Rourkes Drift

League 1st: Rangers 2nd: Celtic 3rd: Hearts Scottish Cup Winners: Celtic Runners Up: Rangers League Cup Winners: Rangers Runners Up: Hearts [/b][/b]

Well done to Shetland with a great result over this team. However, if you ask anyone from the Aberdeen area who has any knowledge of football, and they will tell you that Formartine Utd are pretty poor. I spoke to someone from that area who was frankly surprised that we couldn't get better teams up here than Formartin. I am not taking anything away from Shetlands performance but merely hilighting that we should be getting much better teams up here to play them which would provide us with a sterner test. I would even go so far as to say that we should really be getting highland league teams up - at least some of the lower ones. Neil Bristow made basically that ponit the other week in the article in the Shetland Times.

I don't think that we have anything to worry about with regard to a Shetland Party in this day and age. People will be outward thinking enough to vote on national as well as local issues, and on that basis a part such as this is surely a non starter politically? Shetland is doing not bad out of the present system, oil reserves and the initiatives of our people. On this basis, surely we don't need a Shetland Party at all??!

What about putting those last two paragraphs the other way around! Apologies

Lerwick is a horrible looking place. There's nothing much to see on the waterfront whatsoever... Getting fancy lights and stuff to light up some of the nicer looking buildings at night would be an improvement.

In no particular order...... Zulu (no surprises there!) Usual Suspects Saving Private Ryan Dead Poets Society Godfather (1 & 2) Gladiator The Man Who Would be King Shawshank Redemption River Ran Through It Sparticus

Ok, those are fair points DB. However, I don't think that any of the Celtic support will fly much of the Scottish flag, and certainly none will fly the British flag. Surely the amount of tricolours flown at Celtic Park do no equal the amount of Irish men in the support? Why can't Scottish supporters fly their national flag? Or, could it be because all the other things that the tricolour reflects as being part of the Celtic tradition. The same can of course be said of Rangers with the Union Jack. Likewise, very few Rangers fans will fly the Scottish flag. I wish that more Rangers supporters did fly the Scottish flag as opposed to the Union Jack because we are a Scottish club first and foremost. (then a British Club) My point generally is therefore is that flags = identity = and sometimes can = bigotry (and in some cases) = sectarianism. But, if taken positively, then flags can be good, and the outpouring of national pride in Germany over the past weeks gives indication to this. Flags and national anthems are very important insofar as they give people something to identify. Around Shetland for example during the World Cup I have seen Portuguese, Argentinian, German AND England flags.

Sorry - I didn't make myself clear. Celtic started flying the Irish Tricolour over Parkhead due to their Irish roots. Ok, nothing wrong with that. But, the big mistake Rangers made was to bring emphasis on the Union Jack, when we should have brought more emphasis on the St Andrews flag. This way, the development of both clubs would have been difference since Rangers identity would have been more Scottish than British, and therefore Celtics would have probably been more Irish than Scottish. But, as things have turned out, Celtic have this 'Irish connection', and Rangers have this 'British connection'. Both fuel bigotry.

Correction: In my last post, I did of course mean St Andrews Flag when saying 'Union Flag'. Apologies for any confusion.

There are some very well thought out and interesting points raised by Stan, I agree with much of what he says regarding Scottish anthemns. Also, there is much work to do in terms of looking at lyrics. It is interesting to note though that if Glasgow Rangers . However, I say this as a fellow supporter: Had Rangers from the outset given a bit more equal prominance to the Scottish flag rather than the Union flag, then perhaps we would have been seen more as a Scottish club today, and Celtics allegiance to the Irish flag would have been shown up for the stupidity that it is. As things stand however, we stuck ourselves overwhelmingly with the Union flag, and in turn pandered to the ills of bigotry and sectarianism. Don't get me wrong, I think it is right that Rangers fly the Union flag over their stadium and it annoys me when people say otherwise. Nevtheless, I think we should have constantly given equal weight to the Union flag. Only now have Rangers as a club given more recognition to the Union flag by using it on the card display for European games, and also putting the saltre on their shirt. Perhaps we as a club have now seen sense since we can make the blue and white saltire our own, thus making the Celtic flag flying over Parkehead look all the more ridiculous in a secular, 'modern, forward looking' Scotland. By the way I would suggest Highland Cathedral for Scottish anthemn.

Here are a few more to fuel the fire...... Midnight Dynamos (remember them!!) Nightshift? Davie Bayview? Dave Ferrier (absolutely brilliant, even though he did school discos!) And....the best one of all in terms of name B.G.D. BRAWLY GOOD DISCO!!

New Magnie, I feel that people should not be afraid of religion generally, but feel free to challenge it within a liberal, democratic society (Iran excluded!!) If they have questions about it, ask them. I don't think that anyone says that the bible is black or white. For example, why is it some christians have different views upon drinking, sex before marriage and organ transplants. My point is that christians can't even agree, so there is nothing wrong with a person being a church/mosque/synagogue goer, (or whatever) but still openly challenging a lot of things that the bible or their religion says. The point is to have faith is surealy a good thing - as long as it is not developed into extremism. I agree with your worries on religious extremism. But then, this is not isolated to religion. We have football hooliganism, educational minded extremists, political extremists. It is human nature to develop something perhaps, and then take it too far and become obsessed with it, and in turn often ruin it for others who enjoy it. I agree that there is much to be afraid of in religion, but there is also much we should welcome in terms of how we should treat and respect other human beings. However, perhaps I am too much of an idealist!!!

I agree that many Christians (or religious fanatics generally) should practice more what they preach. There is one important point here that non church goers often forget - and indeed church goers. Going to church does NOT suddenly make a person a better person, or a give them a right to judge others. Church goers and non church goers would do well to remember this. The former because it does NOT give them a right to judge others or be 'holier than thou'. The latter because they should not be afraid of going to church insofar as others should suddently judge them as 'going strange', or becoming a 'bible basher'. Going to church is a matter of free will and normal activity in a democratic free society - just as it is going to the library, going to the gym or even going to the pub. On this basis, I don't think that people should be afraid of religion and challenge it head on. The church as definitely lost its way in todays society and has much work to do. But what makes it different are the people who go to it and can try and change it surely. What do others think??

Hey, with all due respect Big Mouth....is quite a personal question and surely not an issue here. Lets just say that I am interested in the the church, or moreover religion generally. But, I would never preach anything to anyone else.