The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Co-ordinating the mob

Posted on August 17, 2020 by

If you didn’t already know that the BBC were going to run a character-assassination hatchet job on Alex Salmond tonight (and another one tomorrow), you could surmise it easily enough from the state of the Scottish media in the last few days.

We’ve almost lost count of the attack pieces on the former First Minister in the run-up to the show, from specially-commissioned opinion polls to conveniently-timed releases of allegations of unspecified “bullying” during his leadership and highly selective leaks from the documentary itself.

But it’s today’s Daily Record that dredges the depths of the journalistic sewer with a barrel and then scrapes the very bottom of it for the grubbiest, oiliest sludge it can find.

Because the paper chooses today to drag up the case of “disgraced” former MSP Mark McDonald again and his supposed sexual harassment of an SNP staffer, to whom it gives a 1200-word interview in an attack it explicitly links to the Salmond case, even though Salmond was completely acquitted on all charges.

It’s not clear why the staffer would feel the need to voice support for women who a jury decided were lying about an innocent man, and thereby making it harder for genuine victims of sexual assault and rape to secure convictions in future. Nor is it clear why she considers them to be “brave”, since all of them are still – like her – protected by anonymity and have continued to smear Salmond with impunity since the verdict.

(Although the staffer, who worked for James Dornan MSP and who we’ll call Woman Z, is in reality about as anonymous as the movie star in this quiz question from a classic episode of Family Guy. Literally everyone in Scottish politics knows who she is.)

It’s perhaps worth reminding ourselves at this point that the image below is literally the ENTIRETY of the “sexual harassment” that McDonald was adjudged to have subjected Woman Z to, for which he had his entire career and reputation destroyed.

According to the Record story, that innocuous joke about an autocorrect error left her “crying myself to sleep” because it made her feel “sexualised and ­worthless” – an implied slur that might raise an eyebrow from anyone who’s ever seen her Twitter feed, which comprises dozens and dozens and dozens of selfies of Woman Z pouting at the camera with Botoxed lips through an inch of make-up in outfits and poses that Kim Kardashian would consider a little unsubtle.

(McDonald’s text made literally no reference whatsoever to her, or her appearance, or her sexuality or anything else. He made a joke about his phone’s spellchecker.)

But none of that matters so long as it can be in some way thrown into the desperate battle against Alex Salmond, a private citizen with absolutely no political role and yet who still terrifies the Unionist media almost as much as he plainly terrifies the current leadership of his former party.

The Holyrood inquiry into the attempted unlawful framing of Salmond by the Scottish Government and civil service formally gets under way today, with both entities having done everything in their power to frustrate and undermine it.

And neither the slew of newspaper stories nor the broadcasting of the documentaries – both produced and fronted by people known to be deeply and profoundly antagonistic towards Salmond – are, of course, coincidences of timing.

Because at her moment of greatest need the entire Scottish establishment is circling the wagons to protect Nicola Sturgeon, who they may not like but who they now quite unmistakeably regard as the Union’s best hope for survival. Readers should prepare for tonight’s show-trial with that thought very much in their minds.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 17 08 20 12:57

    Co-ordinating the mob | speymouth

193 to “Co-ordinating the mob”

  1. Jill Sharpe says:

    I wonder if anyone will tell us the identities of the women involved – surely if the person is resident abroad they will not be in any danger of prosecution.

  2. A C Bruce says:

    They’re scum.

  3. Josef Ó Luain says:

    Our sleepy Scottish idyll is, by the day, becoming a more dangerous place to live. “In who’s interest?”, needless to add, is a rhetorical question.

  4. Andrew Davidson says:

    @Jill Sharpe

    Anyone that does that would 100% find themselves at risk of prosecution. By nature people here have links to the UK so you could be bet there would be an awkward experience getting back into the country.

    You can find out yourself at least a couple from the pitifully transparent article from that Dani Garavelli. Of course if you breath a word of what you figure out you’re in for it though.

  5. Caroline Wilson says:

    Murray Foote – the words spring unbidden to mind, for entirely arbitrary reasons naturally.

  6. holymacmoses says:

    Rummery says they were ALL interviewed BEFORE the trial took place. Was it legal for the BBC to interview complainants and witnesses before they had given testimony in court?
    AND I do believe that my assessment still stands. I have yet to meet anyone who didn’t believe Mr Salmond had been set up. Even the people who hated him saw/see him as a politically driven animal and many are now supporting him against the media onslaught. The BIG engine has it wrong and Nicola Sturgeon’s parochial imagination will not be able to save her from retribution for her spiteful avaricious desire to BE the ONE and remain secure with her own little bluebackground overladen by the crimson cross of servitude.

  7. Bob Costello says:

    Thank goodness there are still a few voices like Wings and Craig Murray out there.

  8. Alec Lomax says:

    Remember to pay your TV license, folks. Especially you over-75s.

  9. jfngw says:

    Watching the media trying to stitch up someone already found innocent leaves me ‘absolutely shocked’ and ‘like a punch in the stomach’.

    This was supposed to be the programme celebrating his prosecution, it’s been adapted to become ‘he was a bully’. The BBC are endlessly adaptable, and they don’t want to waste all that footage they spent so long gathering before the verdict, it just needs re-imagined.

  10. Fireproofjim says:

    Kirsty Wark has never hidden her hatred of Alex Salmond and Independence. She is also a bosom pal of the Labour Party and especially Jack McConnell with whom she and her husband would go on holiday.
    Her hatred was so obvious at the time of the referendum that it even (gasp) embarrassed the BBC, so much so that her own boss actually apologised for her “rude and dismissive” behaviour during a Newsnight interview with Alex.
    I wrote to the BBC asking why they considered her to be an appropriate presenter of this programme. I have had no reply.
    So bear that in mind tonight.

  11. N. Holmes says:

    Woman Z is a brainless bimbo airhead who appears to buy into North American chav culture (Kardashian style). She even has a ‘trans kid’ who she has paraded in the media, presumably as a way of signalling how woke and trendy she is. A clueless dangerous arsehole who should not really be anywhere near politics.

  12. Frank Waring says:

    I’m an English longterm resident in Scotland, who became a convinced supporter of independence for Scotland in the early days of the referendum campaign. I’ve never been a supporter, still less a member of the SNP, and I have no interest, still less knowledge, of SNP internal politics. I’ve never thought that Mr Salmond is the sort of person I would get on with as a close friend, though I greatly admire his skill as a political debater.
    But I don’t think that I shall be able to bring myself to listen to the one programme, or to watch the other, for fear of the angry frustration these would bring. It almost makes me feel sick now, to realise what political life in the UK — above all, in the BBC — has come to.
    I’m not expressing this very well, but that’s because I’m too wrought up about it.

  13. kapelmeister says:

    Remember, in BBC Sturgeonworld Alex Salmond is guilty until proved innocent and starting the next day he’s guilty again!

  14. Leigh says:

    Starting to think all these, “incidents”, were developed and created by the pretendy, gradualist, careerist rogues….

  15. Kenny says:

    The only thing that slightly troubles me is Alex Salmond saying that the first minister has to fight coronavirus and he will be saving any revelations for later.

    I can understand if there are legal barriers.

    However, nothing is more important than democracy. Why are people acting as if the Scottish constitution says we are an autocracy. If our elected heads have done ANYTHING wrong or illegal, we need to be told.

    Does the Scottish constitution also say “Scots are too wee, poor and stupid to form the executive, with the sole exception of Nicola Sturgeon”? As if there is only one person who can run this country!

    I can also understand if we have a deal with God that there will NEVER be another virus or plague or health scare. But there will be loads more in the future. What happens when we sort ourselves out from the economic effects of Covid, probably some time after 2030… then something else appears?

    Finally, how can the SNP not have ANY PRIDE in themselves or their country and not refuse to interact with the BBC at all after everything that went on in 2014? It does not have to be RT, it could be a European or Middle Eastern broadcaster (or all of them).

  16. John Hamill says:

    I still can’t work out who Woman Z is. I must be thick.
    Maybe someone will DM me who knows. 😉

  17. GeeH says:

    That Miss Z is an attention seeking narcissist who also appears to suffer from trans Munchausens by proxy, eagerly promoting that she had a trans male to female child on social media but becoming strangely silent when the poor child desisted and decided he was a gay male after all. Thank god she didn’t manage to get him on the hormones and surgery.

  18. schrodingers cat says:

    the establishment is doing an snp bad proramme, nothing new there.

    how is this anything to do with NS?

  19. iain mhor says:

    holymacmoses @11:43

    A fair question about that interview.

    Your last comment also reminded me that the Union Flag in Scotland, was once used in the opposite – the Saltire surmounted on the Cross of St George.

  20. MightyS says:

    Makes you wonder just why the SG donated a few million to the newspaper industry in Scotland a few weeks ago, doesn’t it.

  21. cynicalHighlander says:

    I just hope that this backfires big time.

  22. Heaver says:

    Frank Waring you express yourself very well, and apart from being Scottish I think our thoughts are pretty much the same.

    However I will attempt to listen to the Garivelli piece, probably in a mood of fascinated horror, much like when I watch Anne Widdicome.

  23. P says:

    Wark is 65
    Just goes to show that spite is very aging

  24. Sharny Dubs says:

    Politics is the ultimate refinement of war while avoiding the deaths and carnage that actual war would inevitably create.

    However politics should be practiced within the confines of the law (international or domestic) If it exceeds the confines of law then those guilty of transgressions should be punished according to the law.

    Of course the art of politics is to see how close you can get to the limits of the law without actually transgressing it.

    Salmond was found NOT GUILTY in a court of law, any attempt to overturn that verdict should be pursued through the appropriate channels unsung the appropriate procedures.

    Those who seek to overturn that verdict by any other means IMHO are themselves breaking the law and should face the consequences.

    Of course we live in the real world where influence can be used without consequence, or so it would seem.

    We should not allow this to happen.

  25. The bbc and the media had A.S. Guilty before his trial and are desperate to try to still find him so you see the rules do not apply to the ruling classes. Only to us the mugs who put up with them and when we do get our freedom we will not forget the reporters etc., who have betrayed us I have a little list ??? As I said before they receive their betrayal money under the guise of wages a curse on them all

  26. Beaker says:

    @holymacmoses says:
    17 August, 2020 at 11:43 am
    “Rummery says they were ALL interviewed BEFORE the trial took place. Was it legal for the BBC to interview complainants and witnesses before they had given testimony in court?”

    I would imagine that as long as they did not broadcast the interviews then there would not be an issue. Would it not be the same as discussing it with, say, a friend? Tracie Andrews (road rage killer) I believe was interviewed by a journalist whilst waiting for the jury’s verdict.

  27. SilverDarling says:

    This will go on forever.

    I remember Alex Massie, I think, saying before the trial that even if Alex Salmond was found not guilty there was no way back for him. That is what this is all about, smearing him so that nothing he can say or do is credible. They could not forgive that he went to RT and gave informed opinions or that people wanted to speak to him. And crucially, they could not allow him to take over the Scotsman newspaper and that is why the press were so eager to rejoice at his arrest.

    Despite everything we know about these women and how they colluded to create this narrative they still are given a platform. They want to destroy any legacy he has now for their own aims. They knew the burden of proof was not met but they wanted to punish him for supposed bad behaviour. Not for a serious sexual assault because we know that did not even happen.

    We know their ‘story’. There is nothing mature or dignified about their behaviour. They are not doing this for any high or lofty ideals. To achieve, certainly in some cases, revenge for their thwarted ambition, the others were prepared to add weight to a flimsy and malicious accusation possibly sending him to prison for the rest of his life.

    If I were a man involved with any of these women I would be utterly terrified.

  28. Stuart MacKay says:

    The good thing about having all the wagons circled is that they can all be set of fire at one and the settlers have nowhere to run.

    I think it was Craig Murray that mentioned in an earlier thread that the BBC might trying to kill two birds with one stone and take down the First Minister at the same time.

  29. Graha says:

    I know who you mean by Woman Z, and may I be a chauvinist pig and say Mark McDonald should have gone to Specsavers.

  30. Witchy says:

    I must be dense. I followed the trial via Craig Murray, and I was unable to identify any of these women.
    Maybe it was because to me these women were non-entities so didn’t ring any bells. They still are.
    This further persecution of AS seems like a personal vendetta from frightened minds, who still fear him, his achievements, and worry that he might make a come-back to politics. No truths will be drawn, the facts were covered in court. He was found not guilty, and it seems the outcome angered some.
    The ‘programme’ is a further cruel attempt to destroy the man himself. Blood sports!
    I’d rather watch paint dry than watch it.

  31. mike says:

    Woman Z also has a chummy twittter relationship with Miss Leeze.

    Colour me surprised.

  32. PhilM says:

    Publishing used to be a very ‘leaky’ business in the past…is Alex Salmond’s book going through the final editing process or something? Are people getting their retaliation in first on the pitch of public opinion?
    Or is it time to go back to YouTube and watch old videos of The Jam and try to forget that Neil Findlay’s a fan…?

  33. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “the establishment is doing an snp bad proramme, nothing new there.

    how is this anything to do with NS?”

    Please stop being so bloody stupid.

  34. Athanasius says:

    @Jill Sharpe.

    Yes, a person resident abroad (and unfortunately, England is not — yet — abroad) would be beyond the vindictiveness of the unionist establishment (ie, the SNP as it is currently established), but the person resident in the UK who’s board it was published on would not be.

  35. Fran says:

    Wouldn’t lower myself to watch it tonight. Its understandable to see unionists in such a frenzy trying every dirty trick in the book, but so called independence supporters makes me sick to my gut.

  36. Bob Mack says:

    Not guilty from a court means that the accused in law and in fact” has been cleared of any charges against them.

    Yet stil! We have the BBC playing innuendo with that judgement from the trial. They allow the women a platform to broadcast to the nation, and get I see no such platform given to the man found innocent of the charges made by these women.

    Trial by BBC staff is the opposite to justices we know it. Trial b biased BBC staff is even worse. Wark has history and hatred as her witnesses.

    There are many great areas in determining a person’s guilt, but our legal system is designed to let the jury weigh up these areas and reach a connclusion. They did. Not guilty.

    This is utterly unacceptable that our justice system albeit good or bad is utilised as a sideshow for sleazey implications, but more importantly for political gain to opportunists

    Damn them all.

  37. holymacmoses says:

    Two Rivers media run by Kirsty Wark’s husband ALEX CLEMENTS has had two prominent sources of income recently

    Firstly the Scottish Government: Clements writes in the introduction to the company online that

    “The business is also perfectly aligned with the ambitions of the Scottish Government and new agency Screen Scotland which has just been given additional funds of £10m to boost the sector.”

    Second source of funding Noble Grossart
    Angus Grossart
    serves as a non-executive chairman of Sunday Mail Ltd. and Scottish Daily Record;
    That newspaper stands to lose a lot of money should Mr Salmond’s lawyers prove that they have behaved inappropriately.

    Add to this, the UK WM Govmnt, via the BBC, making a programme and interviewing witnesses and complainants (according to one of the people taking party, Kirsteen Rummery) everybody was interviewed BEFORE the trial and Ms Wark says that 5 complainants were interviewd.)
    I think perhaps a lot of cutpurses have their backs to the wall defending their wallets, their jobs, their reputations (ha-ha-ha) and perhaps even their freedom.

    Salmond & Independence is a whale being chased by a ship of Dickheads who didn’t learn anything from Melville.
    Look at Westminster, the Labour party, the Conservative party, the SNP, the state of newspapers, the state of the BBC

    I’m backing Salmond here:-)

  38. ben madigan says:

    I hope some kind soul will put the programme on You Tube for the Scottish Diaspora, the international guests on Mr Salmond’s programme and the rest of the world

  39. Tannadice Boy says:

    If I was Alex Salmond I would be taking out an interim interdict out this afternoon to prevent transmission of this documentary. Alex has been defending his own box for a good while. Time to move further up the pitch and exert pressure on the opposition’s goal.

  40. iain mhor says:

    Alex Lomax @11:47am

    I’m not sure they all will. My folks dropped a bombshell question the other day ‘Can we stop paying the TV licence fee?’ Colour me surprised!
    Not something a douce pair would ever have contemplated and countenanced before. They were not enamoured of revoking the free licence and it was ‘a lot of rubbish anyway’.

    Mind you, a lot of people overlook the errr.. elderly’s capacity to lock onto single issues, as opposed to wide politics. For example, I think I’m safe in saying; that any party who took away, or was responsible for removing free bus passes, or prescriptions would find themselves dead in the water.

    On the other hand, Covid is a real issue for the elderly and tuning in daily to ‘see what Nicola says’ seems to be a ritual among many, from what I gather – seeming to cut across any political leanings – which may well account for her enhanced ratings.

    So it’s a demographic well played to – if the idea is to turn more conservative & Conservative votes to the SNP. Whether that will translate to potential Indy votes? Well again, anecdotally, apparently yes – if the word from the Womens Guild is anything to go by.

    Anyway, I covered the pros & cons – having already hooked them up to get the Kirk service livestreams; they have taken suspiciously quickly to online media.
    It’s been twenty questions about ‘so-and-so gets this and can do that and was telling me about yon, they young ones (70’s!) are that clued up’

    I underestimate highly social pensioners at my peril indeed. Covid has meant, that to stay in touch, modern online media has been embraced rapidly and with it a whole new source of ‘information’ – I forget that.
    They are surprisingly well informed about the Alex Salmond case too – I don’t think this will go well for the Beeb – ‘a lot of rubbish!’

  41. G H Graham says:

    This is nothing more than an obvious & desperate attempt by the British Establishment to save the Union.

    Only the gullible or desperate could possibly believe Sturgeon has any ambition to achieve independence during this term or indeed the next, assuming she even returns to office in 2021.

    A quick search yesterday of the SNP’s website could find neither a proposed written constitution for a free & democratic Scotland nor a road map for a referendum either, beyond some vague suggestions of some sort of legislation at some time in the future. In essence, a carrot to dangle in front of those still committed to the cult of Nicola.

    Rational analysis suggests then, that it is Salmond, beyond anyone else who the British Establishment views as a real threat to the status quo. Having yet to declare his permanent retreat from politics, they fear a second front, led by Salmond via an alternative independence party would rock the boat & potentially gain such a pro-independence majority in Holyrood, that the SNP would look pompously stupid if it failed to execute what it was supposed to represent in the first place.

    If a second independence party swept up the list votes, Holyrood’s landscape would mean few if any pro Unionist MSP’s left, making it impossible to explain or defend the profound lack of action by Sturgeon & her kinky clique. The SNP’s hands would be forced & the British Establishment would not longer be able to depend on their puppet pontificator from Irvine to prevaricate from one nanny state term to another.

    It seems then that with help from the BBC, the British are putting all their eggs in one basket & lobbing the entire contents at Salmond on the assumption that once he has been made so profoundly unelectable, it can return the status quo & carry on as before with the charade of kicking the Scottish Government at any & every opportunity.

    You may also might wonder what the Establishment has on Sturgeon or indeed Murrell that makes them so reluctant to tip the balance of momentum in Scotland’s favour. Perhaps they have just become comfortable with the lavish lifestyle, getting kicks out of nanny state interference or perhaps there’s something going on within their kinky entourage that they would rather not be mentioned in public.

    Everyone has a secret, don’t they?

  42. Lorna Campbell says:

    It seems that the women will still have anonymity, then, if the interviews took place before the trial. So, after the trial, will their interviews not be seriously dated and one-sided? Were the interviews edited to take account of the fact that Mr Salmond was acquitted? What is the point of the programme, in that case? It can only be to continue the campaign against him.

    I’m sorry to disagree, but I don’t think that even the SG has this kind of power, albeit it might be a question of ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’; somehow, I don’t think so. The SG might have been a not-so-unwitting dupe, but I sense the British State’s hand in this, and I believe Nicola Sturgeon was meant to fall with Alex Salmond, even if she was unaware of that herself.

    I’m not saying that the SG and the civil service were not at fault – patently, they were, and the SG’s unrealistic, pathological need to be seen to be above question on all public affairs is part of it – but their own hubris played right into the hands of an even more dangerous and perfidious foe, I think, just as the stupidity of the ‘wokerati’ is being played now to create division within the party.

  43. robertknight says:

    BritNat Brainwashing Channel in full attack-mode.

    We see you… and you can shove your license fee.

  44. Elmac says:

    What a disgusting society we live in. In any decent country the Alphabet women would by now have have been publicly named, shamed and prosecuted for contempt of court. The very notion that anonymity is granted for accusers in a court of law but not for the accused is offensive and now the nation’s broadcaster in set on a new trial by media of an innocent man who will be deliberately smeared again in order to totally trash his life and political aspirations. This is corruption plain and simple on the part of the establishment, their tame media and their BBC mouthpiece.

    I do not watch their drivel (no licence anyway) nor read the crap they print. I would strongly urge people to stop buying unionist rags and ditch their joke “licence” even if this means giving up live TV. Nothing works quite as well as starving these liars of cash. I would recommend doing the same with SNP subscriptions until or unless their stable is thoroughly cleansed. They are up to their necks in this.

    As someone said up thread, we need a list of the worst examples of corruption and lies and the determination to exact revenge when we have our independence from this stinking union. In the meantime I hope AS sues these women, and if possible the BBC and the media for what they have done and exacts every £ he can. Bankruptcy is the least they deserve.

  45. Allium says:

    It does have a dead horse-ish quality to it in that, like the poster up-thread said, even people who loathe AS mostly seem to see the whole thing as a rather badly executed frame up, and feel justice has been served, while not even being particularly interested any more. Yet still they persist. At this point I suppose its the last chance saloon for some of the players, and they have to see it through to the bitter end.

  46. holymacmoses says:

    Beaker 12.28
    I don’t know and I can’t find out easily. Witnesses in medical trials are advised that:

    You should not disclose confidential information to anyone who is not involved in the court proceedings, unless:

    the person the information relates to gives their consent (and there are no other restrictions or limits on sharing the information)
    you must do so by law
    you are ordered to do so by a court or tribunal
    your overriding duty to the court and the administration of justice means that you must disclose the information.

    One has to assume that Mr Salmond’s permission should have been sought, surely?

  47. holymacmoses says:

    I must agree with you Elmac 1.17pm

  48. David says:

    A good post, thanks. I had long suspected the narcissistic Miss Z was involved at some level in this murky business!

  49. winifred mccartney says:

    I cannot believe the BBC and Kirsty Wark are allowed to do this – it amounts to nothing more than trial by media.

    Can anyone recall any other person found INNOCENT in a Court of Law who has been subjected to this kind of programme.

    I sincerely hope that no one in Kirsty Warks family is accused of something found not guilty and then retried on TV. It is shameful and you have to wonder if the treatment Alex Salmond has had would have been any worse if he had been found guilty. This is what some people hoped for and have since decided – so what we will get him one way or another.

    All of this smacks of panic in the Unionist ranks and the BBC is at the top of the hit parade along with Kirsty and her cronies with their very solid labour and anti snp credentials.

    Independence is now a propaganda war and the BBC is at the front of it so we must remember how economic with the truth the BBC is. It is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Union and the Government (not the Scottish one).

  50. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “What a disgusting society we live in. In any decent country the Alphabet women would by now have have been publicly named, shamed and prosecuted for contempt of court.”

    They should – and hey, maybe still will – be prosecuted for perjury and/or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, not contempt.

  51. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    Alex Salmond is disliked and feared by some. Not a problem you are allowed to dislike and fear people however, certainb folk appear to have lied and attempted to damage Mr Salmond. Following that Mr Salmond won substantial damages, the dislikers and the fearful had to beat a retreat.

    Not content at the beating and the massive expense to the public purse the same fearful dislikers had another go resulting in 13 very serious charges libelled against Mr Salmond.

    A jury of mostly females listened to all of the evidence and cleared Mr Salmond of all charges. In such a case a reasonable person would conclude that the jury did not believe the accusers. The dislikers and the fearful had to beat a retreat.

    Not content at the beating and the massive expense to the public purse the same fearful dislikers are having another go.

    There comes a point when legal action has to be taken against these folk.

    The disappointment that there was full acquittal in the Salmond case is very clear for all to see.

    This unreasonable action against an innocent man has to be halted, those behind this need to be revealed action must be considered to stop this disgraceful harassment.

  52. schrodingers cat says:

    Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
    “the establishment is doing an snp bad programme, nothing new there.

    how is this anything to do with NS?”

    Please stop being so bloody stupid.


    ok, what proof do you have that this is orchestrated by the bbc AND nicola?

    i have seen nothing to support this “nicola” conspiracy theory. if im being stupid, feel free to post your evidence

  53. Robert Graham says:

    Even rabid twisted Unionists must be getting totally fed up with these failed attempts to in any way damage Alex Salmond , its so bloody farcical and vindictive I believe it will as usual have the opposite effect ,
    exactly the same way as all unionist propaganda over the past years has backfired , maybe we shouldn’t point this obvious error out and just let the arse wipes carry on .

    One thing that is very troubling is the way these constant attacks on Alex are going unpunished it’s one thing having anonymity it’s another thing abusing that anonymity , rather than pursuing Craig Murray for contempt perhaps the Lady Justice should be going after this choreographed vendetta that must involve some if not all the Alphabet sisters , if not all of them are involved they are all lumped together and so are complicit by association .

  54. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “ok, what proof do you have that this is orchestrated by the bbc AND nicola?

    i have seen nothing to support this “nicola” conspiracy theory. if im being stupid, feel free to post your evidence”

    (1) I made no suggestion that Sturgeon had orchestrated this documentary.

    (2) If I posted my evidence I’d go to jail, just as Craig Murray is currently risking. I’m getting really tired of people demanding I post stuff that they know perfectly well I can’t post. But I still know it, and if you choose not to believe me then that’s entirely your affair, but fuck off with the impossible demands.

    If I haven’t earned even a modicum of people’s trust in the last nine years, maybe piss off and read a website you do trust.

  55. holymacmoses says:

    Elmac 1.17 again:

    “What a disgusting society we live in. In any decent country the Alphabet women would by now have have been publicly named, shamed and prosecuted for contempt of court. The very notion that anonymity is granted for accusers in a court of law but not for the accused is offensive and now the nation’s broadcaster in set on a new trial by media of an innocent man who will be deliberately smeared again in order to totally trash his life and political aspirations. This is corruption plain and simple on the part of the establishment, their tame media and their BBC mouthpiece.”

    The consolation is that we, as a country, had a jury that could not be lied to. So the people of Scotland (Alex Salmond’s people) are good honest folk

  56. James says:

    How can this tv programme go ahead when jury found AS not guilty?

  57. Republicofscotland says:

    Very well put Stu, Mark MacDonald’s unjust character assassination continues via the British nationalist media, and I’m afraid to say the SNP have tainted this young man unfairly intentionally.

    One could almost say his grossly unjust predicament was a trial run for the other disgraceful set up of Alex Salmond by those anonymous lying complainants. Both men broke no laws that I’m aware of, yet the British media and its British nationalist agenda are intent on blackening their good names.

    I recall one British nationalist “newspaper” showing a picture of Alex Salmond along side a whole host of murders and dictators, in a disgusting attempt to link peoples minds to them with the innocent Alex Salmond.

    We must remember that it was Sturgeon and her clique that brought about the persecution of Mark MacDonald and the sham charges of Alex Salmond, in Salmond’s case they conspired beforehand to have him imprisoned for the rest of his life, the British nationalists are just following on from where Sturgeon and her clique left off.

    There was a time when Sturgeon couldn’t buy airtime on the British nationalist media especially the BBC, but now she’s the darling of the BBC, on almost every day.

    Just why would the British nationalist propaganda media channel the BBC give oodles of airtime to Sturgeon, when she’s vowed with every fibre of her being to bring independence to Scotland?

  58. Jill Sharpe says:

    I’m really surprised at you schrodingers cat I thought of anyone who comments here you would of worked out the connections.

  59. jfngw says:


    It’s easy, you change the focus of the programme, the accusers evidence is used as retrospective coverage of his behaviour. You don’t accuse him of the offences but of something else. They know exactly how to skirt the edges of the law and the likelihood of them being prosecuted by the COPFS.

  60. Michael Laing says:

    @SilverDarling at 12.41pm: I’ve seen very little mention of the reports that Alex Salmond was to be given (IIRC) the editorship of The Scotsman, and the sudden and unexplained cancellation of the deal, but I certainly noticed that the accusations against him arose very shortly afterwards and initially assumed it to be a plot to scupper that deal. If it had happened, it might have transformed the fortunes of The Scotsman as well as providing a vital voice for independence amongst the hostile unionist media. I think there may be another interesting story waiting to be told here.

  61. dakk says:

    “He’s going down”, “Guilty as sin”.

    Said before AS trial by two YES voting erudite/writers I know.

    The shite I’ve heard spoken of Alex Salmond before and after the trial.

    He was “definitely guilty”, “he did well to get away with it” from 2 Yoon customers recently.

    Many bastards in the court of public opinion had already made up their minds long before the trial or even allegations.

    Tonight’s bbc offering will only serve to further smear an innocent man.

    Of that I have no doubt whatsoever.

    They will do a job on NS while they’re at it.

  62. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “They will do a job on NS while they’re at it.”

    They won’t, I promise you.

  63. stuart mctavish says:

    Given that the witnesses in these docudrama type shows tend to be seen in shadow, a good indicator as to whether consent was given might be if the interviewees get to be represented by particularly voluptuous silhouettes..

  64. SilverDarling says:

    @Michael Laing

    I think it was more the controlling interest at board level for Johnston Press but the main financial backer withdrew as soon as the accusations came out. One might say that in order to scupper that deal something cataclysmic had to unfold – and it did.

    I’m not sure whether he would have had any editorial interest but you can bet the balance would have changed in the Scottish Press and that could not be allowed to happen.

  65. Breeks says:

    cynicalHighlander says:
    17 August, 2020 at 12:19 pm
    I just hope that this backfires big time.

    It will.

    When William Wallace was betrayed by those around him, the colonial English Establishment and their t[reacherous] House Jocks had him hung, drawn and quartered, and his mutilated body parts returned to Scotland for public display. It was terrible, humbling and shameful thing to have happened, but every ounce of that humbling shame and barbarism is England’s burden to bear in perpetuity. None of it reflects on our man Wallace. Today, over 700 years later, the man is a legend, a National icon standing taller amongst Scots than even King Robert the Bruce himself.

    What they’re trying to do to Alex Salmond might be framed in modern parameters but it’s no less bestial or vindictive in it’s intention, every inch as colonial and every inch as vile, but their intentions will be thwarted, because in 700 years, these colonial BritNats have never learned what it is that turns a good man into a great one.

    They’ve tried to make him an outlaw, just as they did with Wallace, but there is more grace and integrity in Alex Salmond’s little finger, than in all your Kirsty Warks, Sarah Smiths, Dani Garavellis, your Alphabet Conspirators, Nicola Sturgeons and Leslie Evans, and your ‘Sir’ John de Menteith types combined.

  66. Stu hutch says:

    Sadly I think nicola is complicit in stitching up alex.Mr Murrell and Macann probably set it up.but ultimately nicola gave the nod.bad points the snp will take a hit as what comes out will surprise a few and with the people involved and how they have acted. think the judiciary the police and civil service will be shown to have been currupted for political gain.good points no damage to yes movement. now need a list party pronto. we will have to vote snp for the last time.clear out at top of the snp.get someone in with referendum number one on list 2021.

  67. jfngw says:

    @Jill Sharpe

    Some of us want to see all the evidence before condemning someone. So far all I have is the evidence the Rev & Craig Murray have presented, not directly. That’s the prosecution case, I really need to hear the defence, that’s how justice is supposed to work. Otherwise it would be just be the equivalent of saying only the prosecution case against AS should have been heard and he should not be able to present a defence.

    Not sure what the defence will be though, if it is proved not to be a conspiracy involving NS then she has been duped, that just makes her look incompetent and naive, not sure which is worse.

  68. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi ben madigan at 1:05 pm.

    You typed,
    “I hope some kind soul will put the programme on You Tube for the Scottish Diaspora, the international guests on Mr Salmond’s programme and the rest of the world”

    YouTube seems to have a filter that disallows the playing of BBC content.
    If you have a Mac, you can download and install ‘Get iPlayer Automator’, which allows you to download and keep programmes, without time limit, as mp4s. More info at the link.

  69. Big Jock says:

    The media are suddenly in love with Nicola. That says it all Stu.

  70. Helen Yates says:

    Thank you for all you have done and continue to do not only for Scotland but for justice itself, as much as I am beside myself with anger at this continual vendetta against Alex Salmond I’m really hoping this might just be the catalyst to revealing the identities of these witches, they can’t remain in hiding for much longer and If there is any justice left in Scotland they will soon find themselves in the dock themselves, I can’t imagine the pain this must be causing Alex and his family and it has to hurt even more knowing that someone he trusted completey, enough to leave his party in her hands must make that pain harder to bear., let’s hope this year brings justice for the betrayal of not only Alex but also Scotland.

  71. Mike Fenwick says:

    What I am about to post has been sent to the Committee which is starting. It is NOT possible, or at least very difficult, to look at what happened and is still happening without it relating to a “stitch up” – but if you try – if this was (and it most definitely wasn’t) a genuine attempt to update codes of conduct – did it succeed in any way at that level, and if it didn’t is it further confirmation that some individuals were on a very specific mission, and the updating was nothing more than camouflage for that mission – and that allegation is confirmed by what I suggest is a “Missing Category” in the revised and still current code related to harrassment.

    Please read what follows in that way, it is an extract from a F/book page I ruN:

    “But for this post, as in the earlier one, I want to look at the procedure that I believe is current to this day and addresses: ” The Handling of Harassment Complaints” within the Scottish Parliament.

    What if it was flawed when it was implemented, and remains flawed to this day – what if there are circumstances that leave any member of staff working in the Parliament now or at any time in the future – with nowhere to turn if they have been harassed in any way.

    Start with this knowledge: Teams of people set to work to revise how such incidents should be handled and published eventually what they described as “robust procedures”.

    Those teams involved civil servants at the highest levels, others were qualified in human resources, there were lawyers both internal and external, and Unions … so everything should be ok, shouldn’t it … all the staff working now or at any time in the future can feel confident that they are 100% protected. Or can they?

    You will find 2 Categories – you will not find a third – how after all that work – and cost – could that be?

    Category 1) A Minister (Current or Former) who is a member of the party forming the current Administration.

    Category 2) A Minister (Former) who was a member of a party which formed a previous Administration.

    There is one missing Category – namely:

    A Former Minister – who is no longer a member of any political party, …. (and where it is potentially possible that the cessation of his or her membership of a political party has arisen in exactly the types of circumstances the procedure was designed to address – harassment of staff.)

  72. John Thomson says:

    Is this production a private one and just being aired or is BBC2 directly responsible

  73. Robert Louis says:

    This is HOW an out of control state, abuses a previously respected public broadcaster, by turning it into a machine for personal vendettas against political opponents. The lying, propagandist, anti-Scotland BBC, at it again. The BBC, Scotland’s greatest enemy.

    Alex Salmond was found innocent by a mainly FEMALE JURY, in a trial run by a FEMALE judge. This all within a febrile atmosphere of the mainstream media daily smearing Alex and committing contempt of court, with impunity. Yet still, the cabal of conspirators try to exact their bitter, bitter, twisted vendetta against an innocent man. And, by all accounts, it comes from the very top of the SNP.

    Do ordinary women in Scotland really believe that this is what court anonymity for sexual offence witnesses was designed for?? So, even when the suspect is found wholly innocent, they can carry on their politics and career-fuelled vendetta against that same INNOCENT man, all under the cover of anonymity?? Really?

    Mr. Salmond, we have your back. The people of Scotland are with you. These spiteful little people will be remembered for exactly what they are. History will not be kind to them, and Kisty Wark will likely be forgotten.

    You, on the other hand, will be remembered as the man, the leader, the visionary, who, against the odds, took the SNP and Scotland to the cusp of Independence, and removing England’s chains. Who knows, time will tell, you may still lead this country to independence, now we know Nicola Sturgeon is finished – and she really (deservedly) is. The independence movement has an urgent vacancy – only real leaders should apply.

  74. Republicofscotland says:

    “Today, over 700 years later, the man is a legend, a National icon standing taller amongst Scots than even King Robert the Bruce himself.”

    Indeed Breeks, Wallace unlike Good King Robert never swore fealty to King Edward Ist at anytime. On his betrayal and subsequent transportation to London, Edward the Ist couldn’t even bring himself to meet Wallace face to face all six foot seven of him.

  75. highseastim says:

    I hate that Daily Record with a passion, if its not kissing the bahookie of the Labour Party its kissing the bahookie of the sevconians!!

  76. Robert Louis says:

    Breeks at 206pm,

    Indeed, and when you enter Edinburgh castle, their are two people either side of the entrance, Sir William Wallace and King Robert the Bruce. England may have butchered William Wallace in an act of utter depravity, but his record speaks for itself.

    Both men are heroes in Scotland. As is Alex Salmond.

    As for this telly programme, having discussed it with a couple of non political female friends, I think it may very well backfire. Not sure it is going to achieve the effect they want. As one said, ‘he was found innocent, so why are they still allowed to say all these things against him?’


  77. katherine hamilton says:

    Hi Rev
    Maybe 2 things on this farrago of nonsense.
    Firstly as the “Court” ie the Judge made the contempt of court order could the evidence of jigsaw identification in the MSM not be sent directly to her, the judge, to inform her of a potential breach of said order. They live cloistered lives, I know, but could anyone, say a former Justice Secretary, bring it to her attention to be investigated? Or do you have to spend even more zillions and actually speak to the “Court”.

    Secondly Westminster Parliamentary privilege remains a thing. Could not an MP, on the back of tonight’s undoubted mince, raise it in said Parliament, name the lot of them as being in the public interest, and be exempt from prosecution?

    Sorry Mr. McKaskill, looking at you again.

  78. stonefree says:

    @ Stu hutch at 2:08 pm

    I think you are correct in the characters plus another a Leanne person, I wouldn’t like to be McCann , when it hits the fan, he’s going to get the blame His is after all the compliance officer

  79. Lorna Campbell says:

    Dakk: if this interview was held BEFORE the trial, and BEFORE the women gave their evidence, this stinks to the high heavens. If it was edited to take account of the verdict, that stinks. I really don’t know about NS, but I do believe that, if Mr Salmond had gone down, she would have fallen, too. I don’t doubt that there was some kind of co-ordinated plan to ‘get Salmond’ but was NS at the heart of it?

    For starters, his supporters would have withdrawn all support from her. That the inertia of the Scottish government might lead Westminster and Whitehall to believe that she is better kept in place, I can just see, but I cannot think that the SG itself has the power to compel the entire media and, especially, the BBC to do a hatchet job on anyone to the extent that is apparently being done, without some bigger player being involved.

    As soon as the charges were brought, the entire media fell on Mr Salmond like a pack of wolves, and even then, there were veiled suggestions that NS might be implicated in some way. It would take a conspiracy between all the women, the higher echelons of the SG, the civil service, the Crown Prosecution Service, the print media, the BBC and the Unionists to enable this, and that’s without Westminster and Whitehall. Or was this a spiteful and vindictive attempt to bring down a man who was the only likely alternative candidate for leading the country to independence? Or was it just a spiteful and vindictive attempt at payback? So, cui bono? Who benefits?

  80. William Habib Steele says:

    It is rather clear from the reports of the criminal trial in the Media that the Alphabet women lied in court. It’s also clear from the reports in the media that some of those women committed conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. They should be prosecuted.

    Those women are in positions of trust in the Scottish Government, or the Civil Service, or the SNP. They should all have been fired. It’s therefore in the public interest that their names should be made known. What can be done to overturn Judge Dorian’s decree of anonymity?

    Perhaps someone living overseas will write an article for the Washington Post or the New York Times in which they reveal the names of the Alphabet Women. Of course I would not encourage them to do that!

    I would encourage Alex Salmond to sue the BBC and the Alphabet women for any slur against him that is included in the programmes.

  81. Kenny says:

    I remain positive; the former FM easily walks from a rank amateur but wholly corrupt attempt to screw him, he maintains his dignity – and a keg of dry gunpowder – and has nothing to fear, while those with dirty hands have everything to fear. It’s my assertion that Mr Salmond is holding, waiting for the opportune moment to deal with the ("Tractor" - Ed)s and rot. I honestly don’t think he gives a shit what they say about him tonight, he holds the whip hand in all of this.

    On the other hand – and knowing Salmond passionately seeks an independent Scotland – he’d be perfectly entitled to dictate to ‘those responsible’ the date of a second referendum under pain of a series of brutal disclosures. Yes, smoke them out, make them call the Ref prior to a given date, or burn them, preferably in a court of law.

  82. Corrado Mella says:

    You ain’t seen nothing yet.

    The BritNazi Establishment is fighting for its own survival!

    Keep in your mind frame that these same people harbour paedophiles, philanders, alcohol and drug addicts, thieves and rapists, and are the direct descendants of slave owners, children traffickers and exploiters, responsible of mass murders, famine and genocides.

    They’re the deepest, most sordid filth humanity had to deal with.

    We will not win against them without a bloodbath.
    Resign yourselves.

  83. Jay R says:

    I live in the EU (remember when we all did?) and would gladly set up a WordPress blog and publish every bloody name involved if someone provided me with them. Allegedly 😀

  84. Beaker says:

    @katherine hamilton says:
    17 August, 2020 at 3:13 pm
    “Secondly Westminster Parliamentary privilege remains a thing. Could not an MP, on the back of tonight’s undoubted mince, raise it in said Parliament, name the lot of them as being in the public interest, and be exempt from prosecution?

    Sorry Mr. McKaskill, looking at you again.”

    I understand your point, but the political fallout of such an action would be hugely damaging. Salmond case aside, prosecutors have a big enough problem getting women to appear in court as it is. This would blow a hole in the side as some women would be genuinely fearful that they might get named in future.

    If they are going to be named then leave it to the courts.

  85. Republicofscotland says:

    O/T. As the League Against Cruel Sports calculated recently that more than 250,000 of Scotland’s wild animals are slaughtered every year by wealthy estate owners so that rich chinless wonders can get their jollies off on blasting grouse out of the air with shotguns, the Scottish Rewilding Alliance, 24 environmental charities are furious that the Scottish government are allowing farmers to apply for a licence to kill beavers and their kits, even though beavers received a protected status in 2009.

    Even more bewildering is that the Scottish government will not allow targeted beavers and their offspring to be relocated. A staggering 87 beavers we killed last year, and issuing of licences in general now could see beavers suffer a second extinction in Scotland says the Scottish Rewilding Alliance.

    The Scottish government are letting our wildlife down badly, they’ve failed miserably in this department for years.

  86. Jimmy Jo says:

    Will this programme tonight pass the soap opera test?

    My wife and her sister are your average Scottish women.

    They have no interest in Scottish politics, but take a great Interest in Covid 19.

    They are a good gauge of Scottish public opinion.

    They are interested in soap operas and the Corona Virus.

    If they totally ignore tonight’s show, then you know the average punter has also totally ignored it.

    I am not even going to mention to them that it is on.

    My teenage daughter will be another good gauge of their views, if there is no conversation from them regarding Alex Salmond, then I will know that not too many people took a great Interest in it.

    I am hoping that it will be the 5% political junkies who will take an interest,,,with the other 95% not even knowing it was being aired.

    Fingers crossed.

  87. defo says:

    Of course, spelling out the names in the coven, one letter at a time, by multiple posters, would be very naughty, but almost impossible to prosecute.

    They need named & shamed.

    Wind, wave, oil…we’re not short of blessings.
    It’s looking like you can add a surfeit of nasty bitches to balance things out.
    I blame Eastenders, for almost everything

  88. ben madigan says:

    Thanks for the info Brian Doonthetoon. Much appreciated.

  89. Oneliner says:

    No doubt, further documentaries by Wark Clements will go on to examine the indiscretions of former Labour first ministers:

    Henry McLeish – Rentgate
    Wendy Alexander – Donorgate
    Jack McConnell – Rumpygate

    And a warning to those intending to watch tonight’s episode. La Wark’s choice of wardrobe may have you reaching for the Horizontal Hold button on your TV set

  90. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:


    The same old pandering-to-the-gallery shite. Johnson has a majority of 80, and a majority of 500 against a second indyref. He can do whatever the fuck he likes.

  91. Oneliner says:

    No doubt, further documentaries by Wark Clements will go on to examine the indiscretions of former Labour first ministers:

    Henry McLeish – Rentgate
    Wendy Alexander – Donorgate
    Jack McConnell – Rumpygate

    And a warning to those intending to watch tonight’s episode. Going on previous evidence, La Wark’s choice of wardrobe may have you reaching for the Horizontal Hold button on your TV set.

  92. Jimmy Jo says:

    From BBC2 website:-

    This programme will be available shortly after broadcast.

    The Trial of Alex Salmond.

    In March 2020, Scotland’s former first minister Alex Salmond emerges from the High Court in Edinburgh, cleared of 14 charges of sexual misconduct. The verdict concludes one of the most dramatic trials Britain has ever seen.

    From the moment the story breaks in the Daily Record in August 2018 to Salmond’s acquittal the very day the UK locks down against Coronavirus, Kirsty Wark follows the ups and downs of a case that has seen tabloid scoops shock the nation and the destruction of one of the strongest political partnerships in modern politics. Along the way, Kirsty traces the origins of the criminal case to the Me Too movement and, for the first time on television, speaks to some of the women at the centre of the trial.

    Set in the heart of Edinburgh, with the growing Covid-19 pandemic looming in the background, the film sees Kirsty travelling across Scotland as she follows the trial and interviews the people present at key moments surrounding the political scandal. Talking to Alex Salmond’s former press adviser Campbell Gunn, Kirsty learns that Campbell was ‘stunned’ when he heard the criminal charges against his former boss.

    Throughout the film, Kirsty looks back at Alex Salmond’s political career and examines the growing rift between him and his former protege, Nicola Sturgeon. As Salmond prepares to take the stand, these divisions come to the fore, and some of his allies allege that there is a conspiracy at the heart of the Scottish government to stop Salmond returning to politics. Kirsty explores these controversial claims and interviews Nicola Sturgeon, who denies them. Kirsty also reveals how this trial has widened divisions and exposed tensions that threaten to have a huge impact on Scotland’s politics.

    Speaking to insiders who witnessed the story as it unfolds, Kirsty reveals the explosive inside story that has seen a man who was once Scotland’s most powerful politician fight for his freedom, and asks what the fallout could mean for the SNP and Scotland’s political future.

    Release date:17 August 2020
    59 minutes

    On TV


  93. katherine hamilton says:

    Hello Beaker,
    I get your point, but if in the hypothetical case you make if a false accusation has been made, why shouldn’t they be named? Solution is of course anonymity for both till any verdict, I think.

  94. stonefree says:

    @ katherine hamilton at 3:13 pm

    Yes and Yes

  95. Andrew F says:

    Nicola Sturgeon is in on it of course.

    The absolutely implausible alternatives to that are:

    (a) that she has no idea what’s going on; or

    (b) she knows what’s going on but thinks it isn’t what it obviously is, and thinks it’s something else that it isn’t.

    For both (a) and (b) she would have to be totally clinically silly.

    She isn’t silly, but she’s probably not as smart as she thinks she is. Everything’s easy when you don’t get challenged, but these people can’t handle the slightest whiff of dissent or pushback without going ballistic.

  96. Martin G says:

    I would suggest putting a copy of the programme on BrandNewTube instead of Youtube.

    The BBC should be impartial so I wonder if they also interview other women who worked with Alex and were part of his defence. I think one was his office manager called Isobel Zambonini.

  97. ahundredthidiot says:

    I want to thank the Rev in advance as I will be unable to watch the regimes propaganda without having a coronary.

    I also think I am going to start referring to AS as Sir Alex.

  98. He can do whatever the f— he likes well so can we ???

  99. SilverDarling says:

    Actually as a big FU, I would love if someone leaving parliament would stand up and reel off their names. They would probably still go to jail.

    Mark McDonald springs to mind but he has children and has to earn a living beyond parliament so maybe not and he certainly owes no one any favours the way he was treated. Anyway, most SNP reps are so craven they are probably all giving interviews to Wark tonight.

  100. Beaker says:

    @katherine hamilton says:
    17 August, 2020 at 4:33 pm
    Hello Beaker,
    “I get your point, but if in the hypothetical case you make if a false accusation has been made, why shouldn’t they be named? Solution is of course anonymity for both till any verdict, I think.”

    No arguments from me.

    @Oneliner says:
    17 August, 2020 at 4:14 pm
    “reaching for the Horizontal Hold button on your TV set.”

    Showing your age there 🙂

  101. Mike d says:

    Surprised someone has’nt printed a few thousand leaflets with their names printed, then leave them lying about in public places. Or stickers with their names printed on every bus shelter/ train stn. Supermarket etc.

  102. Allium says:

    There seemed to be a concerted effort from trolls at the time of the verdict to chivvy the naïve or unwary into naming names. I hope there won’t be a renewed attempt after this production – and that no-one will be stupid enough to take the bait.

  103. SOG says:

    I hope the Inquiry will ask who leaked the story to the Daily Record.

  104. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi ben madigan at 4:05 pm.

    You typed,
    “Thanks for the info Brian Doonthetoon. Much appreciated.”

    Nae bathir! I’ve been using it for years. Very handy…

  105. Robert Graham says:

    Not sure personal attacks on Nicola Sturgeon is the best way to get what most people want and that’s a normal independent country ,
    I say most , because there are some here that have definitely other motives in play , by all means question some of the moves the current SNP government have done or is doing ,
    Who exactly are you the constant bile spouting posters actually trying to convince ? Are you trying to win over undecided people who might come across this site by curiosity or mistake , it’s like the bloody Wild West sometimes on here and that’s from someone who first posted here in 2013 .

    The site used to be a valuable point of reference for people in a growing Independence movement , now ? Well have a quick look at some of the Dross being pushed and Why it’s being pushed .

  106. Lothianlad says:

    It is my belief that through time at least, Alex Salmond will be honoured as one of the True heros of Scotland.

    Sturgeon trolls on this site, and we all know who they are, spout shite like he was a gambler that lost, or failed to win independence.

    In truth, Alex Salmond took the SNP from the periphery of Scottish politics to the party of government and delivered a fatal blow to the union.

    Yes the union is on life support, but the very fact it had to even justify its exhistance thanks to the referendum wakened the Scotyish people up and was the iceberg that sunk the titanic.

    I now liken Alex to that iceberg, doing fatal damage to the mighty machine.

    Unlike the current FM who is the darling of the brit media, Alex Salmond, innocent of the charges conspired against him, has done more for Scotland than Sturgein ever will.

  107. holymacmoses says:

    The attack on Joanna Cherry simply confirms that both she and Alex Salmond are too dangerous a threat to the SNP monarchy

  108. tollcross says:

    Surely there must have been at least one moment during the trial when the evidence for the defence was incompatible with the evidence for the prosecution: i.e., either a prosecution witness/es was/were lying, or a defence witness/es was/were lying. In other words, by uncritically accepting and repeating the stories told in the evidence for the prosecution, the media are implicitly accusing at least one prosecution witness of perjury. And, of course, not about to offer them a platform to tell their side of the story.

  109. Effijy says:

    The Mark McDonald predictive text is a joke you
    Wouldn’t find out of place on an episode of the Two Ronnie’s.

    That is both scary and pathetic that the anti- Scottish Unionist
    could crest such a mountain out of a something less than a mole hill.

    The UK media has no more credibility than that of North Korea.

    It’s not just Independence I’m after it’s a Media with real journalist that are
    Capable of presenting the truth and nothing but the truth without agendas.

    Absolutely sickening. I am so desperate to be rid of everything connected
    With the murdering fake realm of the UK.

    Kirsty Wark is a multi millionaire with money made from the BBC and she will
    Happily sell our Scotland to keep that gravy train rolling.
    Hope she continues to pick up speed as the buffers are in sight.

  110. Jimmy Jo says:

    Robert Graham 5.30pm

    Fuck Off!!!

  111. Jimmy Jo says:

    Effijy 5.49pm

    You are another one who dances round the “Let’s blame it all on the BritNats”

    The blame for ALL of this lies at the door of Nicola Sturgeon.

    You are not on Ginger Dug now.

  112. Effijy says:

    The BBC grow greater every day with being answerable to no one.

    They are making fortunes from all those millions of pensioners,
    Old Captain Tom their war hero is one of many who were ready
    To give their lives in world war 11.
    They are saving a fortune by not making any new shows under the guise of Covid.

    What are our pensioners paying to watch the hundredth repeat of Dads Army when
    Their licence fee paid for those episodes in the 60’s?

    It’s all money to keep Scotland suppressed and keep noses in our very deep trough.

  113. jfngw says:

    Sad news that Ruth Davidson has apparently been struck down with twitter thumb, why she would be she not be tweeting out her call for the English education secretary to resign.

    Meanwhile the Tories have returned to worry about care homes, they seem to have forgotten about education. Unsurprisingly the BBC have picked up their baton.

    BBC working overtime this week:

    Care homes
    Covid capital
    Alex Salmond (twice)

    And its only Monday.

  114. Republicofscotland says:

    “The site used to be a valuable point of reference for people in a growing Independence movement”

    It still is Robert, with an added great big dollop of reality, that’s sadly missing from other head in the sand independence blogs.

  115. Effijy says:

    Reporting Scotland playing a blinder in condemning everything happening in Scotland.

    The Red and the Blue Tories are always there to back them up,
    Without recourse from any SNP representative.

    There will be an inquiry into pensioners possibly being Covid affected
    Being released from Hospital to Care Homes.

    The Unionists appalled at the possibility but no inquiry pending for the same possibility in England or Wales where both parties fail miserably on the Covid front when compared to Scotland.

    Next story asks why HR didn’t know Inverclyde didn’t have particular Covid protection
    as it is a poorer area?

    I can’t see what could have been done more than what was done.

    They interviewed the council leader, Stephen McCabe, didn’t have his party identified when
    questioned as to why the area was so poor and Covid affected.

    I felt sure that had this man been an SNP official it would have been mentioned
    And a banner raised on the screen.

    Google advised that he is a Labour leader happy to keep the area deprived
    For the sake of keeping them under Westminster control.

  116. kapelmeister says:

    The Salmond documentary is going to be directly competing with ITV’s new true story drama The Lost Honour of Christopher Jeffries.

    Wark’s viewing figures are going to be pure boggin’. HaHa.

    Nice one ITV.

  117. G H Graham says:

    The criticism of Sturgeon is valid because there is zero evidence that she has any intention of attempting to win independence.

    She’s had six years to test all manner of legislation in the courts. Number of attempts so far are zero.

    She could have declared UDI. Nothing.

    She might have suggested civil disobedience. Nothing.

    The softly approach might have been to test a section 30. Silence.

    She can’t even be arsed to lead an independence march.

    Even the SNP’s website fails to demonstrate when the next referendum might take place now that Sturgeon has yet one more excuse not to hold one.

    Finally, her reclusive silence regarding Alex Salmond reveals more than she could ever say at a conference speech.

    Look folks, what’s it going to take before even the die-hards finally figure out she’s been taking the piss all along?

  118. Meg merrilees says:

    Breeks @ 2.06

    I have not been moved to contribute for many months however I have to register my agreement with your comment this afternoon. Well said, my sentiment entirely.

    The one person who will come out of this with his head held high is the man who has been found INNOCENT by our proper judicial system, not the creators of this programme and anyone who has assisted in this with their lynch-mob mentality and their innuendo. It could all go horribly wrong for them tonight.

    I am sure that a great many people listening to this will have a very uncomfortable feeling that they are being asked to be voyeurs and perhaps those trying to create the trial they think should actually have taken place will be ridiculed for their troubles.

    One thing is for sure Call Kaye will be interesting in the morning.

    If by any chance you are reading this tonight Mr. Salmond and for what it is worth, I’m definitely in your team no matter what they throw at you.

  119. Shug says:

    Is it time for a protest at Pacific Quay demanding an end to north Korean news reporting

  120. North chiel says:

    “ Effijy@ 0700 pm . Yes BBC Westminster England broadcasting from Pathetic Quay “ The Rhinestone Cowboy” now “ bigging up” supposed split in SNP over Alex Salmond “ affair” . Nothing other than Britnat fifth columnists broadcasting from Britnat HQ Glasgow . Bought & Sold for English gold the whole sorry bunch . Shameful ! Disgrace to Scotland .

  121. MaggieC says:

    It will be interesting to see how the media deal with the story after the programme tonight which mainly seems to be about the case which was brought against Alex and tomorrow nights programme seems to be mainly about the split within the Snp ,

    Although we’ve already got a good idea how they will run with it .

    I imagine what will be worrying all involved in the case against Alex now is how he has not made one statement to the media yet .

    Link to Dani Garvelli’s programme

    The Scottish Parliament inquiry takes evidence tomorrow from Lesley Evans and it will be interesting to watch that , the session begins at 11.00 am .

    I would like to send my very best wishes to Alex and his family and friends through this column and a very big thank you and best wishes to Rev Stuart for all his hard work and honest reporting about this so far and no doubt there will be more in future .

  122. Effijy says:

    The Christopher Jeffries. story is a repeat.
    Don’t know how many will watch a second time when you already know what happens?

    Sorry to say that reading Nicolas face and her gulp,
    Followed by her defensive body language, when asked
    About the Salmond acquittal suggested to me that she
    Has something to hide and be uncomfortable about?

  123. holymacmoses says:

    Robert Graham:5.30p.m.: At university a close relation of mine was offered a very fine scholarship in second year but he felt that his friend was cleverer than him and deserved the award more. So he went to see the Chair of the School in question and asked for an explanation.
    “It’s simple” he said. “They all say the same thing about you. whenever lecturers ask a question you come up with as many answers as the the rest of the class put together..”
    The lad laughed and said “Yes, but they’re usually wrong!”
    The Prof smiled at him and said “The more quickly you think, the more answers you give, the more chances you have of getting a result.That’s what research is about, trying out as many things as possible in order to get the best answer because usually that’s what we’re looking for – the best answer to a question is not necessarily a question of being ‘right’ or ‘wrong'”.
    People write on here to test their ideas against each other, we all write silly stuff from time to time BUT if we want answers which progress Scotland towards independence then it’s for certain that we need people asking any and all questions to find as many routes as possible.

  124. James Che. says:

    Republican Scotland, rabbits are being shot and a new disease was bought in to kill them,
    Foxes are being shot or hunted still in Scotland, deer are being shot in the hundreds, pigeons ere being shot on a regular basis nearly all year round, badgers are being poisoned and gassed still in Scotland, hedgehogs were also culled in Scotland, seagulls nests are destroyed and seagull culled, crows are being shoot and their nests destroyed, the same applies for many other small animals that goes unnoticed due to politics and covid,
    but in the same breath raptures, that have not lived in Britain for centuries are being reintroduced, along with beavers, wolves and they are even talking about reintroducing bears, this is a very woke cultural attitude,
    I have two very important points to anyone including save the wildlife, following this insane woke belief and culture.
    What do you think these carnivores will find to eat, if the normal prey they usually hunt has already been shot, killed or culled with the permission of governments in advance.
    They will turn to farmers animals and your pets, maybe one or two smaller humans playing in their garden or a park.
    Second point is the ecological system has been settled in Britain for hundreds of years, and nearly everyone in Britain is quite happy that there are next to no dangerous animals here that would attack our children and pets,
    So who benefits is always the leading question, big game hunters that might be fed up shooting hares little grouse on the big estates owned by gentry?
    A serious subject for Scotland that has started being implemented at the moment, without asking us,and going totally under the radar deliberately.
    If the raptures, wolves and bears do not have

  125. mike cassidy says:

    While you’re waiting for that program

    The great Graham Linehan introduces a new award into the trans debate

    The Strategic Ignorance Award

    The column which won its author the award

    The scathing reply

  126. Confused says:

    BBC arts are making a new kafka documentary


  127. Beaker says:

    @Shug says:
    17 August, 2020 at 7:08 pm
    “Is it time for a protest at Pacific Quay demanding an end to north Korean news reporting”

    Are you referring to the daily party political, ahem excuse me, COVID briefing? 🙂

  128. Doug says:

    Boycott all britnat media.

  129. Jules says:

    The Scottish establishment is now protecting Nicola Sturgeon because they see her as the Union’s best hope…???

    Jeez, man… you’ve lost the plot. I say that with sadness, as I’ve enjoyed and appreciated your analysis for years.

  130. James Che. says:

    Republicanism Scotland, rabbits are being shot and a new disease was bought in to kill them,
    Foxes are being shot or hunted still in Scotland, deer are being shot in the hundreds, pigeons ere being shot on a regular basis nearly all year round, badgers are being poisoned and gassed still in Scotland, hedgehogs were also culled in Scotland, seagulls nests are destroyed and seagull culled, crows are being shoot and their nests destroyed, the same applies for many other small animals that goes unnoticed due to politics and covid,
    but in the same breath raptures and carnivores that have not lived in Britain for centuries are being reintroduced, along with beavers, wolves and they are even talking about reintroducing bears, this is a very woke cultural attitude,
    I have two very important points to anyone, including save the wildlife, following this insane woke belief and culture.
    What do you think these carnivores will find to eat, if the normal prey they usually hunt has already been shot, killed or culled with the permission of governments in advance.
    They will turn to farmers animals and your pets, maybe one or two smaller humans playing in their garden or a park.
    Second point is the ecological system has been settled in Britain for hundreds of years, and works perfectly well, except for plastic and large scale industries, and nearly everyone in Britain is quite happy that there are next to no dangerous animals here that would attack our children and pets,
    So who benefits is always the leading question, charities and big game hunters that might be fed up shooting hares, pheasant and little grouse on the big estates owned by gentry?
    A serious subject for Scotland that has started being implemented at the moment, without asking us, and going totally under the radar deliberately.
    If the raptures, wolves and bears do not have food, what will they need to turn to, to feed themselves?

  131. James Che. says:

    Sorry for errors they are not mine, the computer decided to take over my conversation.

  132. Black Joan says:

    kapelmeister @7.03pm

    That really is quite a coincidence, or interesting timing by ITV, given that Christopher Jefferies was another innocent man hounded and vilified by the press.

  133. kapelmeister says:

    Black Joan @ 7:49

    Yes. Could be someone was making a statement.

  134. James Che. says:

    Alex salmond, Christopher jeffries, makes us think how the deep state in America hounded kavinagh, soo very similar in modus operandi, maybe the same people or connected people are running the show?

  135. I actually had the misfortune to read that Daily Record drivel today at work, as there was a copy of the rag lying aboot. Made me want to vomit, the propagandist, sexist, anti-Slamond political posturing and hatred were so transparent.

  136. Addendum(b): misspelled Salmond. Obviously. This way beyond tired post-#MeToo posturing pish gets me itchy-typo-fingered and angry.

  137. holymacmoses says:

    I sincerely hope that Alex Salmond ends up suing that paper to extinction.

  138. Michael Laing says:

    @Jules at 7.44pm: Actions speak louder than words. Or, in Nicola Sturgeon’s case, total inaction with regard to independence speaks louder than paying vague lip-service to it. And I’m afraid to say that whether or not she initiated the conspiracy to destroy Alex Salmond or was one of the main participants in it, as First Minister she is ultimately responsible for the actions of her party and government. If she hasn’t lost all credibility and respect already, it’s only a matter of time before she does.

  139. Here’s a question for you all. With Scottish gladhanding and backslapping policy-making a mere 21 years out of the primordial swamp of local politics, with the opening of Holyrood, is it any surprise that our government is so parochial (yet wanting desperately to believe itself internationalist), throwing round all its ” World’s first” policies like it has a political version of Short Man Syndrome?

    Some of the fucking morons staffing the SNP are ex-Labour careerists, and it would be difficult to find a more stupid group of self-serving dung beetles than them. Anybody who has had any dealings with a Scottish local council, for any reason, will know that only too well. Feathering their nest for life was their modus operandi; the new parochial nest-featherers might wave wee flags aboot and talk aboot American intersectionalist shite that nae cunt gies a fuck aboot, but, at shrivelled heart, they’re just the same sad wee diddies and numpties who have run and ruled and ruined Scotland since post-WWII.

    Every fucking ludicrous move they make makes that more and more clear. I don’t think it’s even a matter of being infiltrators and agents provocateurs. I think it’s genuinely just a matter of them being fucking sub-literate, lobotomised morons, having their worst excesses and stupidest fever-fucked kumbayaesque all-hold-hands-together-forever dreams sanctioned and benevolently smiled upon from the top of the never-shaken lifelong-career Christmas tree by the pasted-on rictus of an incapable Judas First Minister.

  140. cynicalHighlander says:


    Would make great film. Must say I enjoyed that.

  141. Thanks. Chuckling here. But I won’t be in 10 minutes, when I watch the BBC stab at Alex Salmond again in their scummy doc. But I need to see it, get an overview of their shite. Will be watching through very narrowed eyes.

  142. Republicofscotland says:


    I’ve been directed to this by WGD, during a comment exchange on the viability of using our list votes for another independence party other than the SNP or the Greens, taking Rise and Solidarty out of the equation as there’s far too much internal squabbling among them to make any headway, and retaining the Indy Alliance party and the ISP party, as possibilities for list votes.

    I’d like your input as to whether ot holds any water or not.

    Thanks in advance.

  143. DB says:

    That last paragraph is the biggest load of pish I’ve read in a while.

    You WILL be remembered if your weird vendetta against the only realistic vehicle for independence we have ends up fucking us all up.

  144. mike cassidy says:

    Last minute head messer.

    Those who were asked about the judgement were asked post trial. Those of us who were interviewed pre trial didn’t talk about the trial. Again, you want this to be something it isn’t without actually watching it. #Salmond dug his own reputational grave by his behaviour.

  145. Seven minutes into this doc and the amount of angry expletives I have screamed at the screen, more specifically at the strange, obsessive, hateful, strangely smiling, leading-questions Wark…would put a pub full of sailors to shame.

  146. holymacmoses says:

    I hope Salmond sues the BBC and this is only day 2

  147. Michael Laing says:

    @DB at 9.00pm: When the SNP takes action to secure Scotland’s independence instead of imposing ridiculous laws that declare men to be women just because they say they are and making it a crime to state the simple biological fact that a man cannot be a woman, I, and I’m sure the vast majority of former SNP members and supporters, will be more than happy to resume support for them. But a party that refuses to even mention independence, let alone do anything to bring it about, can hardly expect to be supported by those of us who regard independence as the primary and most urgent priority.

  148. John H. says:

    I note that the actress speaking woman H’s lines is using a timid frightened voice.

  149. Jimmy Jo says:

    Turns your stomach just trying to watch it.

  150. schrodingers cat says:

    @martin keatings

    This morning I will write to all pro-indy MSP’s and MP’s formally asking them to support the #PeoplesAS30. If they aver that the people of Scotland are sovereign in the determination of their constitutional future, then we request them to stand in defence of that sovereignty.

    @peat worrier
    Tho’ legally speaking, this case isn’t about sovereignty. Popular sovereignty isn’t the legal argument. It is about whether Holyrood legislating for #indyref2 “relates to a reserved matter” under the Scotland Act. That, I grant you, is much less pithy & much less stirring.

    On the plus side: you should be cheered that popular sovereignty isn’t the legal argument to the fore in this case, because if it was, you could burn the £150,000 it’ll cost even to begin this legal action right now.

    As someone who has followed your thoughts on here on legal and indyref stuff for some time – could you explain why Pete Wishart thinks this is potentially disastrous? Given where we are – being refused a section 30 – I don’t see the downside ….

    @peat worrier
    The core of it is political and not legal. Is the case politically useful? Does it restrict the Scottish Government’s room for maneuver, or retard it? It may bring legal clarity – but that doesn’t mean it is politically helpful. That, as I understand it, is Pete’s point.

    Apologies for my legal/general ignorance but always appreciate your descriptions/explanations. Does that mean sovereignty itself holds no specific technical legal basis? Also will any judgement in your opinion be either for/against or could it be accompanied with notable comment?

    @peat worrier
    It is considerably worse than that. As a matter of law (but not politics) it is clear Holyrood is not sovereign & judges applying orthodox approaches to constitutional law are likely to hold that Westminster is sovereign for legal purposes. On the outcome: it could go either way.

    No: we would be a colony and that’s us off to the UN. It’s out of Westminster’s hands.
    It is worth digging into how the concept of self-determination is actually understood in international law.

    @peat worrier
    It is worth digging into how the concept of self-determination is actually understood in international law.

    The other case they have ongoing (trying to compel UK gov to introduce legislation and to compel HoC to vote for it) and this lack of basic understanding makes it all feel quite grifty, to be perfectly honest.

    As I understand it – there isn’t another case. I think the other case mutated into this.

    Martin explained in total they needed to raise £195k. They already raised £40k the first time, so this crowd funder is to raise the remaining £155k.

    It isn’t really the total I’m afraid Mel. You’d need to factor in the Inner House appeal and likely Supreme Court hearing for that.

    Just going by what Martin has told us. I am confident the Scottish public can raise more in the future if needed. I am glad someone is taking action. If we waited for the Scottish Gov. who knows when we might see indy.

    The court is just as likely to conclude that an indyref is outside Holyrood’s powers, as in it.

    Perhaps, I guess we will have to see. Like I said I am glad someone is doing something. Considering they have nearly reached the goal with 18 days still to go, I am far from alone.

    Clearly there’s a bunch of folk who’re enthusiastic about the general idea. I can understand why. I’m less encouraged by the fact the intellectual justification for it and the strategic analysis of it amounts to “let’s spend thousands on litigation & just see how it works out.”

    better suggestion?

    I’m not sure I accept the framing of your question. When the only concrete plan is cutting off your leg with a rusty knife, it doesn’t follow that you ought to cut off your leg with a rusty knife.

    Liked Aiden O’Neill’s position, calling an advisory referendum is within the rules of the Scotland Act

    That’s the legal heart of it. Though the word “advisory” tends to lead to the word “binding” being used in this debate – which always makes me want to rip my hair out.

    Brexit referendum was ‘advisory’, conveniently fresh in the mind should this conundrum surface.

    Indeed. Almost every UK referendum you can think of was – legally and formally – “non binding.” “Binding” has become an unhelpful way of saying “recognised as legitimate by rUK.”

    Absolutely. Politically tho surely the Brexit outcome negates any perceived illegitimacy conferred on the term ‘advisory’

    There’s nothing wrong with being legally advisory – so long as the process is understood to be politically determinative.

    I’m shocked that someone who grossly misrepresented the proposed action in the crowdfunder blurb would apply an inaccurate description to it here. Legal inaccuracy aside, that letter is an offence against the language.

    We’ve come a long way from forcing Her Majesty’s government to amend Schedule 5 of the Scotland Act under s.30. In no time, too.

  151. Big Jock says:

    Not watching it. Same as I don’t watch things about the 2014 referendum. Just serves to put you on an emotional downer.

    What the eyes don’t see and the ears don’t hear…and all that.

  152. terence callachan says:

    Oh well that’s it then
    Let’s all go home and forget about Scottish independence
    The idiots on here want you to do that


    Yes Alex Salmond was framed but he’s been found not guilty by a court end of story
    BBC and others can come up with as many fantasy stories as they want but it doesn’t change the truth of Alex being not guilty of the things ten women accused him of.

    That the ten have got away with their lies is unbelievable

    What has NIcola Sturgeon got to do with it ?

    Well she is First Minister so she can’t do a thing , it’s the COPFS procurator fiscal and the courts that decide everything not the First Minister we are not living in a country where the Politicians decide who gets prosecuted , if you don’t believe that then you are one of those idiots

    Whether NS believes him innocent or guilty doesn’t affect or have the ability to change or determine the verdict but the idiots on here want you to believe she put the ten women up to it and persuaded the COPFS to forward the accusations to court
    She has no such authority

    Only with SNP can we get Scottish independence
    No other party will get it for you
    NO list party will get you Scottish independence certainly not a WOS list party if one evolved

    A list party is of no use to Scottish independence whatsoever , zero , zilch , nothing , unless the SNP win a majority in the next election
    All you who say you won’t vote SNP Get that through your thick skull

    NO SNP majority NO Scottish independence that’s an undeniable FACT

  153. holymacmoses says:

    The journalists all thought he was going to be found guilty over lunch before the defence came on board
    There’s quite a lot of quotations are from Garavelli

  154. John H. says:

    Big Jock 9.35pm.

    It puts me on a downer alright. but only about the quality of journalism in Scotland. At times I felt as though I had stumbled on a witches coven.

  155. cynicalHighlander says:

    @terence callachan

    You obviously have no empathy for anyone but yourself so you know where to go.

  156. aulbea1 says:

    Did not a Miss Z have a position with a Cathcart MSP sometime in the past? Just asking.

  157. defo says:

    You really are a one Terry.
    Patently, that’s not the end of the story is it!

    The parliamentary inquiry is this very week being held in contempt by the conspirators. A cover up in full view.

    When this sorry house of cards finally collapses, will you drink the Kool aid too?

  158. defo says:

    Wolffe must resign. Here’s another couple of millions your tax pissed away by incompetence.

  159. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Well, there it is.

    In the documentary, Kirsty Wark has just mentioned a meeting in March 2018 – those there were Aberdein, Sturgeon and one of the complainers.

    The pertinent words are

    Aberdein Sturgeon March.

    Try sticking them into Google and from all the hits you get from January 2019, try to work out the name of one of the complainers. And it’s not Lois Lane.

    Is KW now guilty of contempt for providing ‘jigsaw’ information?

  160. Tannadice Boy says:

    Well that’s an hour wasted. Raking over the ashes of the trial. I learned nothing new. The jury said not guilty. Good enough for me.

  161. Dan says:

    Republicofscotland at 3:57 pm

    I like my animals but it is worth pointing out that the beavers in question are the legacy of an unofficial release programme.
    As I understand it the area in question would not have been considered appropriate as an official release site for various reasons which include much of it being Grade A Agricultural land.
    They are pretty cool to watch and I’ve had them within ten feet of me whilst fishing, but they do like a good gnaw on trees and bushes… almost as much as they like to shag judging by how quickly they have spread across the region!

    At least they are getting some action in their lives here in Scotland before they die. For a country that needs more folk procreating to balance society so it isn’t just made up of old codgers this covid is a real fucking downer.

  162. Nelldog says:

    Wark is one evil conniving lizard. Hope everyone could see through the fake empathy for the “victims”. Hope she suffers from a good degenerative disease, she deserves it.

  163. Tam the Bam says:

    So……..Nicola condemned by Alex(sorry Rev…didnt see any evidence of that)…..Alex condemned by Kirsty Wark…well that was the the original intention.

    Now will all you SNP haters just go to bed?


  164. Brian Doonthetoon says:


    There was mention of Tasmina’s evidence discrediting one of the alphabet women. Why not? Didn’t it fit in with the agenda of the programme?

  165. Frank Gillougley says:

    Selective tv trial by inference of actor’s voices reading from a co-ordinated and toxic script.

    Just like the real thing then.

  166. Oneliner says:

    Did anyone else notice the still photograph of Kirsty Wark talking to Alex Prentice during a pause in the proceedings?

    Is she / are they in contempt of court?

    Did Wark try to talk to anyone else involved in the trial?

    Did Wark try to talk to Gordon Jackson?

  167. Republicofscotland says:

    Well first off die-hard British nationalist Kirsty Wark looks drastic, time certainly hasn’t been good to her.

    Anyway the last hour has seen Wark and the BBC retry Alex Salmond and find him guilty. Not only that they’ve mentioned Salmond in the same breath as Harvey Weinstein, and compared his RT show to some sort of Russian propaganda show, whilst not even blushing at the BBC being a state propaganda channel, they also mentioned the #METOO movement, with Alex in mind.

    The mainly women jury found Alex Salmond innocent, they DIDN’T believe the stories of the anonymous women, and rightly so. As for Sturgeon she looked fidgety when asked by Wark if she was involved in the Salmond set up.

    Kudos to Kenny McAskill and temperamental Jim Sillars for coming out and saying what most of us already know that Salmond was fitted up.

    Come back Alex Scotland needs you more than ever now.

  168. dakk says:

    Caught the last 15 mins of it.

    Pathetic lying unbearded lady timewasters is all.

  169. Karmanaut says:

    I hope he sues them.

  170. Beaker says:

    Kenny Macaskil: (40 mins in)

    “I can only operate on the speculation given to me… they were worried about the return of Alex Salmond,”

    Fuck me talk about a killer quote.

    Don’t forget AS also reminded the media outside the court that some evidence has “still to see the light of day”.

    When that appears there is going to be a bloodbath. Jim Sillars definitely thinks so…

  171. iain mhor says:

    @WhoRattledYourCage 8:18pm

    The art of invective is not lost. Have a beer – Cheers!

  172. Margaret E says:

    I watched it. Kirsty Wark unbelievable – watch the eyes! All the allegations,timelines never questioned, linking everything but everything to the Me Too and look how wonderful we are in SCotland to be so brave to link this to our First Minister. It was really sickening. How on earth can the BBC get away with this, the content, the timing, the sly bias of using actors’s voice in promote a certain agenda. And no attempt to interview any other than the complainants. Why not try to find some of the majority female members of the jury? Well, of course, that would not fit the agenda, would it?
    Mr Salmond, you have maintained a dignified silence but surely it is time to speak out.

  173. winifred mccartney says:

    The bbc and Kirsty Wark should be hanging their heads in shame. It used to be said innocent until proven guilty – now if you are innocent and the bbc and Wark don’t like it retry on TV and get the result you wanted with more asides from so called journalists and from the fragrant Kirsty about damage to the government etc. Neutrality of the bbc and news reporters for the bbc – certainly does not exist now, if it ever did, is questionable

  174. McDuff says:

    You are the one who has lost the plot.
    You must be truly blind if you don’t know what is going on out there.

  175. holymacmoses says:

    Well if that documentary had a purpose it was about as determined as Nicola Sturgeon’s fight for Independence.

    Inform: definitely not – it wandered backward and forward and ended up leaving in the middle of ideas at many junctures. There were days of evidence and statement totally ignored.The meal with the journalists including Sarah Smith did tell us that they all had Mr Salmond guilty before he even had his defence up.

    Educate – well that’s a joke

    Entertain – you’d have to have a very warped idea of ‘entertainment’ to find that interesting as entertainment.

    It was gutless. It neither thrust the dagger home with Salmond – although there were hints that it might have been the initial intention NOR did it address any idea that there was a conspiracy -there was virtually no political content.
    The ‘defence of women’ was pathetic and did absolutely no good for many real victims of violent sexual assault.

    This will be a great opportunity for WM to get rid of BBC Scotland forever.

    Jimmy Jo 3.57 — did your ladies make any comment?

  176. Right, the doc is oor. Ah’ve gottae say…n ah’m laughing here…whit ah piece ay pish-yellay rid-top faux-journalism! It annoyed me it the start, yit, is it unfurled its drivelocity tae full fool velocity, ah funt it utterly fascinating.

    Why, ye might ask?

    Well, in whit it said baith aboot the BBC – we aw ken aboot they characters – n, mair specifically, the presenter, the hinging-like-a-hoond’s-jaw skeletal dominatrix Krispy Bark. How utterly, UTTERLY bizarre is that woman? Ah wis watching it, n soon calmed doon eftir ma initial anger, when ah saw how utterly inept a retro hatchet job it wis.

    Lark, clearly a cracked-mirror-mirror-on-the-waw-whae’s-the-unfairest-ay-them-aw type, presentit hersel is the omnipotent forensic, objective examiner ay the eywis-truthful, tearful, fearful, smearful evidence fae the anti-intellectual harpie cabal; she wis the benevolent, listening, nodding, saddened mither tae the liars on trial; she wis oan trial, is a woman, hersel, in her ain mind…n oan n oan.

    This wis an act ay strange pure pathological, obsessive, hateful narcissism, n ah’m no shair the auld sow cow bow-wow even kent it, or kent how she came aff tae…certain amused n bemused observers ay the deceiving proceedings. Christ, whit a hamfistit load ay shitslinger timewaster shite! Wish ah lived in an era when propaganda wis mair effective n impressive, well worth taxpayers’ licence fee money!

    Bit aye, Wark. Interesting how she presentit hersel is the judge n jury n thwartit executioner (LOVED her deflated and defeatit craggy sagging features oan the announcement ay the verdict, quite different fae her liplicking hopes ay Alex getting chucked in the jile fir the rest ay his life) spinterpreting the hail case fir the average Joe n Joanne oan the street.

    Interesting tae see how they filmed her fae the side, is if ye wur getting a voyeuristic glimpse intae an important insider conversation she wis haeing wi somebody aff-camera (probably meant tae be the audience, bit coming aff like she wis talking tae her producers eftir the day’s proceedings), bit it jist made her look like she wis a mad auld trout waffling deludit, dementit shite tae hersel oan the bus, the kinnay pish-reeking banger ye wid move seats tae avoid, simultaneously feeling sorry fir her, n thanful ye werenae her.

    The fascinating (money) shot tae me wis when, oan the morning ay the verdict, they hud the overheid shot ay her coming ootay the coort, framing it is if she wis coming oot afore Alex, is if she hersel hud been oan trial, oan behalf ay aw women, whae she representit, instead ay the slaver-drooling drooling fool-fucked elite.

    Christ, whit Christ-wi-a-fanny-like narcissism!

    Ah mean, the hail hing wis clearly filmed six month ago, especially is they didnae change the tense ay some ay the gutter-mutter utterances in the hing, n wis jist a desperate attempt tae save some cash wi a load ay cobbled-thegither tripe yaising suhhin awready filmed (exploitation filmmmaker Al Adamson used tae the same hing wi random shite horror film footage he hud lying aboot, so it didnae go tae waste) tae try n slap that Salmond gadgie across the arrogant winning chops cos suhhin is gonnae be coming fae him soon doon the political pipes.

    Ah honestly huv tae laugh. If this skanky rank wanky pish is the best thit the secret service (remember, the same cunts thit came away wi ‘The Germans Are Bayoneting Babies’ tae get the UK intae WWI, n many ither wannabe-manipulative comedy classics) kin dae…this second indy gig, n Alex’s nixt moves…ur gonnae be a fucking scoosh!

    Political foreplay
    Promised fireworks shows
    Oestrogenerated vindictive justice
    Phantom sexual menace allegations
    Insinnuendos, inadequacies,
    Foreign bodies, lies and
    Cries in the vengeful night
    Stroking and stoking #MeThree
    Hatebarked megaphone accusations of
    Inaccurate wannabe sexual impropriety,
    Lobotomised barbs, wet blanket skinstorms,
    Sleepy cuddles, hate team prosecution huddles,
    Feminine emotional guddles, fart and start a
    Fuck-men shitstorm, keep the allegations warm,
    Ariel overhead shots of sleepy old narcissist shits
    Shorn of street justice, tweeting disappointment,
    Bleating in old shite crapumentaries, commentaries
    Nobody cares about anymore, move on
    To new fresh glazed arsehole pastures
    To whore the ageing glasses-nose-pushing
    Unionist parasites narrative, faux-indignant
    Cluck-tutting Smith Garavelli Wark gathered
    Round a trial-consensus-manufacturing table
    Three bemuses, three disgraces, three furies
    That an innocent man was never prosecuted
    After being persecuted in a shit-borne
    Cunt-lies-swarm and tomorrow is
    Another chance for another
    Missed chance at slapping
    Down and dirty a man far
    Better than they could
    Ever think of being
    Forever and never
    All men.

    Raising a beer tae Alex Salmond n tae ineffectual, pathetic, licence-fee-financed ratsoup-eating arsefuck propagandists. SOOK ME DISDAIN YA DECORTICATIT BUGFUCKS! 🙂

  177. Saltire says:

    I watched it. It was just a rehash of everything we’d already heard or read. It won’t win many awards.

    Clearly, Kirsty Wark filmed her video diary to make a dramatic documentary telling the story of the trial and conviction of Alex Salmond. It was not an impartial documentary reporting the facts, it was loaded entirely to encourage believing only the complainants. No surpise there

    Editorially, the use of well and softly spoken female actors to represent the complainants but comedic, growling, rough sounding male actors to voice the parts of Jackson and Salmond was ludicirous. It wasn’t a drama was it? It was meant to be a documentary right? Concealing identity is one thing but all voiceovers should be neutral to repeat the words.

    Women (and men) have a right to complain and be listened to if they consider there has been inappropriate behaviour. But not everyone has the right to be believed, because not everyone who makes a complaint is telling the truth. That’s why have trials and juries who hopefully find the gulity so.

    I didn’t find Kenny MacAskill very convincing at the end about a conspiracy though.

    For what it’s worth, I think NS was disppointed in AS’s behaviour (which was not criminal) and that’s the fall-out is about. I think others may be responsible for anything beyond that and maybe tomorrow we’ll hear something about the whole process that sheds light on it.

  178. ‘Saltire says:
    17 August, 2020 at 10:40 pm
    I watched it. It was just a rehash of everything we’d already heard or read. It won’t win many awards.’

    Correct. But what it truly came across like was Wark as Ahab, and Salmond as Moby Dick, with her hunting him for whatever strange, obsessive, damaged personal reasons she might have for doing so. That waste of an hour told us far more about that weird old bird that it told us aboot Alex Salmond and the non-dismissed bullshit allegations against him.

  179. Addendum: ‘the now-dismissed’ allegations.

  180. ‘Big Jock says:
    17 August, 2020 at 9:35 pm
    Not watching it.’

    You missed a comedy classic! 🙂

  181. Tam the Bam says:

    ‘OH FOR A SMOKIN’ GUN!’……..said the Rev.

  182. crazycat says:

    Brian Doothetoon at 10.02

    Is KW now guilty of contempt for providing ‘jigsaw’ information?

    Presumably not, because Garavelli has the exact same jigsaw in her toy-box – and she has not been deemed to be in contempt, as we know.

  183. Tam the Bam says:

    Saltire @ 10-40pm

    Exactly my take.

  184. holymacmoses says:

    whorattledyourcage 10.34pm

    That was a perfect summary and vies with Wings for accuracy and detail. it’s great to get more than one analysis.

  185. ‘holymacmoses says:
    17 August, 2020 at 11:57 pm
    whorattledyourcage 10.34pm

    That was a perfect summary and vies with Wings for accuracy and detail. it’s great to get more than one analysis.’

    Thanks, bit it’s jist ma take, me taking the piss a wee bit whilst saying whit ah saw here n there. That doc wis a pathetic waste ay film, n sticking it oot the noo wis jist an equal waste ay time.

  186. Effijy says:

    This is a direct and blatant attack on Scottish Independence.

    We cannot accept this disgraceful and unjust broadcast in our country.

    We either use this petition or a new one must be raised immediately.

  187. Al-Stuart says:

    John Hamill,

    I am with you. I too cannot work out who “Woman Z” is.

    Ironically, that matters not. Please don’t waste your time. I can tell you who she is insofar as may be helpful. She is a useful idiot; a Unionist stooge, someone who may, or may not have perjured herself in court.

    She does not matter now.

    She has played he part. A sad torrid “B” rate movie actress, in which she has worked in concert with the other alphabet stooges and the British State Broadcaster to neuter the thing that most scares the British State: Alex Salmond.

    The only way that his can be sorted out now is for a new Scottish Independence List Party to TAKE sufficient levers of political control off of the McWokes and Sturgeon’s clique and cast the disinfectant of daylight upon these anti-Salmond injustices.

    Between today and May 2021 a SILP group must be formed and requires to hold the balance of power in Holyrood. To have sufficient votes that an SNP MINORITY Administration NEEDS the SILP MSPs to stay in power.

    A SILP group of MSPs will also be able to look at the books. See behind the scenes. Ask those very awkward questions in committee of witnesses under Oath.

    Wrest the levers of power away from the corpulent, corrupt, gerrymandered Establishment that currently calls itself a Scottish Government, but is nothing more than British State actors wearing SNP clothes.
    Sorry to be blunt, but Alec, are you happy with this state of affairs?


    The damage done by the State actors and the Murrells’ orchestrated lynch-mob, has been substantial. The telltale giveaway is how the Unionist media in Scotland is now giving Sturgeon a very easy time of it.

    In fact, just like the frog in the analogous pot of water being slowly heated and cooked, the sad, torrid destruction of the Scottish Independence movement is becoming a fait accompli.

    Alec, I suspect you may be keeping your powder dry. I hope and pray you are still in the fight for IndyRef2. But some of us need a sign now as without it, any momentum on places like Wings Over Scotland will wither away and die.

    Take care and either way, the Scottish Nation owes you a debt of gratitude beyond evaluation (I quote Alec Guinness),

  188. Polly says:

    A pretty accurate description of Ms Zed who seems really nice and even loyal, maybe even is, to her mentor, but behaved oddly there and being so friendly with that despicable horror Leeze Lawrence means I wouldn’t trust her integrity or her judgement.

    ‘Salmond case aside, prosecutors have a big enough problem getting women to appear in court as it is. This would blow a hole in the side as some women would be genuinely fearful that they might get named in future.’

    No I disagree with this. This case and the flimsy complaints (he pulled someone’s hair in a lift in front of someone else or touched someone on the small of the back to hurry them up a staircase) being brought to court as if they were major sexual assaults does far more to damage the court cases of women who face genuine sexual assault. I still believe women in cases like this should be left in peace – but these women aren’t being left in peace and some don’t want to go back to private life. If they keep having their side spewed all over media then they should be named. Anonymity in such cases is not to give people who lost a court case a platform to keep harassing a man who was acquitted of all charges.

    It has also proved to me, especially with these witch hunts on tv and newspapers so soon after still only showing one side, that men accused should be given anonymity too which I had never believed before.

  189. Polly says:

    @ Cat

    Your quote of someone saying ‘feel quite grifty’ that was and might still be my own feeling and one of the reasons I wasn’t more supportive. I’ve heard rumours that the person behind it is going for independent position at next election, despite saying often and loudly he’s a full time carer and how important that job is. Wanting a political position immediately after an emotionally driven people’s cause/action is similar to another man on the west coast. I have nothing against either but am suspicious of people nakedly firing up emotion in case it’s ultimately to benefit themselves.

    @ holymacmoses

    I entirely agree with your comments at 7.29pm. The more questions asked and the more discussion, from all sides, the better. Too much has been allowed to be done without investigation.
    But the analogy of Ahab and the whale, I’m wondering who might be Ishmael and survive intact to tell the tale?

    @ whorattledyourcage

    ‘You missed a comedy classic! ?’

    No I believe I read yours at 10.35pm. Hilarious and on the money. Well done.

  190. Patsy Millar says:

    I’ve only seen a clip on twitter (I don’t have a TV) but the scene at the lunch table was like 3 wee wifies hingin’ oot the windae in a Bud Neil cartoon.

  191. Dan says:

    Polly says: at 12:15 pm

    I’ve heard rumours that the person behind it is going for independent position at next election

    They weren’t rumours unless Martin was starting them himself or testing the water to see what response he got which may explain why the tweet thread is now deleted, but it approximately stated along the lines of:
    That’s it, I’m standing as a candidate for next year’s Holyrood election.
    I will on principle stand as an independent candidate.

    I mentioned on here a while back that independent Pro-Indy candidates standing on the Regional List hinders the concept of a Pro-Indy List Party such as ISP, as there is division in campaigning messaging across the region, and also no pooling of votes between an independent candidate and a Party making it all the harder to achieve thresholds were both could be elected.

  192. Polly says:

    @ Dan

    I agree with what you say. I didn’t see him say it but saw someone mention it about him. Like you I don’t think it a good idea in general for the scheme of ISP or averarching list party and what is trying to be achieved and don’t like it in particular because with the various newspaper campaigns/legal threats and now this it felt too ego driven and dragging too many people with hopes being encouraged to be raised sky high. I’m sceptical in general and cautious about things and something just seems off but I agree it’s better than nothing at present so hope he ‘wins’.

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top