Sunday, 19 September 2010


The “plot” against the life of the Pope turned out to be a bit of a damp squib... The men who were arrested and kept in prison over the weekend were allowed to go free Sunday morning as not a shred of evidence could be found against them.

No weapons were found in their homes; no explosive materials, no plans or recipes for bombs. Nothing.

It appears that they were working men having a joke in the canteen about the Pope and his expensive visit to the UK and someone suggested something that went a bit too far and everyone laughed. You know how it gets in the canteen...

Frankly given the record of the Church on the child abuse scandal and the fact that the Pope was the guy in charge of priests' discipline for years when it was happening, and that he allowed people to get away with it, I’m surprised that the visit went as well as it did.

Normally the one thing guaranteed to get people REALLY angry is child abuse. It can even get the normally apathetic to stir their stumps and take action. But apart from a few muted protests, nothing much was said about it. The Pope said he was sorry and it seems that that is enough for people. It wouldn’t be for me, but there you go.

So anyway, the plot was a joke in bad taste that got 6 blokes a weekend at Her Majesty's pleasure for nothing much more than I've heard around Dundee over the last few weeks. You’d have thought that London’s finest would have been able to distinguish between a joke in the canteen and a serious terrorist threat. Tessie May really should be looking at how effective these people are.

Mrs Cressida Dick wasn't in charge of the operation was she?

Pictures: The Home Secretary dressed for the office... surely not? Cressida the incompetent moron that organised or rather didn't organise the operation that led to the death of an innocent man because she couldn't find the room she was supposed to be in (and who was promoted as a result of it) Dick. And a small instruction manual which you may find useful if you travel to the English capital and are likely to come into contact with plod.

Don't you just wonder what planet some of these people live on?


  1. An awful lot of fuss over some waxwork driving around in a glass box.
    But even being a totally uninterested atheist I was still glad his trip to Scotland went so well. No idea why. Probably because I'm Scottish or something.

  2. Well I'm glad he came to no harm here. There would have been the most terrible carry on if he had.

    As a state visit there is supposed to be some gain for someone involved. It seems to have been a success for the Vatican; all is forgiven and the wee greman's not as bad as we thought he was. But as for Scotland, that had to help pay for it, and the citizens of Edinburgh and Glasgow who's lives were disrupted, I don't know.

    Spud Murphy arranged it at Gordon Brown's behest, but they weren't even there having been dumped by the English a few months ago. It was nothing to do with Alex Salmond, he wasn't consulted about it, and it was nothing to do with the Liberals who sent the SoS and the Deputy Prime Minister to wallow in some sort of self importance next to the Queen.

    Perhaps the one who had the most fun was old Phil, flirting with Annabel Goldie...or maybe it was Annabel Goldie flirting with the Duke, who knows.

  3. tris..

    I think the 12 hours of Scottish scenery and architecture getting shown around the world to a billion people must be worth a fortune . Dread to think what that kind of publicity would have cost if our tourist board ( Visit Scotland ? )had paid for it.
    Plus the sun shone for a change. And I noticed they even pushed 'The Tram' out onto Princes Street for some obscure reason.

  4. Good thinking. Sunny, happy, friendly, Scotland with loads of Saltires.... Maybe it was worth it after all.

  5. The bairns enjoyed it too, parading along Princes Street. The BBC's coverage of the parade was a disgrace. It used to be, in days gone by, that every section of a parade was mentioned as a kind of courtesy to those who put lots of hard work into their wee bit. All we had was one chat show host prancing up and down Princes Street asking anyone and everyone 'How ya feeling?' Dreadful.

  6. The commentary was mind numbingly dull and banal in the extreme. So whatever good the shots of sunny, happy Scotland did round the world were doubtless more than offset by the boring platitudes and stupid descriptions by the BBC presenters. We can only hope that those watching round the world could not understand English or had the sound off, or even better provided their own commentary.

  7. Yes Subrosa. I heard a tiny bit of it on TV and switched off really because of the banality of the coverage.

    BBC Scotland is a disgrace. I often wonder if they don't do it on purpose to put our country down as compared with London (which is also poor, and biased).

    But as RMcGeddon says, it was brilliant that the world caught Scotland on a day of sunshine.

    Hope your cold is better btw......

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. As you say Munguin. Still given that Edinburgh was looking at its shiny best and completely awesome, I think that the BBC's efforts to dumb it down to their own pathetically low standards will not have done any damage.

    Most countries will have had their own commentary to put on top of whatever British footage they have used. Even if English is understood round the world by the young, most broadcasters operate in their own language.

    And you can bet the Americans had their own people there. So they won't have used the pap that the BBC put out.

    I hope it will do us some good... We need to develop our tourism; there is so much to offer, and this was an ad worth millions.

  10. PS: I hope your cold is better too!!

  11. I think Nicholas Witchell ( sp ?) the BBC 'special royal correspondent' has to be one of the most sneering little toads in the biasedBBC arsenal. He comes very close to Glen ' rhinestone cowboy' Campbell and Gordon Brewer in my opinion. He'll never match them but puts up a good fight. His commentary was abysmal. I'd love to compare his commentary if we had a visit from the grand muffti of Mecca. Fawning and eyelash fluttering I'd imagine.
    But of course impartiality is in the 'BBC genes'.
    Check out the comments in the claim made by a beeboid ( name not important the clones are all the same - it's a genetic thing). Oh and get there quick as there will be a cull of the comments soon I'd imagine.

  12. The best bit aboot the visit wis seein sae miny bonnie Saltires flyin. In fact, the only Union rag wis the yin flyin fae the army depot at the tap o the High Street. It's nae that miny year ago that Saltires were few an far atween, an if ye wantit tae fly a 'Scottish' flag ye'd be as likely tae wave a Lion Rampant. But ower the past few decades the Saltire's taen its place as the flag o' choice aw ower oor fair country. In Embra churches, hotels, shops, public buildins aw fly the Saltire noo.

    Oor country's come intae its ain at last.

    (Ah'm still gled the man's awa hame an the marathon Songs o Praise oan the telly's feenished. Wi a bit o luck the BBC's yaised up its religious obligations fer the next few years an we'll no be bothered wi the fairy-tale-hogwash fer a while. So there.)

  13. It is a source of great pride to me too Sophia to see all the Saltires flying around Scotland... and on car bumpers too (my car has three.. and what with the ones on my t shirt and the iron on ones on my jeans, I doubt anyone would take me for a Spaniard!!)

    There are flags in windows and hanging out of windows and it seems that half the population has a t shirt or a woolly hat with our flag on it.

    It was a surprise that last time I was in England, I saw George Cross flags flying there too.

    And a delight that they should take pride in being English rather than British.

    I like my flag and I like there’s. Each is subtle and beautiful in its own way. It’s a shame that when you put them together you get an over fussy, garish unpleasant mess that makes you want to close your eyes.

  14. I'm on my way now RMcGeddon!

  15. RMcGeddon

    Comment Number seven on the blog struck a chord with me...

    "7. At 5:48pm on 18 Sep 2010, healthytoes wrote:

    Genes do mutate though.

    This blog reads like bad advertising or perhaps a patronising lecture. If we, the audience, trust you - why do you have to tell us?"


  16. The few hours the Holy Father spent on Scottish soil where a time of great grace and honour for this small nation. He had something to say, of value, to everyone, from royalty to the tens of thousands in Glasgow.
    It feels good to be a Roman Catholic once again. He has renewed and restored us.

  17. I'm glad you got something out of it Anon.

    That said I do not think it was a time on honour for "this small nation". It may well have been a time of grace for the Catholics among us, and as I say I'm very happy for them.

    I sort of feel that Jesus was the one who had something of value to say. Only Jesus didn't need the variety of costumes and the red shoes and the hats, not to mention the papal plane and the palaces with treasures with more than the ordinary man could ever dream.

    He didn't have a church building; he didn’t have silver and gold candlesticks or organs. He said what he said, and that message is still there for those who want it today.

    Mr Ratzinger on the other hand is a man, with a job to do running a country and the organization which that country represents. Unfortunately, possibly because of the strange customs of that organization, celibacy among them, some of the employees of that organization have rather bizarre sexual fantasies which they are wont to act out on vulnerable members of their flock, and Herr Ratzinger has, apart from apologising seems to have taken very few steps to deal with this, either in his current job or in his last job.

    The organizations strange rules regarding contraception have also been the cause of much misery and illness over the years.

    And Herr Ratzinger was on a state visit, not a pastoral visit, so his job on this occasion was not to bring grace, but trade. We paid for this, remember.

  18. Indeed we did. As Catholics we paid twice. Once through our taxes(State part of the visit)and then again in Church collections (
    For the Masses etc)
    The job of the sucessor to Saint Peter is always to bring grace and spread hope, which he did in abundance. Anything else, even on this state visit, was secondary.Our mutual friend Jesus was very well pleased I am sure of that.
    As for all the trappings, well to my mind God always deserves the best we can produce, in terms of music, liturgy and beautiful sacramentals, which always point to him, or her!

  19. Well Anon, my humble opinion is that, as Catholics you should have paid for it all. It was not a state visit. We have not set up trade agreements; we are not selling anything to the Vatican. The Queen was dragged from her holiday to meet the Pope and was out of the palace and heading back up the road as soon as the Pope’s car had turned the corner (witnessed by the swift removal of the royal standard).

    This whole visit was arranged as a cynical ploy to buy catholic votes for Labour and Jim Murphy in particular. Why else have a state visit instead of a pastoral visit?

    Of course it failed, and it was the new SoS for Scotland, whose name escapes me, and his boss Mr Clegg, who were on hand to meet His Holiness along with the First Minister and the Queen. A waste of a day of highly paid people if you ask me and an impertinent intrusion into Her majesty’s holiday.

    You can’t invite someone to come for party political advantage and then ask them to pay for it, and it wasn’t costing Labour anything. It did however I’m sure buy a pile of Catholic votes. Not enough, but a pile.

    As for all the pomp...well, your god must be some sort of vain character if he wants all these tra la las while there are people starving and dying for the want of antibiotics worth a few Euros.

    But if you’re happy that Jesus will be up there rubbing his hands together at the amount of money the Vatican has amassed and the number of silly hats the Pope has at his disposal, then....well... you’re happy.


    PS: Did you ever read about the turning over of the money lenders’ tables?

  20. Weel said tris, ah cannae add a thing tae yer insights worth addin. Spot on!

  21. Thanks Sophia. Since I was a kid I could never understand the need for all the baubles, the robes, the art, the gold and silver. And I could never understand the hypocracy.

    They tell us that their God is omnipotent and omniscient and then they feel that it's not enough to feel their respect or love or whatever they want to call it in their hearts.

    No. They have to build big cathedrals, wear ever more elabourate gowns and pointy hats and have ever bigger choirs.

    God doesn't need all that. And guys, it won't matter a cent how much to spend on all that. If you haven't shown love and charity, god will know.