Search And Replace
Here’s a passage from Crown Agent John Logue’s recent BBC interview in which he described the crime for which Peter Murrell was just sentenced to five years and three months in prison. You’ll note that we’ve highlighted a few words and phrases in red.
JOHN LOGUE: I think the best way I can describe it is in some ways this case was no different from embezzlement that people might recognize in their daily lives. If people are a member of a church or a bowling club or a golf club, if someone in that organization has access to money on behalf of the society or the club and takes it and spends it in the local shops, that’s embezzlement.
And in some ways this case was as simple as that because what we were able to prove after the police investigation and after our investigation was that that was what Peter Murrell had done here. He had access to and control of party funds and he used it for his own purposes and that’s the crime of embezzlement.
And now let’s just swap out those words for some very similar ones.
JOHN LOGUE: I think the best way I can describe it is in some ways this case was no different from embezzlement that people might recognize in their daily lives. If people are a member of [a political party], if someone in that organization has access to money on behalf of [the party] and takes it and spends it [on other stuff it wants], that’s embezzlement.
And in some ways this case was as simple as that because what we were able to prove after the police investigation and after our investigation was that that was what [the SNP] had done here. [They] had access to and control of [ringfenced] funds and [they] used it for [their] own purposes and that’s the crime of embezzlement.
It’s really quite hard to understand why the Crown Office sees the first version as a crime but not the second one, isn’t it, readers? Perhaps their next letter to us will make the difference clear, because to be honest, we’re struggling with it.
Peter Murrell is a total dafty but to get 5 years for that and some get off with less for rape… It’s pretty fucked up.
7 years is the going rate for that offence so he got off lightly. But yeah, rape seems to be treated lightly by the judiciary.
I think Murrell stole from the SNP,
and the SNP stole from the donors.
The SNP would like him to carry the can for both, but really, the NEC had a duty to look after the money they ringfenced and they failed in that duty. His embezzlement wasn’t the whole sum, so that needs accounting for.
In particular, Sturgeon and Beatie signed off on the books, which they ought to have known were bent. Whether they knew or not, signing off bent books makes them personally, legally and criminally liable.
The NEC of the SNP is the legal body of the Party. Members of the National Executive Council of the SNP are jointly and severally liable for any debts of the Party. That means that if the party becomes insolvent members of the NEC must pick up the tab. It’s no coincidence that since the NEC ignored the advice of Senior Counsel ( then QCs) to the effect that their treatment of Joan McAlpine on the Borders Regional List could be taken to Judicial Review resulting in a six figure judgement for reparation and costs being awarded to / demanded from then members of the NEC. In the event Joan McAlpine did not pursue the NEC of the SnP and the triennium in which Civil actions at the Court of Session has long passed.
What’s significant today is that since Angus Robertson’s “reforms” to the internal democracy of the SNP, especially the NEC, seats on the NEC have been attracting much less interest at National Conferences now that delegates from the the post 2018 Affiliated Organisations which have tiny and undisclosed memberships cast votes which can make members of the NEC more likely to be held to account following possible Judicial Reviews brought by disaffected members. NEC members could face loosing their savings, homes, pensions and salaries and wages ( according to the Debtors Scotland Act). Members who have achieved responsible and well paid jobs in the public sector and professions or who have built successful businesses are no longer putting themselves forward for election to the NEC which is now more likely to vote, as recent members have few assets on the line, for policies which are more akin to those of student rather than grown up politics and which seem to have been formulated in a bubble of politicians out of touch with the priorities of working folk.
Which brings us to the question of how to build a party which is proof against the Angus Robertson treatment; something which is important throughout the world.
Exactly. Murrells stole Party funds which did not include the £600,000 as he stole before that money had been collected. Swinney admitted the £600,000 had been stolen ie spent by the SNP. That’s embezzlement! What’s the difference? They both took money which did not belong to them.
I hope the lack of comments is I just stumbled in as you posted. We simply must not grow weary of pursuing justice and transparency here. An independent Scotland (as any country) requires a strong and independent judicial system and if we haven’t got that then we simply don’t deserve to be an independent country. Keep going, for all our sakes and those of the next generation. The saddest thing is we had this before devolution and the SNP
Your compare and contrast of the Crown Agent’s views of a) the Murrell use of monies from the SNP bank account versus b) the SNP use of the ring-fenced referendum campaign funds pretty much nails the contradiction in the decision to prosecute the former case but not the latter case.
The murrel’s conviction was meant to lay the SNP’s embezzlement to rest, but it hasn’t. Its now got more people asking more question and its attracted all the sorts of people The SNP and others never wanted to attract in the first place. See the trouble is, you can work on a plan for two years and if you haven’t thought everything through down to the last detail it’ll all going to come tumbling down.
You just have to watch Swinney answering question on TV, here’s a man who all of a sudden has started sweating a lot from his bold spot and supposedly the NICE Mr Swinney has got a temper, I wonder why? I think the pressure is getting to him.
While the love of his life is lapping it up in London she couldn’t be happier and I’m willing to bet she hasn’t given John a second thought.
Keep up the good work Mr Campbell you’re having a major affect.
link to bbc.co.uk
Scottish independence is not just dead it’s covered in concrete.
Well done MI5…saviors of England’s patrimony
¡Viva Mexico!
I fail to see why you believe Independence is dead!!!! I would agree if David Henry is correct, its more like the SNP is finished and I welcome that with open arms.
Lets remember everyone Independence hasn’t happened and never will until the SNP leadership is removed or the SNP as a party is resolved.
Scottish Independence has never been so strong its weak because of the SNP and the Scottish Government.
It’s the same mentality that put Sturgeon on a pedestal. The same mentality that tried to silence Sandy Peggy. The same mentality that painted windows on a ship. The same mentality that puts illegal immigrants above the the Scottish people.
The same people again and again.
Vote Reform.
I totally agreed with your words then you let yourself and me down with the last two words , I don’t know whether you’re doing your regular piss take or you are just being stupid , but if reform are the answer you most definitely are combining the two,
Reform’s corruption is legendary and is far in advance of anything that the snp aspire too, and their reps are the equivalent and equals of the morons that infest ALL the OTHER political parties
I take it that’s a no then.
Blind ‘them and us’ tribalism in the independence movement is the reason for the mess we are in today.
Reform voters are doing the same thing and if anyone thinks Reform are the answer to all the problems we face in our society then they need their head seen to.
Yet in Wales, they see a Reform government at Westminster as being a sure fire boost for Welsh Independence.
Maybe the Welsh aren’t as “special” as the Scots.
@ Main
The same was said about Brexit, the same was said about Boris Johnson becoming Prime Minister. What difference will a Reform government in Westminster make?
A thread concerning dodgy financial dealings and someone suggests voting for Reform. LOL…
I guess some people don’t do irony.
And you are voting for?
Likely spoil my ballot again. I don’t vote for unionist parties, including the SNP.
(painting windows on a ship and constructing a funnel before you’ve dropped the big kit in though the void)
I knew then two things-
1) the mainstream media was captured, and
2) the SNP government thought they were untouchable & therefore corrupt.
Swinney had a tiny window of opportunity to promise a fresh start, but he had neither the guts nor the gumption to sieze it.
Goodbye & good riddance NSSNP
What I cannot understand is why Murrell cut a deal to get £60k knocked off the £460k, since it would have made no material difference to his crime or punishment.
But it leaves all that £60k out there to be subject to further investigation and legal processess.
For example, even if you took the establishment line that your donations were furthering the cause of independence by being spent by the SNP on any of their legitimate operations; that could cover them for salaries, travel, marketing and the usual stuff, but it must become SNP not Murrell embezzelment once they start spending it on Nicola’s pants and gym gear.
I don’t think Murrell cut a deal I think he was offered it
“We’re thinking of forgetting about some of the stuff. OK?”
“What’s in it for me?”
Doesn’t look quite as bad”
“What’s in it for you?”
“We get to keep Nicola out of the frame”
“Yeah, whatever”
the sunday times unveils the extent of farascist corruption, on a par with that under the trump regime….Ukania’s future? not one with reasoned accountable democracy in it.
THIS post just goes to highlight the DELIBERATE obfuscation and lies of Logue , does he really think that people are so stupid that they cannot see the context of both actions
Their contempt for the people is palpable , the whole justice system and the scum politicos need the French response
“And in some ways this case was as simple as that because what we were able to prove after the police investigation and after our investigation…
—————————————–
There is something wrong with that statement.
The Police investigate – the Crown Office decides if there is enough evidence to prosecute – if not they tell the Police to investigate more or drop the case.
So WHAT was the Crown Office doing investigating?
John Logue explains that in another part of his interview:
(My emphasis)
(see link to wingsoverscotland.com)
Inception style with the levels of embezzlement kicking the indy movement to the floor
Reality #1: As long as the SNP is in power in Holyrood, nobody will be prosecuted for this fraud.
Reality #2: The only way to oust the SNP from power is to vote it out.
Reality #3: Since the micro-parties like Alba and the Alliance are going nowhere, that means voting in some combination of Labour/Reform/Lib Dems/Conservatives.
Reality #4: If you’re not prepared to vote for one of the four parties named in #3, you’re not serious about holding the SNP to account for its crimes.
I can see no other reason for this, which is exactly as you have it on your twitter blurb, Rev.
‘In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, the ruling Party asserts that \(2 + 2 = 5\) to demonstrate its absolute control over reality, truth, and logic. The Party’s ultimate power lies in forcing citizens to reject verifiable evidence and accept blatant falsehoods as absolute fact.In this totalitarian regime, the slogan is used as the supreme test of loyalty. Citizens are required to fully internalize the lie to the point where they truly believe it. The concept highlights the dangers of extreme propaganda, psychological manipulation, and the suppression of independent thought. The protagonist, Winston Smith, desperately resists this, famously noting in his journal that “freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four”
O’Brien of course says it can equal three if needs be, or five depending on the party’s needs at any particular time.
On the face of it, there certainly seems to be no essential difference, except that embezzlement is usually clear-cut financial gain to the embezzler.
Did those who donated to the SNP have full expectations that their money would, in no circumstances, be used to fight an election(elections), for example? Is ring-fencing monies and using them for other things strictly illegal? In some circumstances, it is, but is it illegal in party politics when the actual thing that the monies were raised for does not materialise and has little chance of materialising in the near future? Should those monies then be placed into an interest-bearing principal or can it be used for other purposes? Should the donors have been consulted?
It is laughable that people should ask Westminster to investigate since I am almost certain that something similar has happened at Westminster, and I could find no law that spells out this very situation in party politics at either Westminster or Holyrood, although I am not saying that this is not embezzlement. We know that it is illegal for a person/s to obtain money and spend it to his or her own benefit, but did anyone within the SNP hierarchy actually spend the ring-fenced funds on himself or herself, or were the funds spent on general expenditure within the SNP structure – in an election, for example?
I suppose it could be said that the SNP (and, therefore, members) did benefit if the monies were spent on elections and other party business, but, again, should the donors be consulted about how the monies were spent if it cannot be established that they were spent on particular candidates’ campaigns as opposed to a general campaign? Even if they were spent on repaying loans, these in themselves were legal obligations to which the party, and, therefore, its members, were committed.
Had the monies been placed into a separate account, embezzlement would have been much easier to prove, I think, as the intent to remove them from that account into the general account would have shown at least that some intent mot use them for other purposes could be deduced. Were they deliberately not placed into a separate account do that they could, in fact, be used for other purposes, which does tend to show prior intent, if that was the case, or did those who held the responsibility not even think that the monies could not be used for general matters?
If that was the case, the lack of legal oversight has been appalling, as has the day-to-day management of the accounts, not to mention that lack of understanding of those NEC members that they were liable, jointly and severally, for all fiduciary mismanagement and misappropriation? For an administration that was in power for at least 10 years after 2014, it shows a level of amateurism and lack of oversight that was quite astounding – while, they were telling the Scots that they would lead us into independence, some day, somehow, whenever, however. Putting aside the hubris and lack of forward momentum on independence, since 2014, the SNP government has epitomised a series of unwanted and dangerous legislation, unwinnable court cases and the hounding of a man to his great detriment. The stupidity, the spite and the insufferable pettiness will be their legacy.
Lorna, the money-raising was NOT done on behalf of the SNP. Therefore they were/are not entitled to take ownership of it. E.g. an individual has posted that they were a Green election candidate at the time they contributed. Their conditions with the Green party preclude supporting any other party (reasonably) so that they would not have contributed if the money were going to the SNP.
Fund-raising laws are very strict about this.
Yes, exactly.
The website for the 2017 fund-raiser had the URL ref.scot, not snp.org, though that appeared on receipts for donations.
The later fund-raiser was called yes.scot, but since I didn’t donate to it, I don’t know if that was the URL on the donation website – I assume it was.
AdamH: so, Greens donated to another party for a referendum? Why? Why would anyone do that? If a referendum were to be in the offing, the Greens would be just as likely as the SNP to use donated funds for the purpose of fighting it, wouldn’t they? That makes no sense at all. Also, the Greens believe in independence about as much as they believe that the moon is made of green cheese, so I cannot see any Green being daft enough to donate to the SNP for a referendum. If anything, they are possibly even more corrupt than the SNP as the Manivannan situation, and others, have shown.
Yes, fund-raising laws are very strict about specific ring-fenced monies – for example, charitable funding – and the Electoral Commission becomes involved when monies outwith the permitted parameters for an election are overspent, but I have looked and nowhere does the law state that ring-fenced monies held by parties cannot be used for other purposes. It is a loophole that has never been closed – either at Westminster or at Holyrood.
Look, I’m not saying it isn’t embezzlement. What I am saying is be careful as it could mean throwing good money after bad in a court case than cannot be won if embezzlement cannot be proved. All that will do is destroy the SNP’s credibility without having anything to put in its place. No other party or movement is strong enough to pick up the independence vote and run with it – yet – and the Unionists, or the Greens, will step into the breech. Anyone who actually believes that the Greens would be an improvement on the SNP needs his or her head examined. It is likely that Reform UK would benefit, or Restore.
If there was embezzlement rather than gross mismanagement, then someone or something would have had to have benefited and that would have to be proved in court, as a direct/indirect link between the embezzled monies and an outcome – as in the Murrell case where the monies were used for his own benefit, to enrich himself. Did the party benefit? How did it benefit? Directly? Indirectly? In an abstract way? Would it be in the public interest for Westminster to interfere?
If not, it will go nowhere, as Westminster itself could find itself in the dock if it has done the same thing. I think people do not understand how Westminster/Whitehall and the Thames Embankment lot operate: they would bring down the SNP government in Scotland only if it was a ‘dangerous’ impediment to them. Is it? Or is it doing precisely what they want? Assuming they have agents within the top echelons of the SNP – and that is a rational assumption – those agents will be scuppering independence anyway without resorting to embezzlement via ‘ring-fenced’ funding. Remember, the ‘Scottish’ Civil Service was warned by Whitehall not to hound Mr Salmond as it could backfire. It didn’t listen. I think what we have is a totally incompetent, stupid, irrational bunch of absolute amateurs for a government, although even then, not everyone within it is, and it is predisposed never to listen to sound advice from anyone.
According to Cesaire (I think – somebody will correct me if needed), the moon IS made of green cheese.
@Lorncal
Two particular Greens (one no longer a member of the party) have publicly said they donated to the 2017 fund-raiser. I’m acquainted with both of them, and they definitely do support independence.
And the whole point is that they didn’t “donate to another party” – they donated to what they thought was a non-party fund-raiser, which was a reasonable assumption given how it was presented.
crazycat: I’m not doubting you. I am doubting their sanity. Why would anyone who is a Green donate to a fund that was so evidently run by the SNP instead of to your own party? Who did they think was running it? Did they check?
Lorncal-Should those monies then be placed into an interest-bearing principal or can it be used for other purposes? Should the donors have been consulted?
No. If the money could not have been used for the purpose donors were persuaded to donate their money to, it should as a matter of law been returned to the donors. To spend the money raised soley for a second referendum, on another purpose, is as a matter of law, illegal. Your comments regarding the possible legality of spending the money on other independence related matters, are as matter of law, simply wrong.
james: then tell us which law pertains to ‘ring-fenced’ party donations being used elsewhere?
Lorncal
There is no specific statutory laws under Scots law that concern the “ring-fencing” of internal political donations. However case law is applicable to the legal and illegal uses of the ring fenced monies raised by the SNP specifically to be spent on a second referendum campaign. See; Fraud-Scots Common Law-Richards v H. M. Advocate 1971 JC 29.
Theft by appropriation-Carmichael v Black 1992 SLT 897.
Moore v HMA [2010] HCJAC 26.
James: I have checked those cases, and none of them appears to be applicable to this case. In each case, the person/s concerned had INTENT from the outset, and none of them applies to party ring-fenced monies.
Did the SNP top brass and NEC members have the necessary INTENT to embezzle the funds from day one? Were they sincere that the money would be used to fund a second referendum, but that referendum never appeared. After 2014, another referendum was off the table – probably forever. The SNP would have known that there chances of another referendum were slight, but that winning an election had more chance.
Of course, they scuppered any chance of holding a plebiscitary election on independence by refusing to join forces with any else and by insisting on SNP 1 & 2.
I would not be one little bit surprised to discover that other parties have done the same thing, both here and down there, so that a real can of worms has been opened up and the loophole will have to be closed quickly. What the Rev’s action will do is set a precedent for the legal use of ring-fenced funds raised from the public.
Actually, Lorncal, I regard the fact that I appear to have more bank accounts than the SNP as sufficient evidence to write the entire operation off as a bunch of incompetent amateurs, not fit to be entrusted with a collection box.
When Scotland’s late and much lamented Mammie owned up to suffering from Imposter Syndrome, not only was she telling the truth, but she was speaking for the entire, sorry shambles that is the SNP.
HMcH: I tend to agree. I have not read or heard anything that would indicate deliberate and prior intent to embezzle, unlike the Murrell case. The SNP has an absolute harem of lawyers, yet it was never pointed out to them that not having the ring-fenced donations in a separate fund was sensible? Or did they just not listen: we know better. Yes, utter incompetence and gross stupidity, with a powerful splash of arrogance and a sense of the ‘untouchable’. I would like to see the SNP brought low for all that it has done to Scotland through its petty restrictions and insane laws, but I am not sure that there is a case here, although, my usual proviso: I could be very wrong. Many people rely on the top-up benefits introduced by the SNP (one of the few good things they did) and, if it were to fall tomorrow, suddenly, these would be the people who would be hurt most. The SNP can’t be replaced overnight either.
Hmm, what to make of this…
Talks of “growing up” to improve Scotland’s lot, and portrays this with a pic of a fucking SMR, Data Centre, and talks of fracking as worthy industries, and links to a load of Unionist “newspapers”, and a whining Jim Ratcliffe’s opinion.
link to yesthink.scot
And before anybody starts, I’m not a “leftist”, and am actually pretty centrist, and as such still think it is a ridiculous situation that UK energy policy over the decades has allowed so much of our energy industries to be hived off and exploited, by being owned and controlled by private individuals and foreign interests.
A reminder that energy policy is reserved to Westminster and London Rule.
Scotland already has an abundance of energy infrastructure in place to serve our needs, and at the moment significant industrial work is happening to send even larger amounts of energy generated here down south to keep the lights and heating on in England.
If the idea is to use less energy (which is comedy gold whilst a bunch of war hawking cunts are blowing up refineries in wars) then maybe start developing industries that are more beneficial to our specific needs such as manufacturing / producing the goods we actually need, rather than importing huge volumes of stuff about the planet on massive fossil fuel burning cargo ships.
Do we really need reams of power for even more servers to capture insane amounts of data. AI won’t fix broken shit, and it ainit even that good at generating cat videos which used to be something worth watching on the internet back in the day. The junk AI spouts when you google something technical now is comical. And even if AI could to some extent fix things, humans still need to be physically active doing an array of activities for the body and mind to function and thrive.
It’s my opinion that the problem is “influencer” and narcissist individuals addicted to spouting their shite on the internet, exacerbated by even more gormless fools that think listening to and thinking that someone who sits on the internet all day has any real comprehension of what’s actually required to keep local communities and wider society functioning.
Dan, whether you are ‘leftist’ or ‘rightist’ depends on who wants to insult you. Likely that some who use the terms are ignorant of the origins and cannot provide workable definitions. Maybe best not even to think in terms of ‘centrist’., better alternative could be ‘sensible’ meaning practical, common sense as you seem to be. Man with a tractor must have at least some practical common-sense, probably lots of it.
One person’s Leftist is another person’s Right-winger. Once saw a book title ‘Left wing Communism (an infantile disorder)’. mssrs Beggan, McHateful, Chas, Caveman, ‘eat your hearts out’, V. I. Ulyanov beat you to it. Check him out.
There seems to be a shortage of decent people in politics (with any variety of power) and discussion of that problem is seriously limited by using labels.
Who will volunteer a list of what is wrong with politicians?
Dan, you’ve hit the nail on the head with your last paragraph.
Case in point the hysteria about the recent ‘heat wave’ and everybody going mad about getting air conditioning installed in their houses.
Firstly, you can bet your bottom dollar that those screaming that having aircon should be a guaranteed human right is the same ones screaming about climate change regardless of the fact that the technology using large amounts of electricity that adds to climate change.
Secondly, there has been many articles about people being scammed for large amounts of money for aircon units that simply don’t provide the level of coolness that they are advertised for and these aircons are not needed now that temperatures have dropped to normal levels after such a short period.
With this level of nonsense I hardly go online any more apart from a few sites like this one.
“With this level of nonsense I hardly go online any more apart from a few sites like this one”
That’s the way to do it, Bilbo. End with a joke!
We think alike, Dan. Truth bombs in every paragraph, especially regarding AI.
A couple of thoughts about AI.
We all see free AI-generated results when we use the internet, yet we are told that the costs of AI are and will be eye watering. I expect that at some future point, when AI has pushed out all other means of finding things online, we will suddenly find that meaningful use of the internet can only happen if we are prepared to pay. It has to be the long-term plan – pay per inquiry – as otherwise, the humongous investments will have been for nought.
We are told that AI will eliminate most white collar jobs, and blue collar jobs in manufacturing, leaving only unskilled manual and social care type roles. Yet these roles have long been the preserve of the immigrants. It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that AI will usher in a future where the indigenous will have to survive mostly on the largess of the immigrants, who will be the majority still with jobs and paying taxes.
Dan as soon as I read that post on yesthink.scot I thought I was reading something from Chas, Aydan, or some of the other unionists , I wrote a lengthy response to the denigrating condescending anti Scottish pish but couldn’t be arsed posting it, anyone trying to solicit sympathy or credibility for Ratcliffe after what he has done to Grangemouth is no friend of Scotland or Scots
As you say his insistence that we prostrate ourselves at the altar of neocons only highlights that he and people like him shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near Scotland’s commercial or financial future
Really Twat H?
Anybody saying that Scotland should develop its resources to provide jobs for Scots and earn taxable profits to help pay for Scottish public services for Scots “shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near Scotland’s commercial or financial future”?
Wow. Just as well you’re not “allowed anywhere near Scotland’s commercial or financial future”.
The Yes campaign now under investigation for £1.5 million smackaroonies. Another MI5 plot exposed. Those bastards at MI5 have their dirty fingers into every pie.
Actually I think the new investigation is just a smokescreen to divert attention from the 650k.
Expect Salmond to be thrown in the mix and if murrell was anything to do with it I will not be surprised.
The SNP has already said it ain’t anything to do with them and if it isn’t then it’s an ideal way to divert attention away from them.
The fobbing off by the utterly politically corrupt Police Scotland and the Crown Office will continue for ever.
How much more of it will you (and us) have to tolerate before the civic proceedings commence?
I no longer believe in an Independent Scotland and Ross Greer has just told you why. We live in a sub Banana Rupublic. The Judiciary System is corrupt with the dual advocacy role. Now here is the rub I have been called to a High Court Jury Witness Citation possibly for 6 weeks. I will be fined a thousand pound if I don’t register. What do I do ? I Have registered to avoid a fine but I have no confidence in the Scottish Judiciary System.
You’ve answered your question in the last sentence of your post. Having no confidence in the system you cannot be sure of anything presented in the court, so you have doubts. Having those doubts you can only conclude a not guilty verdict.
Let the judge know this before proceedings begin and the reasons for your lack of confidence in the system (of which there are plenty I could guess at) and they could not in good faith put you on the jury.
I was in this position several years ago and posted on this site about it. As it was I was not selected and therefore did not have to make the choice as to what to do.
I wish you well
Surely anybody holding serious, cast-iron doubts about the system and anything presented in court has a moral duty to attend AND vote for Not Guilty?
Not weasel out with some lame excuse.
After all, everybody is innocent unless guilt can be proved. And if you believe the system is irredeemably corrupt, then guilt can never be proved.
Good luck to George if he finds himself attending court while some weeping lassie is trying to prove she was raped by some neanderthal, entitled migrant, said migrant no doubt supported by all the resources the state can muster.
Here’s what I would do, George. Turn up, do your duty, keep an open mind, vote according to the evidence and your common sense interpretation of it.
That’s what just about everybody else tries to do, whether or not they support Indy.
One thing is for sure. We’ll never get Indy if every supporter keeps finding excuses for giving up and dropping out.
George, we will never improve our system UNTIL we leave the Union. From there it is a clean slate whereas whilst still in it, nothing can change.
So we Scots can’t conclude the SNP are corrupt incompetents and vote them out while we are still in the union?
Naw. Not seeing it. Sorry.
Sure, we can vote them out.
Removal of London’s Civil Service, with all the attendant subversive paraphernalia, is not so straightforward.
What do you mean, sarah, we can do nothing? Of course we can. Yes, undoubtedly, we need independence, but going into independence with the same corrupt and silly ideas about ‘trans’, ‘climate change’, energy, taxation, raising money by investing in people and jobs – which is capitalism, whether you like it or not – etc., etc., and all the nonsense from the ‘woke’ crowd, will destroy us before we even start.
Business can only be hampered by such utter tosh because there comes a point when we cannot expect businesses to shell out constantly to accommodate the latest fad. Big corporations can afford two loos, for example, for male and female, another for disabled and baby changing and a fourth for unisex to which all those who are ambivalent about their sex can use. Make this the law and anyone trespassing (unless genuinely by mistake and a one-off) is arrested. Unwinnable court cases should be embargoed, both those by government and those by vexatious litigants.
Anyone who wants to ‘transition’ without substantial pre counselling, should pay his or her own way or parents to do so. No more unnecessary operations on the NHS. Real methods of harnessing clean energy for the future should be invested in at university level, and existing oil and gas relied upon until such time as completely reliable new energies can be brought on tap. Any new ‘boiler schemes’ or means of making homes more waterproof and insulated should be heavily subsidised or wholly subsidised. Scottish base industries require to be set up and invested in, and a demand that all contracts made by the UK government until independence have a Scottish input and voice, and that no contract with a southern or foreign company will be honoured unless this is so.
A gradual return to state ownership of all utilities that people depend on for survival: water (already state-owned, but should remain so); gas, oil, electricity, renewable energies; transport (to be linked and integrated); an end to immigration, both legal and illegal until a proper immigration policy is set up and running in the home countries of the immigrants; no more foreign aid to states which use it to fund terrorism; a properly-funded benefits system that does not penalise those unfit for work, but encourages everyone else into employment; fewer pressing taxes on SMEs to open up employment opportunities, etc.
It will not be easy, but neither will it be impossible if the will is there. I really do not believe that we can save an independent, or a dependent, Scotland otherwise. The Scots will simply cease to exist as a nation, and as a people, within fifty years if we don’t start soon. England-as-the-UK is going to fall, and we need to be ready to take up the reins of independence when it does. The template for independence needs to be drafted now.
If the first version is embezzlement, is the second not fraud?
What a game!
Fabulous win 🙂
Get in! 🙂
Reaching the QF was the “minimum acceptable” for me, so anything else is a bonus. Harland looking on fire, so a mouthwatering prospect in store. Happy days. 🙂
“Fabulous win”
Aye, Norway were excellent against Brasil, unlike the confused and uncertain Scots; the contrast between a confident independent people and a ‘schizoid’ colonized fowk (Purves) made dependent (Cesaire).
Once independent a people must believe fully in themselves while the colonized and dependent are made to believe their oppressor culture and identity is superior; and anything else the colonizer tells them, including if necessary that ‘the moon is made of cheese’.
And like the ‘colonial hoax’ (aka the non-existent ‘Union’) they will tend to believe it.
How many up front did Fanon recommend, Alf?
Haha, I’m having a laugh. Still though, surely there must be something in the writings of Cesaire to guide a betting man as we progress through the KO stages?
Between them, Fanon, Cesaire, Elkins, Purves and Jonesy have covered everything else we will ever need to know.
Excuses, excuses, never-ending excuses. You’ll get nowhere like this you know.
“Between them, Fanon, Cesaire, Elkins, Purves and Jonesy have covered everything else we will ever need to know.”
Yes, that’s why its called ‘postcolonial’ theory, Hatey, because it describes what occurs in colonies prior to and also after their independence/liberation, including the critical role of ‘Crown forces’ in blocking independence, such as the Rev is discovering here.
All the colonized native really need to understand is why they think the way they do:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Do you reckon Fanon would send the ‘keeper the wrong way in a penalty shoot out, Alf? He might be useful to have on the bench – do you have his deets?
link to scottishdailyexpress.co.uk
The dirty truth about who and how there was a conspiracy to do down an innocent man is set to see the light of day. And jail and ruin will be the wages of their sin.
They know who they are and they know what’s coming.
Good, great in fact. Their time is coming.
Maybe they just don’t want to investigate this crime and are determined not to because then it all gets a bit messy?
i think the ENGLISH & AMERICANS are just «lucky»
history, events have been notably kind to them
how do they get away with it?
could it be «satan», released from his bottle, knows his own?
the other guy has obviously gone back inside the magic lamp.
250 years ago some English religious fanatics reached «America» and after some nice words began wiping out the locals. 250 years later, little substantive change in attitude.
250 years more? …..even luck eventually runs out.
Wow, TURABDIN.
You’ve reached the age of “maturity” without ever learning that the Irish, Germans, Italians and Scots also reached America and did their share of wiping out.
You’re unaware of the Spanish and Portuguese genocidal contributions too – contributions that make what went on in the Northern half of the New World look like small beer.
If ignorance truly is bliss, TURABDIN, you must be one of the happiest men alive.
Yeah right. That’ll be why over 90 per cent of all indigenous Native American people alive today live South of the US border. The Native American population of Northern America was near exterminated. You really know nothing.
I’ve heard of the Maya, the Aztec and the Inca civilisations, Marie. Have you?
The ruins of their great cities, temples, palaces and irrigation systems can still be visited. I suggest you go.
Being named after the Mother Of God, you’ll get a warm welcome from the descendants of the Spanish conquerors and colonists who genocided them all.
After you’ve done all that, perhaps you might want to learn about the fabulous riches in gold, silver and precious stones extorted by the Spaniards and shipped, hundreds of tons at a time, back to Spain.
Hey, you might even be moved to speculate why it is that the only major South and Central American country that doesn’t speak Spanish is Brazil, which speaks Portuguese.
Sorry, Marie, but I’ve been cruelly harsh to you. I learned long ago how much you value your uninformed ignorance. Take that away from you and what have you got left?
Ignorance is always the norm with committed racists, made all the worse by a clear intelligence, but one that has been so warped by hate that willed stupidity and a vision so narrow as to be laughably wrong, is what the brain embraces.
Funny thing is though, Turabdin is a migrant to the UK as far as I am aware. Makes you wonder why.
“committed racists”
Colonialism is described as ‘hateful racism’ (Cesaire); thus, colonialists must be ‘committed racists’.
Scots ‘unionists’ evidently still need to figure this oot:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Up to a point, I don’t disagree Alf, but all racism is bad, no matter its origin, and nationalists also have their fill of it. And all racism is equally hateful. But when you say unionists = colonialists = hateful racists, you accuse anyone who would or has voted for a continuation of the Union of being a racist (presumably against their own, somehow). This is a sleight of hand, a 2+2=5 moment that few you might be seeking to persuade will buy.
British ‘unionism’ is ‘a nationalist political and cultural ideology’ (Pettigrew).
Or, what Elkins describes as ‘nationalist imperialism’, i.e. colonialism.
Colonialism is therefore an oppressive form of nationalism because it involves one culture and identity subordinating and exploiting other national identities and cultures.
In other words, ‘unionism’ is a form of ‘trans-national’ nationalism and colonialism.
link to scotlandspeaks.com
All nationalism, including the Scottish variety is a ‘political and cultural ideology’ by definition but to then say that means ‘imperialism’ i.e. ‘colonialism’ is another 2+2=5. By your own logic you are saying all nationalism is colonialism. It doesn’t make sense but serves the purpose of delegitimising any Scot who might not support independence by calling them a colonialist. It is false.
“you are saying all nationalism is colonialism”
No I am not saying that at all.
So-called ‘unionism’ (so-called because in this case it is simply English domination of other ‘peoples’, i.e. ‘colonialism’) is an ideological nationalism reflecting the imposition of ‘a culturally-intertwined political identity’ (Pettigrew). It is clearly an aggressive form of nationalist political ideology.
It is only British nationalists who maintain that their nationalist ideology is not a form of nationalism and colonialism, which brings us back to Orwell’s ‘doublethink’.
Self-determination nationalism, on the other hand, is about a defined people seeking to end such an imposed ideological nationalism and its colonial rule. In this regard the UN’s declaration has the objective to ‘terminate the former Colonial Empires’ (McWhinney).
On the colonial markers that Scotland has in common with former colonies:
link to youtube.com
america’s early ruling class were all puritans; remember the puritans were mad protestants who were too fucking mad even for henry 8 who even tried to stop them reading the bible
with the puritans (i.e. english equivalent of presbyterians) it is all about the OT, they are “judaizers”, none of this hippy Jesus crap, but fire and sword. Naturally they see -themselves- as the new “chosen people” (one was enough), and america was “the promised land”, and thus the daft cunts who were already there must be … amalekites, right? So, it was God’s will that they be wiped out – this “ancient guff” really has legs you know. So, they went out into the west as they say “with a bible, and a GUN”.
South america was different because it was catholic, everyone interbred and you see it in the peoples. Watch “the mission”. The specific example of the aztecs – they practised human sacrifice by ripping folks hearts out atop a pyramid (not propaganda), so I don’t have much sympathy for whatever happened to them. There were a number of south american cultures that came and went before europeans arrived.
– bottom line, With the catholics you get a church (cathedral), school (university), a hospital, a welfare state (alms for the poor), and a local business hub, they make even make wine; with the prods you get a bank, a masonic lodge and a slave market (and a national debt); all faith, no hope and no charity. Oh, and there are 40000 varieties of them, so the heretics can’t even decide on what fucking heresy they believe in; the point is – every prod is a pope with his own relationship to God, and you don’t have to obey anyone, you just go off and form your own church.
A lot of people are coming to the conclusion – america is essentially satanic, and when you think about it, it would explain a lot (pride, kidfucking). Thing is though, most folks think it has “turned to shit”, whereas it came from rotten roots to begin with. The founding fathers were all masons (and check out the back of the dollar bill), and there was even a story today that Hamilton might have been a “crypto”.
If you are in Glasgow, you may have seen “the walk” the other day – that is the kind of trash that founded amerika.
I wondered if somebody would post that the Aztecs “had it coming”.
Thanks, Confused.
Good to be reminded occasionally, if we ever forget, what Indy is really all about for some people. Thanks again, Confused.
You never mentioned the Tea Towel carpet lickers. You know. The inbreds who think it’s still the 8th Century and their wonderful enlightened culture. The desire to destroy everything that is not them.
Credit where credit’s due, Mark. They know how to stage a good funeral.
I doubt that even the North Koreans could do it better.
With the Catholics you also got the inquisition. Their main weapon was fear.
Tuberculosis was the weapon used. Very effective. Maximum fatality. No cure at that time. The same method used successfully all over the world. Poor natives had no immunity to it. Their immune systems just collapsed. It was in the blankets they slept under. The fibers of clothing they wore.
The idea of mass elimination namely genocide may have been on some minds but the actual logistics and methods of liquidation were only available later in the 20th century.
“and after some nice words began wiping out the locals.”
That’s the Islamist’s who do that or tried and failed very badly. So bad in fact they are all out of holes to hide in.
History is a wonderful subject if you take the time to read it.
In excess of 7 million deaths were attributed to Covid by April 2024 when the gathering of international statistics ceased.
Think of that the next time you shell out some hard earned for some Chinese mass produced tat.
It would have been really nice if, just once, a representative of the Chinese state had had the grace and humility to say sorry.
You confuse the era of the “Founding Fathers “ (post 1776 Declaration of Independence) with that of the English, puritan “Pilgrim Fathers”, who sailed on The Mayflower in 1620.
“Wiping out the locals” by English and other, later European colonial- settlers (including Scots), started between those two years.
Of course, the Iberian conquistadores, Cortes and Pizarro pioneered the process much earlier, although it did not develop on anything like the same scale.
Blair Jenkins?
STV, BBC, Yes Scotland, OBE.
Hmm
How much public m9ney was secretly used to support anti independence dark arts organisations to undermine the independence campaign.
And in the gove4nment COPFS, the civil service the extent 9f the dark deeds brigade is now b3come clear.
Will Sturgeon squeal. I do believe she m8ght end having to. The wheels on the corrupt state are starting to come of. Or will she just have an accident, a car crash, or a heart attack.
I really can’t see any way forward towards Independence now until or unless Nicola Sturgeon is charged, tried, convicted and jailed for her crimes. She is the visible part of a deep seated tumour and must be lanced to flush out the cancerous cells of the ideologists who infected the movement.
Please confirm you’re not registered with and never have been registered with the GMC.
Hate-filled @ 11.59hrs. You haven’t been cruel to me in the slightest. I am well aware of the theft of land and mineral resources by Spanish and Portuguese empires. I have heard of Aztec, Inca and Maya. The point I made is that the descendants of these peoples still exist in huge numbers throughout both Central and Southern America. In their MILLIONS in fact. The same cannot be said for the near extinction of the indigenous population of North America. The numbers don’t lie – that is why your original comment is incorrect.
The Central and Southern American peoples who practiced centralised government, settled agriculture, irrigation and monumental building in stone were not counted in the same numbers as the North American peoples who lived off the land and migrating herds, and constructed their abodes of animal skins and wood.
The disparities in population numbers you refer to pre-dated the arrival of the white man.
Whilst both populations were likely genocided by approximately the same percentages, the total numbers genocided were very different.
A quick online check puts the estimated ratio of deaths, North America against Mesoamerica, at 1:5.
Archeologists refer to the 50+ million Americans who died in total after whitey rocked up as the Great Dying. It set a world record that stood until the 20th century when Mao got his arse in gear.
Of course, many modern day whiteys are still reluctant to accept that Columbus, a native of what is now Italy, was ever a whitey at all.
I raised, in total, 50 quid for the venezuelan earthquake victims.
– after expenses (a nice jalfrezi and a couple of beers), there is 1.20 to distribute among the victims.
(I am ALL about the victims, everything I do, is, ultimately, for them …)
I think a second round of fundraising is in order.
(theres a new place just opened, got a good rep)
This is how the “charidee” business works – the CEO will fly private jet to um bongo land, get an instagram experience standing next to a well you (-some locals you bunged a few quid to) dug for the villagers and a smiling local – little Aisha, “who now has clean water to drink” – then its back on the gulfstream … and then you can get on the social media and virtue signal about what a fucking saint you are (and work in some -shite- aboot THENETZERO and zuzzstain-a-billidy, on AI augmented social media, on an iphone, on a private jet, with a gucci bag and a hermes scarf, ray bans …)
Never give money to charity (unless you know the people personally) – it is being used to fund the lifestyles of fragrant, middle class CUNTS, or simply stolen by gangsters; even when they turn up with the food aid, the local criminals will appear, with guns, rob you of it, then SELL it to the highest bidder.
A lot of these “NGOs” are actually arms of the deep state and full of spooky people; you can do a lot of subverting by pretending to be a “philanthropist” who is “passionate about democracy and gay rights” in the third world (all these darkies, having too many kids, need to get them into the buttsex – DONT GO UP THE FRONT GET ROUND THE BACK – while we get the copper mine up and running … )
“mistah kurtz” is still up-river, but wearing calvin klein
It is like an elephant in the room, glaring, never said – of the class differences between these charidee leaders and their worker bees; first of all, there won’t be any working class people in the charity sector, unless, of course, they are working as volunteers for the “experience” and to buff the CV. They don’t fly private. They might get a t-shirt for free, but the gilet they have to pay for themselves.
The attitude, among them all, seems to be – when you give me your money, it’s mine … okay, it’s mine now … my money. I mean where would we be if we had to “ring fence” everything – national insurance is meant to be the tax that pays for the welfare, pension, NHS – and VAT – gawd blimey – that was brought in to pay for the napoleonic wars … nah, all the money just goes into a general pile and they do what they want with it. Everywhere.
As above (westminster), so below (holyrood); Murrell probly feels hard done by, like he got a speeding ticket at the indy 500.
Ah, c’moan noo, Confused.
I can’t believe you’re lumping appeals for G@z@ in with that.
Is it not time you started sharing those drugs you are on so the rest of us can keep up?
Big ugly Zak is getting the chop. Way to toxic for the liberals and not Marxist enough for the Antifa thugs, too gay for the Islamists, too ugly for the Lucy’s. To urban for the tree huggers and to insane for the general public.
The Left are at each others throats. (Fanon)
Finding out his real name is Dave was the last straw.
Dave the Jewish Jew hater.
Police told “stop the woke culture and get on with catching criminals”
Are Police Scotland listening?
@Hatey
That’s the point about these people. They are in a constant state of funeral.
The only way Scotland can even begin to start a fresh independence movement is to learn from the past and vote Reform.
Sure, and the only way to beat a cocaine addiction is to use heroine and vote Reform.
Any other random pearls of wisdom you’d like to share to which you can tag “vote Reform”?
How about “The only way to find out if a person is truly compassionate and loving is to see how they treat you when you vote Reform”.
Or…
“The the only way to get beyond death is to give up the love of life and vote Reform”.
Or…
“The only way to get what you really want is to let go of what you don’t want and vote Reform”.
I could go on …
“The oppressive jackboot of the coloniser will never be lifted from the throats of the wretched, nor the alien, colonising values of the extortioners eliminated from the minds of the downtrodden, until the colonised resolve as one to vote for Reform” (Memmi).
You don’t vote but you could go on and on about Reform. You are suddenly an expert on Reform corruption. Ain’t that a coincidence that the media are full on with the same expertise and not a legal action in sight. Just like all the other accusations.
If you did vote then who would you vote for? There’s not much choice.
You’ve not been paying attention.
I do vote.
I go into a booth and if no candidate takes my fancy I vote for none of the above by spoiling my ballot. I exercise my civic duty and my democratic right to chose, or not to chose. Simples.
As for corruption, all political parties are corrupt and all politicians lie. It is in their nature.
The difference which separates the parties is only the extent to which they are corrupt and the frequency of lies which fall from the mouths of their politicians.
Once you’ve established that, you can then turn your attention to the policies.
Is it no past your bed time wee man?
“…..I don’t know whether you’re doing your regular piss take or you are just being stupid , but if reform are the answer you most definitely are combining the two.
Reform’s corruption is legendary and is far in advance of anything that the snp aspire too, and their reps are the equivalent and equals of the morons that infest ALL the OTHER political parties….”
You are all singing from the same BBC hymn sheet. Nothing will distract from the disaster that is now Scotland. The days of dismissing Reform with a wave of the arrogant hand are over. The biggest political party in the UK and growing.
Who amongst you would welcome a General election now?
I would.
on the subject of «areswipes», this ought to win a prize for the AI generated variety.
link to newcivilengineer.com
London the Great Wen, the great boil, the massive carbuncle on Ukania’s fundament.
Will Burnham dare lance it?
@ Confused at 1:23 pm
On form today C!
As the mentalists continue to wage war, and Musk and others sending rockets intae space; I continue to ponder the living more sustainable existences bullshit thang.
Happened to try to park behind a new MINI Countryman the other day, but for some reason there was little space available due to it encroaching over the designated bay lines. This promoted some research…
So this new
MINI(should really be called a MAXI) model weighs in at about 1750kg, which is the same weight as a 2 door Range Rover Classic 2 door weighed in 1980!Back in the day a Mini Traveller which was the estate version of the old Mini weighed just 680kg. So the new version is over 1000kg heavier due to it being built using ridiculous amounts of raw materials and energy to produce all the parts.
Anyway, as an aside, after over a decade I finally got rid of my old diesel estate to “save the planet”, not really as it had been a magnificent 100 quid purchase and a great reliable old barge with way over 300k on it, but chose to change it because I was getting reamed for road tax even though I do very little miles.
So now running a wee Asian petrol puddle jumper which is braw, and being so narrow makes easy work of dodging all the potholes and squeezing into what’s left of parking bays due to the epidemic plague of obese cars.
How progressive am I now with its little capacity fuel efficient all alloy engine… Oh, but that’s the same as the Hillman Imp had in 196fucking 3, so maybe the modern virtue signalling progressives aren’t really so at the forefront of tech development as they’d like to think they are.
So cars have got ridiculous large and heavy, even though humans haven’t suddenly evolved to be twice the size we were a few decades ago.
And whilst cars have grown excessively in these times of us supposedly being more efficient and using less of the earth’s precious resources, chocolate bars have got smaller…
“humans haven’t suddenly evolved to be twice the size we were a few decades ago”
False memories there?
Try looking at pictures of typical Scots in the 1960s and compare them with typical Scots now.
Here’s a conundrum for you. Which came first, the potholes, or average vehicles big enough to cope with the potholes?
On the roads I regularly drive, it takes a Transit or bigger to provide a reasonably smooth and comfortable ride on the lunar-like surface.
When I’m driving my Focus, I can’t find it in me to criticise the SUV boys too much. They’re probably going to get home, wheels, tyres and springs intact, whereas I may not. I don’t recall the last time I didn’t have to replace a spring or two for the MOT.
It really isn’t that much of a conundrum.
You should maybe take some time off endlessly posting on here and study some of the laws of physics relating to force and mass. It isn’t a chicken-and-egg situation.
If you start significantly increasing the weight of vehicles travelling on roads that are not upgraded in design and structural terms to cope with the heavier loads acting on them, then something has to give.
The cumulative loads of heavier and wider vehicles come into play, and you get the weak areas of the road breaking up and drain culverts getting crush damaged and sinking as folk drive over them because their cars are so fucking big they have to run to the edge of the road so they don’t hit some other twat in a big car coming the other way.
Lack of general road maintenance with the basics like keeping drains and run-offs clear so the road structure isn’t saturated and more liable to break up with winter frost heave is another factor.
Your suspension takes a hammering because the springs and shock absorbers and other components like antiroll bar drop links and bushings have to try to cope with dampening the significantly increased loads of a vehicle being twice the weight they need to be.
But fuck it, jist sit on yer arse complaining and get AI to sort it all out for you, and ignore the insight of someone that builds competition rally / race vehicles including their suspension systems, and also takes the time out to help maintain my local roads so they don’t deteriorate so quickly.
Well the main problem, I think, is that you constantly come across as some clueless whinger with an axe to (endlessly) grind, Dan – and when it boils down to it, much of what you say is just laughable bollocks?
Here’s the big news: we ain’t going back to Minis that weigh 680kg, pal. Why? Because if we did, the occupants of said vehicles – on today’s vastly more overcrowded roads – would likely end up as dogmeat, even for relatively minor shunts.
Yeah I know, “Elf and Safety Gone Mad” etc. no doubt (according to you), but you try saying that when some foreign driver in a heavily laden VW Transporter cuts across you from the INSIDE lane (with no signaling prior) to do an impossible U-turn on a major 60mph limit A-road, himself doing 50mph prior to this manoevre, and you’re driving a small modern hatchback that then ends up on its roof…
Yeah, trust me my recalcitrant, misanthropic friend – you become VERY grateful for all those heavy side impact bars, multiple airbags and all the rest at that point, and moreover you live to tell the tale with only cuts and bruises.
But yeah. Let’s all go back to Hilman Imps and air-cooled DAF trucks, right Dan? FFS, stop embarrassing yourself.
The English nationalist can’t engage in a debate without abuse.
Big cars do cause problems.
Big cars come with big challenges
Even a stationary SUV can be a significant problem in a city that evolved around smaller cars. In 2023, Which? – an organisation that tests consumer products and services – found that 161 car models were too big for the average parking space in the UK. Twenty-seven of those models were so wide that it would be difficult to open the doors while constrained within a single parking bay.
In the EU, the average width of new cars has now surpassed 180cm (5.9ft), which is often used as a lower threshold for on-street parking in Europe. Meanwhile in the US, the strain on parking exacerbated by SUVs has been making headlines for more than 20 years…
…Rising US road deaths
Electric SUVs are equipped with bigger batteries because these vehicles have higher power needs. But EV (and conventional) SUVs are also geared toward better performance, meaning it’s not just the weight and size of these vehicles that affects traffic safety – it’s the way they’re driven too. “We can attribute some of the dangers of these bigger cars on the behaviour of the consumers,” says Petropoulos. “They want to accelerate faster, which requires more battery power.”
The New York Times recently highlighted the “exceptionally American” problem of rising road deaths. Roadways are becoming safer in many developed countries across the world, but not the United States.
Some design trends may not be helping. Many newer, behemoth models have high hoods, which pose distinct safety hazards. A US study of nearly 18,000 crashes involving pedestrians found that SUVs and vans with a hood height greater than 40in inches (102cm) were about 45% more likely to cause fatalities than those with a height of 30in (76cm) or less.”
link to bbc.co.uk
Duh, you’re thick aren’t you Sam?
Dan was talking about (relatively) SMALL cars like the modern, present day Mini being vastly heavier now than they were in the 1960s, and he used 675kg (for a Mini) as his supposed benchmark. By comparison, the present day “basic” Mini, with non hybridised 1.5 litre 3-cyl petrol engine weighs 1400kg, more than double.
Yes, even the new “basic” Mini is appreciably larger than the original, but still not in any way a big car. It isn’t the size that’s the (main) issue, it’s the plethora of safety features that Dan (and no doubt yourself also) thinks we can all do without: high strength, rigid steel safety cells with reinforced A/B pillars, crumple zones, massive steel bars within the car doors for side impact, multiple airbags, ABS, decent brakes, modern radial tyres. It is these that add the bulk of the weight, not to mention air conditioning/climate control, soundproofing, stereos/speakers, screens etc.
What might be true for a chopped down, period restore rally special – hardly a daily driver for ferrying kids about and doing 15k miles a year in – doesn’t hold for a family car. It’s all very well pointing out that fuel economy, size, performance could all be improved without all these things, but it is a stupidly simplistic and juvenile non-argument.
Besides all of these factors, the world we now find ourselves in is vastly more regulated and litigious – and as I’ve pointed out the bleeding obvious, our roads are vastly busier. Imagine if a manufacturer forwent even the “low hanging fruit” car safety features of side impact bars and airbags that even my 1993 Vauxhall Cavalier had more than 30 years ago? The families of the next people needlessly ending as dogmeat would be suing them left, right and centre, rightly so.
Very little of the above has much to do with cars getting BIGGER (although they have of course, largely thanks to changing tastes and consumer requirements), but much more to do with cars getting SAFER (not to mention far more reliable, much more comfortable and usable, and much longer lived, far less likely to rust away on your drive, less likely to be stolen and so on).
Oh, and “English Nationalist”?
Hilarious. I’m not the one calling for English independence, nor claiming genetic superiority over other Britons (less still being a space-travelling Ancient Briton).
I leave this sort of thing – and much besides in your particular case Sam – to others.
Aye, Sam, the dickhead troll jist has to try to find an angle to kick off and create discord and division rather than find any sort of consensus.
He (and surprisingly Main missing the opportunity to post more drivel) completely ignore and swerve the discussion on the roads not being designed to cope with heavier loadings.
He’s jist a shallow argumentative prick of an individual defending his beloved UK, which now has fuck all vehicle industry of worth as we now import so many of our vehicles, rather than having developed our own car industry and kept the technical capability, jobs, and resultant economic benefit here.
The example of the all alloy engined Hillman Imp built in Linwood, Scotland was from 1963, and could easily have been developed over the following 6 decades if the vision and will had been there to maintain vehicle manufacturing industry and encompass higher efficiency and safety standards.
Vehicles would undoubtably gain a degree of weight as the vehicle shells evolved to meet higher safety levels with structural strength and crumple zones to better dissipate destructive energy force in collisions. Efficient disc brakes needn’t be significantly heavier than ancient old drum brakes. But if the car gets significantly heavier, then the brakes also need to grow proportionally because physics… Don’t make the car so ridiculously big and heavy, and if it isn’t driven like a race car on the public road by fannies thinking they are Stirling Moss, then there’s no requirement to put mahoosif brakes on it.
There’s no need to go supersize with vehicles for some of the reasons you highlight, and filling vehicles with a ridiculous level of gadgetry that very few folk will ever understand, let alone use is just a waste of resources and additional weight.
Old 5th Gear vid of 3 mins showing how small cars like a Renault Modus weighing just over 1000kg evolved to be safer.
link to youtube.com
Ah, impotently throwing insults around, blatantly ignoring points raised and refusing to address them – and posting more mince I see, Dan. Seriously? Stick to what you’re good at – digging holes and shovelling shite – because it sure as hell isn’t engineering fundamentals and demonstrable fact.
It is a FACT that SIZE FOR SIZE (i.e. ignoring the whole “cars have gotten too big” thing, which is a completely separate argument and red herring), cars have got much heavier than they were in the ‘60s, ergo your “675kg Mini estate” example to now. Why? Because as I said moron, SAFETY SYSTEMS – the things keeping you alive in a crash like massive steel side impact bars, crumple zones, rigid safety cell, modern radial tyres with steel skeletons, multiple airbags, beefier materials, ABS disc brakes and traction control etc. – as well as (secondarily) things like sound deadening aircon/climate, info screens, hifi/speakers. NOT size.
Heres’s what a 5 second enquiry to Google AI yielded:
’… Yes, safety is one of the single biggest reasons, but it isn’t the only one. It actually shares the crown equally with luxury features and acoustic insulation (comfort).
If you look at two cars of the exact same length and width, the modern one is a dense fortress of high-strength steel, explosive safety charges, heavy electronics, and thick soundproof matting.
Here is how the weight gain breaks down between safety and luxury:
1. The Safety Foundation (Non-Negotiable Weight)
To pass modern crash tests, car bodies can no longer just be thin sheet metal wrapped around a frame. Safety requirements add hundreds of pounds of hidden mass:
The Safety Cage: Modern cars use a thick, interlocking network of high-strength steel and boron steel alloys around the cabin (the A, B, and C-pillars around the windows). This prevents the roof and sides from collapsing in a rollover, but it adds massive density.
Side-Impact Protection: Every door now contains heavy steel intrusion beams to protect passengers if they are T-boned.
Airbags and Modules: A 1960s car had zero airbags. A modern car has 6 to 10. Each airbag requires a canvas bag, a heavy metal inflation canister, chemical propellants, and a complex wiring harness connected to a computer module.
2. The Luxury & Quietness Factor (The Equal Contributor)
While safety makes the car structurally dense, consumer demand for comfort adds an incredible amount of “dead weight.”
The biggest culprit here is NVH (Noise, Vibration, and Harshness) insulation. People in the 1960s accepted that driving at 60 mph would be loud, shaky, and full of wind noise. Modern drivers expect library-like silence. To achieve this, manufacturers pack cars with:
Heavy tar-based or rubberized sound-deadening mats glued inside the doors and floorboards.
Thicker, double-paned acoustic glass.
Massive blocks of dense foam injected inside the frame pillars to block wind.
Additionally, standard modern features like power-adjustable heated/cooled seats (which require heavy electric motors and heating elements), thick carpeting, and expansive infotainment systems add significant poundage.
3. The “Weight Spiral”
Safety and luxury create a compounding physics problem known as a weight spiral.
Once the safety structure and luxury insulation add 400 lbs to a car’s design, engineers have a problem: the original brakes aren’t strong enough to stop it, the suspension is too weak to hold it, and the transmission can’t handle the strain.
To compensate, the manufacturer has to install larger brake rotors, heavier multi-piston calipers, thicker suspension control arms, and a more robust, multi-speed transmission. By fixing the problems caused by the initial weight, they accidentally add even more weight.
The Verdict:
If you stripped a modern car down to its bare metal chassis, the structural weight increase would be entirely due to safety engineering. But the reason the final vehicle is so incredibly heavy “size for size” is a 50/50 split between the survival cage protecting you and the luxury insulation keeping you comfortable. …’
So yeah. If you’re going to have a debate with someone, it’s best not to blatantly ignore basic, demonstrable facts that can be readily cited, dick.
I’d point out that the basic Mini weighs 1,160kg, the higher 1750kg weight is probably for the countryman which is an SUV produced under the Mini brand.
It’s also worth pointing out that whilst heavier cars do mean the roads require more maintenance, the figure used in the HMT Green Book for the Valuation of a Prevented Fatality is £2m per fatality. Just over half of this is the intrinsic value of human life, with the other half being loss of output, disruption, medical expenses etc. The total value of road accidents was estimated at £35bn therefore in 2022, when the DfT last studied it.
Now consider this: road traffic increased by a factor of 10x between 1970 and 2019, over the same period road traffic fatalities reduced by 75%. That’s equivalent therefore to a 97.5% reduction in fatalities per journey compared to 1970. Had the number of fatalities per journey stayed at 1970’s levels, the ADDITIONAL economic cost (I.e. above the costs currently incurred) would be £156bn. In contrast, the U.K. spends about £7.5bn maintaining the roads every year.
Whilst factors such as higher driving test standard and the introduction of the alcohol breathalyser have contributed to that fall, by far the biggest factor is the vast improvements in vehicle safety over this time period. Not only in terms of the protection vehicles offer in the event of a collision, but also much better tyres, brakes, suspension, headlights, steering etc. which help to prevent a collision occurring in the first place.
So yes, we do “need” bigger and heavier cars, not only are they more comfortable and can carry more stuff, they impose lower overall costs on society. I’m sorry if those facts “sow discord”, but you are after all posting your rant on a public forum where people are likely to challenge you.
Hey Dan, the practical man, hope you are having a great time.
How stupid are these fucking tits, determined to start something over nothing?
– the “safety” of the big fucking stupid car only applies as long as there are no big fucking stupid cars coming the other way.
And the safety gains don’t apply to pedestrians or cyclists or bikers, or anyone driving a normal sized car.
Big fucking stupid car owners also have a habit of reversing over their own toddlers in driveways due to the lack of visibility.
The weight penalty has destroyed any fuel efficiency gains.
Blame the americans and the perils of doing the right thing : in the 70s california tried to do something about emissions – but the car lobby was too smart – they created an entire new class of vehicle, the sports utility vehicle, the SUV, which was not technically a car at all, and thus exempt from these regulations. They were, in law, trucks.
– and the law of unintended consequences kicks in : big fat americans like big fat fucking cars … because they make them feel safe. Now they are everywhere, and they just don’t fit into our country’s roads and towns – parking spaces, or old roads, originally designed to fit the width of 2 horses arses (aidan and caveman). America is big wide open, wide roads, wide straight roads, with car parks and rest stops everywhere – it was built for the car; your quaint highland village was not.
I love the freedom of the motor car – nice day, jump in the car, go anyhere … Glencoe, the Fife coast, the beach at Ayr, no problem; this is all going to get wound up. First up self driving taxis, then assisted driving for ordinary cars (driving is optional), then it becomes compulsory – no one will stop you driving, just your insurance premiums will be unaffordable. All the new cars are tracked, with kill switches; it looks great you get in and tell it where to go – but (checks govt database) – have you permission to make this journey, think of the carbon emissions, YOUR CARBON CREDIT ACCOUNT is overdrawn. You want to take a wee walk up Ben A’an – you will have to book a parking space, on our app. They are stealing our country from us and selling it back to us by the pound; if they could monetise the fresh air and the sunlight, they would.
Also, cars are now unrepairable – anything goes wrong, back to the main dealer to get ripped off; wing mirror for a merc, at least 600, the GPS maps on an SD card, 600, and don’t try to be clever and get some 3rd party gear off amazon, it won’t be recognised by the electronics bus and will mess up the software. This is all deliberate.
Old cars, properly made bullet proof ones, are what you want, preferably diesel. The new stuff is all designed to break one millisecond after the warranty runs out. It is also expected that we all live on the personal contract plan treadmill, of never owning, just rolling over a new plan for a new vehicle every 4 years.
Some of the shite the car industry pulls – its pure cartel-ism and market manipulation – is breathtaking; sometimes the EU shakes a fist at them but they largely get away with it. There has been vast overcapacity in the car industry for a long time, by “markets” we should all be driving brand new beauties which are cheap as shit. And yet they manage to keep prices really high, and they do this by all sorts of clever means, including selling your own new cars to yourself (or affiliate) then parking them up at an old airfield for a year, then quietly selling them as used cars a year down the line. This is to protect new car prices and overall sales – any regulator would break this up.
– and check this out :
link to allaboutcookies.org
next up, they will put a chatbot in the dashboard.
You know, the car industry are a real shower of bastards, going way back. There was an engineer in the late 50s who knew his thermodynamics – theoretical maximum efficiency (carnot) being linked to temperature difference; so – he made a diesel engine designed to “run hot”. He took some ludicrous finned non-aero car of the time and put his engine in it and he got 60mpg from a 17mpg standard. The engine had to be heavier and very well made, this made it “indestructible”, would never wear out, and what is more he could get higher performance, even putting his vehicle into drag races; spent many years trying to get the car makers to use his engine – but they shied away – less fuel consumption and cars you don’t need to replace so often, hit the bottom line (this is classic cartel behaviour since no one would come in). General motors also made a very good electric car a long while back, then recalled them all, would not let people buy them, and scrapped the tech.
Aw, you’re insulting horses arses, Confused.
Poor cut’n’paste Adrian is just trying to join in.
The other one is dribbling to himself in a mirror as usual.
They should get a room.
Let’s just ignore all the data showing the huge improvements in vehicle safety attributed to vehicle design in favour of the uneducated, unhinged rantings of “Confused”. I hope when you talk about “jumping in the car” that’s either rhetorical, or at least with someone else driving and you sat in the back. Someone with your temperament shouldn’t be in charge of a vehicle.
The irony of you popping up when people are complaining about things that weigh too much isn’t lost on me or anybody else “James”. As usual, contributing absolutely nothing to the conversation.
“ – the “safety” of the big fucking stupid car only applies as long as there are no big fucking stupid cars coming the other way.”
Even by your low standards, that’s possibly the most stupid and ignorant thing you’ve ever said. “Confused” by name and nature. Imbecile.
“And the safety gains don’t apply to pedestrians or cyclists or bikers, or anyone driving a normal sized car.”
Literally wrong in every regard. NCAP tests specifically include pedestrian safety in their scope, hence the proliferation of huge front grilles. You are utterly and embarrassingly clueless.
“The weight penalty has destroyed any fuel efficiency gains.“
My 2017 Audi A3 diesel regularly did 70mpg. Toyota petrol MHEV hybrids so beloved of taxis do 60mpg plus. If we’re including actual PHEV, their potential economy is off the scale. All this DESPITE the huge weight gains – because technological leaps, most notably in engine EFI systems. Again, you’re talking utter shite. Have you ever even owned a fucking car?
“Also, cars are now unrepairable – anything goes wrong, back to the main dealer to get ripped off; wing mirror for a merc, at least 600, the GPS maps on an SD card, 600, and don’t try to be clever and get some 3rd party gear off amazon, it won’t be recognised by the electronics bus and will mess up the software. This is all deliberate.”
What utter nonsense – AGAIN. Thriving independent garages round here pal, at least four of them in the small Cheshire town we live closest too. I literally took my V6 TDI VW Amarok to one mere weeks ago and they did a sterling job, absolutely no need to go anywhere near a VW main dealer. It’s almost as though you’re spouting this stuff on purpose, do you not have eyes, the internet, or even good ol’ Yellow Pages if that even still exists? Fuck me….
“The irony of you popping up when people are complaining about things that weigh too much isn’t lost on me or anybody else “James”
😀
Classic. Any further comment superfluous
At least nobody’s popped up to say there was a boy developed a car that ran entirely on water, but “they” had him hunted down and killed.
Not yet.
In all the discourse about road safety, I’m surprised nobody has commented on how the authorities have reneged on their comittments in recent years. Verges un-mown, lane markings worn away, road signs broken or obscured by vegetation. And, of course, the potholes. A chicane to be negotiated by drivers with mechanical sympathy, or, for two-wheeled traffic, a lottery of death.
I recall reading somewhere that road surface damage goes up with the cube of the axle loading. Regularly, in the days when we were in the EU, I would read how in the pursuit of harmonisation the maximum permitted vehicle gross weight on British roads had been increased. Some experts predicted back then that would inevitably accelerate road surface breakup. And so it came to pass. Another bonus to our EU membership, to line up alongside un-deportable crims and billions of pounds spent on migrant grifters and a plethora of unroadworthy, untaxed, uninsured vehicles on our roads, driven by people with “licenses” they bought in a Sudanese bazaar.
Did we reduce maximum permitted vehicle gross weights when we left the EU?
Don’t be daft!
Larry, Curly & Moe; all day, every day. *yawn*
If you don’t like it here James, you can always fuck off. It’s not like you add anything to any conversation is it.
Away and take a flying fuck to youself; this is a Scots Indy site and it’s you who is the fucking half witted unionist charlatan.
This plaxe would be ten times better without you -and your two mates- here.
All good here Confused, thanks. Trust life is good for yourself tae.
Aye, the trio of bawbags hard at it, but also catching themselves out with their efforts.
Desperately trying to claim I want everyone driving original Hillman Imps when it was only used as a solitary example to point out modern ICE engines are not actually anything new, just finessed examples of existing tech embracing sensible developments to improve efficiency and reduce harmful emissions.
They seem to have missed that I pointed out that I now drive an Asian puddle jumper which is basically what the original Imp or similar could have evolved into over 6 fucking decades. So I am in no way stating everyone should drive original Imps.
I even posted a few minutes long vid of a Renault Modus versus big Volvo 940 collision test showing that safety standards can drastically improve with a moderate weight increase.
No need to go full obese supersize and make huge cars which don’t fit the roads or parking bays, which as Aidan bawbag 3 points out- “It’s also worth pointing out that whilst heavier cars do mean the roads require more maintenance…“, which was my original point to Hatey Main’s bawbag 1 complaint about potholes.
Yet big Range Rover driving Captain Caveman bawbag 2 ignores this point and continues to play the man and not the ball by trying twist the point of what was actually being discussed.
At least he also has the bigger Amarok engine as the smaller 4 cylinder 2.0 common rail bi-turbo engine (also used in the Crafter vans) is as previously discussed btl a fuckup with it using a stupid wee wet belt for the oilpump which fails and destroys the engine leaving many working business with considerable replacement engine costs. I’ve retrofitted fitted the earlier chain driven oilpump setup and crankshafts from the previous iteration 2.0 PD VW engines to repair fucked 2.0 CR engines. But I am just an idiot and VW must know best by deliberately engineering weak and highly costly failure points into what should be robust and reliable engines.
Bi-turbo on a fucking pickup and van engine, just get in the sea with that shite! VW just couldn’t be arsed selecting an appropriately size modern turbo and control its boosting capabilities properly instead of clagging on two fucking turbos.
Got another pal who has just had the small turbo on his bi-turbo engined VW shit itself and take out the larger turbo with the shrapnel, so expensive repair in parts and labour for him and the van off the road for a decent while too.
Last week at the garage there was a muckle Audi Q7 in. No charging, ha, 1200 quid for an alternator! The fucking thing is watercooled with O rings onto the engine blocks cooling passages, and it’s a totes cunt to fit with so little room in the engine bay even though the car is huge, so front end off to gain access to do the job and a shitload of hours and cost just to change an alternator.
Plus you need to hook car up to diagnostic controller and code in the new alternator, aswell as put the ECU into purge mode so the extra electric coolant pumps can cycle and bleed out the airlocks created in the system whilst changing the alternator. It’s fucking mental.
I do like slagging off Teslas when they are in the workshop though. The things are listening and scanning a lot of the time, and you can even see it has sensed you are near the car on the display screen. Even took the workshop dog out the piece room and over to the car to see if the car could see it with whatever beams it uses to constantly scan for things.
And be aware that some new cars record a ROB (record of behaviour) which actually watches you when you drive and can see if you look out the side window for too long, and logs how you are driving with regard to throttle and brake application rate and of course speed. You will comply… and it is only a matter of time until reports will be sent to the authorities should laws be being breached.
Give over, Dan.
Even schoolkids will know that it’s the 40 ton HGV’s doing 95% of the road damage.
I guess the ad hominem response trumps being arsed to learn something new every time.
“This is a Scots Indy site”
No shit, Wally, here’s a haddie just for you.
Why don’t you post something sane and rational that won’t have normal Scots running for the hills?
What would YOU know aboot normal Scots, Prick?
Warmongering unionist Tory. GTF.
Aw, Wally, I can see you’re suffering.
Hope it’s something that will involve root canal work. Hope you have to go private and the dentist takes you for every penny you have.
But no hard feelings. Hae anither haddie.
At the end of the day James, you’re just some sad little keyboard warrior getting a pathetic thrill by mouthing off to people from behind the safety of your computer screen. You and I both know if we were face to face there wouldn’t be anything coming out of that gob.
Ah, c’moan noo, Aidan.
Weapons grade halitosis for certain.
Snowflake Adrian threatening handbags at dawn. LOLZ
Better get some of the hard stuff doon ee first, petal.
Try a half pint of pale pish 2% English ‘beer’.
Do they sell that in Fifeshire?
“Weapons grade halitosis for certain.”
Yup, no doubt. Enough to strip the fur from a badger.
LOL – as if I or anyone else would bother.
It’s just a bit of a sad state of affairs James isn’t it, getting to your time of life and being a bitter, spiteful internet troll with nothing to say or offer. No doubt comforting yourself about your own missteps, wasted opportunities and poor choices by mouthing off from behind your keyboard at people who worked hard to make themselves more successful than you.
What I might do is when you eventually slip up and tell us what part of the borders you live in, sponsor a nice old people’s coach tour for English pensioners to come for a day trip. Just maybe 3 or 4 buses worth, imagine all those English accents right outside your front door. I can just imagine the psychotic fit of rage that would induce in a horrible, xenophobic little man like you.
Still biting, then? lol
Ah hear nothing but English accents round here as it is, Petal.
Yes, precisely Aidan: such enormous strides in road safety and crash survivability are the (priceless) dividend of research, progress and ENGINEERING.
But yeah, let’s all go back to deathtrap 600kg Minis and Hilman Imps, where even a relatively minor shunt left the driver with an A-series engine in his lap and/or a steering wheel embossed into his heart, eh.
There’s really no fixing stupid.
Of course there’s nothing stopping Dan driving a Hillman Imp if he wants to. There’s one for sale on the autotrader for £8k that looks in decent condition. It’s the insistence that other people have to also be forced to make the same choices, even if they don’t make sense on a personal or a societal level.
Yes absolutely, there’s a world of difference between personal choices affecting only you, and making sweeping (objectively misguided, misconceived and incorrect) statements about what everyone else should be doing.
I adore riding and owning motorbikes and have done since 16, but I acknowledge they are dangerous things and wouldn’t evangelise about everyone else having to get one eg for the sake of reducing road surface damage at the gross expense of personal safety…
I hope wee Pete in his cushy jail cell write’s a book n sets out everything he’s got on (ex boyfriend) Nikki n Swine Eh
@Hatey McHateface
Duty I have been doing my duty all of my life. Of course it’s people like me that keep having to do it. Because in corrupt Scotland very few people are clean. I am a few months short of a time bar on High Court Jury Duty. And I get served with this Citation. Half my family have emigrated. The other half are in disengagement mode. We don’t give credence to the Scottish Institutions and we find the Scottish Parliament legislation a joke. And as for migrant click bait it more likely to be Scottish Gangland killings a la Glesga.