some still have gone to George Square if Ibrox was opened? I suspect yes but perhaps not 15k. The insurgents may still have been there agitating and taking pictures
 
A very good article, which pretty much sums up the incompetence of the SNP, but sadly it won't make a blind bit of difference, they are untouchable.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
This, I think:

IT may be unfashionable to point out but football can create really joyous occasions. Take last Saturday’s FA Cup Final at Wembley with 21,500 people in the stadium, an intimation that normality is again conceivable.

There was an emotional quality to the singing of Abide With Me, dedicated to victims of the pandemic. “When other helpers fail and comforts flee; Help of the helpless, oh, abide with me”. Old words with special meaning as people came together after so long, in this way.

Then there was the game itself, turning on two acts of beauty – the goal from Youri Tielemans which won it and the save from Kasper Schmeichel that thwarted Chelsea. So Leicester, one of our cities hardest hit by the pandemic, had its morale lifted to the heavens.

The occasion was possible through a balanced approach to risk. Putting 21,500 people into Wembley’s open air must carry a scintilla of risk. But keeping them out and playing this special game behind closed doors would surely have done far more harm than good.

In Scotland, such thinking is taboo. Even before the latest Glasgow shutdown, there were to be just 600 supporters inside Hampden for the Scottish Cup Final. Now the vast terraces will be empty. To what good effect or elimination of risk, I wonder?

Last Friday I was in Glasgow Airport, a place of eerie silence these days but suddenly raucous sound announced the arrival of a flight from Belfast which disgorged a platoon of Rangers tops, clearly here for a party. I should make clear the colour of tops is irrelevant to the thrust of my argument.

If anyone had doubts, this confirmed that the following day’s celebrations were going to be a big event attracting supporters from far and near. Given that entry to Ibrox stadium was precluded, the logic pointed to a big event somewhere else – ie the streets, bridges and squares of Glasgow. Who had decided that this was a good – or at least, less bad – idea?

It seemed basic common sense – which would have applied equally regardless of which club had something to celebrate – that the thousands congregating in Glasgow should be allowed to do so in their preferred environment, their own stadium. The choice was not between whether or not people would congregate; only where.

I have still to hear any rational explanation of why it was thought preferable for this to happen in the aforementioned streets, bridges and squares where, as soon transpired, absolutely no rules would apply, than within the confines of a stadium where they all wanted to be and within which some degree of regulation would have been possible.

Then, while I was waiting for my flight, a friend in the hospitality industry phoned in despair to tell me about the latest disaster – the decision not to move Glasgow down to level 2. At this point, the contrast between what everyone knew was going to happen the following day and the latest extension of Glasgow’s lockdown moved from being merely irrational to grotesque.

I have never quite understood why it is forbidden to have a glass of wine with a meal within permitted hours. However, the idea this would continue to be banned in Glasgow on public health grounds while the same politicians and experts had put exclusion from a football stadium before all the blatantly obvious risks inherent in the alternative now appeared incomprehensible and irresponsible.

Yet who does one turn to for an explanation? Who can the beleaguered hospitality industry ask for the right of appeal, based on reason? In what respect is the public health advice in England different to that in Scotland? There are so many questions and after more than a year of this, so few detailed, satisfactory answers.

The decision makers hide behind the mantra that anyone who challenges their edicts is less interested than themselves in public health or protecting the community. That has never been true and should have been called out long before now. The longer this goes on, the more urgent the need for scrutiny.

Keeping Glasgow closed is a blunt instrument which fails to recognise vast differences within its boundaries. Concentrating on postcode areas seems more sensible than relying on boundaries which were drawn in the 1990s for entirely different reasons – primarily to keep more prosperous areas out of Glasgow.

The idea that people are not going to travel from Glasgow for a meal in Bearsden or Kilmacolm does not accord with reality. So the major impact of this blanket ban within the confines of the city is not to limit the spread of the virus but to put another nail in the coffins of good, responsible businesses that are struggling to survive.

If the politicians believe their own rhetoric, why did they not act last Friday to limit the public health damage from the Rangers party? Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf could have made a recording of his pious strictures to be released around 6pm. and then taken the rest of Saturday off. What did he expect in George Square? Community singing of Abide with Me?

Ditto the First Minister who should surely have seen the need for containment within her own constituency? The lesson is that while it is easy to ban things it is within your authority to ban, a greater talent is required for seeing a bigger picture – and that is what they made a complete mess of last weekend.
Click to expand...

silverbear said:
That's an excellent article. At last we have someone in the media spelling it all out. The madness of knowing there would be anything between 10,000 - 20,000 of our fans out in the city on Saturday. Yet not allowing them into an outdoor arena to see what it was they wanted to celebrate. Thereby meaning they had to find other outdoor places to go.
It's incredible incompetence and an example of the stupidity of the government. If thousands of people are going to gather anyway, put them somewhere that you can control better and, ultimately, the actual place they want to be.
Click to expand...
In George Square for 7hrs + with no facilities or any entertainment.
No indoor drinking in pubs .left to their own devices.
Police then block access to Square at certain points but this also stops people looking to leave.
Then turn up in full riot gear .. aye that sounds like a plan :oops:
 
Brian Wilson is an intelligent man. One that generally can be relied on to take an even view. His work in land reform in Scotland is excellent he is one of a very small number that actually understands the issue.

Here he totally nails it. I have tried hard to follow the Covid rules because I want to do the right thing for others in a pandemic. Now though it so difficult to see why we should follow rules that increasingly make no sense at all.

Saturday could have been a day of enjoyment at Ibrox. If we had 4 days with 10k in the stadium everyone could have been happy.

But suppose that doesn’t fit the nationalist narrative.
 
Rabbie was right,"such a parcel of rogues in a nation".

BTW, who is George Square named after? St.George, patron saint of England, King George,perm any one from 6, George Galloway ?
 
I know exactly what Brian Wilson is and in fairness he does not hide it. He could not have been more honest in that article.
Being of an age to remember when Labour were actually Labour, I can also remember him being a very astute politician back in the day. Not any of the current days offering at the Edinburgh Assembly could have lived with him.
 
Brian Wilson is consistent in what he puts in the Herald.
He puts it right up the SNP in every article and never misses them.
Must admit I never knew he was a Cellic director,and you know what it disnae matter.
It shows that you dont need to be bluenose or a Protestant to see the SNP for the Facist control freaks they are.
 
DavieC1953 said:
Brian Wilson is consistent in what he puts in the Herald.
He puts it right up the SNP in every article and never misses them.
Must admit I never knew he was a Cellic director,and you know what it disnae matter.
It shows that you dont need to be bluenose or a Protestant to see the SNP for the Facist control freaks they are.
Click to expand...
I think he also wrote the Official History of Celtic (well the football part anyway)
 
RabSpackman said:
Rangers missed a trick by not revealing that the clubs suggestion had been rejected, with no compromise offered.

Rangers FC needs to stop being so “nice” in all of this.
Click to expand...
Possibly they were worried it might escalate the issue with us fans and wanted to keep it celebratory only.
 
johnnybravo said:
Wilson is surprising me,
one of the few, and he’ll be copping a lot of flak for speaking the truth
Click to expand...
If it's the Labour MP, then Wilson is pure Rangers hating filth.

His words are there to try and harm the Natsis and nothing to do with trying to stand our corner.

Some people are easy pleased.
 
TerryMunro said:
Possibly they were worried it might escalate the issue with us fans and wanted to keep it celebratory only.
Click to expand...
And I think we are at the point where if anyone at Rangers thought that a newly elected Nationalist administration were going to play nicely with the biggest symbol of Unionism as far as the eye can see, then we need someone else’s input into such decisions.

We needed clarity and protection for the club & supporters from the type ofnsocial media napalming that we have been treated to since Wednesday.

Protecting the brand involves more than chasing up a few folk selling bootleg scarves.
 
No arguments at all with that article.
A common sense approach is beyond the remitt and agenda of the anti British snp, as every bear should know by now.
 
RabSpackman said:
And I think we are at the point where if anyone at Rangers thought that a newly elected Nationalist administration were going to play nicely with the biggest symbol of Unionism as far as the eye can see, then we need someone else’s input into such decisions.

We needed clarity and protection for the club & supporters from the type ofnsocial media napalming that we have been treated to since Wednesday.

Protecting the brand involves more than chasing up a few folk selling bootleg scarves.
Click to expand...
I suspect they’re protecting the brand, just doing it quietly. Doncaster not being at the trophy ceremony has brought me to that opinion.
 
Brian Wilson was/is no fiend of Rangers pretty sure he was part of the Labour Westminster Celtic cabal that included Dr Death, however that said credit where it is due that was a well written and balanced article firmly pointing the finger at the SNP, GCC & PS who orchestrated this and all got what they wanted as they knew they would.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top