gannonball Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Are the Celtic fans calling the aberdonians tories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 What is wrong with defending someone's rights? You mean like the soldiers did? You are embarrassing yourself here. This is not a human rights issue, this is a minority of people actively disrupting a silence for political purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhoy who invented weetabix Posted November 9, 2014 Author Share Posted November 9, 2014 Decent game so far, Zaluska and Reynolds at fault respectively for both goals. We started slowly but finished first half strongly, Guidetti been quiet so far, think he may have something up his sleeve for second half though. Very much in the balance this one though, definetely more goals in it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 What is wrong with defending someone's rights? As I said, I don't agree with it. But we don't live in a country that such things are against the law So it's acceptable for these people to deliberately go out with the intention of disrupting a minutes silence. And therefore being disrespectful to those who choose to remember those who have fallen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gannonball Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Singing IRA songs. Not all 'IRA' songs are banned though, even with that new stupid bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Enrico Annoni, on 09 Nov 2014 - 13:18, said: What is wrong with defending someone's rights? As I said, I don't agree with it. But we don't live in a country that such things are against the law It may not be against the law, but it is totally disrespectful to actually go out of your way to ruin it and act like scum. Can't believe a right minded individual would defend that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Decent game so far, Zaluska and Reynolds at fault respectively for both goals. I think the fault really is with Brown (the keeper) while Reynolds let him turn, rushing out and going to ground was the worst thing he could have done other than running in the opposite direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 You mean like the soldiers did? You are embarrassing yourself here. This is not a human rights issue, this is a minority of people actively disrupting a silence for political purposes. Again, people have a right to express a political view, not only the ones you or I agree with. The minutes silence isn't only for the fallen of both the Great War or WW2. It's for all conflicts we have been involved with. Even the modern professional armed forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhoy who invented weetabix Posted November 9, 2014 Author Share Posted November 9, 2014 You mean like the soldiers did? You are embarrassing yourself here. This is not a human rights issue, this is a minority of people actively disrupting a silence for political purposes. I think you will find a lot of people are of the opinion that the whole upsurge in poppy day & all the palarva around it is for political purposes. I agree 100% the guys that shouted out through it were wrong though but as Enrico and others have pointed out its peoples CHOICE to participate in it, if you dont want to then take your seat in the ground after it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 So it's acceptable for these people to deliberately go out with the intention of disrupting a minutes silence. And therefore being disrespectful to those who choose to remember those who have fallen? As I've said from the outset. I don't agree with it. I'd be surprised though if people chosen a football match to remember those who have fallen and not this morning as the vast majority would. People do have a right to protest though, that is my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 What is wrong with defending someone's rights? As I said, I don't agree with it. But we don't live in a country that such things are against the law It's also their perfect right for to rock into your relative's funeral wearing nothing but a mankini and start playing the theme from Roobarb & Custard on a little trumpet. Such things are not against the law. But only someone who was deliberately pretending not to understand the issue would react to this type of behaviour with grand claims about "defending rights" and the letter of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Decent game so far, Zaluska and Reynolds at fault respectively for both goals. We started slowly but finished first half strongly, Guidetti been quiet so far, think he may have something up his sleeve for second half though. Very much in the balance this one though, definetely more goals in it Yup. A decent game so far, second half will hopefully see more goals. Who for? I'm not sure but to coin the old cliché the next goal could prove crucial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Again, people have a right to express a political view, not only the ones you or I agree with. I can only presume you simply don't understand the argument you are trying to put forward here. It would certainly explain the reason you continue with it. This is not about stopping people's rights, the people's rights are NOT being abused or restricted by being asked to remain silent for 60 seconds. This is not a human rights issue. Yet you continue to defend it as if it is. This was a political, churlish, childish and petulant act that was performed by a minority of fans who have publicly shamed your club. You, by implication, should be shamed by using the human rights angle to try and defend their atrocious and pathetic behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordieBoy80 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Anyone who condones the actions of the scumbag element is just as big a scumbag as they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhoy who invented weetabix Posted November 9, 2014 Author Share Posted November 9, 2014 Rico you are havin a mare here and coming across every bit as much of a c unt as the vermin at pittodrie Nope. Expressing an opinion and a valid point, but clearly not one you share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 It may not be against the law, but it is totally disrespectful to actually go out of your way to ruin it and act like scum. Can't believe a right minded individual would defend that. He's not actually defending the fact they ruined the minutes silence - he's defending their right to do it. Fine difference, I agree. I'd like to see the reaction if myself and a bus load of like minded individuals turned up at The Martyr Memorials Sunday, or whatever it's called, that is held once a year up the road to remember brave volunteers killed on active service, and disrupted the ceremony. Apart from the fact we would be lucky to get out alive, I don't think we'd be getting any pats on the back for standing up for our "right" not to acknowledge this ceremony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 It's also their perfect right for to rock into your relative's funeral wearing nothing but a mankini and start playing the theme from Roobarb & Custard on a little trumpet. Such things are not against the law. But only someone who was deliberately pretending not to understand the issue would react to this type of behaviour with grand claims about "defending rights" and the letter of the law. Nice deflection. Please keep talking about a hypothetical situation that has nothing in common. You haven't told me, what else should the club ban people from doing Adolf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Could Rico and casual please f**k off somewhere else. Ta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 He's not actually defending the fact they ruined the minutes silence - he's defending their right to do it. Fine difference, I agree. Nail on head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyWellFan Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Did anyone really expect them to be respectful? What a vile and embarrassing support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.