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/
Test and good morning to everyone.
liveinhope says:
June 9, 2013 at 9:52 am
what happened to sandaza hearing for unfair dissmisal
==============================================
A trip to the Employment Tribunal in Glasgow should be able to get that info as its public record. From memory I think the case must be lodged within 3 months or basically it falls.
Have no idea about waiting times at the moment but if he’s out the country it could delay matters. However now that Green and Imran have gone then I think there will be a quiet settlement agreed with Rangers. If no case has been lodged then I would assume that a settlement has been done and dusted.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
June 9, 2013 at 8:49 am
http://bit.ly/11AkVLB
————-
The club badge on Kenny Shiels track suit top has TWO squirrels on it. SMSM have upped the ante.
Thanks OnandOnandOnand, I’ve just noticed a load of posts that were invisible, no doubt some glitches in the system. No idea about the story behind the CF material. Did they buy new PCs for Ibrox and forget to wipe the hard drives on the old ones? Of did CW forget his laptop in the back of Tommy’s taxi? 🙂
@ForresDee
Been thinking the same.
Morning everyone.Interesting to see whether trolling will cause a stir.Well done TSFM for all your hard work.
Great to see you back OnandOnandOn.always a pleasure to read your posts and take.
Danish Pastry says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:18 am
Actually, it’s even funnier and unbelievable than that but I don’t want to take the wind out of Charlotte’s sails
Mullach says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:08 am
3 0 Rate This
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
June 9, 2013 at 8:49 am
http://bit.ly/11AkVLB
————-
The club badge on Kenny Shiels track suit top has TWO squirrels on it. SMSM have upped the ante.
——–
😀
Good morning, Rantin, I’m only back for a short while, people were going in all directions re Charlotte, especially worrying themselves about conspiracy theories when the truth, as always, is more mundane, just putting them back on track. The next few days will be interesting……..
Zilch2 says:
June 9, 2013 at 9:56 am
On the CF releases – the MSM silence is becoming a deafening crescendo.
You have to ask yourself why that might be?
No, my money is on the silence being what the MSM have done for years. Failing to report on the real issues afflicting Scottish football in the hope that the Establishment club will be protected and nurtured (to the detriment of all others) and that the loyal fans will continue to lap up the nonsense being peddled by the MSM about 30 glorious years of Ally at Ibrox etc.
—————————————————————————
It is painfully obvious that any journalist worth their salt could take such a rich source of information as CF is offering and immediately construct the wording of 100 questions that could elicit some ‘on the record’ information from the main players, or at least a noteworthy ‘no comment’ or two. This would be the usual manner, I would suspect, by which journalists test the veracity of information such as this – the answers (or lack of) that they receive tell the story, and prove it either to have a legitimate basis or to be made of straw. To be fair to the hacks, it is also possible that there is a massive legal sledgehammer somewhere in the background that we don’t know of, in case things might become too free and fair for our own good.
Thanks for all your efforts TSFM, much appreciated. Best wishes for the new site.
Lord Wobbly says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:04 am
0
0
Rate This
ecobhoy says:
June 9, 2013 at 9:52 am
0 0 Rate This
Lord Wobbly says:
June 9, 2013 at 8:39 am
In Turkey, fans of Beşiktaş, Fenerbahçe, Galatasaray,
Trabzonspor, Bursaspor and others have joined forces on the
country’s streets and squares in anti-govenment
demonstrations. Meanwhile in Scotland, its football fans
continue to allow the country’s football governers to remain in
place despite a calamitous regime.
==================================================
To be fair I think the issues involved in Turkey actually involve
life and death, a way of life being denied and an attack on the
structure of Democracy. I have no wish to divert the blog but
what we are fighting here is a tawdry football administration
and useless MSM which can’t be compared to what the Turkish
people are facing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh I completely agree. I was just trying to point out that if the Turks can take on their Government, shirley we Scots can take on our football governors.
===========================================================
People have to care enough to take to the streets and possibly there aren’t enough Scots left who have enough of an interest left if football beyond paying for their Sky subscription. People aren’t daft – they’ve more or less lost all faith in huge bits of our system of government never mind football administration and realise how difficult it is to be able to change things that are so obviously wrong.
When I was young I truly believed I could be a part of changing the world – with experience I now realise just how strong the opposing forces actually are and how difficult it is to achieve change because it will affect those who hold the power and they will never willingly relinquish it.
But fans did have a magnificent victory last year because they drew a line in the sand and I believe they are capable of doing so again and part of our job in facilitating that is to keep not only the flow of info going but with informed comment as well to expose the duplicity and weakness in the likes of the SFA and MSM and – to take some of the latest CF stuff – to show what goes on behind the scenes and the pressure wielded on the MSM by the PR spin doctors to suit their client’s agenda.
Is any newspaper going to reveal to their readers that a couple of ex Glasgow hacks turned PR gurus are having the dealings and discussions that Charlotte has revealed involving Dave King’s SAR tax dealings.
This stuff is pure dynamite and been buried by the Scottish Media on purpose – it has to be kept away from the public – not to protect Rangers and the Establishment – but to protect the MSM who are in danger of being exposed as a cesspit who have no interest in bringing the truth to their readers but in building Empires or being handed Knighthoods for services rendered. This is all about power and power is based on knowledge and it can’t be wasted on football fans – that is what the MSM is all about: Controlling what we are told and how it is spun.
A very good moaning! Just returned from Doha and the general consensus between us “climate systems ” peeps is that a summer World Cup there would be rather tricky ….
test
the taxman cometh says:
June 9, 2013 at 8:08 am
So how does one raise the issue of SFA awarding UEFA licence wrongly to the deceased club, to the detriment of other clubs?
——-
By asking the clubs concerned (Celtic, Hearts, Dundee Utd and Kilmarnock) if they are fin by losing the prize money from UEFA for that season. Celtic and Kilmarnock in particular – because Cetlic would have played in CL and Kilmarnock would have played in Europe – both denied unlawfully by SFA pronouncing RFC-NIL as having no outstanding tax deb, when they had been clearly agreeing to a settlement to pat the WTC – which at time of administration was still not paid.
Since Peter Lawwell and the board are responsible for the financial decisions taken on behalf of the shareholders, he is answerable to the shareholders for not pressing a claim for this from SFA – since they clearly are at fault.
I would suggest anyone form the 4 clubs get tweeting/emailing/writing to their clubs asking what is their response to this and have they asked SFA for clarification why they were denied monies when the evidence is so clear SFA bungled this (and thanks to CF) and were complicit in the cover up
Exiled Celt says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:37 am
Bit difficult for Mr Lawwell to complain about a decision that, he was, err um, party to.
I very much doubt that we will hear anything about this from Celtic, or indeed anyone else. Still, if it creates a more realistic, and less of a my club right or wrong, attitude among my fellow Celtic fans, then its all to the good!
Areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
June 9, 2013 at 9:29 am
Should also have said – perhaps the reason that the leaks aren’t even being acknowledged is the lack of a source?
—————————————————————————————————————————————————
Lack of an identifiable source isn’t a barrier and many whistleblowers go to great lengths not to reveal their identity. This actually suits lots of journalists who can then falsely play-up their investigative skills when all they did was take a very lucky phone call.
Sometimes ‘sources’ might actually address the brown envelope to a specified journo because they have seen something they’ve written previously which makes the source think they’ll do a job. And it’s not unknown for a source to develop a long association with a journalist who is able to get their material into print and yet the source is never identified except when written on expenses forms and it’s usually a name from the Obit columns.
If anyone is daft enough to listen to the Scottish MSM decision to sit on its hands over Charlotte Fakes then it’s just as well Watergate happened in America or no one would have printed anything Deep Throat said in Scotland.
The source isn’t usually as important as the material – that can be checked in all sorts of ways. What is lost is getting a handle on the motive of the source and that can be very useful for a journalist to know but in many stories fed to journos, especially from PR people and spin doctors, the hack hasn’t a clue what possible clients are involved and the real purpose of ther story is well and truly disguised.
As to the material being stolen – don’t make me laugh. It’s in the public domain and the journalist and publication who publishes wasn’t involved in any illegal activity. There is also a clear public interest to be served.
I think of the gutless hacks that comprise the Scottish MSM and their toady editors and I can smell the stink of fear from them. Then I think of the real journalists out there, all over the world, unearthing the truth working undercover in danger of life and liberty in hell-hole dictatorships. And all ours can do is fawn over PR fixers and wonder when their next plate of succulent lamb is coming.
They are a disgrace to journalism and the only satisfaction I get from the whole mess is that they all know it and they all know they are cowards and they most certainly can’t look real journos in the eye as they slither on the ground.
Just a note to summarise what has stuck with me over the last day or so.
Whyte seemed to think a CVA was possible. I suspect he based his optimism on the possibility of doing a deal with HMRC.
The derailment of Rangers plans was brought about by supporters delaying season ticket renewal it seems. This action prevented a further major distortion of sporting integrity. I’d like to think that the fans of the wee clubs that would have been an essential part of that force do not find themselves disenfranchised by their application of principle. Any league reorganisation cannot just be a power grab by the big clubs.
The cat is well and truly out of the bag. SMSM might be in lockdown but there will be journo’s internationally taking a squint at the current revelations, even if just for entertainment. It will be ironic that the biggest story in Scottish sporting history will not be broken by a Scottish sports journalist. Couldn’t hit a cows backside with a banjo. Prove us wrong Tom.
The Uefa licence issue is bound to cause tension between the national and European body. Give it six months and CO will be spending more time with his family. Regan and Doncaster may be given a bit more time to see if they can reform but they are likely to die from radiation poisoning in the medium term.
Technology can be a wonderful thing. When it works it appears to make life so much easier. When it goes wrong it tends to fail catastrophically. The damage here is immense. Humpty Dumpty won’t be reconstructed no matter what weight of arms is brought to bear. It may be tried but it will fail.
To cap it all we have beautiful sunny weather. This is the ultimate conspiracy. When you go to work tomorrow, or wherever your life takes you, the people without sunburn have been staring at their computer for the last few days.
Thanks to the monitors (I’m feeling particularly magnanamous this morning), this level of entertainment is priceless. I got my share (logon) just over a year ago but it has grown exponentially in value and has become amongst my most prized belongings.
ecobhoy says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:59 am
Please see my post at 10.02 today, I’m afraid that on this point, the MSM are “not guilty, M’Lud”, they cannot print what they know or comment on CF for perfectly sound legal reasons and until someone gets a court ruling on it, their hands are tied
Thank you for the instant thumbs down for pointing out the factual position. Those who remember me from RTC days may recall that I only posted on matters I had knowledge of. As I said to rantinrobin, I only came on to stop people going off on a tangent, I shall disappear into the shadows again
scapaflow says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:46 am
Exiled Celt says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:37 am
Bit difficult for Mr Lawwell to complain about a decision that, he was, err um, party to.
I very much doubt that we will hear anything about this from Celtic, or indeed anyone else. Still, if it creates a more realistic, and less of a my club right or wrong, attitude among my fellow Celtic fans, then its all to the good!
*****
That is the whole point – he either has to answer why it was ok to allow the SFA to do this or he is “outraged” at this new information.
Time to have some honesty and transparency here
interesting from CQN poster
Those emails were just amazing.
Regan:
.”Since the potential liability was under discussion by Rangers FC and HM Revenue & Customs as at 31st March 2011, it could not be considered an overdue payable as defined by Article 50.We are satisfied that the evidence from all parties complied with Article 50 and, on that basis, a licence was awarded for season 2011-12.
———————————————————————————————————-
Now my recollection of this was that the bill was for £4.2m, made up of £2.8m in taxes and £1.4m in penalties. It was ONLY the penalties that were being disputed – NOT the actual taxes. Therefore for Regan to say that they had no overdue taxes is at best misleading and at worst……
The MSM have hidden behind the ‘we could be sued’ excuse all too often. There are actually three discrete stories running here:
1.CF releasing documents/recordings, are they authentic? What is the response of the people named in the documents/recordings?
2. The implications of the content of the documents, e.g. did the SFA seek copy approval from Rangers?
3. The absolute failure of the MSM to offer any comment whatsoever on the released material, the media regularly print hearsay, tittle-tattle and PR puff pieces and stories which are at best embellished or at worst made up. Suddenly they’ve discovered their moral compass! What’s behind this conversion?
I just had a strange thought regarding Media House.
They have been suppressing the media, an action which led to the situation where Murray, White and Green could do what they wanted and it was Rangers who paid for those services.
Does that mean the Rangers fans themselves have been paying the club to pay a company to keep news away from them that would have shown that they are being ripped off?
To all Rangers Fans: Wake up and smell the corruption guys, stop feeding these people, cut off their oxygen and hold back on the season ticket money to see what response you get, what have you got to lose? You already believe that your club hasn’t and cannot die, so why give them the money?
Let the new business die and start again from fresh roots, the sort of roots that won’t prompt the other fans to reach for the Roundup!
OnandOnandOnand says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:02 am
There is no conspiracy, it’s a matter of interpretation of Leveson rules. CF’s information is 100% genuine and when she tells you the story, you won’t believe it. Just because he/she came by it lawfully doesn’t mean that it can be disseminated, there may be a legal issue in the concept of theft by finding which makes publication by the MSM difficult. I suspect lawyers are at work seeking a court ruling on this, then all hell will break loose.
==========================================================
What has Leveson Rules got to do with a Scottish Publication publishing in Scotland under a separate Legal System?
I don’t know if CF’s material is 100% genuine although I believe a helluva lot of it is. Perhaps you can point to exactly what Rules you refer to and I am unsure of the ‘Theft by Finding’ concept you refer to and the context in which you reference it.
And the time-honoured way of getting round difficult issues is to raise it in Parliament or even Edinburgh. No one has and yet there are immense matters of national interest and importance underway and yet all of our politicians are as struck-dumb as the MSM.
Even if I accepted your argument that the MSM couldn’t publish then the politicians can but they haven’t.
test
OnandOnandOnand says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:13 am
Thank you for the instant thumbs down for pointing out the factual position. Those who remember me from RTC days may recall that I only posted on matters I had knowledge of. As I said to rantinrobin, I only came on to stop people going off on a tangent, I shall disappear into the shadows again
=================
Don’t be offended by our serial thumbs downer.
In fact if your first rating is a thumbs down, and it remains only one, count it as ten thumbs up, because it means you’ve nailed a truth.
OnandOnandOnand says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:07 am
10 2 Rate This
ecobhoy says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:59 am
Please see my post at 10.02 today, I’m afraid that on this point, the MSM are “not guilty, M’Lud”, they cannot print what they know or comment on CF for perfectly sound legal reasons and until someone gets a court ruling on it, their hands are tied
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Alex Thomson on twitter has stated that the problem at present is the hacking issue.His silence is based on this, and I would hope that ITN lawyers are looking into it as we write.My question to OnandOnandOn would be which camp of lawyers ,in your view,are currently looking at this issue?
http://www.celticunderground.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=856:in-whom-do-we-trust&catid=47:season-2011-2012&Itemid=83
This article is an update on the original of Oct 2011 that at Measure Two sets out what the SFA should have done. There is a link to original article in the update.
It is pretty clear from CF’s leaked e mail that the SFA were looking for a way to present matters before he did go public and that when he did so he was still following a line that was not a clear representation of UEFA rules as is stated in both articles.
OnandOnandOnand
Very happy to be ppointed in the correct direction – thanks!! This is what makes this blog a cut above the rest.
You say that the silence is due to interpretation of Leveson – and therefore in the hands of lawyers. My limited experience of the legal fraternity is that it is quite difficult to achieve a definitive position on an issue where their may not be an absolutely clear precedent or where the particular circumstances are somewhat ambiguous. Does this mean that investigative journalism in this country is effectively stymied due to fear of prosecution, even in cases such as this where data sources are in the public domain?
It also sounds like you have the inside track on how CF got the material. I understand not wanting to steal thunder and especially not wishing to place anyone in jeopardy. Any light that could be shed on this issue, bearing in mind the previous comment, would be more than welcome.
Interesting to see that thre appears to be more cock up than conspiracy – I feel my faith in the natural order of things restored a little this morning.
Thanks again for your input!
OnandOnandOnand says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:07 am
Please see my post at 10.02 today, I’m afraid that on this point, the MSM are “not guilty, M’Lud”, they cannot print what they know or comment on CF for perfectly sound legal reasons and until someone gets a court ruling on it, their hands are tied
—————————————————————————————————————————
Onand, i know you are acting in ‘good faith’ but what is to stop MSM discussing the UEFA licence for instance without mentioning Charlotte at all. The Wee Tax Case info is in the public domain so the questions raised above can be posed without stating that we ‘know’ from Charlotte that Regan was stopped from commenting by CW. I’ve effectively asked AT same question and whilst there are laws they have to follow, I believe it’s a very convenient excuse for avoiding the issue….not from him btw.
I wonder what if anything would change if permission was given to quote Charlotte
One for the lawyers, would the publication of all this info have any impact on a fraud trial?
The problem we now face and I mentioned it yesterday if someone will answer it if only to bring it up front is the admissability of the evidence.
None of what CF publishes can be used by msm because of its provenance which is not CW. I have that on good authority from a respected journalist.It is goods taken without permission and only exists in the internet silo separate from the real world of msm, like a cold war missile leaking highly toxic radiation. Its not about msm protecting their succelent lamb its that they cannot as much as suggest it needs mint sauce for fear of being implicated. Think of handling stolen goods and thank Murdoch for neutralising journalism by going too far in quest for a story.
My question yesterday is how do we get anyone in any position of authority to even address the issue of malpractice when they evidence cannot be used in its current form? There is much experience and good thinking to draw on here. I have my own thoughts that I will try to blog on later but it would useful to get feedback on my original post as well. Great minds n that 😉
I am unlikely to be able to check back in until much later – you do not get many bbq days in Scotland so no quick responses but thanks in advance for any feedback.
rantinrobin says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:51 am
OnandOnandOnand says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:07 am
10 2 Rate This
ecobhoy says:
June 9, 2013 at 10:59 am
Please see my post at 10.02 today, I’m afraid that on this point, the MSM are “not guilty, M’Lud”, they cannot print what they know or comment on CF for perfectly sound legal reasons and until someone gets a court ruling on it, their hands are tied
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Alex Thomson on twitter has stated that the problem at present is the hacking issue.His silence is based on this, and I would hope that ITN lawyers are looking into it as we write.My question to OnandOnandOn would be which camp of lawyers ,in your view,are currently looking at this issue?
================================================================
I think it has to be remembered I write about the Scottish MSM and that excludes C4. My original point remains that Leveson IMO doesn’t affect Scotland directly and cannot prevent the CF material being published.
My understanding of Levesen wasn’t that hacking could never be countenanced as public interest has a part to play. Some of the things that appear to have happened and which are currently the subject of criminal legal proceedings in England may well have gone way beyond a public interest defence but can that be said of CF – Personally I don’t thinl so.
However I have asked OnandOnandOnand some simple questions and await his/her response as it might assist my understanding and others like me as to what possible bloc could be operating on the Scottish Media.
I find it amazing there is not more media speculation regarding the CF recordings – how they were obtained and by who doesn’t invalidate their importance – the Wikileaks files are clear evidence of this. The MSM are fully aware of their importance and how it affects the football landscape, not least in relation to TRFC but more importantly on the whole sorry sordid organisation that is the SFA. Once one mainstream journalist or paper carries the story, the genie will be out of the bottle. It just requires some proper journalistic -dare I say the word – integrity.
An interesting option from a poster above to go through one of the parliaments to raise CFs material.
Yep, I know, straight to the establishment dens to try to stop the establishment, but you never know your luck.
Does anyone have the political connections to their local party to pressure / encourage / seduce their msp / mp to ask some questions? Its maybe worth trying to suss out the potential support. There could be some angles with non SNP parties suggesting the SNP can’t govern and is open to corruption by supporting the SFAs unwillingness to stick to the rules, or a Green MSP with the big business / taxation implications?
Hmmm, even I’m not greatly encouraged by this suggestion given what we’ve seen already, but CFs material must be spreading even unto the MPs & MSPs. Maybe one of them will dare face the party whip if they have a big enough grudge against some of the protagonists/issues in all of this.
Auldheid at 12:12 ,you have it in a nutshell.Post Leveson is a vey frustrating time for this story .Charlotte has signalled her intention to point up her position vis a vis the legality of her ‘property’ as it were,and your analogy of a leaking toxic dump is all too apt.
I’m sorry, have to do this from my phone and the site is not very mobile friendly
Publication may result in a charge of “art and part” guilt. Rantin, both sides of lawyers are working on this. Like Auldheid, l too am barbeque bound
Exiled Celt says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:17 am
“That is the whole point – he either has to answer why it was ok to allow the SFA to do this or he is “outraged” at this new information.
Time to have some honesty and transparency here”
——–
Were CO and the CEO firing off like loose cannon, without the knowledge of the Board, and feeding them some guff about the propriety of their actions?
If that is the case, then clearly, unlike the MSM (conveniently claiming ‘legal reasons’ for not investigating) the other Board members, and indeed, any member of the SFA , would be free to ask for some comment from the two as to the truth of the CF information.
But, of course, Peter Lawwell in particular would have to be extremely careful not to be seen(or heard) publicly referring to allegations contained in documents that have not yet been proven to be genuine.
I will be surprised, though, if he and others are not privately discussing how to handle this. The advice of their lawyers will, I imagine, already be being sought , with a view to ensuring that while no rash action is taken, the truth will be established.
If the Board as a whole was complicit by agreeing, by majority vote, the actions at a formal Board meeting , it might be that the minority voter(s) would be off the hook in terms of complicity.
The point at which resignation from a Board over disagreement with a policy line is not for me to say.
Ecobhoy 11.28
Parliament was in my thinking. This has to go political. What kind of civil society fails to take action on such a serious matter given the importance of football as a social glue? ESPECIALLY in a country about to hold an independence referendum . What kind of government would we get post independence if it is prepared to avoid serious ethical issues pre independence simply because they have an excuse to do so?
How can they justifying doing nothing if they are not even prepared to investigate the issues at play?
The stuff is genuine but is toxic to msm. You raise a very good point about Scottish law and its view on admissability of evidence in pursuit of justice. Individuals have rights not to have their personal mails taken and used by someone else so there has to be a balancing act but that is no excuse for pretending Houston does not have a problem.
Just a thought on the idea that the MSM may be hiding behind an injunction. A year or so ago, when super injunctions were all the rage, I heard, on tv or radio, genuinely can’t remember exactly where, that there was no such thing as an injunction in Scots Law and that the press in Scotland only had to concern themselves with ‘D’ notices where national security is concerned. As I recall, a story had appeared in the press in Scotland at the time which blew an English injunction out of the water. Not sure if the law has been changed as a result, but doubt it would have been in the relatively short time. If I’m mistaken in this I’m sure someone will put me right, but if I’m correct, then AT might be restrained by it, but the MSM in Scotland can have no such excuse, but might be happy to hide behind it 😉
Auldheid says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:12 pm
The problem we now face and I mentioned it yesterday if someone will answer it if only to bring it up front is the admissability of the evidence.
None of what CF publishes can be used by msm because of its provenance which is not CW. I have that on good authority from a respected journalist.It is goods taken without permission and only exists in the internet silo separate from the real world of msm, like a cold war missile leaking highly toxic radiation. Its not about msm protecting their succelent lamb its that they cannot as much as suggest it needs mint sauce for fear of being implicated. Think of handling stolen goods and thank Murdoch for neutralising journalism by going too far in quest for a story.
=====================================================================
I’m afraid that I do not accept the argument advanced by the journalist in question. From what OnandOnandOnand states he believes that some Leveson Rule or its interpretation might apply. I have asked what the Rule is so that I can consider it.
However I don’t believe it applies to Scotland. The vast majority of journalists have little in-depth legal knowledge and therefore I am not really prepared to accept what they say without them spelling out the legal issues involved.
I would also state that a lot of ‘whistleblower’ material is stolen, in one way or another, from an employer or legal owner and that doesn’t stop it being used in various ways. It may be that there is some dubiety as to how CF came to have possession of the material or maybe not as that could be part of her cover or even CW’s cover and I would blame either of them.
But we have a public interest scandal of growing proportions in Scotland and it cannot continue with a cloak of secrecy being flung over it by the MSM and now our politicians. We aren’t in the dark ages when ordinary people couldn’t even read and could only make their mark with a cross.
Now our mark can be spread across the internet and it can’t be stopped – it would appear however that there is no Scottish Publication with the guts of blowing the lid off this. I remember the day when several would have and now they are silent.
3rd para correction to my previous post:
It may be that there is some dubiety as to how CF came to have possession of the material or maybe not as that could be part of her cover or even CW’s cover and I would blame either of them.
Should read: It may be that there is some dubiety as to how CF came to have possession of the material or maybe not as that could be part of her cover or even CW’s cover and I wouldn’t blame either of them.
Test…
The new site looks well people.
#Chapeau
Test…
Off topic, but for general background – another story of football values in the shark-infested waters of finance and PR. Franchise system 1 – Football as part of the community 0
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/relegation-scandal-takes-toll-on-doncaster-rovers-belles-8650856.html
Test
Captain Haddock
The Better Together parties could ride to victory on the back of this if they had the sense.
Point out the SNP in charge have failed to do anything to address the many issues coming out, particularly governance ones ( on which you would think they would have concerns) ,
Point out that Scottish football is a mirror of a post independence society where the population base is not large enough to stand as well on its own as it would be together.
Promise Scottish football that if Better Together parties win they will make it a matter of policy to pursue a single UK association so that all clubs get their snouts in the national trough and not just those nearest London.
Just as our banks had to be swallowed up by national banks to save them ( whilst still retaining their Scottish identity) so too would our football be transformed by being swallowed into a larger association.
One thing for sure the SFA are not going to make things better apart.
Afternoon Phil.As someone with a close connection to all matters journalistic.What is your take on the current situation regarding Charlotte information and the MSM silence on the material?
Auldheid says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:44 pm
Balderdash. None of the parties come out well from this.
Allyjambo says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:30 pm
=================================================================
The old D Notice system has been replaced and there is a good explanation of the new system at:
http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2013/01/comprehensive-answer-on-the-use-of-d-notices
It’s well worth a read and also the government link in the letter as well.
The old D Notice system, from memory, was heavily used to protect issues like nuclear weapons, their production, siting and transportation. But it was always a voluntary system and editors sat on the different D Notice Committees although obviously no goddam pinkos would have been selected 🙂
As to an interdict being in force then the way round it is a question in parliament which has absolute privilege. Indeed I think that’s also how the English Super Injunctions were defeated from memory.
Auldheid says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:12 pm
“My question yesterday is how do we get anyone in any position of authority to even address the issue of malpractice when they evidence cannot be used in its current form”?
————-
Auldheid, evidence is only required if a formal judicial process is to be undertaken. There are a number of reasons I believe this would be stranded on the rocks.
1. Most obviously, Charlottes material and the way it has been obtained would be challenged. If she did just stumble across an unregistered e:mail address the the materials aquisition may have been fairly innocent but we’ve already seen what the laweyrs do to the truth.
2. The material is so expansive that there are numerous lines of investigation that would have to be followed. Resources would become too thinly spread and whether through a lack of will or ability, the outcome of such enquiries could be neutered. Just as likely, a raft of findings returning guilty verdicts would spread the condemnation too thin so that those implicated get a slap with a wet fish and little else.
3. The level of implication would be so expansive and damaging that everyone in authority would be sharing a golf clubhouse with the implicated. Like trying to break something hard with a blunt instrument, the force required may be beyond our gift.
4. Following on from 2 and 3 it might be considered impossible to ‘reinvent the wheel’. The ingenuity and resources perhaps don’t exist.
I’m thinking about the Al Capone case where it was difficult to get him on plain illegality (due to underworld establishment forces) so he was done on tax evasion (ironically). It may not be possible to nail all the perpetrators but you might be able to ‘out’ a couple of important ones. Their corpses swinging in the wind might make the scavengers a bit more wary and keep them from pecking the infants eyes out.
Irrespective of any formal legal moves, what we have witnessed has made us better informed. The next WATP jibe might easily be met with a well informed response that causes the rabble rousers to pipe down. That creates a different environment where perhaps more level headed conversations can take place. The people engaging in forums like this are not generally of the ‘us and them’ fraternity. They are quite possibly opinion makers who through conversation will alert those around them to the pitfalls of the media, law and authorities. One volunteer is better than ten pressed men.
James Forrests original blog seems to have been an eery foreshadowing of what was to come. For once, despite our contrary nature, we stayed largely on topic.
Auldheid says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:44 pm
Point out that Scottish football is a mirror of a post independence society where the population base is not large enough to stand as well on its own as it would be together.
___________________________________________
I’m not with you on this part of your argument. In my view Scottish football is reflecting (or, it is axiomatic) pre-independence society, a society that is dominated by a pro-union establishment.
Cancel the barbecue :
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 8m
Mind-boggling. 1/4) http://i.imgur.com/L39Tl9F.jpg and 2/4) http://i.imgur.com/MAwsebG.jpg and 3/4) http://i.imgur.com/N3ChL8H.jpg and 4/4) http://i.imgur.com/b16PXFZ.jpg
john clarke says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:27 pm
Exiled Celt says:
June 9, 2013 at 11:17 am
“That is the whole point – he either has to answer why it was ok to allow the SFA to do this or he is “outraged” at this new information.
Time to have some honesty and transparency here”
——–
Were CO and the CEO firing off like loose cannon, without the knowledge of the Board, and feeding them some guff about the propriety of their actions?
If that is the case, then clearly, unlike the MSM (conveniently claiming ‘legal reasons’ for not investigating) the other Board members, and indeed, any member of the SFA , would be free to ask for some comment from the two as to the truth of the CF information.
But, of course, Peter Lawwell in particular would have to be extremely careful not to be seen(or heard) publicly referring to allegations contained in documents that have not yet been proven to be genuine.
I will be surprised, though, if he and others are not privately discussing how to handle this. The advice of their lawyers will, I imagine, already be being sought , with a view to ensuring that while no rash action is taken, the truth will be established.
If the Board as a whole was complicit by agreeing, by majority vote, the actions at a formal Board meeting , it might be that the minority voter(s) would be off the hook in terms of complicity.
=========================================================================
I wouldn’t necessarily judge the Board to be complicit as in a negative sense if they were given legal advice which was wrong or shall we say misinterpreted by the official who was the conduit between the lawyer and the Board presentation.
There is also the point that there is no need to look at the CF documents on the issue but at the actual SFA files – unless they’ve been shredded as well 🙂
Charlotte Fakes latest is a hoot. The MBB attempts to engage a hardcore tax avoidance specialist/get you off the hook merchant without paying him. Jack Irvine suggests to him that the reason HMRC are pursuing Rangers is that the senior bods on the case are all Catholics. Tax avoidance specialist points out that a) he is a Catholic and b) he used to work for HMRC – the chaps concerned were Rangers fans.
These people are mentalists. Yes, it must be religiously motivated, like all attempts to pursue high level fraud and tax evasion…*headdesk*
I’ve often wondered throughout the last 18 months or so, what it will take for the truth in all of this to hit the headlines.
Not 1 journalist is asking the questions, CO is sitting, complicit to his core, and as brass necked as can be, in post taking OUR money in the process.
Regan is still issuing useless platitudes about addressing sectarianism and corruption whilst standing on a carpet which is 2 feet off the ground due to the stuff that’s been brushed under it.
Will it be an Al Capone/IRS thing that busts the dam? Something completely left field will bring this rotten edifice tumbling, it won’t be a Scottish journalist, that’s for sure.
Charlotte has a new tweet.
Allyjambo says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:30 pm
Just a thought on the idea that the MSM may be hiding behind an injunction. A year or so ago, when super injunctions were all the rage, I heard, on tv or radio, genuinely can’t remember exactly where, that there was no such thing as an injunction in Scots Law and that the press in Scotland only had to concern themselves with ‘D’ notices where national security is concerned. As I recall, a story had appeared in the press in Scotland at the time which blew an English injunction out of the water. Not sure if the law has been changed as a result, but doubt it would have been in the relatively short time. If I’m mistaken in this I’m sure someone will put me right, but if I’m correct, then AT might be restrained by it, but the MSM in Scotland can have no such excuse, but might be happy to hide behind it 😉
========================
I think it was the Ryan Giggs story.
Mullach says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:50 pm
2. The material is so expansive that there are numerous lines of investigation that would have to be followed. Resources would become too thinly spread and whether through a lack of will or ability, the outcome of such enquiries could be neutered. Just as likely, a raft of findings returning guilty verdicts would spread the condemnation too thin so that those implicated get a slap with a wet fish and little else.
———————————————–
You might then think that would open the way for different journalists to pick one small area on which to focus, not have to all follow the same stories like a herd, and see what they can open up. At least Alex Thomson and Tom English are buzzing around the edges of the story / stories, but, as you mention, lack of will or ability may work against most of the hacks and their advertising sheets putting in any effort.
How Charlotte (may have) acquired CW domain and email servers (legally)
@Charlotte … hope i’m not stealing your thunder ……
Explains Charlotte’s tweet regarding laywers have tried …. etc
Charlotte then is correct ….. she owns the email address ….. legally !
1. Placed a backorder on GoDaddy prior to renewal date (from WhoIs)
2. Domain renewal due within 30 days
3. Owner emailed that renewal due by date
4. Owner sometimes procrastinates
5. Domain expires but held for 40 days grace period
6. Renewal fee due
7. After 40 days domain enters ‘redemption period’
8. Owner has additional fees to re-register
9. Domain enters 5 day locked phase as prep for deletion
10. Timing now is critical – the key times are 11am to 2pm Pacific Time as it id dropped from the ICANN database
11. Domain now available …..
12. The Crucial 3 hour chase begins …….. !
13. The 3 hour period is crucial ….
14. Major domain services flood VeriSign to register elapsed domain during this time
15. Enter …. Pool.com
16. Pool.com use a network of registrars to hit VeriSign on your behalf
17. Since not aware when domain becomes available to effectively use a type of DoS attack on VeriSign …. every 5mins for example will stop VeriSign seeing ou as a DoS and then swapping to different registrar to carry on attack to prevent VeriSign blocking you on bandwidth alarm/alert
18. Snapnames can also be used to increase your chance
19. Pace bid on Pool (remember others might be after it)
20. Place other bids (Snapnames) as required
21. Wait to see if successful …. (Don’t leave computer …. timing is essential)
22. Entering ‘Phase 1’ auction
23. 3 days to enter ‘sealed bid’
24. Must be in top 2 bidders or 30% of top bid to enter Phase 2
25. Phase 2 is a 1 day all out bid process
26. Up the sealed bid (assuming others are bidding !)
27. If you are largest bid …… Pool now has the Domain
28. If others have used Pool (or the winning service) then the final Challenger Auction takes place … same rules as before …. top bidders only
29. Final Challenger Auction is EBay style with auction end time ….
30. Highest bidder takes all ….
31. The Domain is yours
32. Email servers ….. the lot
33. Register email addresses (….. ahem … )
The world is your oyster …..
Note ….. Manually trying to grab domain that expires is near on impossible … so basically this is the route that needs to be followed ….
Charlotte Fakes thank-you for showing us how this great wee country really works. After the high’s of Croatia, I’m afraid I’m ashamed to be Scottish. The media and political elite in this country are corupt to the core. I thank you for shining a light upon this, even although we know nothing will be done, proof of what actually happen’s is enough for me. For the MSM hang your heads in shame your collusion is a national disgrace every single one.
Whatever truths and outings arise,one thing is absolutely certain the whole landscape of matters pertaining to football in Scotland has been changed forever.
To those of us of a certain vintage, I am 54, we have always known of the vagaries of the system, and that is putting it mildly but with these revelations at all levels pertaining to decision making our senses have been bombarded by too many injustices towards a whole host of people,starting with the creditors.
There is too much information which castigates too many people.We know full well that the whole thing is truly toxic and there are a lot of people who have been humiliated and cast asunder by these revelations.
The truth is out there, it is in the public domain and there is no going back.
v
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 26s
Outrageous behaviour concerning Rangers on HMRC coming up. I’d personally drop this ‘same club’ argument once and for all. Far too toxic.
Charlotte Fakeovers Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 19m
Mind-boggling. 1/4) http://i.imgur.com/L39Tl9F.jpg and 2/4) http://i.imgur.com/MAwsebG.jpg and 3/4) http://i.imgur.com/N3ChL8H.jpg and 4/4) http://i.imgur.com/b16PXFZ.jpg
Ecobhoy
What the Scottish position is may well differ from England but if the info is coming from down south that does not mean it is falsev info. Only that down south they believe it cannot be touched.
Up north of course no one wants to even check the admissability question
I believe the leaks are original material. I believe they are not from CW or CG because of questions it raises against both ( or indeed any of the parties) that never stood up for me.
I think that whether the law north and south may differs is immaterial in the sense that if everyone thinks its toxic, its toxic.
That leaves us with the problem of getting authority to focus on information that is true, even if it was delivered in a brown envelope.
Not much point debating if the info is true or not or if it came from CW or not as we only have the word of someone else. We can however put aside those doubts and move from a basis that the info is true, does nit come from CW and needs to somehow become admissable.
If journos hands are tied we have to find other ways to get the wider publc involved.
ecobhoy says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:31 pm
4
1
Rate This
Auldheid says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:12 pm
________________________________
Surely a public interest defence would stand up?
But in any case, I would encourage people here to write to their MPs and have this CF matter raised in parliament. Under parliamentary privelege, MPs cannot be sued. Once an MP has made a brief statement in the commons, journalists are free to report upon the content and background of that parliamentary statement without fear of legal reprisal.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
Tried to post Hurricane Charlotte’s latest tweets,went to moderation.Anybody else have a problem.
Is this a new policy?
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 10m
Outrageous behaviour concerning Rangers on HMRC coming up. I’d personally drop this ‘same club’ argument once and for all. Far too toxic.
If the CF material is raised/discussed by an MP in parliament under parliametary privelege (by which the MP is free to speak without fear of litigation or criminal prosecution) the press can then freely subsequently report upon what the MP has said and the background to it without risk of being accompliced, since the material will then be in the public domain. Theoretically the MP would be liable for any such illegal disclosure, but they could not be prosecuted for this because of the protection parliamentary privelege correctly affords them.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
ecobhoy says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:48 pm
Cheers eco, but are you able to confirm, or debunk, my thoughts that there are no such things as injunctions in Scotland, and that the Scottish MSM are free to print, in that respect at least?
Regardless of what restraints there are on the MSM printing Charlotte’s revelations, whether she came about the information legally or not, surely there is nothing to stop the MSM from starting their own investigations armed with information now in the public domain, even if they can’t specifically mention it. They could easily start by going to the SFA and asking them, without mentioning Charlotte, to explain, in detail, how they came to issue RFC with a license to play in Europe when the club clearly had huge outstanding tax liabilities. There would be an array of subsidiary questions should they merely reply that they were satisfied with the information supplied by a member club. Should Regan, or whoever the SFA spokesperson might be, introduce the Charlotte revelations during the interview, then the journalist would surely then be free to probe further and cite what is claimed on twitter, at least within the boundaries of that specific enquiry. Should the SFA refuse to be interviewed on the matter, the journalist could tell them they believe the license was issued without due dilligence and that they are going to publish a story on that basis and will write that the SFA appear unable, or unwilling, to justify their actions. Again, no need to mention Charlotte, just to investigate properly and publish what is uncovered in true journalistic fashion.
Tic 6709 says:
June 9, 2013 at 1:16 pm
“Tried to post Hurricane Charlotte’s latest tweets,went to moderation”.
—————-
Same thing happened to me. The moderators must be getting jittery. Handling plutonium is a very cautious process.
I hate to seem ungrateful Charlotte but its a beautiful day outside and I can’t be hanging aroun this keyboard any longer. Do not interpret my absence as disinterest.
Allyjambo says:
June 9, 2013 at 1:22 pm
You might find the blow of interest
http://www.inhouselawyer.co.uk/index.php/scotland-home/9510-dont-know-much-about-geography-interdicts-across-the-border
Mullach says:
June 9, 2013 at 1:28 pm
Tic 6709 says:
June 9, 2013 at 1:16 pm
“Tried to post Hurricane Charlotte’s latest tweets,went to moderation”.
—————-
Same thing happened to me. The moderators must be getting jittery. Handling plutonium is a very cautious process.
——————————————————————————————————————————
I’m fine, I just put on the full body suit, mask etc which is made from the same material as CO’s neck.
OnandOnandOnand says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:24 pm
Publication may result in a charge of “art and part” guilt. Both sides of lawyers are working on this.
==================================================
I’m afraid I don’t agree with your legal interpretation on art & part – My understanding of Scots Law is that you can only be ‘art & part’ prior to and at the time of the offence BUT not after it. You cannot be an convicted as an accessory after the offence so irrespective of CF’s position you would not share her guilt if indeed there is any.
In fact I pretty much either disagree or have serious doubts about a number of legal things that you have stated this morning. It may be that if you answer the simple questions I have asked I will be able to see the legal point you are making but until then I’ll need to rely on my personal understanding of the law as it applies in Scotland which is certainly contrary to your own.
I’ve produced a Wiki definition on ‘art & part’ below and if it isn’t correct or not fully explained please let me know:
‘Art and part is a term used in Scots law to denote the aiding or abetting in the perpetration of a crime, or being an accessory before or at the perpetration of the crime. There is no such offence recognized in Scotland as that of being an accessory after the fact.
‘Under section 293 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, a person may be convicted of, and punished for, a contravention of any enactment, notwithstanding that he was guilty of such contravention as art and part only’.