Celtic Supporters Thread (contains GB chat)

This is absolute horseshit. How exactly were the club clear about that when they banned them?

 

How is it horseshit? The club banned Palestine flags, the GB organized a display, the club banned the GB.

They were already banned from away games due to the initial Palestine banner.

The board are being extremely devious about this, but their actions have been clear. They want to shut down support for Palestine within the Celtic support.

 

Theyll be let back in soon. The public is witnessing what's happening now. Opinions are shifting. The true massacre of those people is coming to light everyday. Too bad the board are cowards and didn't want the backlash.

 

No you're spinning it to suit your own agenda. The board were clear that there were numerous issues which caused them to act, that is a 100% fact. You saying it was 100% because of Palestinian flags and the board were clear about it, is demonstrably made up bullshit. A blatant lie presented as fact. Why do people do this honestly it does my * * in.

 

Then why wait until after the Atletico game to ban them? Surely if they were as big a safety concern as the board are saying, they would have been banned before then. The fact the spineless * that run us went out their way to beg supporters not to show support for Palestine prior to the Atletico game was nothing short of embarrassing. So after the GB ignored this, then got banned immediately after this game, it’s not exactly far fetched to think it was the show of support for Palestine that the board decided to ban them for.

 

I know all these arguments, you all post the same * constantly. Am saying you can't state something as absolute fact when in reality it's just an opinion. Most of you just completely ignore the multiple and ongoing safety issues cited by the club, as if they have nothing to do with it.

You can suspect the ban was purely about Palestine flags all you want, just don't try and claim it's a stated fact because it's not.

 

It’s a fact they weren’t banned prior to the Palestine display. It’s also a fact that the board went out their way to write a statement asking not to show support for Palestine. It’s also a fact that they were banned after the game and the aforementioned display. That’s not “*” as you say. That is what happened.

Why do you think they weren’t banned already if the “safety concerns” were such a major issue?

 

Was the main issue around the Atletico game not the fact they essentially broke in to the stadium ?

I think the Palestine stuff has brought this about quicker but it doesn't mean the other reasons given don't hold any weight

 

If a group can “break in” on a Champions League night, then I’d be more worried about our level of security at the stadium.

 

Just emailed cfc that board is full of hypocrisy over GB

 

It was CLEARLY an issue over the Palestinian flags, and NOT the one flag ppl are intent on raising. Unlike the one Sevco * flag that was conveniently ignored in the aftermath of the Hamas' atrocity.

It's clear as daylight with club issuing statements for no flags.

The bottom line is Celtic are trying to prove to Uefa that they're doing what they can, rather than getting a * spine and officially and publicly asking the question why some flags are solidarity (Ukraine) and some are "offensive".

Uefa claims politics have no place in sport, but court and bribe politicians, take bribes from governments, cherry pick which "atrocities" need support, which need ignored, and all in line with policy from various governments around Europe.

Case in point, a Palestinian flag is "offensive". A Star of David is "solidarity".

Take your head out of your * *.

 

Still struggling with the point I made eh? Keep trying mate you'll get there in the end.

 

Not struggling, I’m just pointing out what happened. Is there anything I’m saying that is factually incorrect? If there is just point it out and I’ll hold my hands up.

Still ignoring the question about why you think they weren’t banned before the Atletico game I see. Care to answer that question?

 

Have Celtic not outlined that they essentially broke in before the Atletico game to lay out the display ?

I agree the Palestine display has more than likely brought this about but the club have also given genuine reasons

 

The guy I quoted said the club were clear that the ban was about waving Palestine flags. That is a lie as there were multiple reasons given for the ban. Pretty straightforward stuff my man.

 

The board were not clear that there were numerous issues. The board made up a list of issues weeks after the banning.

The stuff on the list is a lot of made up *, some of which is nothing to do with the GB.

The fact is the club had no problem with the GB until the Palestine issue, then all of a sudden they were banned without warning.

 

One of the things that the club put on their list of grievances was break ins or attempted break ins.

The GB entered the stadium at 6pm when the doors opened to set up that display.

 

But they were clear that the ban was about Palestinian flags?

 

It's annoying that neither side is being entirely upfront and open here. If it's safety issues, then make your evidence public or at least allow some trustworthy neutral party to look it over and vouch for its validity. Equally, if the GB want to argue that it was the flags, then remove doubt about the banner.

FWIW, the delay makes me think it's not about the flags. As far as I know, no major backlash has occurred and the board will be as aware as anyone else about world opinion. It seems pretty clear that the display hasn't harmed the club, so I personally doubt it's that. Regarding the statement, I don't discount the official line as impossible; but the timing is suspicious and they haven't made their evidence public so I'm not going to buy it until they do that.

Which leaves the banner. For now, that seems the most likely interpretation for my money. If it really did show support for HAMAS and the massacre that day, the ban is merited; if (as I genuinely believe) it didn't, then FFS explain the banner and explain your exact position. It may be that the board might still have a problem with your position; but it will be a lot easier for ordinary fans (some of whom might share your views about the legitimacy of armed struggle but find HAMAS repugnant and the massacre of over a thousand civilians indefensible) to defend you.

 

Yes