A Blog by James Forrest for TSFM
I am a socialist, and as a socialist I believe in the fundamental goodness of people. Some people find that hard to believe when they read the stuff I write.
I published my first novel recently, on politics and the corrupting nature of it, and it is a deeply cynical book, a book where no-one has clean hands come the end. What has surprised some of those who’ve read it is that I didn’t focus on the lies and smears of the right, but the hypocrisy and deceit of those who claim to be of the left.
Corruption, you see, doesn’t respect political boundaries or points of view. It’s like rainwater. It finds every crack, and gets in there.
My political beliefs revolve around two apparently paradoxical elements; the belief in the inherent decency of people and the need for a strong, and powerful, state. I believe the second underpins the first, and this brings me into conflict with a lot of people, some on the left and some on the right. Too many people see the state as inherently evil, as something that interferes too much in the lives of ordinary people. As something suffocating.
Yet the state exists to protect us. It exists to provide a safety net. It exists to regulate and to oversee. If the state is made up of bad people, if the gears of society are captured by those with malicious or selfish intent, the results are obvious; war, corruption, chaos.
The vast majority of our problems in the modern age can be neatly summed up in two lines from Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming”, which I used to open my novel. “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
We live in a time when those who are protecting their own interests have assumed such power that they’ve cowed the rest of us. They have become a law unto themselves. They have changed the nature of the game, because they have sapped our will to the extent some barely put up a fight anymore. The weak get weaker, and the strong use their strength to crush the rest even more. It is a vicious struggle, a downward spiral.
Society is held together not only by the endeavour and common interests of its citizens but by a collection of laws. We elect the people who make those laws. They do so in our name, and we can remove that right every four years. That is a powerful thing, and we do not appreciate it enough. The present corruption exists because we allow it to exist.
The people around me continue to puzzle over my uncommon interest in the affairs of a football club on the west of Glasgow. My own club plays in the east end. I tell those who ask that my primary interest in the goings-on at the club calling itself Rangers is no longer about football; how could it be, after all? With promotion this year they are still a full two divisions below us, emasculated, skint, weak and unstable. If we were fortunate enough to draw them in cup competition the match would be over, as a tie, by the halfway point … in the first half.
In footballing terms they are an utter irrelevance.
Rangers is more than a football club to me. They are a symbol. Their unfolding calamity is an on-going outrage. What is happening there, what is being allowed to happen, is an offense to decency. It is a stain on the face of our country.
In short, it is a scandal. It is a scandal without parallel in sport.
Yet it’s not just a sports story either. If it was, I might not be so focussed on it. What is happening at Rangers is a colossal failure of governance. It is a damning indictment against the very people who are supposed to oversee our game. It is a disgraceful abrogation of responsibility from those at the top, those who claim to be “running things.”
If this is not a failure of governance it is a result of corruption at the heart of our national sport. It says they are bought and paid for, and I will say no such thing here.
So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. We’ll say instead that what they are is weak, indecisive, inept and disconnected from reality.
It reminds me of our political class, which has become insular and ignorant about what the public wants, and what it needs. It’s not a wonder parties like UKIP can achieve national vote shares of 25% at local elections. Nigel Farage strikes me as a dog-whistle politician, the kind who knows how to appeal to a select group of voters. He is little different to Charles Green, the man who beguiled Rangers fans into handing over large amounts of money, because he was “standing up for the club.” It is easy to do what he did, easy to do what Farage is doing.
Real leadership requires toughness. Say what you like about the Tories, but they have that in spades. Yeats was right about the worst being full of passionate intensity. Green was. Farage is. Cameron and Osborne personify it in their political outlook.
It is easy to be cowed by blunt force politics, and by “tough talking Yorkshire men” and venomous speeches about “strivers and skivers.” The politics of divide and conquer is the oldest form of politics there is, and it’s no surprise to see it practiced by some of the vested interests in the game here in Scotland. Yet, lest we forget … something significant happened last year. The maligned and the ignored, the weak and the voiceless found something they never realised they had. They discovered that, in a very real sense, the power was in their hands.
Last year, the fans rose up when the governing bodies and the media went all-out to save Rangers from the self-inflicted wounds caused by a decade of cheating, malpractice and ineptitude. I have no problem calling that what it was.
What happened at Rangers seemed incredible, but it was all too predictable, and some of us had been talking about it for years before it hit. The Association seemed caught in the headlights but it would amaze me if they really were as insular and ignorant as they appeared. They must have known how bad the outlook was for Rangers. They just chose to ignore it.
They were aided and abetted by a thoroughly disreputable media, a collection of cowards and compromisers, charlatans and frauds, masquerading as journalists, but who long ago laid aside any claim to be bold investigators and settled for commenting on events as they unfolded. More often than not, with their ill-informed opinions, sometimes due to weaknesses in intellect and others wilfully ignorant, they failed even in that.
Entire newspapers became PR machines for crooks and swindlers. They aided in the scam because they didn’t do their jobs, some because they were lazy, some because they were incompetent and others because they wanted a seat at the table and were willing to sacrifice whatever integrity they once had in exchange for one.
That all of this was embraced by the Rangers fans is amazing to me. They trusted when they should have been asking questions. They closed their eyes, covered their ears and sang their battle tunes at the top of their voices so they wouldn’t have to hear anything they didn’t like. As incredible as I found it then, and still find it now – and now, even more so, when they have already seen the results of it once – I find it pathetic too, and I do feel pity for some of them.
A lot of these people are genuine football fans, and nothing more. They have no interest in the phony narrow nationalism, or the over-blown religion, or the notion of supremacy which manifested itself in a ludicrous statement from McCoist when interviewed recently on Sky.
Some of the Rangers fans look at their team of duds, kids and journeymen, they look at a boardroom of cowards and crooks, they look at a failing manager in his first (and last) job in the game and at a dark future and are not in the least bit impressed by, or interested in, the chest-out arrogance espoused in those ridiculous words “we are the people.” They know full well that their present crisis was made by men like McCoist, and they understand that pretentious posturing is not an act born of strength, but a scrambling around in the gutter, and a symptom of weakness.
They understand their position, and they hate it. And because they care about Rangers, because they value the club, because they cherish those things that made it a great Scottish institution, they want that back. They understand that before the Union Jack waving, Sash singing, poppy wearing, Nazi saluting, Orange element became the public face of their support Rangers meant something else, and that, above all things, is what pains them the most.
People do not hate Rangers. When the country appeared to turn its back last year, they were turning the back on favouritism and the bending of rules. Yet it would be a lie to say that there is not an element of dislike in the gleeful mockery of many rival fans.
But they don’t hate Rangers either. They hate the version of it around which a certain section of the support continues to dance. They hate the version which hates, and so too do many, many, many Rangers supporters, and they definitely deserve better.
David Murray chose not to openly challenge that version. Indeed, he encouraged certain strands of it to flourish and grow, with his “Britishness Days” and his effort to turn the club into the “team that supports the troops.” Other clubs have done as much, if not more, for the British Army than the one that plays out of Ibrox. Other clubs have given more money. Other clubs have lent their support to those on the front lines. They just chose to do it with respect, and with class, and with dignity. They chose to do it in private, understanding that there eventually comes a tipping point between looking after the ends of the soldiers and using them to promote your own.
The army has not battened on to Rangers. Rangers has battened on to them, and although it is unclear when an altruistic motive became darker, what started out as a gesture of solidarity is now used to entrench division and promote a notion of superiority.
Craig Whyte took over from Murray and immediately understood the lure of the “dog whistle.” He knew too that the media would accept whatever he told them, without question, and as he spoke up for “Rangers traditions” he made sure the lunatic fringe was well onside. He met face to face with the hard-core extremists in the support first and made them his praetorian guard. They spoke up for him until the day the club entered administration.
So, whereas Murray pandered to them and Whyte used them to further his own ends, it was only a matter of time before someone suggested to Charles Green that he could use the same tactics to win over the support. He went even further and blatantly promoted and encouraged this mind-set, and stoked the hate and nonsense to frightening new heights. The same people who cheered Whyte to the rafters jumped on board the Big Blue Bus and the results are clear.
Through all of it, the ordinary Rangers fan has seen his club buffered against the rocks, battered, broken, smashed to smithereens and sunk. Now there’s a big hole in the side of the lifeboat, and they are terrified that further tragedies await.
They are right to be concerned. Much of the media is still not telling them what they need to know. The people in charge of their club – the owners who have lied, the former hack who covered up the truth about Whyte and now acts as a mouthpiece for Green, the “club legends” who are content to sup with the devil and take his greasy coin when they should be standing toe-to-toe with the fans – are trying to silence those members of the press who do have facts to present.
How many times now have media outlets been banned from Ibrox for daring to report the truth? The manager who demanded the names of a committee last year defends those inside the walls who are desperate to keep secret the things that are going on. He is either an unprincipled coward, or he is, himself, bought and paid for. The fans suffer for it.
The “inconvenient truth” is still being kept from them, and this denies them any chance to play an active role in their club. Indeed, it is all too possible that they’ve passed a point of no return, and that their club is heading for a new liquidation event and it can no longer be stopped.
In either case, their power has been eroded to the point at which they must feel they have nothing left to do but stand back and watch what happens next.
They are wrong. I am a socialist. I believe in the inherent good of people. I think the ordinary decent Rangers fans are the only people left who can save their club … and the means by which they will do it is as simple as it could be.
They must stand up for “big government.” They must embrace the need for a “strong state.” They must lobby the SFA, and they must trust the SFA and they must get the SFA to follow its own rules and thereby save them from any further harm.
There is a tendency amongst some Celtic fans to see our governing bodies as pro-Rangers. If it is true then those running our game are ruining Scottish football without benefiting the thing they love more. The incalculable harm that has been done to Rangers in the last 20 some months is a direct result of the subservient media and the willingness of the football authorities to be “deaf, dumb and blind.” Those who believe this has actually helped the Ibrox club have not been paying attention in class. It has irrevocably scarred them, and it may yet have played a hand in destroying them once and for all, as a force if not as a club entirely.
For years, the SFA sat and did nothing as a club in their association operated a sectarian signing policy. They did nothing whilst the fans sang sectarian songs. In their failure to act they strengthened those elements of the Rangers support, instead of isolating, alienating and eventually helping to eliminate those who saw that club as a totem pole of division and hate. Their failure over EBT’s, and their lack of scrutiny, led to one of the greatest scandals in the history of sport, and I say that with no equivocation at all. The testimony of their registrations officer in the Lord Nimmo Smith investigation was a disgrace and in years to come it will rank as one of the most disreputable and damaging moments in the association’s history.
The most egregious failures of all were the failures in the so-called “fit and proper person” tests, which allowed first Whyte and then Charles Green to assume controlling positions at Ibrox. They will pass the buck and say the responsibility lies with the club itself, in much the same way as they are content to let the club investigate itself at the present time, but any neutral who looks at this stance knows it is unprincipled and spineless. It’s like letting the defence set the terms at a trial. It is foxes investigating the chicken coop.
It is a blueprint for corruption, and a recipe for disaster.
It is now too late for the SFA to declare Green “unfit”, as it was too late when they finally slapped that title on Craig Whyte. He and his allies own Rangers, and they control its destiny. They can push the club to the wall if they choose, in the final extremity, if that gets them what they want. The time for changing that is past. The damage has already been done. The barbarians are not at the gates. They are inside the walls, and sacking the city.
The SFA will be forced to punish Rangers for the sins of the owners, for the second time in as many years, and whilst it is right that the club face up to that, all the better to send a message to other clubs and other owners, the SFA cannot be allowed to slither off the hook here as though this was none of their doing. Green will skip off into the sunset. Craig Whyte has yet to pay his fine. These people never cared about Scottish football and they don’t care now.
The SFA are supposed to. Our governing body is supposed to govern, for the good of the whole game, and not as a support system for a single club. What they have allowed to happen on their watch is absolutely shameful and if the people responsible were men at all, with any sense of accountability, they would resign en masse.
They can pretend ignorance, but only the truly ignorant would accept that. Craig Whyte was not inside Ibrox a week before RTC and other sites were dismantling his entire business history, with some of the people here doing the work the SFA would not. Whyte himself claims to have made the governing bodies aware of the scale of what was facing the club, and they did nothing at all. Heads should have rolled a year ago.
In October of last year, on this very site, I posted an article in which I wrote:
“Which isn’t to say the due diligence matter isn’t worrying, because, of course, it is. Again, no-one is going to convince me that the SFA has conducted proper due diligence on Charles Green and his backers. No-one will convince me they are satisfied that this club is in safe hands, and that the game in this country will not be rocked by a further implosion at Ibrox. They failed to properly investigate Craig Whyte, because of lax regulations requiring disclosure from the club itself, regulations which are just a joke, but they can be forgiven for that as the press was talking sheer nonsense about him having billions at his disposal, and a lot of people (but not everyone!) were either convinced or wanted to be convinced by him.
To have witnessed what Whyte did, to have witnessed the Duff & Phelps “process” of finding a buyer, and having Green essentially emerge from nowhere, with a hundred unanswered questions as to his background and financing, for the SFA to have given this guy the go ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces later, would annihilate the credibility of the governing body and necessitate resignations at every level. There would be no hiding place.”
There are times when it is fun to be right, but this is not one of them. It is dispiriting and disquieting to have been so on the nose. It scares the Hell out of me, as someone who loves football in this country, to have seen this matter clearly when the people running our game apparently either did not or chose to ignore very real, very obvious, concerns. The Internet Bampots had no special insight or access to information that was denied those at the SFA. We just weren’t prepared to ignore it and pretend that it wasn’t there. There was too much at stake.
I have become convinced that things will never change until the Rangers supporters join us in demanding the full and unabridged truth here. They need to come out from under the bed, and confront their fears. They need to be willing to take the consequences, so that their club can emerge clean from this, and start again, with all this behind them.
And it can all happen with one simple thing. The application of the rules.
The existence of laws comes down to a simple principle; they protect society from those elements within it who are interested only in their own selfish ends. We may cry out at those rules and regulations we see as “restrictive”, but the law was not made to restrict our freedoms but to protect them. Had the SFA years ago acted against Rangers sectarian signing policy, and the songs from the stands, the club would not have mutated to the point where there was no help on hand when they needed it the most. Let’s not kid ourselves about this; Whyte and Green were only able to grab control because the club itself has a dreadful image which put off respectable and responsible buyers. The SFA could have helped change that perception years ago and did nothing.
The SFA could have conducted its own investigation into who Craig Whyte was. They could have asked David Murray for full disclosure when he was running up £80 million of debt, a sum of money that is beyond belief for a single club in a small provincial backwater league. Had they had the guts to do that the club would never have spent itself into oblivion and forced the hand of Lloyds, which led indirectly to their ignominious end.
The SFA could have fully investigated Charles Green and the means by which he took control, instead of rushing through a license. His emergence at the last minute was transparently suspicious and designed to force them into a quick decision, but they did not have to bow to that pressure by making one, without being in possession of the facts, as it is now 100% clear they were not.
Had they asked for every document, had they insisted on legal affidavits and personal securities from investors (and this would have been perfectly legitimate and is common place in other licensing areas) none of this would have come to pass. After Craig Whyte they had a moral responsibility to the rest of the game to get this one right and their failure is without parallel in the history of Scottish football.
As the club hurtles towards a new abyss, names are cropping up which should send a shudder down the spines of every honest, genuine supporter of not only Rangers but every team in the land. The SFA claims that a strong Rangers is essential for the sake of Scottish football, but they have been extraordinarily lax in protecting that club, and therefore the game, from destructive elements. Craig Whyte and Charles Green had dubious personal histories, and the acquisition of the club itself was mired in controversy and scandal. Yet it was allowed.
Neither Green nor Whyte were known to have operated outside the law, yet neither was worthy of trust or stood up to scrutiny. Neither man should ever have been granted the status as fit and proper persons to assume a role in our national sport, and if it is true of them what can we say about the three men who are, presently, being touted as the Great White Hopes for a bright, new Rangers future; Dave King and the Easdale brothers?
King recently cut a deal with the South African government over an on-going dispute over taxes. In other words, he pled guilty and accepted the central plank of their argument; that for years he was engaged in wilfully with-holding vast revenues from their Treasury. The media does not like to put it like that, and the SFA seems willing to ignore it utterly, and this would be scandalous enough. But it does not stop there. HRMC rules – as well as the SFA’s own governance documents – actually bar him from serving on the board of the new club.
Last but not least, aside from being an admitted tax cheat, King is also awaiting trial in South Africa, having been indicted for corruption, forgery and fraud – 300 charges in total. Yet as recently as last week, we were told that the Association was willing to look at him and consider representations from his lawyers. This is almost beyond belief.
If Dave King’s position is untenable, and he is yet to be convicted of a crime, what can we say about the position of the Easdale’s? One of the two brothers, Sandy, has already served jail time. He is a convicted criminal, a fraudster nonetheless, who’s “victim” was the same Treasury who are appealing one case involving the old club and liquidated it entirely over another. This is precisely the kind of “businessman” the fit and proper person test was supposed to weed out, and if the SFA holds its nose here the reek will stink out the halls at Hampden for decades. If King or the Easdale’s are judged fit and proper, then who exactly is the test for? What exactly do you have to do to fail it? How do we explain the existence of laws, when these are not applied?
Pascal says “Law without force is impotent.” The SFA’s weakness has allowed one version of Rangers to destroy itself, and has allowed an existential risk to another. If the next power at Rangers resides in South Africa or Greenock I can say with some certainty that the Association is engaged in an even more dangerous roll of the dice, because the surfacing of fresh scandal will be an ever present risk, and will be of the sort no-one will survive.
The damage to Scottish football will take years to heal. The Scottish game has been through enough trauma. It does not need more. It barely survived the last calamity to hit Rangers. The rest of us should not be forced to pay the price of the next one.
The greater damage will be done to Rangers itself. If the Green crisis ends in another collapse – as it well might; another administration event is a certainty, and another liquidation is a much more likely prospect than it was before 14 February 2012 – the club will once again have to start from the bottom, and this time the reputational damage will be impossible to repair. The club faces internal strife, sporting sanctions, and criminal investigations. The last takeover might be declared a fraud. the Whyte takeover will almost certainly be. The share issue might be invalid, as well as criminal, and the people involved may well end up in jail. Lawsuits could follow from investors, there could be as yet unknown consequences from the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal (thank you Brogan Rogan for pointing out what those might be) and a host of other issues.
Rangers fans must be the loudest voices here. How do you want the world to view your club in years to come? Do you want one to be proud of, or one forever associated with the shame and disgrace of these days gone by? The one which bailed out on its tax obligations. The one with supporters who disgrace your very name. The one which allowed Whyte and Green to take you to the cleaners and send you to the wall. The one which handed over control to one convicted criminal and another awaiting trial. Do you want to be reborn clean, or mired in the muck?
David Murray destroyed your financial stability. He made it so no bank would issue you a line of credit and no investor of note wanted to buy. Craig Whyte liquidated you. Charles Green has cast the future of the Newco into doubt and acted in a manner which has annihilated your credibility with the financial markets for decades to come.
Between these three men, they have taken everything from you, and the press and the people who run the game here, as well as some of your own blindly ignorant fans, have allowed them to do all this and more. Now they conspire to hand the keys to Ibrox to other men of questionable character, who will wreck further havoc on the reputation of the club.
The Scottish Football Association has damaged the game it was supposed to protect, but above all else their greatest failure of governance was a failure to protect one of its biggest clubs from its own excesses and those of its owners.
Rangers fans, the SFA have betrayed your trust, more than the trust of any other club. What you must insist on now is full disclosure and transparency from the powers that be in Hampden. The SFA has to end the charade of allowing your club to handle this in-house. They must hand everything over to an outside agency – whether a legal one, or a footballing body like UEFA – and they must demand co-operation and answers, and threaten to withhold the license if they don’t get them.
You must not be afraid of that. You must embrace it. The men with their hands on the gears at Ibrox are motivated by money, and nothing more. If the license is withdrawn their “investments” are worthless. They cannot risk that.
You must demand that the rules on fit and proper persons are applied, and where necessary even made stronger, to prevent your club falling into unclean hands. You must demand that they protect your reputation from further damage, by getting this all out there and acting accordingly, even if that means your club does not play football for at least a year.
You must be willing to suck it all up, knowing that what will emerge is a Rangers which has been cleansed and moves forward with honour, and dignity, led by custodians who treasure it rather than those who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
The Rangers Standard has recently emerged as a genuine voice for those in your support who are sick and tired of what Rangers has become, and want it restored to something that is worthy of the love and respect in which you hold it. On that website, there are discussions about the kind of club you seek to be and about whether the institution of Rangers is about more than just football.
If that’s how you feel about it then you know it is about more than how many titles the club can claim, about more than just results on the park, about more than just the game. Rangers, like Celtic, is an idea. It has to be something you are proud of.
I am a socialist, but one with a fevered imagination and a tendency to write very dark things. This piece won’t have been good reading for some of you (perhaps all of you haha!) but I think there’s more hope in here than in other things I’ve written.
In spite of everything that’s come to pass, I still believe. I believe in Scottish football. I believe in our system of football governance, even if those who are working in it are failing on some level.
In society, as much as we strain against them, laws exist for our protection. To fail to enforce them is to leave us at the mercy of those elements who would do us harm. The rules of football ensure the protection of all clubs, not just a few.
The failure to enforce the rules has never had graver consequences than here in Scotland. The irony is that bending and breaking them has hurt the one club those violations were designed to help. It cannot be allowed to happen again.
The rules must be applied without fear or favour.
The best must find their conviction, and their passionate intensity once more.
James is a co-editor of the On Fields of Green Blog http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/
A large part of me would love to see the fans to do and say something on Sunday before or during the final to tell the SFA and the watching world just what the real stakeholders think of our corrupt administration.
But fun as it might be its neither the right time nor place for most fans to protest. Sunday is Hibs’ and Celtic’s day and may the better team on the day lift the cup.
I hope it is a good game.
That doesn’t exclude or give an excuse for the inaction (past present and future) by two of the attendees however, Rod Petrie and Peter Lawwell.
I’ve said before that things like the outrageous 5 way agreement were dreamed up, facilitated and implemented because guys like Mr Petrie and Mr Lawwell did nothing to stop it. And they with the rest of the club heads they could have.
The word I’d use is complicit.
Complicit in the fleecing of the tax man and of the creditors by the dead club and the circling spivs.
Complicit in shocking stuff even now like Regan accepting the club could rule on itself yesterday.
Complicit in more cover ups than in the Sistine Chapel.
Mr Petrie and Mr Lawwell please start the revolution your fans are hoping for.
rantinrobin says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 14:00
As I said I borrowed from Tom, his original assertion was that “Scotland would only be free, when the last Church of Scotland Minister is strangled by the last copy of the Sunday Post”
The quote marks around my borrowing, are there because I am not really suggesting that people should be strangled….
Forres Dee (@ForresDee) says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 12:57
ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 12:23
Their report will tend to form the bedrock of subsequent consideration by the SFA and I actually believe that the SFA has a very strong survival instinct and if it comes to a choice between them and whatever sevco creation is adjudged the new owner then I have no doubt that the SFA will protect itself first and foremost.
==============================================
That is becoming my opinion of the SFA, but more from a point of view that as long as the same people are in position at the SFA, then a new club in blue can play at ibrox next season.
======================================================
Ah but what I didn’t say as it didn’t directly relate to the SFA role re Green v. Whyte was that financially Rangers may well collapse before the end of next season. I had blithely predicted not more than a week ago that as things were they could probably get to January no problem with roughly the same ST sales as last season and that by then there could be new investors and even another share issue. I also stressed that severe cuts in expenditure were required.
But since then all the wheels have fallen off the wagon and it looks as though a serious ST boycott campaign might be getting mounted. So all bets are off for the moment as I haven’t a scoobie what comes next. So I agree with you that the SFA would dearly love any Rangers variety playing at Ibrox next year but it may prove financially impossible.
“Scottish football will only be free when the last member of the SFA & SPL boards is strangled by the last copy of an SPL programme”
————————
I believe the original was “mankind will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last cleric”. I did see the attribution recently, but I can’t quite recall it at the moment.
Favourite versions of mine include –
Scotland will never be free until the last member of the Tory Party has been choked with the last copy of the Sunday Post.
And a slight variation applicable to current discussions –
Scottish football will never be free until the last Rangers supporter has been choked with the last copy of the Celtic View.
I’m sure there are others.
Damn it meant to add Tom’s original quote was either from the “Break up of Britain” or a Scotsman piece he did around the time of the second devolution referendum
Basher, quite right, the original quote was as you have it by Diderot
Got it! Denis Diderot, 18th C French philosopher.
Great minds etc, Scapa!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Meslier:
Greenockjack says @ 13.53:-
It doesn’t matter a jot in this instance whether the info was obtained legally – the MSM could issue their usual caveat ‘a source told us blah blah …’ if they wanted to print it.
They just don’t want to touch it.
finloch says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 14:01
A large part of me would love to see the fans to do and say something on Sunday before or during the final to tell the SFA and the watching world just what the real stakeholders think of our corrupt administration.
But fun as it might be its neither the right time nor place for most fans to protest. Sunday is Hibs’ and Celtic’s day and may the better team on the day lift the cup.
I hope it is a good game.
————————————————————————————————————————-
You are,of course, quite right.it should be a day of spectacle and celebration for the fans.
If,however, you were to ask each fan as he/she entered Hampden,do you think the SFA have managed our game well in the last twelve months?
I strongly suspect you will get a resounding 50,000 NOs!
HirsutePursuit says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 14:16
Chapeaux mon brave Vive la Révolution!
Will Charlotte lead us over the barricades?
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m75n4ed6IH1rxv319o1_1280.jpg
bect67
Considering the desperate need of the print media to encourage people to buy their newspapers or click on their links they´d need a good reason not to go with the material.
Scapa,
Judging by the picture, it’ll be a walkover!
If anyone needs to verify that UBIG holds interests other than Hearts one can look at their investments here:
http://www.ubig.lt/index.php?lang=2
Many nights in sleepless turmoil wondering where the central command PR Media bunker located.
Govan? Hampden? – someplace central? – & Some venue for MSM & spivs discrete leaking
Anyway – have cracked it!! The perfecto spot
Mediahoose on Bath Street has Lawyers for neighbours – AND – King Tuts Wah Wah Hut
Now – it may just – just be a coincidence, – but – Tutankhamen had his brains removed before mummification – and – it has microphones, tapes – & all sorts of video gigs for the modern spiv MSM.
Perhaps `Spurious Speculation` 😉
Incidentally – is I true that some of them eat human flesh on the Sabbath? – or does that come out Friday?
Scapa
Are you on the claret and is that Charlotte with the flag ?
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 14:34
On hols, cooking a la Floyd. Sadly, I think it more likely that Charlotte is a group of fat balding fortysomethings who still live with their mums, rather than her actually resembling Delacroix’s Madame Liberté!
re recent discussions about the morals or risk of speculation about CF, I would like to make it clear, my speculations are around who is orchestrating this and the motives, as to who CF is – I have no concern, my view is that the individual is not really important in the scheme of things rather the role that they are playing is. (just as it is not important who RTC is – but the role played by them was)
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 13:53
“Why wouldn´t the press touch the material that Charlotte now has on her hard drive ?
Do we know that the material was obtained legally”?
————
GJ, trying to read rather than post as doing other things right now but I can’t ignore a direct question.
I only have very vague recollections of how the Watergate investigation unfolded. I believe an anonymous source tipped off two journalists who were willing to pursue a complex and covert set of events.
Using that as a template, I’d imagine there is nothing to stop journalists pursuing the matter but suspect they would have to verify sources before going into print. Wouldn’t need to be Charlotte that they question. It could be someone implicated who feels under pressure and can be persuaded to blab before another colleague does the same. Perhaps this is happening as I write. However Charlotte has already shown there is a disturbing level of complicity between the press and the spivs (alleged Kenny McAlpine E:mail 27 March 2013 to Craig Whyte). Many suspected this complicity even before corroboration was provided. I suspect few here would be shocked if none of this scandal ever saw the light of day in the MSM. This speaks volumes about their efficacy and professionalism. Someone however could turn a coin by writing a book and probably will.
Whether it is admissable in court or not, it is out there and people know about it and the climate of public opinion will have been affected accordingly.
To go to court you would need to mount a case. Who would bring that suit. Obvious candidate would be Ticketus since they got stiffed but HMRC and the liquidators BDO might be other candidates. I personally am highly unlikely to bring a suit as I have not personally been damaged by this conspiracy. In fact for me its been rather entertaining.
If someone wanted to bring a suit then Charlotte’s releases would alert them to the existence of potentially incriminating material. The claimant would then try to obtain original copies, presumably by applying for some sort of warrant. In todays internet age documents cannot just be destroyed. Impressions of them may remain around the edges of all sorts of hard drives even after the owners of the computers concerned think they have deleted them. They might be sitting on servers of internet service providers. Very difficult to erase entirely.
At the moment the documents only appear admissable to the court of public opinion. However, particularly for the authorities that rely on respect to perform their duties effectively, the court of public opinion can bring forward very powerful verdicts. Ask Prince Harry if you don’t believe me.
From the Scotsman:-
“Meanwhile, Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan insists the governing body will open their own investigation into alleged links between Charles Green and Craig Whyte if Rangers’ own probe does not go far enough.
”
I’m reading this as saying if Green is found innocent we will do our own investigation. If he is found guilty we have saved ourselves some legal fees. Quite sensible me thinks.
fara1968 says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 15:49
0 0 Rate This
From the Scotsman:-
“Meanwhile, Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan insists the governing body will open their own investigation into alleged links between Charles Green and Craig Whyte if Rangers’ own probe does not go far enough.
”
I’m reading this as saying if Green is found innocent we will do our own investigation. If he is found guilty we have saved ourselves some legal fees. Quite sensible me thinks.
————————
Could also be read the other way, that if links are found then the SFA will conduct an inquiry with men of great standing and virtue and will eventually find no links what so ever because it’s not in the rules to open someone else’s emails and therefore since rfc* now say there is no link then there is no link.
But that couldn’t happen could it!
but it doesn’t matter what the investigation finds, according to the SFA – if they did not know or it wasn’t disclosed at the time of the offence then the actions were valid at that time, is this not the rule?
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/spiers-on-sport-rangers-in-the-grip-of-a-dirty-war.1369148379
“”Behave yourself. Show some dignity. Have some class. Stop acting like spivs.””
“Why did you sting me?” said the frog to the scorpion “Now we will both drown” “It’s just my nature” replied the scorpion.
______________________________________________
iamacant says: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:52
Charlotte Fakeovers @Charlotte Fakes Someone was in the process of compiling Duff and Phelps info. Note Paul Clark is aware that it’s a 3 year ticket deal
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142089135/Duff-and-Phelps-Advice …
______________________________________________
iamacant says: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:09
Excuse my ignorance but in the email dated 19 April 2011 sent by Gary Withey, he starts it off by stating “James” yet the recipients appear to be Phil Betts, Craig Whyte and David Grier. Who is James?
—————————————————————————-
iamacant says: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 21:34
Still bugging me, don’t know why
______________________________________________
zerotolerance1903 : says: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 22:46
There’s a James Earl in the email on the 2nd page.
______________________________________________
I’m a long time obsessive (since RTC article in The Guardian on Monday, 13 February 2012) and first time poster as I have struggled to add anything of significance to our debates and unlinked period of depression.
Anyway after admiring more of Charlotte’s dirty linen a quick internet search led me to the following links, which will hopefully provide another small piece of our puzzle.
1. Article by James Earl when at Clarke Willmott.
http://www.clarkewillmott.com/news-and-articles/2009/sponsorship-crunch-to-hit-sports-organisations-says-clarke-willmott.php
No longer shown as an associate of Clarke Willmott.
2. So is this the same James Earl now working at Pinsent Masons?
http://www.pinsentmasons.com/en/people/partnersconsultants/james-earl/
If so, is James part of the continuing The Spivco (© acknowledged) cover-up?
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 11:20
What exactly was SDM´s role in the takeover of 2011 (going back to 2009) ?
When did SDM first meet or know of CW in relation to Rangers and what actions did he take ?
Do you think Charlotte has anything on SDM ?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Your question to Barcaboy also made me wonder
For two reasons
1 What was the real reason King got involved with SDM and RFC ?
Why did he hang around when all the other SDM Directors were gone?
What was uis motivation?
Was it somehow connected to the RFC accounts for 2010- 2011 and prior period?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I`ve never understood why the RFC accounts for the year ended 30 June 2011 weren`t published by Whyte
I `m also baffled as to why Duff and Phelps passed up the chance to generate fees by redoing the 2010- 2011 Accounts when they took over
.In the event they neither the 2010- 2011 accounts nor the 2011 -2012 accounts were published
At the time there was speculation that the Auditors wanted to add comments Whyte would not accept.
However it might have been something completely different
e.g.
Was concealment of the 2010-2011 accounts a side deal between SDM and Whyte?
And
Was the 2011 2012 accounts concealed because there was no 2010-2011 accounts to provide continuity?
And if so
Why?
An interesting piece on Sherriff Reid’s decision of last week on a case involving the ridiculous Offensive Behaviour at Football (etc) Act of 2012
http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/the-football-act-ending-shame-of-turnip.html
Mullach
I fail to see the relevance of Watergate and suspect you have been reading a lot of BRTH.
If the press saw a scandal that they could back-up, they´d be all over it.
They obviously can´t back-up what Charlotte has or would have legal barriers put in their way.
If you think that they would sit on useable info that would sell copy then I think you are very mistaken.
The example of what you call complicity cannot be compared with what we are talking about here.
As far as Prince Harry was concerned and the court of public opinion, again it has no relevance.
Harry was all over the front pages, the case as it were was based on images/videos that were difficult to defend.
It was something that had to be dealt with, an image is worth a thousand words (in print).
The Herald touched on one of the tapes that Charlotte released but on nothing else.
So the ongoing show that seems to have stalled for the time being, whilst capturing a lot of attention hasn´t yet played a significant role.
GG
Your first questions could be answered by the simple fact that he is a Rangers supporter who invested a sizable sum of money.
As for the accounts of 10/11, I don´t think CW had any intention to publish audited accounts.
D&P neither, they always intended to put forward their own report on the numbers.
fara1968 says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 15:49
====================
Who will decide if the investigation has gone far enough though. Presumably the SFA themselves.
So, if the SFA receive a copy, which says there are no problems and the SFA agree it has “gone far enough” then presumably that will be an end of that.
The rest of us will just have to accept that.
“There are three separate investigations on-going around the calamity which befell Rangers. It’s just a pity there is also not an agency somewhere with sufficient power and moral influence to be able to say to these Ibrox principals: “Behave yourself. Show some dignity. Have some class. Stop acting like spivs.”
That was from Spiers in the Herald today in a fairly poor piece. I just wonder if the thought has ever entered his head that if the SMSM had been acting like professional journalists and doing the job they should have been doing then things quite probably would never have reached this stage.
Instead they lapped up all the bullsh*t dished out by Green and checked nothing – he was a great guy and good for a quote or soundbite at the drop of a hat.
Ordinary fans who don’t come to forums like this don’t have a clue there is a whole counter-argument and indeed counter-culture out there in the internet so they rely on the print media especially. These fans are dying out but old habits take quite a while to go.
But we alaso have a whole new generation that fully understands and recognises Spiers and all the rest – and btw I don’t regard GS as anywhere near the worst of the bunch – as basically lazy, ill-informed reporters who seem happier cutting and pasting a press release than seeking out real exclusives and doing a bit of investigating and producing a piece worth reading.
Quite simply, in this day and age, people are too busy to wade through the dross served-up by so called professional journos and especially sports reporters who almost to a man are incapable of understanding never mind reporting the Rangers story in a balanced and objective way with real facts rather then conjecture.
zerotolerance1903 says: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 14:32
———————————————
I believe that Hearts have a strong case that they shouldn’t be sanctioned when UBIG finally does go into administration.
The main points of that defence are:
1. Hearts have traded independently of UBIG and have received no financial assistance since January 2012
2. Hearts are currently servicing the debt due to UBIG (£10M) as part of an agreed interest only payment deal.
3. The debt to UBIG is currently half of what it’s debt to HBOS when UBIG took over in 2005.
4. UBIG is an umbrella company for a diverse range of businesses of which Hearts is a small part
5. The insolvency of UBIG cannot be definitively be linked to overspending on Hearts in the early Vlad years. e.g. did Rudi Skacel’s wages in 2005 result in UBIG going under in 2013.
6. The “Group Undertaking” rule only came into being on 1st July 2012, therefore Hearts should not be sanctioned for any financial assistance (or sporting advantage) prior to that date.
7. The new SPL rule (A6.12) is untested, subjective and open to interpretation. The purpose of the rule has never been defined.
8. Sanctioning Hearts, thus causing financial unstability for the club in terms of league position, possible relegation, reduced ST income, reduced sponsorship opportunities etc., because it’s major shareholder (UBIG) has become insolvent is Ultra Vires, and any competent lawyer would be able to have that view upheld in the CoS.
The case against
1. The rule is black and white. If UBIG suffer an insolvency event then it automatically follows that Hearts will be sanctioned.
2. Hearts have received financial assistance from UBIG over a period of years and these represent a significant reason for the ultimate insolvency.
3. Hearts continue to have debts due to UBIG.
————————————
Regardless of what happens re the sanctions, Hearts cash flow remains dodgy to say the least, mainly because of interest and tax payments to UBIG, Ukio and HMRC following agreements with each party. Cash flow projections for 2013/14 are dependent on player sales (who?) and further funds coming from fans through a membership scheme (which doesn’t exist at the moment).
The total outgoings to these three parties is £1.78M per annum for the next two years. That is money lost to the club before they pay any wages.
IMO, unless Hearts are sold. I think they may well end up in administration of their own accord by xmas.
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:31
Mullach
The Herald touched on one of the tapes that Charlotte released but on nothing else.
So the ongoing show that seems to have stalled for the time being, whilst capturing a lot of attention hasn´t yet played a significant role.
==============================================================
The only role of any real significance to be played by the MSM is to trot-out the club PR line although you sometimes get the odd piste-off stories like Stockbridge and his video today (the reversal was intentional btw).
But I think it may well be rash to think that because Charlotte has not had widespread MSM exposure that her tweets are not playing a significant role in many places probably because of the fear of what may yet be to come. I think in some quarters – other than the bampots and clatterers like ourselves – every single word will be getting analysed and defences and deflection shields being erected for when the media eventually find the courage to act.
Not fitting is an inquiry reputedly concerning individuals – who may or may not co-operate – that could cost [just a nominal figure] of say 10% of STs. This `inquiry` reported` as sponsored by MM – who has been on the receiving end of a full works across the board negative now vicious PR Campaign
Board splits are not uncommon, neither are nefarious dealings, or resignations if caught, or blame game culture – or indeed base smearing [although few as base low as this from financial rats]
Not sitting well is the dearth of `official` comment from the `Ibrox` club or the SFA – or an active MSM
Let’s substitute `independent` for an inserted crisis management team – something’s big blown. Big enough for `investors` to come out of the woodwork. Is the `independent inquiry` is a fairy tale cover title? Could it be the `independent` `authorities` – have uncovered a few wee fault-line `problems`?
But they need `proof` – That could justify mobilising a million or so when finances so tight to `defend`
– And a wee interweb campaign to spin things along
All in the name of transparency – jolly good stuff
We’ll see
Just `spurious speculation`
Blimey 😉
For Charlotte……..
Days of absence, sad and dreary,
Clothed in sorrow’s dark array, –
Days of absence, I am weary;
She I love is far away.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Eco
fear of what may yet be to come
————————————————–
That´s what it comes down to. Has Charlotte a genuine smoking gun ?
chipm0nk on Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:48
1 0 Rate This
fara1968 says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 15:49
====================
Who will decide if the investigation has gone far enough though. Presumably the SFA themselves.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////
No I was thinking that “not far enough” was Regans way of saying no evidence against Green. This would force the SFA to look at things further. By taking this stance Regan could save money and possibly the wrath of the TRFC fans. I know I have no reason to trust the SFA going by their past performances but Regan couldn’t say, “if they don’t find anything we will try to”. That would be suicide.
“Charles Green, a buffoonish Rangers CEO, is gone”
A quite from Spiers’ piece today. It wasn’t so long ago that he was lauding the self-same man (“I like him” is, I think, a direct quote of his).
If anything illustrates the MSM’s ability to bend with the perceived wind, it’s this. While most right-minded people could see that Green was a very dangerous and divisive force in Scottish football, old Speirsy was of the opinion that he added to the gaiety of nations. A man who incited a rapid support with calls for boycotts, who called the SPL and SFA cheats and thieves, who upped the general mood of ill-feeling to dangerous heights . . . I could go on.
But now, the scales have fallen from Speirsy’s eyes.
Well, about f***ing time.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/spiers-on-sport-rangers-in-the-grip-of-a-dirty-war.1369148379?
“spiers-on-sport”
what has, a man, who has finished his work and had a few pints after work – got to do with “sport”
why does spiers make issue of this video, but not the other “leaks” from charlotte fakeovers?
why does spiers “spear” green, whyte, ahmad, stockbridge, but fails to ever question the amount of money that “walter” wasted and ultimately put “rangers” out of business?
is spiers scared of “walter” or just friends with him?
finchleyflyer says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 17:23
“Charles Green, a buffoonish Rangers CEO, is gone”
A quite from Spiers’ piece today. It wasn’t so long ago that he was lauding the self-same man (“I like him” is, I think, a direct quote of his).
————————————————————————————————————————-
Variations on a theme.” I like this guy”,” He’s a good guy” ” Say what you like about him……………………………
Changes in more directions than the wind.
Let me take a wild punt here and say …
I believe the SFA will do sod all about Green and Whyte ,nothing ,zilch,nada .
IMO the SFA have shown themselves to be a corrupt ,spineless bunch of biased cretins who when their covering up for Sevco became too overwhelming just dropped the pretence and brass necked it .
Regan more or less admitted it today ,just when you think you have sorted one thing all of a sudden something else crops up .
A word of advice to Mr Regan .If you sort something by the rules it is sorted ,if you sort something against the rules it only leads to another problem .
It’s the same as telling lies ,if you tell a lie you end up having to tell more lies to cover your first lie up ,if you tell the truth (it may not be what you want the peepil to hear ) but it will be out and can be dealt with .
Why don’t you and your friends not just apply the rules and tell the truth .
ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:50
Oh for the insight of a sports journalist, especially one like Graham Spiers! Without his excellent article on the goings on at Ibrox, would any one of us be able to work out that the people running TRFC are making a rather public farce of what has been a rather long running public farce? I think it takes a rather special, venus flytrap, kind of mind to be able to work out that company directors slagging each other off in all sorts of media outlets is not good for said company. I wish he’d been around a couple of years ago when the farce began, so he could have kept the bears fully informed on how these men ‘acting like spivs’ (acting? I think he means fully fledged spivs) should not be allowed to get a grip on their football team.
I think Spiers knows that there’s a story out there but he’s just not got the gumption to do some real investigating, but feels he has to comment on what others have printed or posted online so he doesn’t appear to be too far behind his competitors, who are in turn, miles behind everyone else.
easyJambo says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:58
Thanks EJ. One thing, though. Given that Hearts aren’t wholly owned by UBIG/BANKIOS, then to my untrained eye, it would appear that the holding company arguement doesn’t really hold here, unless the SFA/SPL have included some quantifiable limit of shareholding, above which it is implied that they will act as if ownership is whole (e.g. if someone owns ,say, 75% of shares, then as far as the SPL are concerned, they will view them as the owner/parent company).
I suppose what I’m saying is that if Desmond Dermot was declared insolvent, would it follow that Celtic are insolvent? He’s (I think) the biggest shareholder at Celtic, but it would seem harsh on the other 70+ percent of Celtic shareholders if that were the case.
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:31
“I fail to see the relevance of Watergate and suspect you have been reading a lot of BRTH”.
—————
I think you treat your fellow posters rather lightly with such a remark but I will rise above it and deal with your question on its own merit (sounds a bit terse but not meant to be).
The reason I mentioned Watergate and Prince Harry was because they were the obvious expamles that sprang to mind.
In the case of Watergate the journalists that broke the story had a starting off point of an anonymous source. The authenticity or motive of that source could not be proven by them but they felt the story was sufficiently important to accept ‘Deep Throat’s’ information at face value. As it transpired this was a good call by them since they were subsequently able to uncover far more evidence.
If someone told you there was treasure buried at the bottom of your garden you might, not unreasonably, choose to ignore them. You may however take a shovel out the shed and go poking around. If you found treasure you know your information source was a good one. I’d have thought for your average journalist that this story is the equivalent of treasure. If you had a map and clues what’s to stop you digging around journalistically to see what you can uncover. It doesn’t matter where the information came from. Only whether it turns out to be true. If you don’t investigate it then you will never find this out one way or another. I still don’t think it is known who ‘Deep Throat’ was but the information provided was significant as it turned out.
So your next question was; why aren’t the press all over this?
I’m not them but as you’ve posed the question to me then I’d have to say that they have become too cosy with Rangers Football Club. They don’t want to bring out stories that would damage an organisation within which they have friends. Perfectly understandable human reaction, if you were not a journalist.
Whether they can back it up or not they can still ask questions. If I had a press pass I think I’d be asking a few questions of a number of people. However I don’t think I would have that press pass for long as no-one would employ me. When you ask difficult and potentially damaging questions there is a danger at some point you will get something wrong. At that point people that you have previously damaged will attempt to undermine your credibility. Therefore most newspapers prefer to employ journalists that ask nice simple questions.
As for Harry, it was perhaps an unfortunate and lazy example for me to select. You say a picture is worth a thousand words. We have around 10,000 words from Charlotte that paint quite a pretty picture. It is not so instantly recognisable as someone’s photograph but certainly a lot of the RTC/TSFM stalwarts will see the unmistakabl;e outline of a narrative they have gone over many times. I may not see it. You may not see it.
I don’t know if Prince Harry has a birth mark but if I did and I seen a photograph of only that part of his anatomy I would immediately suspect it was him. If you know someone that intimately you probably dont need a high definition 3 dimensional image to be able to convince yourself who you’re looking at.
He (Harry) was all over the front pages. The Sun decided that despite Buckingham Palace urging the newspapers not to run the story, they published anyway. The photograph was not taken with Harry’s permission. By the terms of Levison (?) it was probably procured illegally and should not have been used. The Sun however decided to take the consequences and published it anyway.
People are probably writing books and film scripts about this right now. It will be remembered for decades. I never really saw Prince harry’s photograph but I wouldn’t try to deny that the unfortunate frolic did not in fact take place.
La SFA ne ferai rien car elle est complice et, de plus, lâche.
N’est-ce pas, Charlotte?
Wow, Charlotte wooed always up here.Come back Charlotte,I was wrong!
areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 17:50
———————————–
I’m pretty sure that SPL clubs are required to state their Group structure with their accounts.
Hearts state that UBIG is their parent company.
Celtic’s are Celtic PLC (36% owned by Dermot Desmond)
Hibs are HFC Holdings Ltd (90% Tom Farmer, 10% Rod Petrie)
Dunfermline “were” Charlestown Holdings Ltd (100% Gavin Masterton)
Aberdeen (no named parent although S Milne’s shareholding is described as including “shares owned by companies in which he has a controlling interest”)
Dundee Utd (no named parent – Controlling party is Catherine Thomson with 88%)
Kilmarnock (no named parent – Control lies with Michael Johnston 85%)
etc. etc.
mullach says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:05
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:31
“I fail to see the relevance of Watergate and suspect you have been reading a lot of BRTH”.
—————
Deep throat was Mark Felt,I think he was FBI.
Still thinking about who benefits from Charlotte’s leaks. Greenock Jack, I accept you’re not after a name to cause any harm, but are interested in the motivation. Your recent posts worry me a little, though, in that you seem almost too keen to link Charlotte to AT, RTC etc. I hope this isn’t so Charlotte can be discounted as another ‘Rangers-hater’.
A little while before Charlotte, a post of mine requesting clarification/confirmation of my understanding led to responses that got me to a place where I could see why MM was being asked/forced to resign i.e. he was a decent RFC*-minded businessman trying to prevent the spivs from bleeding RFC*.
Later, the desire to get rid of him became even more urgent because of his desire to see a genuine enquiry into the apparent links between CW/CG/IA.
It was around this time that Charlotte started leaking. To me, the leaks serve a number of purposes….
1. They indirectly support MM by (apparently) providing evidence that the enquiry is required and help prevent the option of a cover up.
2. They strengthen CW’s legal claims that CG was his front man and support his claim on the assets
3. They promote investor fear in the stability of the company
4. They promote fan fear in the future of the team (or should, I think)
So, they seem to benefit MM, CW, any new investor/purchaser (as share price should fall when it can). Anyone else?
Are the three who benefit mutually exclusive or could they be working together for mutual benefit e.g. MM’s reputation enhanced by standing up to spivs for the greater glory of ‘Rangers’; CW benefits by getting hold of the assets to rent to a new purchaser (DK?) and DK gets to buy up the ‘entity’ at a lower price.
I don’t know, only surmising – shoot me down…..
delahvunt on SSB claiming that sevco websites saying “walter” will be gone tomorrow !!??
I’m not near a radio now but the first Rangers supporter who was the first caller of the evening on SSB was imho a realist who has well founded fears about is club and the possible consequences of the CG & CW tie up.
Mullach
The remark was made in jest, no need to be rising above anyone.
As far as Watergate, Prince Harry and the conspiracy amongst the press that you believe that would sit on a scandal (if material was legalled). I listen to what you have to say but can´t agree that there is much relevance with what we have in front of us today.
What it comes down as far as Charlotte is concerned is if she has a real smoking gun or not.
rantinrobin says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Spiers on Green
August 2012 – Green, an engaging character who once played up front for Goole Town, is slowly but surely creating a safe berth for himself in Glasgow.
January 2013 – There are two competing schools of thought about the faintly Barnum figure that is Charles Green, the Rangers chief executive. The first is that he is an engaging, gutsy man, who has astutely taken on this Rangers mess and stored up for himself future profit, while simultaneously restoring the club. The second is that he is a colourful buffoon, a blusterer adept in the outrageous statement, who has taken in the Ibrox hardcore with his megaphone pronouncements. I think there is merit in both points of view.
April 2013 – Let’s be clear about what Charles Green, the Rangers CEO, was trying to say in his ludicrous comments about having a “Paki friend” and having once played alongside a “darkie” striker. Green was interviewed last weekend and, in highly unfortunate remarks, came over as some kind of cross between Alf Garnett and Bernard Manning. He actually sounded as if he had travelled in a time-machine straight from 1972.
D&P appear to have got the all clear from the IPA investigation, according to letters posted on line today:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/64892429.jpg
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/17/56830702.jpg
(sorry if posted previously)
chipm0nk on Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:42
2 0 Rate This
….and given CG’s turn of phrase in the CW recordings, quite an objectionable and uncooth charachter at best.
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 16:31
=======================================
I’m not so sure the media will always run with stories as long as they can stand them up. One of the easiest things in the world for them to stand up would have been Craig Whyte’s business history when he took over at Ibrox. They chose not to though, and instead portrayed him as a billionaire – the rest is history of course.
duplesis says: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:57
D&P appear to have got the all clear from the IPA investigation, according to letters posted on line today:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/64892429.jpg
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/17/56830702.jpg
=================================
The key words from the investigation “Based on the information provided by Messrs Clark and Whitehouse from their case files ………………….”
I wonder what the outcome would have been had they known of the information on Paul Clark released by CF? Probably still “nothing to see, move along please”
nawlite says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:21
“I don’t know, only surmising – shoot me down…..”
——————-
I had a different train of thought but your post made me stop and think a bit. You may be onto something but let me critique your remarks in the light of what I am thinking myself before going on to expand on my own hypothesis.
————
Q1. They indirectly support MM by (apparently) providing evidence that the enquiry is required and help prevent the option of a cover up.
————
A1. I can see that but why did Charlotte mention Pearl & Dean/STV and Chris Akers. These remarks are irrelevant to the internal enquiry MM commissioned as far as we know.
————
Q2. They strengthen CW’s legal claims that CG was his front man and support his claim on the assets
————
A2. Up to a point but they also reveal that Craig Whytes involvement was much wider, possibly going all the way back to SDM (Media House). The liquidators, BDO, might be interested in these other links. Why expose this possible connection if you are only trying to strengthen Sevco 5088 claims. Also A1.
————
Q3. They promote investor fear in the stability of the company
————
A3. I can accept that though I understand the share price has not altered significantly (so far).
————
Q4. They promote fan fear in the future of the team (or should, I think)
————
Yes I agree.
———————————-
As far as I can see there is no obvious outstanding candidate for who might be at the heart of the leaks from the list of candidates you provide. You are obviously trying to exercise the possibilities though, which is exactly where we should be right now.
Further to my earlier post, something else is now cooking in the back of my head. Was it Ianagain who mooted the possibility of the previous Ibrox internet provider being a source. I’m not convinced about that for the reason I gave previously but it did add something to my cerebral casserole.
If a 15 year old Gary McKinnon can hack into the Pentagon’s military computer network, then no IT system can be safe from external infiltration.
Perhaps there are IT companies out there that can provide this service, very discreetly. If there were, then who would wish to make use of such a facility to scrutinise Rangers?
Answer. Dozens of people.
I’ve already suggested Ticketus.
The previous internet provider has been suggested by someone else. When I dug out the list of contracts to be breached the poster remarked that it was the list of creditors from administration he was referring to.
That’s a whole other bunch of people.
Now it probably wasn’t the newsagent or Caithness glass but there were likely a few major creditors who certainly had the finance, even if they did not have the motivation, to commission such a hack.
Lets forget who might have commissioned my hypothetical hack as the candidates are toooooo numerous. If this was the motive however, what if the hacker found more than they expected to find. All sorts of other juicy titbits. Some they could see the relevance of, others they could not. Perhaps they even jumped to conclusions in certain places as they did not have a full understanding of the big picture.
So in the commissioner of the hack’s mind is there the thought, “Rangers stiffed us so we’re going to stiff them back and a bit more just for good measure”?
Just my idle musings. Stick it up there with the other posts marked ‘conspiracy theories’.
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 17:12
Eco
fear of what may yet be to come
————————————————–
That´s what it comes down to. Has Charlotte a genuine smoking gun ?
=================================================
Oh I think she’s proved she’s got a gun but we don’t know its accuracy; the size of bullets or even the magazine capacity. We can’t even be sure of the target and, most importantly, we can’t be sure of the damage already done. Her mission might already be accomplished or she may return.
I’m afraid in situations like this I am prepared to wait and watch for developments and see what can be made of what she actually has revealed.
I am particularly disappointed with the Sevco 5088 minutes posted which just don’t feel right to me but I have to say that there nothing else shouting ‘fake’ at me.
But to return to my ‘fear of what may yet be to come’ comment – I know through experience that when dodgy deals are being operated then a helluva lot more goes on than ever meets the light of day and no matter how deep and successful an investigation is there is usually lots of moves that never see the light of day.
That’s really what I refer to – the fear of the spivs who know everything they have done and the worry they have of not knowing for sure what might surface and how any particular disclosure might unravel much deeper and more serious activities.
greenockjack says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:37
“The remark was made in jest, no need to be rising above anyone”.
“What it comes down as far as Charlotte is concerned is if she has a real smoking gun or not”.
————-
I tried to acknowledge in my opening remark that I thought I sounded a bit curt. I was keen to defend BRTH’s good name which I know carries a lot of currency here rather than my own. The foot I placed in the stirrup of my high horse was immediately remioved as I did not think you were being anything other than light hearted and humorous.
As for your final remark. I don’t think Charlotte has a smoking gun. I think its a red hot 4.5″ calibre Howitzer.
duplesis says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:57
“D&P appear to have got the all clear from the IPA investigation, according to letters posted on line today”
———–
easyJambo says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 19:21
“I wonder what the outcome would have been had they known of the information on Paul Clark released by CF? Probably still “nothing to see, move along please”.
————
The SFA can keep a copy of the IPA ruling and cut and paste it into their press release on the outcome of Rangers internal investigation.
Insolvency Practitioners Association spectacularly succeed in utterly discrediting themselves. Just add themm to the list.
Anyone else get the feeling that all the revelations that are now appearing is a deliberate plan for the spivs to incriminate themselves in the belief it will draw out a hefty buyout by someone…anyone…crook…honest guy…with a reasonable amount of cash to allow them out of dodge?
After all…as it stands…the current spivs will have to continue to run SEVCO…a loss making organisation…that will require hard work…commitment and a serious cost restructure to a point that the return in money is not worth it for a group who could not care less about the club…a far greater return is a buyout…and move onto the next victim.
Did I not read that if D&P were cleared in the IPA that one reason may be that there is a very large debt on the club that may not be widely known of that had precedence over the other shareholders .
Floating charge anyone .
mullach says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 19:22
nawlite says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:21
Q3. They promote investor fear in the stability of the company
————
A3. I can accept that though I understand the share price has not altered significantly (so far)
===================================================================
I would say the share price has altered quite a bit from a 94p high at the turn of the year to its current flatline around 56p – the share offer price to fans was 70p and the flotation day price on AIM was 76p on 20/12/2012.
But IMO the share price is on its current plateau because of a shortage of shares to sell. The Rangers share trading has invariably been very light right from the start. But if big share blocs become available after 6 months on 20 June then I reckon they’ll be sold mainly by direct deals done between sellers and buyers for potentially large blocs.
Obviously if someone wants to buy shares as a means of gaining a level of control over the club then they would be happier seeing the price fall but the Institutional Investors – who bought £17 million shares last December – face pressure from their own clients who invested in investment vehicles holding these shares and don’t want to lose money.
Fans are highly unlikely to sell. So we are left with the original investors and many of them hold 1p shares although some have paid £1 a share. So there is big money to be made there and I would think a lot of these investors might decide this is the time to go but who knows? And who knows what, if any, conditions might apply to their original investment.
All shares are a gamble and the AIM market has been likened to a casino – so ordinary investors place their bets, close their eyes, dream and hope it doesn’t turn into a nightmare. The spivs are different and have much more carefully laid plans and their profits usually come those crossing their fingers.
duplesis says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 18:57
3 0 Rate This
D&P appear to have got the all clear from the IPA investigation, according to letters posted on line today:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/405/64892429.jpg
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/17/56830702.jpg
………………………………………..
I’m curious….other than the fact that link appears to have been set up by a SEVCO fan….there is no date associated to that document…
upthehoops says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 19:05
———————————–
Agreed!
I will not mention some of the more unsavory incidents that have allegedly gone down with the walls of the big hoose but there are many others based on fact where the media ignored a good story.
The media have already admitted to sitting on stories concerning Rangers, I don’t believe that is even up for debate now. Even in the last weeks we have heard GS and others say “that was open knowledge, the media have been talking about that for months”, of course it was never put into print, just that him and his colleagues talked about it.
Was it a scandal that Rangers had (and still have) an unwritten policy when it comes to employees of a specific religion? There was a story, the facts were there, and it was as transparent as you could hope for as a journalist, so why did nobody ask the direct questions? Why are they still not? That is what’s known as sitting on a scandal so to say that the press would not sit on a scandal is plainly wrong, what that should read is “no way would a journalist sit on a scandal unless it would lead to the demise of Rangers”.
With regard to the clearing of D&P I assume there is nothing to prevent a fresh complaint based on the evidence which has since come to light regarding Sevco 5088 and other issues. There is a helluva lot that hasn’t been investigated by the IPA because it has not been complained against.
And it should be considered that perhaps the Charlotte information may have been connected with the imminent release of the IPA verdict which would have been known about in certain circles. I have to add that I don’t quite see how that might assist Charlotte or any associates she might have but all possibilities have to be examined.
new from CF
CtH right up to date with her info I see
what does that tell you …
Wait, “Rangers” and the “Club”, wait a minute you mean they are distinct legal entities, OOOHHH who could have known!
It appears Charlotte has a letter to Craig Whyte from 3 may 2013. There go most of the conspiracy theories…
RT @CharlotteFakes: Investigation reminder http://bit.ly/10SlFbk and a typical opening letter to other parties. http://i.imgur.com/FGp1QE9.jpg
Telephone Number on latest document is correct at least
James Doleman (@jamesdoleman) says:
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 20:45
———————————————–
Not quite ….
deduced from earlier info that there is direct colusion …….. orchestrated
Charlotte Fakeovers@CharlotteFakes18 May
Pinsent Mason deadline expired yesterday without a formal response from Whyte and others. Full and explosive QC’d LBC in 5-10 days instead.
Had to be hot info ….
If I was Whyte I doubt if I’d be meeting P&M
Any info disclosed by him to them can be disclosed to other un-named persons and also may be used in any subsequent unspecified proceedings.
Also all relevant docs, emails, texts, or other comms requested.
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 1m
Private Dinner with the President. Minutes should be interesting. http://www.scribd.com/doc/142823209/Regan-Letter …