Roskoranger
Well-Known Member
It is NOT point scoring but we should be highlighting this horrific abuse to the wides world audience.
In the last bit they have instructed their lawyers to take them to courts for these claims I for one wish they had because it would have maybe stopped the abuse from happening for some of the other boys involved and that bit really stands out for me.
And iam not saying or dismissing what has happened to the one's before this so called internal investigation is supposed to have happened.
I understand what you’re saying but I can tell you that journalists overseas are taking a definite interest in this issue. The SNP left us no choice but to take it outside Scotland.
I admire Hugh Burt for standing up and trying his best to be of help to these young people who where being abused and to me he deserves to be mentioned a lot in this whole sordid affair and I hope he has at some point written down what he knew and who were the main perpetrators in all of this.Remember that this is where they had too remove Hugh Birt, a man of honour who
stood his ground. When he refused to go, the panel was McGinn, Torbett & Cairney
who delivered the news; imagine being pushed out by 2(?) of the Rats from the list
of 14, who he was trying too eradicate from the Paedo Club. Few things bothering
in that decision, again and not for the first time; what did the other 2 (guilty) have
over the top man at the Club, to persuade him too"go along with the Rats"?
Bear in mind that this was in the last century, 34 years ago and we are still chipping
away at the roots,hoping that eventually it has too come down.
Not even to deny it.
I admire Hugh Burt for standing up and trying his best to be of help to these young people who where being abused and to me he deserves to be mentioned a lot in this whole sordid affair and I hope he has at some point written down what he knew and who were the main perpetrators in all of this.
That bbc article is just over a year old - so that 'internal investigation' looks to be lasting at least over THREE years and counting! Celtic / their insurers must be leaving no stone unturned.It’s happened and so did the tour of Japan. So shhhhhh sweep sweep
are they really?I understand what you’re saying but I can tell you that journalists overseas are taking a definite interest in this issue. The SNP left us no choice but to take it outside Scotland.
Prior to last year their statements didn't even include sorry.makes a change to their usual repeat of 'sorry sorry, separate entity tho'
Yes.are they really?
are they really?
The separate AGM’s chaired by celtc fc officials. Those ones?Devils advocate here.
If the Boys club was part of CFC then why have a seperate AGM?
Was there a seperate AGM for the reserve team?
Celtic Pools? Celtic hospitality?
Think the fact there was a seperate AGM will actually be used as part of the scums seperate entity defence.
The problem stems from the church they belong to they have been brought up with it happening and no prosecutions for many years, the priests and brother paedophiles just got sent to another diocese.That just shows you that the mentality at Celtic Football Club has not changed over the years.The management, board members and owners still think it's perfectly acceptable to harbour Paedophilia within said Club and that is the sickest part in this whole sordid affair.
Celtic Football Club and the Paedophile ring they helped to protect, should not sit comfortably with any right minded individual, but we know it will in certain quarters and again that is just so morally wrong.
Paedophilia has no place in a civilised society and if at Celtic Football Club they think otherwise, then as a Football Club they have no place within the society that is representative of the country we live in.
That just shows you that the mentality at Celtic Football Club has not changed over the years.The management, board members and owners still think it's perfectly acceptable to harbour Paedophilia within said Club and that is the sickest part in this whole sordid affair.
Celtic Football Club and the Paedophile ring they helped to protect, should not sit comfortably with any right minded individual, but we know it will in certain quarters and again that is just so morally wrong.
Paedophilia has no place in a civilised society and if at Celtic Football Club they think otherwise, then as a Football Club they have no place within the society that is representative of the country we live in.
So let's see.
Did they just say this in the knowledge that no-one in the media would question it, or at least ask for proof of these "hundreds of letters"?
"During the course of the last ten days Celtic Football Club and the Boys' Club have been in receipt of hundreds of letters and phone calls from boys and their parents, past and present, stating their complete support and backing of all involved with the Boys' Club".
It's a ridiculous statement to make, it's a pathetic barefaced sickening lie!
And now today many years on after those involved are doing jail time for those heinous crimes committed they are coming out with shite like the Boys' Club had fuckall to do with us?
That whole disgusting organisation needs fully investigated and punished accordingly by the law of the land.
Humza Yousef, YOU can fuck off ya cunt!
It’s the current Celtic wayBack in the days when Only an Excuse was mildly amusing, they did a skit on Michael Kelly, or Gene Kelly or whoever it was in charge of Celtic at the time. It was "A statement from Celtic Football Club on the financial blah, blah blah at Celtic" Johnathon Watson comes out dressed as Michael Kelly and reading from a script in his catholic plaintiff voice come out with something like " Winsae us, leez alane, merely custodians, geez yir money" This tone pretty much sums up the quality of this denial. It was the Old Celtic way.
Celtic's stance has changed materially over the years. From initially dismissing allegations of paedophilia at CBC as "scurrilous", they have had to concede that abuse did take place. Court convictions have left them little choice but to do so. Now, their tack is to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that CBC was a separate entity to CFC, with the implication being that CFC had and continues to have no legal responsibility for it and the crimes committed by its officials.
The question is no longer whether or not abuse took place at CBC. It is one concerning the extent to which Celtic are responsible for the failure to address it timeously and effectively. However, given that Celtic's default position is to deny, to deflect and to disparage others, their second and seemingly ongoing investigation into matters is unlikely to address this question transparently. That no-one - not the SFA, the media, politicians, supporters of other clubs on social media - would appear to be putting them under pressure to conclude this investigation and publish the results reflects an assumption that, if not so arrogantly dismissive as the first one, it won't be anything other than an exercise in damage limitation.
And so we await the results of an investigation by the Scottish football authorities, led by a chairman whose credentials have been doubted by the charity Open Secret, which supports victims of sex abuse, and whose public utterances to date give no cause to believe that much attention will be paid to the magnitude of malpractice at one particular club. And we await the publication of a Scottish Government inquiry into child abuse which specifically excludes sport and religion, and which states its purpose to be the protection of children in the future, not justice for victims in the past. That Scottish football is run by and for Celtic is more opinion than fact. However, it's credible opinion, given the background and behaviour of Regan, Doncaster, MacLennan, Mulraney, Whyte and others. Meanwhile, Humza and his cronies don't need to fuck off. They've already done so, happy to abrogate responsibility for endangering Celtic's star role in a success-against-all-the-sectarian-odds story of an immigrant community (risible as this narrative might be when considered unemotionally), because to do so might lose them votes and, consequently, power.
This situation is certainly disgusting. More than that, it's frightening. Frightening that a football club and its cheerleaders, and a country's guardians (the cheerleaders and guardians, as we know, often overlap), can so calculatedly prioritise their own interests over justice for the victims of prolonged and particularly reprehensible crime, and over punishment for not just individual perpetrators of such crime but for institutions under whose management they were allowed to operate.
That the image has cracked - thanks in no small measure to the sterling efforts of some on FF - is encouraging. Will, it, though, shatter? Not from any investigation within Scotland, it won't.
One of the best posts ever on these boards never mind just this thread.Celtic's stance has changed materially over the years. From initially dismissing allegations of paedophilia at CBC as "scurrilous", they have had to concede that abuse did take place. Court convictions have left them little choice but to do so. Now, their tack is to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that CBC was a separate entity to CFC, with the implication being that CFC had and continues to have no legal responsibility for it and the crimes committed by its officials.
The question is no longer whether or not abuse took place at CBC. It is one concerning the extent to which Celtic are responsible for the failure to address it timeously and effectively. However, given that Celtic's default position is to deny, to deflect and to disparage others, their second and seemingly ongoing investigation into matters is unlikely to address this question transparently. That no-one - not the SFA, the media, politicians, supporters of other clubs on social media - would appear to be putting them under pressure to conclude this investigation and publish the results reflects an assumption that, if not so arrogantly dismissive as the first one, it won't be anything other than an exercise in damage limitation.
And so we await the results of an investigation by the Scottish football authorities, led by a chairman whose credentials have been doubted by the charity Open Secret, which supports victims of sex abuse, and whose public utterances to date give no cause to believe that much attention will be paid to the magnitude of malpractice at one particular club. And we await the publication of a Scottish Government inquiry into child abuse which specifically excludes sport and religion, and which states its purpose to be the protection of children in the future, not justice for victims in the past. That Scottish football is run by and for Celtic is more opinion than fact. However, it's credible opinion, given the background and behaviour of Regan, Doncaster, MacLennan, Mulraney, Whyte and others. Meanwhile, Humza and his cronies don't need to fuck off. They've already done so, happy to abrogate responsibility for endangering Celtic's star role in a success-against-all-the-sectarian-odds story of an immigrant community (risible as this narrative might be when considered unemotionally), because to do so might lose them votes and, consequently, power.
This situation is certainly disgusting. More than that, it's frightening. Frightening that a football club and its cheerleaders, and a country's guardians (the cheerleaders and guardians, as we know, often overlap), can so calculatedly prioritise their own interests over justice for the victims of prolonged and particularly reprehensible crime, and over punishment for not just individual perpetrators of such crime but for institutions under whose management they were allowed to operate.
That the image has cracked - thanks in no small measure to the sterling efforts of some on FF - is encouraging. Will, it, though, shatter? Not from any investigation within Scotland, it won't.
I called Radio Clyde a number of years ago claiming I was "George from Coatbridge." I spoke to Delahunt and keevins asking them if they believed Rangers were responsible for the tax avoidance/evasion scandal as Craig Whyte was representing the club. My point being that Whyte didn't have sole responsibility as he was acting on behalf of the club. Both Keevins and Delahunt happily agreed that this was the case.
I then moved on to my real point and asked them if they then agreed that Celtic were responsible for the paedophillia taking place at Parkhead.
There was a quick pause followed by them claiming they didnt understand my logic. "Next caller".
So well written it should be sent to the newspapers opinion column, not that they would print it.Celtic's stance has changed materially over the years. From initially dismissing allegations of paedophilia at CBC as "scurrilous", they have had to concede that abuse did take place. Court convictions have left them little choice but to do so. Now, their tack is to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that CBC was a separate entity to CFC, with the implication being that CFC had and continues to have no legal responsibility for it and the crimes committed by its officials.
The question is no longer whether or not abuse took place at CBC. It is one concerning the extent to which Celtic are responsible for the failure to address it timeously and effectively. However, given that Celtic's default position is to deny, to deflect and to disparage others, their second and seemingly ongoing investigation into matters is unlikely to address this question transparently. That no-one - not the SFA, the media, politicians, supporters of other clubs on social media - would appear to be putting them under pressure to conclude this investigation and publish the results reflects an assumption that, if not so arrogantly dismissive as the first one, it won't be anything other than an exercise in damage limitation.
And so we await the results of an investigation by the Scottish football authorities, led by a chairman whose credentials have been doubted by the charity Open Secret, which supports victims of sex abuse, and whose public utterances to date give no cause to believe that much attention will be paid to the magnitude of malpractice at one particular club. And we await the publication of a Scottish Government inquiry into child abuse which specifically excludes sport and religion, and which states its purpose to be the protection of children in the future, not justice for victims in the past. That Scottish football is run by and for Celtic is more opinion than fact. However, it's credible opinion, given the background and behaviour of Regan, Doncaster, MacLennan, Mulraney, Whyte and others. Meanwhile, Humza and his cronies don't need to fuck off. They've already done so, happy to abrogate responsibility for endangering Celtic's star role in a success-against-all-the-sectarian-odds story of an immigrant community (risible as this narrative might be when considered unemotionally), because to do so might lose them votes and, consequently, power.
This situation is certainly disgusting. More than that, it's frightening. Frightening that a football club and its cheerleaders, and a country's guardians (the cheerleaders and guardians, as we know, often overlap), can so calculatedly prioritise their own interests over justice for the victims of prolonged and particularly reprehensible crime, and over punishment for not just individual perpetrators of such crime but for institutions under whose management they were allowed to operate.
That the image has cracked - thanks in no small measure to the sterling efforts of some on FF - is encouraging. Will, it, though, shatter? Not from any investigation within Scotland, it won't.
I just don't live there anymore. I don't see anything in the media regarding this!Think you might be new to the child abuse threads mate ?
The problem stems from the church they belong to they have been brought up with it happening and no prosecutions for many years, the priests and brother paedophiles just got sent to another diocese.
Child rape has been present for a long time in the Roman Catholic church, and the fact that they are led to believe that somehow they can confess as perpetrators or as witnesses and do nothing with the knowledge that it has happened, and will be forgiven is a huge lie and a large part of the problem.
How twisted is it that people say nothing about what they know, but torture and ridicule the victims of CSA, that is totally unforgivable,unacceptable and they will all be accountable for these cover ups at some stage,in this life or the next.
I called Radio Clyde a number of years ago claiming I was "George from Coatbridge." I spoke to Delahunt and keevins asking them if they believed Rangers were responsible for the tax avoidance/evasion scandal as Craig Whyte was representing the club. My point being that Whyte didn't have sole responsibility as he was acting on behalf of the club. Both Keevins and Delahunt happily agreed that this was the case.
I then moved on to my real point and asked them if they then agreed that Celtic were responsible for the paedophillia taking place at Parkhead.
There was a quick pause followed by them claiming they didnt understand my logic. "Next caller".
I just don't live there anymore. I don't see anything in the media regarding this!
In any other walk of life they would be. Unfortunately they're a protected species in Scotland so the best we can hope for is demotion, massive fines, ALL the perpetrators brought to justice and some closure for the victims.Iv heard a few on here say that as a club celtic should essentially receive the same punishment as us so put down to the bottom devision of scottish football,i personally think for the crimes committed against children and the audacious cover up that still continues to this day they should be wiped out of existence completely.
Unfortunately I can see it playing out this way too - for celtic this is all about money (seperate legal entity is an accounting term) that's all they are interested in. However if Celtic are successfull they absolutely will call it out as a moral victory - they are that disgustingMorally they have a massive case to answer but, in a strict legal sense, it may be decided that they were separate entities. Often morality and the law don’t align, unfortunately (How I think it will play out, not how I want it to btw).
For me that’s it exactly. Meanwhile the victims have to live with the lifelong consequences. I would have thought in these days where the importance of mental health is all consuming, much more would be made if this awful situation.Unfortunately I can see it playing out this way too - for celtic this is all about money (seperate legal entity is an accounting term) that's all they are interested in. However if Celtic are successfull they absolutely will call it out as a moral victory - they are that disgusting
For me that’s it exactly. Meanwhile the victims have to live with the lifelong consequences. I would have thought in these days where the importance of mental health is all consuming, much more would be made if this awful situation.
For me that’s it exactly. Meanwhile the victims have to live with the lifelong consequences. I would have thought in these days where the importance of mental health is all consuming, much more would be made if this awful situation.
For me that’s it exactly. Meanwhile the victims have to live with the lifelong consequences. I would have thought in these days where the importance of mental health is all consuming, much more would be made if this awful situation.
Well done for that mate, maybe we should all make a concerted effort to hound the various phone ins to ask the legitimate question about paedophilia taking place over the decades at one of the country’s biggest sporting institutions and the governments/media’s apathy towards what is one of the worst criminal offences a person can commit.I called Radio Clyde a number of years ago claiming I was "George from Coatbridge." I spoke to Delahunt and keevins asking them if they believed Rangers were responsible for the tax avoidance/evasion scandal as Craig Whyte was representing the club. My point being that Whyte didn't have sole responsibility as he was acting on behalf of the club. Both Keevins and Delahunt happily agreed that this was the case.
I then moved on to my real point and asked them if they then agreed that Celtic were responsible for the paedophillia taking place at Parkhead.
There was a quick pause followed by them claiming they didnt understand my logic. "Next caller".
I would like to see the people who supposedly done the investigation into the abuse questioned under oath.Why are Mcginn and his pals not being pulled into court? Are these dirty bassa's above the law...
And yes the above is damning, tik tok Timmy..
Celtic FC did not respond to a request for comment
Now isn't that a shock.
Gene Kelly ? Ha! Ha! Any chance of a Tap BC ?Back in the days when Only an Excuse was mildly amusing, they did a skit on Michael Kelly, or Gene Kelly or whoever it was in charge of Celtic at the time. It was "A statement from Celtic Football Club on the financial blah, blah blah at Celtic" Johnathon Watson comes out dressed as Michael Kelly and reading from a script in his catholic plaintiff voice come out with something like " Winsae us, leez alane, merely custodians, geez yir money" This tone pretty much sums up the quality of this denial. It was the Old Celtic way.
I agree with most of this. Reference your last sentence, this is why I took it to Westminster 2 years ago. Others will verify this on here. My reply from the MPs that replied was they could have an opinion but couldn’t act professionally due to the devolved government. I wouldn’t accept this.Celtic's stance has changed materially over the years. From initially dismissing allegations of paedophilia at CBC as "scurrilous", they have had to concede that abuse did take place. Court convictions have left them little choice but to do so. Now, their tack is to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that CBC was a separate entity to CFC, with the implication being that CFC had and continues to have no legal responsibility for it and the crimes committed by its officials.
The question is no longer whether or not abuse took place at CBC. It is one concerning the extent to which Celtic are responsible for the failure to address it timeously and effectively. However, given that Celtic's default position is to deny, to deflect and to disparage others, their second and seemingly ongoing investigation into matters is unlikely to address this question transparently. That no-one - not the SFA, the media, politicians, supporters of other clubs on social media - would appear to be putting them under pressure to conclude this investigation and publish the results reflects an assumption that, if not so arrogantly dismissive as the first one, it won't be anything other than an exercise in damage limitation.
And so we await the results of an investigation by the Scottish football authorities, led by a chairman whose credentials have been doubted by the charity Open Secret, which supports victims of sex abuse, and whose public utterances to date give no cause to believe that much attention will be paid to the magnitude of malpractice at one particular club. And we await the publication of a Scottish Government inquiry into child abuse which specifically excludes sport and religion, and which states its purpose to be the protection of children in the future, not justice for victims in the past. That Scottish football is run by and for Celtic is more opinion than fact. However, it's credible opinion, given the background and behaviour of Regan, Doncaster, MacLennan, Mulraney, Whyte and others. Meanwhile, Humza and his cronies don't need to fuck off. They've already done so, happy to abrogate responsibility for endangering Celtic's star role in a success-against-all-the-sectarian-odds story of an immigrant community (risible as this narrative might be when considered unemotionally), because to do so might lose them votes and, consequently, power.
This situation is certainly disgusting. More than that, it's frightening. Frightening that a football club and its cheerleaders, and a country's guardians (the cheerleaders and guardians, as we know, often overlap), can so calculatedly prioritise their own interests over justice for the victims of prolonged and particularly reprehensible crime, and over punishment for not just individual perpetrators of such crime but for institutions under whose management they were allowed to operate.
That the image has cracked - thanks in no small measure to the sterling efforts of some on FF - is encouraging. Will, it, though, shatter? Not from any investigation within Scotland, it won't.
The only way to carry this out is via a public inquiry, surely if Celtic FC believe themselves to be innocent of the myriad of accusations of Paedophelia carried out on their premises by their employees ,then they would want to clear their name and polish up their tarnished reputation as little boy Rapists.I would like to see the people who supposedly done the investigation into the abuse questioned under oath.
I agree with most of this. Reference your last sentence, this is why I took it to Westminster 2 years ago. Others will verify this on here. My reply from the MPs that replied was they could have an opinion but couldn’t act professionally due to the devolved government. I wouldn’t accept this.
We then set about proving that there was cross border abuse linked with Celtic in the aim of getting a full independent inquiry run by Westminster. We obviously proved this when we uncovered Father Michael Spencer.
I think you’ll agree that we cannot trust the Scottish government in appointing the correct person to head an inquiry in Scotland. It would be like marking your own homework. Our belief is that not only Celtic need to be dragged in front of an independent inquiry, but also Police Scotland and certain members of the SNP. Especially the under qualified justice secretary.
For this to be done correctly, then my belief is that only Westminster is qualified to do so and not the clowns that reside in Holyrood.
Tesco bankMorally they have a massive case to answer but, in a strict legal sense, it may be decided that they were separate entities. Often morality and the law don’t align, unfortunately (How I think it will play out, not how I want it to btw).