Here's what a Boycott originally was, per Parnell "When a man takes a farm from which another had been evicted you must shun him on the roadside when you meet him, you must shun him in the streets of the town, you must shun him in the shop, you must shun him in the fairgreen and in the marketplace, and even in the place of worship, by leaving him alone, by putting him in a moral Coventry, by isolating him from the rest of his country as if he were the leper of old, you must show your detestation of the crime he has committed”."

Of course, if you're shitting money like Sir Fred is, you probably don't nip down to the shops. What really needs to happen is that everybody he comes into contact lets him know what they think.

it's an awful thing to do...I think the Parnell approach might be a bit far for this type of thing - what do you do with other offenders, but the point is that you can't hurt people like Sir Fred in wallet - all you can ever do is take away their self esteem. You can't buy that!

...for robust and insightful thinking on the matter! On the esteem front, I'm not ashamed to say (and I've NEVER associated with the Daily Mail, before anyone asks) that for that reason I signed the Downing Street website's petition calling for the stripping of this guy's knighthood for 'services to banking'. It's probably the sort of thing that WOULD bother him if it were to happen (which it probably won't), even though it's meaningless in terms of financial recovery. We, the country, will be paying through our income tax, for the consequences of this man's arrogance and incompetence for literally decades. Even if his pension is somehow challenged by law and clawed back it's a meaningless amount in the grand scheme, but then sometimes it's the principle of pursuing the perpetrators that counts. Same argument for continuing to hound elderly Nazi war criminals. Yes, I view Goodwin in a similar light: shameless, unrepentent and vile.

He certainly fits The Word demographic. White male, family man, 50 years old, music fan, decent standard of living and (crucially) plenty of time on his hands.

I have to admit that I don't have the same thoughts as most about Sir Fred. After all, I really believe that no-one would give back their pension pot. He negotiated a salary & termination package and this was included. Not his fault. He might have made a pig's ear of what he was supposed to have been doing, but I don't feel he was dishonest. Certanly not in the way Robert Maxwell (also KBE) stitched up the Mirror pensioners. And certainly not to be compared to a Nazi.

....but I believe there are 55 million suspects.

It's just his misfortune that he's become the tabloid face of the credit crunch.

I wonder if those who did this wondered for a minute if his kids were at home when they carried out this pathetic attack?

Slash his pension, strip him of his knighthood, pursue him in the courts by all means, but I don't agree with vandalising anybody's home or property.

...and I agree indeed about it being impossible to justify when looked at in terms of the law, effects on kids if at home, etc. Nevertheless, I would be lying - as I said - if my gut feeling (not my considered, head-over-heart response) was not 'serves him right'. But I'm quite serious when I compare him to a Nazi. Is it not telling that these bankers who play God by gambling on worthless futures with our money - OUR money, remember, not theirs - seem to be referred to by financial journos as 'Masters of the Universe'. If that doesn't sound Aryan I don't know what does.

Banks SHOULD be places where you or I can deposit our money for safekeeping - that, in essence, is what they're for. But somehow the balance shifted and it became impossible, practically, to exist in today's world without having to have a bank account - so there's no longer really a choice - and, worse, bankers became nothing more than over-paid gamblers using the capital that others had given them (to keep safe or to invest within very cautious parameters) to throw into crazy multi-billion pound Ponzi schemes and worthless derivatives. And somehow society has allowed their world to have created these monstrous all-but-automatic bonus schemes where you just sit on your a**e, p*** away billions of your customers money, wait for the government to bail you out and then sail off into the sunset with a vast pension (which, contrary to what has been said above, could and should - much of it being discretionary and, I guess, awarded him on the sly by his cronies within RBS while Lord Myners was frantically trying to organise the public take-over of the bank he'd wrecked - in Fred's case have been substantially smaller than it is.

No, I can honestly say that - while I would not advocate extra-legal retribution of any kind - I wish this man nothing but ill luck during the rest of his life, in however that manifests itself. And I don't feel in any way morally compromised in that.

So that's a decent first point for me.

Regarding his pension, he should be getting no more (and possibly less) stick than the remuneration board who gave him the deal. I've certainly never told an employer that they were paying me too much. I wouldn't expect him to either.

Yes, I think he was paid more than he is worth and also, I think he was pretty rotten at his job (certainly in the last few years at least). But I would expect Word bloggers to be a little less tabloid in singling out one idiot when there are many in the banking industry (and at RBS) still drawing big salaries.

... but without physically injuring him. Wreck his property, he got it dishonestly, but don't wreck him. Or his family. But his property is fair game. Hell if I lived in Edinburgh I'd have tried to raise an angry mob earlier.

have been made a scapegoat for the whole financial disaster. Despite the fact that pretty much every boardroom of every bank in the country is staffed with people just the same as him, or maybe even worse. I have no love for this man and his ilk, but who in their right mind is going to answer the question "Seven hundred grand a year pension alright for you mate, and a three million quid lump sum?" with "Ah, no thanks. Seems a bit excessive to me."

Not me, that's for sure.

and saying that there's plenty more like him in other boardrooms doesn't make his behaviour any less disgusting.
I'm amazed that it's taken this long for something like this to happen.

RBS's craven cowardice in the face of animal rights nutterdom led to them withdrawing banking facilities from Huntingdon Life Sciences. That unleashed a shitstorm of violence and intimidation against those involved in medical research and testing that is only now being brought under control.

And now here's an (ex)RBS exec getting a taste of what their gutless behaviour inflicted on others.

That doesn't make it right, mind. Just funny.

Working, as I used to, on RBS premises in Bristol, we were forewarned of a visit from Sir Fred about a month prior to it actually occurring. Suddenly, the lifts in the foyer were working, the sad, tired, pot plants replaced, the catering staff in matching uniforms, worn carpet replaced. Even the interior of the building was repainted, though hilariously, only up to 6 feet from the floor (I guess it would have cost more to have the decorators use ladders) and of course, the paint didn't exactly match.

I heard the sum of 110,000 bandied about when discussing how much our facilities, who never had money for anything, had spent.

Come the day, Sir Fred appears, avoids a floor walk, and turns down a meal prepared by our caterers. Luckily, he'd brought his own piece of salmon down from Scotland. And a chef to cook it.

...but vandalise a house and terrify his family? No thanks.

I have nothing against Fred's family, but I wonder what his kids will think of him when they grow up? 'Good old dad, he shafted the country, cost people their jobs and became the figurehead of a failed industry that was rotten to the core - someone to be proud of'. Or will they grow up with people, time and again, saying to them 'You're not related to that smug b******d who brought the country to its knees and thought he deserved a fat payoff'?

It's worth remembering that John Profumo - who merely had an affair that embarrassed his political party in the 60s - spent decades of his life thereafter 'atoning', clearly to his own conscience, for this episode by working very quietly, tirelessly and in a genuinely hands-on way for homeless charities. Now there WAS a man with dignity and a sense of honour, who felt he made a mistake that impacted on others and opted to give something back to society.

To answer the 'what would you do if it was your pension, mate'? rhetorical question that some have posed above I could honestly, categorically say that if I had caused the destruction and pain that Fred has (and his crimes are far from victimless - he has, essentially, stolen a few pence - on income tax over the next decade - from everyone in this country, aside from the wider implications for confidence/the economy)I would hand it back. (Remember IF he'd been sacked he would be eligible for £27,000pa in pension - surely enough for anyone to live on?) If it was me I simply couldn't live with myself otherwise, and even at that would spent the rest of my life wracked with guilt and regret at my actions. I'm 100% serious - and I'm sure a lot of other Word readers would, if in the situation described, similarly not be comfortable walking away with a smug grin and a truly obscene reward for failure.

But then the likes of me, with that kind of conscience, never get anywhere. I've just done a bit of mental arithmetic and I realise that Fred will make, in one year as a retired economy-wrecker, more than I will earn in my ENTIRE working lifetime. That's a sobering thought. If I believed for a moment that society truly valued a man like that more than the kind of person I - and I'm sure 99% of us - try to be, then I'd be as well just going out and throwing myself off a bridge. What would be the point of persevering? For this - for what he represents (not that he is, as others have said, in any way solely 'to blame') - I firmly believe that he should be held in opprobrium, pilloried, hounded and pursued by every legal means possible to achieve something which most of society can identify as at least some kind of retribution. In the end, they got Al Capone for tax evasion when they couldn't make his other crimes stick - but everyone knew that justice for those other crimes was being served. I sincerely hope something - jay-walking, drink driving, anything - will one day give Fred a criminal record. And maybe make his esecutive class international travelling just that little bit more bothersome. And so some kind of moral justice will be done.

by Robert Peston

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/03/will_obama_...

If there were any potential liability and if it were to rest with Royal Bank's former directors or with Sir Fred himself, they would probably be protected under the specialist insurance policy taken out by all directors of big companies, what's known as "directors and officers insurance" (D&O).

This is insurance that protects directors against the financial consequences of their boo-boos.

Which insurance company was a global market leader in D&O cover?

You guessed it: AIG, the crumbling insurance giant, recipient of almost $173bn of financial support from US taxpayers, and 80% owned by the US state.

about where we are as a society when something like this can happen and still people try to defend the guy, whether directly or otherwise. It's precisely this reaction which makes them think that they can fuck us all and get away with it. I'm very much a peace loving person, but the way we are all insidiously brainwashed is staggering. It's at the stage now where we don't even realise what we have become. Let's be clear about this, he doesn't give a fuck about any single other person outside of his circle [and probably not much about them, unless they are useful]. We are all less than scum. No one with an ounce of decency could have done this and that's precisely why he got where he did. And the really sad thing is that it has happened before and it will happen again. I'd like to end by saying he deserves everything that's coming to him, but unfortunately that's gonna be a long and prosperous life.

My rational response is that any form of destructive vandalism is inherently wrong, does nothing to make Sir Fred pay for his greed, doesn't redistribute any wealth to the poor, and only drags the perpetrator down to his level of moral pondscum.

And yet, and yet... isn't this wretched villain a special case? I'm not suggesting he's the only one, but c'mon, isn't he very obviously guilty of a giant crime against society? If he can't legally be sanctioned for what he's done, then perhaps a life made miserable (or at the very least inconvenient) is the next best thing. I want this person to realise, every day, that millions of ordinary people bear him serious ill will. I want him to to be troubled by his conscience. A wanton act of destruction on your car and your house is no substitute for real justice, Sir Fred, but it makes the point. Watch your back.

banker to screw up and he won't be the last. If he hasn't broken any laws then that should be the end of it. If you start advocating vigilante justice you're on a very slippery slope.

According to the chip wrappers it's a group of anti-capitalists who are targetting fat-cat bankers (that rhymes with...)

I don't agree with them but can't join the string-em-brigade either because there was a time in the last year when I would have gladly gone to my ex-branch of RBoS and put a brick through their window for the way the behaved.

According to a story on Radio 4 there are 2 test cases being taken to court by people who were hounded by RoBberS to a point they contemplated suicide. One died of leukemia but was still being rung up day and night while undergoing treatment. A similar thing happened to my wife, hence my anger.

Perhaps the Queen should take away the Royal R, Fred's folly of a knighthood and Gordon's gonads.

I can´t justify or condone the violence done to this man´s property. If we do, we start on a very slippery slope. And you know they only lead downhill.
Stripping him of his knighthood is fair enough, blackballing him from the local golf-club too, but sticks and stones do break bones.

Interesting. While we're all pondering the moral maze of vigilante-ism, extra-legal retribution, golf-club ostracisms and 'special case' scenarios there's a thread over at The Independent talking about 1968 styled revolution of which the pursuit of Fred is but the beginning. Who'd have thought Independent bloggers were so exciteable?

Still, we go through a law-abiding life feeling often as downtrodden and conflicted as Clint Eastwood in 'Unforgiven', so the prospect - even in one's imagination - of thinking, 'Ah, what the hell...' and kicking in the doors of Little Bill's saloon and blowing away all the worthless excuses for humanity therein is kind of empowering. And the fact that one has the will NOT to put that pleasing pipedream into effect is empowering in its own way: moral high-ground, not sinking to their level.

But then genuine popular revolutions really do happen when society, en masse, feels that 'enough is enough' in terms of corruption, injustice and other dissatisfactions with the way countries/economies are being run (usually 'into the ground'). I see no reason why Britain should be regarded as immune from such an eventual path. Unlikely, yes, but hardly impossible. If Fred was 'first against the wall' I wouldn't be one of the guys pulling a trigger. But far be it for me to interfere with the will of the people.

published in Private Eye a few weeks ago. It was a list of names of various CEOs and boardmembers of high street banks, and at the bottom of the list was the name Sir Terry Wogan (yes, *the* Terry Wogan) and readers were invited to spot the odd one out.

The answer: Terry Wogan, of course. Why? Because he was the only person on the list who actually has a formal banking qualification.

... with Sir Fred's tenure at the top of RBS is the change in culture it helped generate over a period of years ... it's often been said that back in the 1990s and before, RBS was an important UK bank, a very important Scottish bank but hardly on a par with the big boys of international finance ... then Sir Fred (or plain old Fred Goodwin) came along in 1998 (deputy CEO), was instrumental in RBS's takeover of NatWest in 2000 (cutting 18,000 jobs at the two banks according to Wikipedia), then stepping up to the top job in 2001.

Thus started a jolly tale of expansion and acquisition, bouncing RBS up the world bank league table with some thrusting senior execs (Goodwin, the guys at the Global Banking & Markets division, the guy in charge of the Citizens Bank subsidiary in the USA etc) surrounded in douce old Edinburgh by old school Scottish banking gents who nearly pissed their trousers when barked at by the Masters of the Universe.

I know personally of one middle management woman, screamed at by her under-pressure boss one day and called "a cunt" to her face, while there are hints and whispers of this nasty, bullying culture now leaking out to the media ... At certain levels, this was a plainly nasty place to work, presumably because the cost of standing up the arseholes in charge was your job/salary/career.

Interesting Telegraph article here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/5025315/RBS-w...

For the record, I don't condone the attack on Goodwin's Edinburgh house - his family don't deserve that and it's a bit of an adolescent reaction I think ... but the stress, misery, illness, depression and humiliation caused by Goodwin's tenure at RBS makes a broken window pale into near insignificance ... I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that some insider actually kept a diary and blows the human cost of Goodwin's RBS "economic miracle" right across the redtops one day very soon.

...whaddaya know, the hope expressed above that perhaps the best non-vigilante moral justice we could expect for Fred 'Uttermost of B*****ds' Goodwin is that he be shunned at his golf club is ACTUALLY HAPPENING. I see from today's Times that he has been taken off the waiting list for the prestigious Royal & Ancient Golf Club at St Andrews after protests from members. Even rich people, it seems, have moral indignation at the guy. There's still a possibility he'll be stripped of his knighthood too.

There is a God.

or it may be possible that:

a) the good denizens of the R&A wish to avoid unsought attention from those "awful media types"

b) they wish to avoid unsought attention from those proponents of direct action who are handy with a half-brick or keep a chisel handy.

c) they have to said to Sir Fred "look, old boy, bit tricky at the mo - pop back in a year or so when the fuss has blown over and we'll see what we can do. Of course, a small donation to The Greenkeepers Fund might help..."

or most probably because:

d) they've realised that old Sir Fred is not likely to be much use to them anymore

...column: 'You can never be too cynical'.

Whatever the reason - moral outrage or self-interest or a bit of both - I take great delight in even this morsel of micro-justice.

Incidentally, Scots folk icon Karine Polwart has a FANTASTIC new song, in her current live repertoire, about bankers: 'A Pack Of Lies And A House Of Cards'. A velvet-gloved kick the groin for Fred and his scumbag associates. Won't do any good obviously, but it's a killer tune, a load of exquisitely razor-sharp couplets and heartening nonetheless...