Sinner-to-Saint

Maybe to remind the players to follow Gerrard's instruction, which is to score one more goal than their opponents.

I'm supposed to be 'out of here', but I feel rude by not responding to a direct question. So, just to make people aware, after this reply, I will not be posting in this thread for a few days. and will not reply to any questions. Many of the nationalists I know, possibly the majority, are staunch republicans. Their reaction is likely to be "Meh! So what? He was a privileged king anyway. Who gives a f**k? We should be looking to the future Scotland - diverse, multicultural, equitable. Royalty sucks! I'd be quite happy if it was pulled down. The Bruce has nothing to do with the sort of nationalism I support or the Scotland I envisage! Let's build a workers' paradise." Some might even agree, given that he was racist against Saxons. Other nationalists I know are more traditional. Aye, most of them are still pretty woke, but they also value Scotland's past. The majority cherish Scotland's past and share it with everybody. They value Scottish history, Gaelic, Scots, Burns. "We're all Jock Tamson's bairns." They'd probably be pretty annoyed by it. In a nutshell, Scottish nationalism is mostly woke. Many supporters wouldn't condemn Black Lives Matter, and if the hoax were believed would refuse to condemn, and perhaps even justify, the graffiti. I hope that makes sense.

If I'm honest I did think the Bruce statue was possibly done by Unionists looking to cause division amongst nationalists. BTW, I'm out of here for the next few days, now. I find this thread and these recent events to be thoroughly depressing. I am full of foreboding as to where all of this will lead, especially given the potential economic crisis we're likely to endure. This will not end well, though I hope I'm wrong.

Cocoa with almond milk.

Why, because I'm not gleeful that Hearts have been unfairly relegated? If Saints had been bottom of the league you'd have a different perspective, so where are your principles?

Wouldn't it reek of rank hypocrisy, though? Why restructure to save Thistle and Stranraer, but not Hearts?

Probably already been posted, but apparently the Gandhi statue is a target, too: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-53025407 I thought his racism would be overlooked...

So what you're suggesting is they were long overdue a win, then?

You want him to die?! What sort of 'crime' do you believe would justify him being kicked to death?

Well, I'm presuming the folk on here will justify the attack by claiming the victim had unsavoury political views. The definition of lynch is thus: So his 'offence' will be his political views, or perhaps he insulted someone or even attacked someone. Perhaps his political views were imputed, maybe he was wearing something that indicated he might have an affiliation with some group or other. So if he goes on to die in hospital, you may well get your wish, as he will have been killed for his crime.

I can't comment on the motive or individuals responsible, but this looks pretty nasty.

I can see how some people become so entrenched in their views. Basically what you're telling me is that the 'left' don't commit false flags, but when something hateful appears and is attributed to the 'left' it must be a false flag committed by the 'right'. I'm sure false flags are as old as time itself. Even as a kid, I remember one of my pals came up with the idea of scratching the class nerd's name into a table, in order tl get him into trouble. The alleged assault on Jussie Smollett is an immediate example of a hoax hate crime: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jussie_Smollett_alleged_assault The other one that springs to mind is the Covington School boys, where the media selectively edited footage to portray them as intimidating ethnic minorities, when the footage literally proved they were the ones initially being intimidated. 'm sure similar false allegations happen frequently for all sorts of motives - insurance purposes, to attract attention, sympathy, donations or just besmirch one's political adversaries. It can also be used to justify wars, and I am convinced the 9/11 narrative is false.

I completely agree. I imagine Hearts supporters feel they have not been dealt with fairly, and perhaps believe that clubs are voting in their own self interest. That will inevitably lead to hostility, anger and spitefulness.

Wow. Hilarious. There are some bad b*****ds supporting Scottish football clubs. I do love it, though. The internet is one of the best things ever for footy fans, IMHO. In decades gone by you'd mostly just see away supporters in the away end and milling about the stadium, unless you were playing a local side, in which case you may be acquainted with a few. But nowadays you can read each others'opinions 24/7, and even better, because folk are anonymous, you actually see what utter b*****ds they really are.

Thanks for replying, pal. Remember Edinburgh City have now been promoted into the SPFL, though I appreciate they're one of the diddiest of all clubs. Hibs obviously have an Irish history, as reflected by their name, colour and badge, so I would have thought that must have some bearing on who one would support. Also I'd imagine if I were one of the 15% of Catholics that live in the city I'd probably not choose to support Hearts. I'm not especially familiar with Edinburgh, besides the touristy bits, but aren't the north and east of the city considered the less affluent areas, e.g. Muirhouse and Leith? A lot of my 'knowledge' of Edinburgh comes from Irvine Welsh's fiction, btw, which is why I asked in the first place. I can't imagine Renton, Sickboy, Spud and Bruce Robertson are exactly representative of Edinburghers, but I do like to think there's some truth in it somewhere.

Do they actually say that, though? Or have you just made it up?

“He who asserts must prove” - let's see your evidence, please!

Serious question, is geography still a factor in determining one's allegiance to the (two biggest) Edinburgh clubs? I mean I'm obviously aware that Leith is traditionally Hibs and Gorgie Hearts, but is that still relevant? Also I thought religion is, or certainly was, a factor, too.

Is that a reference to the velocity of a bullet? I hope not.

I have to admit they're both pretty smart.

Voted to live in a democracy where people were free to demonstrate and counter-protest, you mean?

I detect a hint of cynicism. In December a lot of emails were sent out at work promoting Veganuary - https://uk.veganuary.com - you may have heard of it? This led to a discussion amongst work colleagues about the benefits and ethics associated with veganism. At least one of my colleagues is already vegan, a few more are vegetarian and interested in becoming vegan. Then there were those who declared it was not for them, and those who became enraged by the mere suggestion. Up until lockdown some of the latter category were still talking about veganism and how ridiculous it is, whilst the rest of us had long since dropped the subject.

I have made a similar point a few times to those who have criticised my endeavour to consume less meat, usually obese, ruddy-faced, porcine men. Usually supporters of one of the Old Firm, too. Anyway, they will always tell me how it's natural to eat meat and it's tantamount to child cruelty to deprive kids of red meat. So I always ask them if they'd be prepared to take a young child to an abattoir? I am also a Christian, which is something that often upsets people when I mention it. My belief is that mankind is inherently repulsed by acts of callous brutality. It's instinctive. If you were to take a young child to an abattoir, I imagine they would scream and cry when they witness an animal slaughtered and butchered. I think many adults would be shocked and upset, too. There is, in my opinion, a reason for this. One can become desensitised to violence, and cruelty, of course, but our initial instinct is to be repulsed by such things. I like to think that's the spark of the Divine that dwells within us all, but, of course, plenty of you will not see it that way. Regardless, I think even those who rage against veganism would be reluctant to take their young child or grandchild to a slaughterhouse.

Where did I say I was a vegan? I created a thread for those interested in veganism. Again, where did I state that I was a vegan? I should declare, in the interest of transparency, that I am not vegan. I am endeavouring to transition from a carnivorous diet to either a pescatarian diet or fully vegan. I don't currently eat red meat or dairy produce at all. I don't think I've eaten chicken this year either, but I have had some bone broth. When starting this thread, my intention was to discuss recipes, protein and calcium sources, that kind of thing. Of course many people are vegan for ethical reasons, and I certainly hate the idea of animal cruelty, and given an equally nutritious alternative would opt for that. For those interested in a whole food, plant based diet for health reasons, I recommend https://nutritionfacts.org - it's a website of research compiled by Dr. Michael Greger, author of the book How Not To Die.

Both the Old Firm will have to go, obviously.