The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Gun fired, smoke everywhere

Posted on December 09, 2020 by

The Scottish Parliament website has just published a letter from Peter Murrell following his appearance at the Salmond inquiry yesterday.

The media is focusing on Murrell’s continued evasion of the question of his WhatsApp usage (Murrell bizarrely states he has several messaging apps installed on his phone but uses none of them), but there’s a much more interesting revelation in the second of the letter’s two sections.

This is a direct, unambiguous and categorical statement from the First Minister that the investigation into the false allegations against Salmond was a Scottish Government matter that was absolutely nothing to do with the SNP.

Her failure to record the use of her private office at the Scottish Parliament to discuss the issue on 29 March 2018 (despite repeated denials that such a thing happened at all), and to take minutes of that discussion and of subsequent meetings at her home to consider the issue, and her numerous statements that the matter was private party business (now revealed by Murrell to be false) are all therefore indisputably breaches of the Ministerial Code.

The net draws ever tighter.


[EDIT 3.43pm: We’re informed, interestingly, by an SNP member that despite Murrell’s statement that the above email was sent to “all members of the Scottish National Party” on 27 August 2018, no such email was in fact received by them on that date.

They did get a DIFFERENT email, with the same title, three days earlier, which also made it plain that the investigation was being conducted under the auspices and procedures of the Scottish Government, not the SNP. We attach that email below.

There was also a statement released by Nicola Sturgeon in a tweet on 26 August 2018 which contains some of the same text as that quoted by Murrell.

If any SNP members can verify that they received the 27 August 2018 email described in Murrell’s letter and can forward it to us, please drop us a line.]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 09 12 20 15:57

    Gun fired, smoke everywhere | speymouth

  2. 09 12 20 20:17

    Gun fired, smoke everywhere – News of the world

  3. 11 12 20 22:36

    Gun fired, smoke everywhere | The New York Press News Agency

210 to “Gun fired, smoke everywhere”

  1. Kevin Cargill says:

    The unionist media and unionist politicians will say nothing about this. They know that if Nicola Sturgeon resigns then a real supporter of Independence and true activist for the cause will get the job and the union is fucked. Meanwhile who’s going to be first on the SNP side to ask for her resignation?

  2. ScotsRenewables says:

    Thon shoogly peg is hingin oot the wa’ noo…

  3. faolie says:

    Increasingly unsurprised by all these wee leakages which are pointing to something explosive about to happen within the SNP and /or the government – and mibs before the GE too.

    I just listened to Peter Murrell’s evidence to the committee and, to my mind, didn’t come out of well. Just seemed evasive. Like, first he says he wasn’t home when NS & AS met at their house. Then later in the hearing, he says he arrived home while the meeting was still in progress!

    And that text he sent about the ‘police twiddling their thumbs’ and ‘good time to pressure them’ was, apparently, the one time in 40 years that he hadn’t been careful with his words because he was so upset. So upset about his colleague for over 40 years being involved in sexual harassment claims he’s wondering how to put pressure on the police to do something because he thinks they’re daudling.

    Still paying my dues but I’m wondering for how much longer 🙁

  4. WhoRattledYourCage says:

    After all the in-your-face brass-necked brazenness, dictstorial directives, independence ignoring, Machiavellian manoeuvering to destroy her mentor, use of the mentally ill and useful idiot swarmtroopers online to attack her opponents, endless selfie-servings with adoring myopic devotees, playing at being the wacky indulgent hip auntie to a pack of sniffy middle class wannabe-American dolts, turning the arts scene into a racist circus, naked misandry, ignoring of the working class base of the party and their problems in her dealings…and on and on…there’s not a chance this weird and disturbing woman will ever resign, at least. The lady’s not for turning.

  5. Nell G says:

    In normal times this would be enough for a resignation. Unfortunately live in a post- truth era where populism and deception reign supreme. Nicola will rouse her rabble just as Trump has when her position is threatened. Expect a full on assault on AS and JC in the media.

  6. shiregirl says:

    Same email as above sent to me 24th August 1440.

    No longer a member. I’m getting the popcorn in for this.

  7. Robert graham says:

    Must be something in the water, a previously undetected addition to our drinking water has rendered some people in the SNP with unknown special powers of invisibility and you can’t touch us Syndrome , usually people under pressure present outward signs , undue sweating or nervousness , well not these Two the double act are exhibiting none of these , bloody good acting worthy of a Oscar if ever I saw it a real eye opener as how convincing they are.

  8. Jill Sharpe says:

    Be careful all this does not have the desired purpose of removing more undesirables from the party i.e. those of you who want the Murrells out.

  9. Stuart MacKay says:

    This First Minister goes on at great length that this is Scottish Government business in this tweet

  10. Hatuey says:

    You’re playing a blinder on this, Rev. It’s a joy to watch…

    But I think I see where this is going…

    When Sturgeon’s account is at odds with the facts or any previous accounts she has given, that’s when she is acting as leader of the SNP.

    When she’s telling the truth, that’s her acting as leader of the Government.

    It’s like that famous T-Shirt with words on the front that suggest “the message on the back is true”, and on the back it says “the message on the front is false”.

    I heard they’re talking about asking PM back in for a chat. I don’t know why they can’t chat to him and the rest of the Council leaders on WhatsApp.

  11. There's a Stormski Coming says:

    Mine was received 24 Aug 2018, 14:40 & is exactly the same as your email above. Doing a search I can confirm that I have never received an email from SNP/Nicola Sturgeon with the text given to the committee.

  12. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “This First Minister goes on at great length that this is Scottish Government business in this tweet”

    Cheers, edited in.

  13. Been thinking for a while now that those in power will be watching Wings for the truth. Saves them a lot of bother etc

  14. James Horace says:

    A repost from another thread, as I am still none the wiser…

    may have missed something way back, or maybe even recently, but what is the relevance of Whatsapp itself?

    When Kenny got handed evidence of the messages from Murrell, it was widely reported that they were Whatsapp messages at the time. The #whatsappmurrell hashtag became quite popular around this time, and Kenny’s article here also mentioned Whatsapp a lot. From memory (correct me if I am wrong) there were also screengrabs of the conversation, direct from Whatsapp.

    Then, it seems to have been corrected that these messages were “text messages” rather than Whatsapp.

    Is this true?

    And if so, what does Whatsapp have to do with anything?

    Please join the dots for me, if I am being thick…

  15. Astonished says:

    Has Mr Murrell just thrown Mrs Murrell under a very big bus ?


  16. Flower of Scotland says:

    I don’t seem to have received any of these at all. I’ve been in the SNP for over 50 years.

    This whole situation stinks now and has right from the beginning!

  17. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Kevin Cargill in the first response to this post, said pretty-much what I was thinking.

    If Baroness TRuthless does not lead on this at FMQs tomorrow – and goes in with all guns blazing – then we can be fairly-certain there is an Establishment plot to keep the Murrells in-power within the SNP – at least for4 the time being.

    They are keeping their powder dry until the Holyrood camopaign begins inearnest, then they will hit the Murrells with everything.

    The SNP have to lance the boil before New Year, and get the new leadership team in-place well before the campaign begins. Or they are in deep doo-dah.

  18. Doug McGregor says:

    Can we make sure that he tells us where the £590 k is before they go?

  19. susanXX says:

    I’m truly disgusted by the SNP leadership. Charge them all. Nothing more to say.

  20. Nosey says:

    All hell is about to break!! I’ve got the popping corn at the ready. Me thinks Mrs Murrell is definitely holed up in holyrood by the Tories. If big mouth Ruthie doesn’t go to town with this tomorrow in first minister’s questions, then we all will know for sure, the Murrell’s are unionists plants I think most of us have known this for a very long time, given sturgeon has been sitting on her hands since 2014 ignoring all calls to seek a referendum. It’s sickening as what she’s doing, folk are getting really angry now. I’m just wondering who has the bottle in the NEC to call for the Murrell’s resignation?????? PLEASE

  21. Giesabrek says:

    I can confirm I’ve received pretty much the same emails as listed above and in particular the one in question from Nicola Sturgeon was received on the 24th August 2018, not the 27th August.

  22. Stuart MacKay says:

    It might be worth trawling through all the press articles that Google returns with the search terms “the investigation into complaints about Alex Salmond” – us the double quotes as google will search for the sentence not the inidivdual words.

    The Huffington Post article, where I found the tweet (page 7 or so of the results) also had this:

    Leslie Evans, Permanent Secretary at the Scottish Government, said the complaints were raised in January and Salmond was notified in March about an investigation.

    I’ve not been following the timeline but I thought that the meetings with Aberdein etc were in March/April. The mention here that Lesley Evans said it started in January would mean that the First Minister surely would have known at this time – unless Evans was acting on behalf of another “entity”.

  23. Black Joan says:

    I was an SNP member at the time and received neither message.

  24. SilverDarling says:

    Smoke for a smokescreen.

    They look like they are playing for time and trying to keep stuff hidden until after the Holyrood elections. It does not inspire confidence in the transparency of the party or current government.

  25. Hatuey says:

    Socrates, you’re bang on with that. It’s the issue party loyalists don’t seem to understand – if the leadership survives this it means the election is going to be dominated by it. It could really hurt them too; aside from the impression it makes on the minds of pro-Indy types and the certain loss of votes there, how many non party members in the middle ground are going to take a very dim view of this and other stuff?

    Sturgeon and Murrell are electoral liabilities for the SNP and it’s for that reason they need to go, before it’s too late. The worst thing that could happen for the SNP is they scrape through this, damaged and tainted, and they go into an election totally compromised.

    Mark my words, everything that gets said in here about conspiracies and an innocent man being targeted, the abuse of power, corruption, etc., will play a huge part in the Tory campaign if they’re still there.

  26. Alastair says:

    Re Having a number of messaging apps on his phone could be fare enough but your screenshot yesterday is only possible if you have registered an account which means using the app and having activated and signed up to a live account account.

  27. finnz says:

    The meeting on the 29th March did not inform the FM there was an investigation into Salmond, therefore it cannot have been Government business.

  28. Margaret Lindsay says:

    The husband and I were both members at the time and received no such email.

  29. A Person says:

    -Nell G-

    Aye, and look at what’s happened to Trump now: a farcical has-been, shouting at clouds. Keep the faith!

  30. Terry says:

    Alex – will ye no come back again? Let’s face it you and Bonnie Prince Charlie both share the same birthday – the 31st December. (I know, I know – it’s all fanciful. But at least you BOTH actually made the effort to regain our sovereignty!)

    Bonnie charlie’s noo awa
    Safely o’er the friendly main
    Mony’s a heart will break in twa
    Should he ne’er come back again
    And mony a ("Tractor" - Ed) ‘mang the isles
    Brak the band o’ nature’s law
    And many a ("Tractor" - Ed) wi’ his wiles
    Sought to wear his life awa

    And will ye no’ come back again?
    Will ye no’ come back again?
    Better lo’ed ye canna be
    Will ye no’ come back again?

    The hills he trode were a’ his ain
    And bed beneath the birken tree
    The bush that hid him on the plain
    There’s none on earth can claim but he
    And whene’er i hear the blackbird sing
    Unto the e’ening sinking down
    Or merl that maks the woods to ring
    To me they hae nae ither soun’

    And will ye no’ come back again?
    Will ye no’ come back again?
    Better lo’ed ye canna be
    Will ye no’ come back again?

  31. Hamerdoon says:

    I can confirm the email containing the NS statement was delivered to me on 24 August 2018 at 14.41.

  32. Nally Anders says:

    No emails received.

  33. James Horace says:

    All this “the Murrells” are UK Gov plants is a wee bit too far fetched for me.

    Corrupt, yes.

    Not entirely focussed on Indy, yes.

    Nauseating with their Woko Haram agenda, yes.

    But UK gov plants? Thats a little too big a stretch for me.

  34. msdidi says:

    I received the email sent by NS on the 24th August but definitely did not get the one referred to by PM as sent on the 27th.
    My email to 8 MSP’s (Alex Rowley MSP, Liz Smith MSP, Dean Lockhart MSP, Mark Ruskell MSP, Murdo Fraser MSP, Alexander Stewart MSP, Claire Baker MSP and John Swinney MSP)
    has had 3 replies from Alex, Murdo and Claire – all in support of the amendment. Nothing from the others. I did tell John Swinney that I would be watching the debate on Thursday and if he votes against the amendment he will not get my vote in May…I have voted SNP (because I want independence – not as a fan of either Swinney or Wishart!) in every election for 48 years!

  35. Bob Mack says:


    Geoff Aberdein who was actually at that very meeting would disagree with you. His sworn testimony in court was exactly that it was about the complaints and investigation which was being conducted by the Scottish government ,not the SNP.

    Therefore it could only be government business.

  36. Alan Mackintosh says:

    Yep just checked, I received only the second email on the 24th Aug at 14.39. Nothing on 27th.

  37. willie says:

    Well played Rev Stu.

    The treachery and lying from the Murrells just becomes more and more exposed. At some point, and maybe not too far from now, the whole thing is going to unravel completely for the Murrells.

    Their time is up and it is not difficult to see big big changes in the not too distant future.

    Keep up the good work Rev Stu.

  38. As an older person now, having fought for CND, Women’s Rights, Employment Rights and especially Freedom for Scotland I’m struggling to get my heed around all this shit. It is a shit show and we should all be ashamed. Time to let COMMON SENSE reign.
    SNP need a whip from Scottish people

  39. Muscleguy says:

    I had a twitter exchange with an utterly devoted and myopic devotee to Sturgeon which I explained to them very plainly why Sturgeon had broken the minsterial code and lied to parliament. I pointed out the lie was admitted when it was corrected. I urged them to look up the ministerial code if they did not believe me the behaviour around the meeting was a resigning offence.

    But still they did not wish to accept any of it. Some people are really, really deep within the personality cult of the sainted Nicola. I said that since they were not receptive that the exchange was thus at and end and goodbye. But still they continued so I had to employ the block button to save my sanity.

    When Nicola is finally forced to step down some time after it has become clear that she should people like this are going to have mental problems coming to terms with the realit I tried to make them see.

  40. Beaker says:

    @Socrates MacSporran says:
    9 December, 2020 at 4:37 pm
    “They are keeping their powder dry until the Holyrood campaign begins in earnest, then they will hit the Murrells with everything.”

    Spot on.

  41. Patrick Roden says:

    Murrell to be recalled by the panel to answer questions about his contradictions:

    Not looking good for the Murrells!

  42. Muscleguy says:

    @James Horace
    Then answer me this, the media know all this stuff, they are not idiots. They know Sturgeon and Murrell are toast. They almost certainly, like Craig Murray know a lot more than their editors will let them say.

    Yet there is no attempt to go get those political scalps, of the SNP by the UNIONIST media. Who usually salivate at the mere prospect by screaming RESIGN at SNP ministers. They are utterly silent about Nicola and Peter. Utterly silent.

    Plants is perhaps putting it mildly, when it comes to Murrell never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by lazy stupidity. I suspect a deal has been done, the big bung thrown at the media may have been part of the deal as well.

    IF Sturgeon survives to ask Johnson for yet another S30 permission and is rebuffed. IF there is no further action then you can assume her side of the deal is to manage devolution in the union and manage Yes expectations.

    Hopefull there will be some ISP MSPs in the chamber to castigate her. Maybe the media will love a spat between Yes parties and report it and maybe some will, finally wake up.

  43. Stuart MacKay says:

    Lenny Hartley, here you go,

  44. Papko says:

    “They are keeping their powder dry until the Holyrood campaign begins in earnest, then they will hit the Murrells with everything.”

    Spot on.

    So its an actual case of SNPBAAD, but the usual MSM Tories & Yoons are holding back, as if they can carry the Murrells till May they will be able to launch a full scale media attack on them and the SNP, even though 58% of Scots (2.2 million of us) don’t pay much attention to MSM SNPBAAD stories anyway.

    What a cunning strategy.

  45. Bob Mack says:

    Nicola is very clear that Alex was under Government investigation in August 2017 and not one held under the auspices of the SNP.

    Therefore any decisions taken thereafter relate to government
    action rather than SNP. The government found a block that did not allow them to prosecute or discipline former First Ministers. Somewhere along this timeline Nicola sanctioned changes in policy which would allow such action.

    She may not have created it herself but she signed it off, knowing that the Government were actively investigating Alex.

    Alex won his review but then Leslie Evans involved the police as a fall back position. Alex won that as well.

    Nicola we are led to believe knew nothing of these subsequent actions after she asked the Civil Service to create a new policy, because she recused herself from the process.

    She knew how and who it was going to be used against. But she did not want to be publicly seen to have blood on her hands.

    This is disgusting.

  46. christine says:

    I received that e-mail on 24/8/2018. I am no longer a member. I think I loathe the Murrells, as their secrets and lies unravel and their true characters are revealed. There are no big secrets about the monstrous and vicious and indefensible actions they took to “ Get Salmond “ They are cowards and saving their own skins is all that matters.

    You deserve our heartfelt thanks and gratitude, Stuart, for the pivotal role you continue to play, a true Scottish stalwart.

  47. Stuart MacKay says:


    Killing independence is probably not possible. You’d just be going through a succession of leaders, each slightly more intransigent than the previous one. Much better to kill the desire for independence by have the faults and frailties of devolved government on show so they people generally give up on the idea as they see it’s little better than the system they hope to break free from.

    If I was head of MI5 I wouldn’t be wasting my money on Nicola Sturgeon. Instead I’d be making sure the line of people following her were even more inept and feckless – kind of like the various people we all know and love.

  48. Patrick Roden says:

    I agree that the claim that Nicola is a ‘plant’ is a step too far.
    She would have needed to have been a deep sleeper since she joined the SNP as a schoolchild, so a plant is not realistic.

    However, the idea that MI5 has something on them is not all that far-fetched, as I have seen questions raised about the Murrells ‘relationship’ and this may be just one avenue in which the classic ‘honeytrap’ so beloved by MI5, is hatched.

    We all know for a fact that attempts will have been made to infiltrate the SNP ever since they became a serious threat to Englands’ elite, so who have they ‘got’ so far?

    Smith? Nicolson? McDonald? Wishart? Black?

    Why are these people acting so bizarrely? why are they breaking the SNP’s long famed in party discipline, and turning on the SNP’s own supporters/members?

    Thousands of people have resigned their membership because they have been insulted by these 5 people, and yet these same people are left to continue to insult and alienate members at will. what’s going on?

    Not forgetting the disastrous GRA legislation, and the manner in which it is being delivered, and the disgraceful way people who have legitimate concerns from within the wider SNP/Yes movement, are being responded to!

    This would certainly not be allowed to continue by people who had independence as their priority but would be just the way people who wanted to divide the SNP and stop the momentum towards independence, would want the SNP to act!

    People who would have otherwise had independence as their focus (for instance Wings), instead of focusing on independence, are instead having to concentrate on reporting what’s going on within the SNP and what the hell is happening within the woke branch of the Scottish government.

    And that’s exactly what MI5 would have wanted!

  49. Helen Yates says:

    Murrell remains as CEO today and Nicola looks as confident as ever, this should ring alarm bells for anyone, and then there’s Leslie Evans, where she should have been sacked she had her contract extended instead, this says to me the party has been taken over at the top by unionists. for the record neither myself nor my husband received either of these e-mails, we were both members until last year. I’d love to think this will finish her off but I can’t help but think she’ll survive this. maybe the party itself needs to make a move on her.

  50. Not Bob says:

    I’d never heard Peter Murrell speak before yesterday. I’d assumed he would be suave, urbane, handsome, confident, persuasive, omniscient, commanding, unflappable, reasonable, effortless. Radiating the stature of a man accepting a £100k stipend for the cause when he could be earning ten times that as a captain of industry. Imagine my surprise to witness instead a nervous, baldy, hesitant little thing squeaking away like Sooty.
    CEO material? Of the SNP perhaps. I’ve seen middle managers in life assurance companies who impressed me more.

  51. Papko says:

    @Stuart McKay
    “Killing independence is probably not possible. You’d just be going through a succession of leaders, each slightly more intransigent than the previous one. Much better to kill the desire for independence by have the faults and frailties of devolved government on show so they people generally give up on the idea as they see it’s little better than the system they hope to break free from.”

    A Fabian strategy then? keep the SNP in power for a s long as possible (say 20 years from 2007 to 2026) and watch the shiny idealism wash off, and corruption and cynicism take their place.

    What else can the Yoons do? they have no arguments.

  52. Bob Mack says:

    I remember someone( it might have been Stu) stating that Mark MacDonald might have been the litmus to test this policy.

    Was McDonald prosecuted by the courts? One of the assault charges against Alex was he touched a girl’s hair in a lift and remarked how wavy it was. Was McDonald “crime” any less?

  53. Ron Maclean says:

    The First Minister of Scotland and leader of its governing party along with her husband the Chief Executive of the same party are called to give evidence to her government’s Harassment Complaints Committee. Overlooking that that in itself seems to provide grounds for investigation, the conduct of both appears, at best, dubious and therefore questionable. That raises the query – are they being held accountable to their party’s procedures.

    From the SNP’s Constitution, Rules and Standing Orders –

    2. Aims
    The aims of the Party are—
    (a)  Independence for Scotland; …
    (b)  the furtherance of all Scottish interests.

    The SNP conduct Standards;
    s4: Every member owes a duty to the Party to refrain from conduct likely to cause damage to or hinder the Party’s proper pursuit of its aims in accordance with its constitutionally laid down policy and direction.

    The National Secretary (Stewart Stevenson) acts as guardian of the Constitution of the Party.

    Are those with the power to halt and improve the deteriorating standards within Scotlands biggest political party refusing to take any initiative? Are they just easily swayed, attention seeking, time wasting mediocrities who have lost sight of the requirements of their country and Constitution while concentrating on irrelevant but controversial issues which deflect scrutiny away from their limited abilities?

    Ref: Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, Construction and procurement of ferry vessels in Scotland,
    ‘403. … the Scottish Government’s approach to the procurement and construction of new vessels to serve Scotland’s ferries network has been short-term, piecemeal and lacking in strategic direction.’

    Like the governance of its country?

  54. Gareth says:

    I got the email on 24 August 2018

  55. ahundredthidiot says:

    NS isn’t a plant.

    But she has been turned East German style.

    One wonders what they have on her.

  56. Bob Mack says:


    Thanks Dan. I remember it now and on the events revealed over the last few days it makes sense. I wasn’t sure if he was ousted as a result of an internal SNP inquiry or a Scottish government one.

  57. dakk says:

    I recall K1 posting an excerpt some months ago from the inquiry/Guardian I think, which stated that a civil servant going by the name of Hynds admitted it was he who instructed Nicola to pursue retrospective “harassment” HR policy.

    That comment (from Hynds) removed clarity of the gunholder if not the smoke for me re the Alex Salmond allegations farce.

  58. Bob Mack says:


    I listened to Mr Hynd give evidence. Perhaps you should too.

    Nicola knew about the Government investigation in August 2017.

    Mr Hynd testified that he found a gap in the policy in October 2017.

    Two months AFTER the investigation was started. Makes you rather think they were looking at the possibilities if they went after Alex don’t you think ?

  59. Christian Schmidt says:

    I laughed about AS “is now challenging the Scottish Government’s procedure in court. The Scottish Government refutes his criticism of its process and will defend its position vigorously” – that hasn’t aged well 😉

    More seriously is “this focus on process cannot deflect from the fact that complaints were made that could not be ignored” – this ignores the fact that processes are there for a reason, and that is to ensure that the right conclusion are reached. I think it is a fair comment that if the Scottish Government had actually followed its own processes properly then Alex Salmond would have been cleared pretty clearly…

  60. Sylvia says:

    Letter reveals Leslie Evans met Salmond accusers

    Permanent Secretary meeting with complainers

    “Ms Baillie asked whether the Permanent Secretary had spoken to the complainers following her consideration of the initial report from the Investigating Officer. The documentation sets out that the Permanent Secretary spoke to Ms A and to Ms B in early March 2018, to discuss the investigation of their complaints in the context of the new Procedure, and to allow the Permanent Secretary to explain her role and the SG’s duty of care as their employer”.

  61. wee monkey says:

    Peter Murrel called back, this time to not talk in circles apparently…

    Scot gov allowing overseas holiday travel slammed for building second wave.

    “Scientific analysis looking at the make-up of the virus reveals that in the second wave Scotland saw imported strains associated with UK and foreign travel”

    Is anyone surprised at this cf?? Well apart from St nicola.

  62. Muscleguy says:

    @Wee Monkey
    If even as a citizen I was to fly to NZ to see family or whatever I would be put in mandatory govt isolation for a minimum of 2 weeks. Even if i had the money and I could have tapped the estate going back for my mother’s funeral last month would have been utterly pointless.

    So i wrote a poem for her which my youngest read, very well I’m told, for me at the funeral.

    Scotland and England’s voluntary isolation is a farce. In NZ they put you in a hotel, unused because the tourists are gone, ringed by security fencing with 24hr security. They test you for covid regularly and you don’t get out without two consecutive negative tests.

    That is a quarantine system. They’re talking about moving things to military barracks instead.

  63. stonefree says:

    slightly O/T I whittered on about liability, and the missing money. it surfaced circa end of may 2008 in regard to Labour one of the articles, the subject ran for a little while

  64. Bob Mack says:

    I think the Inquiry members are readings Wings. It’s no coincidence that they are doing what they are. Same language,same points.

  65. Bob Mack says:

    !elsie Evans found to have met two complainers in March 2018,
    despite telling the Inquiry that she did not as it would be jnappropriate.

    They have put out a statement to try and justify it but she lied under oath.

    Put this in context. The civil service is a large employer.

    In no other organisation I know do you get to meet the Head of the organisation via a complaint. They must remain neutral and detached. Here again is proof she deliberately involved herself in this case to achieve an end.

  66. dakk says:

    Bob Mack said

    “Nicola knew about the Government investigation in August 2017.”

    “Makes you rather think they were looking at the possibilities”


    Operative word being “they”.

    I still don’t know that NS was the instigator.

    The “government” civil servants were applying the pressure along with some others in SNP I believe.

    The response of NS to that pressure may be more the issue.

    The # Me Too campaign at the time would likely have weighed on some people’s judgement.

    I’m still waiting for a smoking gun in NS hand before I condemn her the way some condemned and still do an innocent Alex Salmond.

  67. kapelmeister says:

    Whatever their precise motivations are, whatever is exactly going on in their heads, the Murrells have been undermining the cause of Scottish independence and will continue to do so if left in post. Their removal from the public life of our nation is urgently needed.

  68. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    That Times story – – about Lesley Evans (the permanent secretary), raises a pertinent point. A quote from it:-

    ““The documentation sets out that the permanent secretary spoke to Ms A and to Ms B in early March 2018, to discuss the investigation of their complaints in the context of the new procedure, and to allow the permanent secretary to explain her role and the SG’s duty of care as their employer,” she said.
    “The permanent secretary explained her consideration of the initial investigation report, and informed Ms A and Ms B of her decision and what that meant in terms of the next steps in the procedure. The meetings also provided a further opportunity for the permanent secretary to reiterate the options for further support and assistance.””

    As this was a government “procedure”, how was Liz Lloyd, Nicola Sturgeon’s chief of staff, who is not mentioned in the Times story, able to discuss the matter with Geoff Aberdein, Alex Salmond’s former chief of staff, in the same month, March 2018?

  69. Bob Mack says:


    Nicola Sturgeon accepted a policy that existed nowhere else in the UK. She could easily have said she would accept it if the rest of the UK did too If she was reluctant.

    If she had refused to accept it, then Whitehall who were Leslie Evans bosses would have backed Nicola as well. They advised Evans against the policy.

    So somewhere along the line whether you accept it or not, someone in Holyrood gave Evans permission to proceed with this move. Who could that be apart from Nicola? Nobody.

  70. kapelmeister says:


    “I still don’t know that NS was the instigator.”

    She was and is the boss of the SG. She could have put a stop to it all. That makes the matter of whether she was prime mover of the conspiracy of secondary importance.

  71. Iain More says:

    Eh. THE SNP ARE THE SG. If they arent the SG then who is? Sturgeon must go!!!!!

  72. nickylee says:

    The whole NS is a plant/has been turned thing could of course be a simple case of the old adage “power corrupts”.

    She may simply have turned against independence because she’s realised that the moment that aim is achieved her current position of power evaporates with it.

    Now you may argue that the SNP could reform into a new party afterward with her still at the head of it and win with a landslide – but there’s no guarantee she’ll have the power she has now.

    In this hypothetical, we as a country could decide on a system of governance that does not give as much power to a single person as the current system does, for example.

  73. Bob Mack says:

    @Brian Doonthetoon,

    Possibly because they all knew what was happening? Even though the process was supposedly confidential of course.

  74. Wendy says:

    I didn’t receive that email…all I received was an invitation to a ‘Beach Busk’ on 24/08/18 then nothing until 13/09/18 which was a branch meeting.

  75. Mark Russell says:

    I was going to write that I was astonished that you haven’t yet figured out what this entire case was all about, but then thought – perhaps erroneously – that you have no experience in such matters.

    Isn’t it perfectly obvious by now? This isn’t a conspiracy – more a classical tragedy. Consider the principles and their personal history and relationships – then the disclosures regarding the conduct of one during his trial. Turn back the clock and a very capable young woman and a couple of older, powerful and impressionable men.

    None of us – except those three – know the emotional mechanics of the relationships or what might have happened to influence and taint respective friendships and expectations. But respectfully – use your imagination and your own experience – if you have any.

    These have been tragic events for those espousing Scottish independence – and it would be the greatest shame if the necessary discourse exploring these matters were impaired by the (understandable) disagreement between the principals. Circumstances exacerbated and complicated the entire episode – perhaps with untoward influence from the civil service and the Crown Office – but had Mr Salmond behaved with complete propriety and honour, then none of this would have happened.

    It is a tragedy for everyone – but particularly for Moira, who bears the greatest burden. I suspect most empathetic Scots would agree.

    They share a similar loss.

  76. Betsy says:

    Checked my emails, nothing at all for the whole month of August 2018 except unrelated branch stuff.

  77. Bob Mack says:

    @Mark Russell,

    There are many elements to this story and not necessarily the ones you highlight. There is also ambition ,protection of position and fear of rivalry.

    If you know anything about Nicola Sturgeon, you would know she is just as demanding as Alex ever was,so don’t let the smile deceive you. Behind that’s a very determined lady who wants no bad publicity.

  78. Papko says:

    Mark Russell

    “Isn’t it perfectly obvious by now? This isn’t a conspiracy – more a classical tragedy. Consider the principles and their personal history and relationships – then the disclosures regarding the conduct of one during his trial. Turn back the clock and a very capable young woman and a couple of older, powerful and impressionable men.”

    Very eloquently said, I have been trying to phrase that same thought for months (without getting banned).

    classical tragedy is very apposite.

  79. @ Mark Russell at 9.29pm: What on earth are you blethering about? If the attempt to jail Alex Salmond on false charges was the only problem with the SNP leadership, you might just about have a valid point, but that isn’t the only problem, is it? We also have the total inaction in securing our independence, that £500,000-odd in ‘ring-fenced’ donations which have vanished, and the focus on anti-factual gender and hate-crime nonsense. And if Sturgeon and Murrell have nothing to hide, why are they doing everything in their power to obstruct the inquiry, and finding it so difficult to tell the truth about what they did?

  80. Bob Mack says:

    Can anyone n this forum name me someone who has risen through the dogpit of politics to become Prime Minister of First Minister because they were vulnerable or nice?
    Any name at all ?

  81. Big Jock says:


    That doesn’t excuse the cover up. It also doesn’t excuse trying to frame a man on criminal charges, when they are matters of a moral societal matter.

    Salmond’s moral compass may be found wanting. But to me that is completely irrelevant here. It was alleged attempted rape or as near as that description. Every second male executive would be up for these charges using this logic.

  82. kapelmeister says:

    Mark Russell

    Sorry, but you can’t spin this as a clash of personalities. As Michael Laing pointed out, the list of the Murrell’s delinquencies and wrongdoings is just too long. Compared to all that, Alex Salmond’s personal shortcomings are very little.

  83. holymacmoses says:

    Mark Russell

    I find it ironic that I find myself writing and saying to you that to suggest that the Trials of Mr Salmond represent the make up of a ‘Greek Tragedy’. It’s ironic because that suggestion is so simplistic when studying this case and it had never dawned on me, before, just how simple a Greek tragedy was:-)

  84. Dan says:

    Bob Mack says: at 9:15 pm

    Possibly because they all knew what was happening? Even though the process was supposedly confidential of course.

    Aye, it looks like there will be enough Scooby Doo episodes to make a series… and they would have got away with it if it wasn’t for those pesky kids cybernats…

  85. willie says:

    Patrick Roden at 6.57pm considers how Sturgeon, Wishart, Nicolson Black et al may have been turned by the security services.

    This is a very real probability. Compromising politicians is one of the key ways the security services work. And neither do the individuals compromised have been guilty of their indiscretion because they can be very easily set up. Its the oldest trick in the book.

    A penchant for other girls might not be the thing the FM wants over the papers. A lavender marriage with a husband with an interest in deviant sex, little boys, promiscuous gay cruising, extra marital affairs – all very much in human frailty or easy to set up.

    Or dodgy financial dealings. Or failed attempts to destroy a political rival. The FM and her circle may have thought about doing in Salmond, but could well have been helped along that route – ergo Police, Fiscal etc. And now, they are exposed for their dark deeds that they should never ever gave done.

    Yes, democracy is not a hallmark of the UK. read its colonial history and you’ll see that. Time we brought Salmond back.

  86. Mark Russell says:

    @ Michael Laing at 9.46pm

    I don’t know, Michael – I’ve kept up with the disclosures in this site and others – and have been just as perplexed as you. These would ordinarily be matters of utmost importance (and common sense vis-a-vis the gender issues) – but seen in context – of personal emotions and external events – they are at best, a distraction, but certainly an irrelevance.

    Outside this bubble, there are the dangers associated with the virus outbreak affecting this whole island – and beyond that, if we somehow prevail, the impending ecocide by the middle of the century. Reading the comments on this forum reminds me of the hysteria generated by other historical events – the Inquisition and other barbarities.

    I share the dissatisfaction of evidence from many actors – James Wolfe, Peter Murrell and the civil servants. I would prefer NOT to hear the evidence from Ms Sturgeon or Mr Salmond – but hope some other accommodation can be reached.

    If you know people and can accept your own failings and still have understanding – you will understand why. There is a much bigger picture here. Please try and see it.

  87. kapelmeister says:

    Mark Russell

    The bigger picture is that Scotland is being shafted because we have a corrupt and ineffectual leader.

  88. Tannadice Boy says:

    @Bob Mack 9 48pm
    The short answer is No. However I can name a few ministers that resigned for a lot less than is going on at present. Henry McLeish, Wendy Alexander, David McLetchie and more recently Mark Mac Donald and there have been others. So if we are talking about behaving honourably…

  89. Mark Russell says:

    @ Papko at 9.43pm

    It would be a wonderful story, if we all weren’t so emotionally involved, but I guess that will be its enduring and inescapable strength. I don’t hold much hope for the lessons of this to be applied in time for any salvation or hope – in any context, politically or personally. I think we’re all fucked as long as we stay on the same conveyor belt.

    It’s a great shame. Nicola Sturgeon reminds me very much of Jennie Lee – in so many ways. She’s canny, principled and honest – not withstanding the commentary here and elsewhere. She’s gained the respect of many people – way beyond the narrow confines of the independence movement. Maybe a time for everyone to take stock – not just the principles.

  90. Terry says:

    I got it too! No longer a member though

    I replied at the time to Nicola – “ I honestly think Alex is incapable of behaving like that.”

  91. velofello says:

    @ Mark Russell; “but had Alex Salmond behaved with complete propriety and honour,none of this would have happened”.

    Eh? He was found not guilty by his peers, is that not sufficient for you to then ponder why simply spurious complaints – he touched the hair on my head – were compiled by a coven(?) of persons so inept to fail to grasp the frail weakness of their strategy?

    Persons so inept.. perhaps,but in well-paid positions of authority, who when appearing before the investigating committee at Holyrood…cannot recall, are unsure, have to return and correct their statements? Your taxes are paying the salaries of such people.

    In the broader sense, sexual attraction is a devil of a thing, I read once an article by a lady regretting that as she aged, she had become invisible…to men. Is flirting, an enjoyable pastime, now off limits for fear of being accused of ‘touching her hair’.

  92. Terry says:

    Oops – i should say it was the 24 august one i got – not the pretend one three days later – no sign of that

  93. Daisy Walker says:

    If you take a wee step back from this and look at it from a distance.

    NS in her position as FM was made aware of 2 historic – and what turned out to be UTTERLY disproved, allegations of sexual offences against former FM and Leader of HER OWN PARTY – a man whose previous track record – had absolutely no such bad reputations attached, in spite of an open cheque book to any reporter, anywhere, who could dredge some up.

    She was informed that legally, the SNP had no jurisdiction over AS, as he had resigned from the party.

    She was informed under existing Scot Gov / employment procedures the complaints while they might constitute employment harassment procedures at the time of the offence – as AS was no longer employed by Scot Gov he was no longer under their remit and therefore, legally, there was nothing Scot Gov could legally do about it.

    Employment laws, are there to be used by employers and employees. They’re not there to police random members of the public.

    At this point in time, NS – with the greater good of Independence in mind – she should, have breathed a great big sigh of relief, shrugged her shoulders, drafted a very sympathetic letter to the complainers, and explained to them, that legally – both in employment law and SNP rules and regs – there were no legal levers available to deal with their complaints, and she had pursued every avenue.

    But lets just assume, she wanted to make absolutely sure, with the best of intentions. The civil service drafted the ‘retrospective’ legislation – which suddenly enables the complaints against AS to be dealt with.

    It was looked at by Westminster Civil Service – who told them in no uncertain terms – it was extremely unadvisable, unlikely to withstand any legal proceedings, and that it would certainly not be adopted anywhere else in the UK as policy.

    This gave NS, in her capacity as FM, and leader of the Party supposedly trying to fight for Scotland’s Independence, an absolute, totally legal, and morally upright OUT.

    Instead she signed off on it. She’s a lawyer ffs. A fundamental principle of committing any offence, is Guilty Intent. If the action was Not Illegal on the day it is carried out, for someone to re-write the law 4 years down the line, to entrap you, is basic, fundamentally unjust.

    Think about it, every day for a year you’re driving down the road obeying the speed limit. Today they Retrospectively change the speed limit on that road, and in effect make you guilty of speeding. No court in the land will entertain this.

    I do not want leaders – of my party, or any party, to cover up complaints of this nature.

    What I do expect of my party, is that when complaints of this nature come about, and procedures are legitimately followed which mean that legally there is not much they can do about it – I do not expect them to bend over backwards, write illegal procedures, waste millions of my tax payers money, to carry out a spurious, malignant, witch hunt ON ONE OF OUR OWN.

    There’s no shortage of Unionists in positions of power who can do that.

    There are obviously some who still think that NS was following her conscience, and attempting to be scrupulously kind to the poor wee wimen.

    Good intentions, coupled with malignant, dodgy legislation, aimed at your own team….

    Truly if that is what you believe, can I respectfully suggest, that while that might be the case, it is NOT the quality or skill set needed of the Leader of the Independence Movement at this, or any other time.

    And if your thinking that someone as demonstrably grossly incompetent – and/or wicked – has some magical plan B to deliver Indy when WM declines a S30 for a third time. Then Scotland really is too stupid to run its own affairs.

    Wake up and smell the shit.

  94. James Horace says:

    What do you think will come of this then Daisy?

    How will it all play out from here?

    Will Sturgeon make it to May?

    (I still think she will survive, one way or another)

  95. Mark Russell says:

    @ velofillo says at 10.33pm

    If I was in a relationship with someone who behaved like Alex Salmond admitted during his trial, I would seriously attempt to change his sex with shearing scissors. I don’t think it acceptable that someone I love would this it ok to have a lie down and a cuddle with someone else – unless it was completely non-sexual and they informed me about it immediately afterwards. That’s just me.

    Sexual attraction and flirting is cool with mature adults – respect and consent as a given. Some people are good at it – some aren’t. Some have no fucking experience whatsoever. 🙂

  96. kapelmeister says:

    Mark Russell

    If Nicola Sturgeon was, as you say, canny, principled and honest then we’d be currently gearing up for indyref2, the innocent Alex Salmond would never have had to appear in court and Peter Murrell would have been both sacked and divorced.

    Far from being canny, principled and honest, Sturgeon is strategy illiterate, a serial and brazen liar, and has the moral compass setting of a Mexican bandit leader.

  97. Bob Mack says:

    @Mark Russell,

    She’s canny ,principled and honest.

    Well at least you got one out of three right. She is canny.

  98. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

    It’s nice to know that Boris and Vauglinin dined on TURBOT tonight eh!

    Its ONLY the dearest fish on the market they consumed while some families can hardly afford fish fingers.

  99. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

    Von der leyen meant there lol

  100. John says:

    Marc @10:16

    That’s a pretty fancy dead squirell there!

  101. kapelmeister says:

    Ayrshire Rob

    Rather than hearing that Boris Johnson had dined on turbot I’d have preferred to hear that great white shark had dined on Boris Johnson.

  102. Bob Mack says:

    If Nicola is honest and principled then by extension it means you classify everybody else in the drama as a liar and immoral. That includes Geoff Abdrdein, the jury,and many many others who were excluded by legal process from revealing their evidence in support of Alex.

  103. David Caledonia says:

    There was a clown in the greenock telegraph the other night telling everyone about all the people who have been reported for moving about into other areas
    He seemed to be quite happy about all of this
    Now I know for a fact this clown travels to edinburgh all the time as his big minging coupon is there behind Saint Nicola of Wiznymee all the time
    Yes, he is our very own Stuart McMillan MSP from Inverclyde, a charmless doughnut and a big wind with a bag around it
    He obviously does not consider himself as one of the great unwashed as he is every where like a bad smell in a dirty cludgie

  104. mr thms says:

    I have always thought Article 50 was to facilitate the dissolution of the UK. The weird Internal Market Bill makes it seem the countries of the UK are already independent.

    The UK/EU agreement on Northern Ireland will create a border down the Irish Sea and the news tonight from Brussels says negotiators have until Sunday to figure out an agreement otherwise custom checks and tariffs come into effect on the 1st January.

    Scotland has powers with regard to fisheries, it is devolved, but few people are aware the Fisheries Act 2020 “provides powers to Scottish Ministers to execute functions in a reserved area, for example, to make orders in relation to marine conservation, marine planning and marine licensing in respect of the offshore region (12-200 nm).”

  105. Daisy Walker says:

    @ ‘James Horace says:
    9 December, 2020 at 10:38 pm
    What do you think will come of this then Daisy?’

    All of this has become the single point of focus for the Yes Movement.

    One side has seen more than enough evidence of foul play and no longer has any trust in Nicla. They also see the great big threat that Brexit will do, to the economy and in destroying Devolution/Holyrood.

    The other side, of true believers, won’t look at the evidence, can’t see the evidence, won’t listen to the evidence and nothing will dent their faith in Nicla.

    The first side thinks (probably wrongly) that if there is enough evidence comes out – just a little bit more, it will be so overwhelming, that all the wheels will go back on the Yes bus again and we can all start pushing in the same direction. With a great deal of speed.

    And while all eyes are on this ‘show’ – there are only 21 days before Breshit hits, and 5 months for the new Civil Service Hub in Edinburgh to take over all the powers of Holyrood before the May election.

    The only guaranteed method of not getting caught up in BritNat games – is to look at what campaign strategy and ground needs covered, and if it is not being covered, we need to do it. Which is sole destroying if there is no one pointing the way, shouting out the route, and singing the rallying song.

    The upcoming vote on gender/sex amendment as per Wings last post – will, or should identify all SNP MSP’s who are loyal to the GRA nonsense.

    If Scotland is to gain Indy –

    I think the Holyrood election in May has got to be plebiscite for Indy (one way or another – including with a confirmatory Indy Ref if appropriate).

    For that to happen – Independent candidates will need to be stood for votes 1 and 2 in all the seats where the above identified SNP GRA loyalists are sitting.

    And it would need to be backed up by a campaign starting now.

    And lastly – the closer this looked to working, the more likely it is that something will come up and the Holyrood election will get pulled…. or spiked.

    As to whether NS will remain – she got through the Conference. From now on until May there will be no more Polls showing support for Indy in the high 50’s%. It will drop now to around the 53% mark, no higher.

    The only way I see her going now, is if someone high up in the SNP falls on their sword and does a big reveal. And that would also need to be coupled with an organised take over by plan B group.

    Stranger things have happened, but …

    For Nicla – once Breshit is delivered, she’s in clover. Everything from then till May – deliver a big fail for the SNP – will be her bonus. She’ll get a lucrative deal on the international stage a la Tony Blair. Big Pharma pay very well I believe, and she’s been such a loyal advocate for their latest new market.

  106. Bob Mack says:

    Remember the Sophy Ridge interviw where Nicola claimed Alex was angry at her for not “colluding with him” to make the allegations go away. In fact Aberdein and Alex legal team were warning her the actions were illegal.

    In the interview she still persisted Salmond had questions to answer even though he was found not guilty by a court of law following their completely botched process. Still slinging mud.

    Principled, vulnerable ? My ass.

  107. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

    Yeah kapelmeister pity.

    To make ma blood boil even more just watched stv news there. Two English men arguing over the price of our grouse.
    Wan fae Edinburgh and wan fae London.To be fair the guy fae Edinburgh was saying it should be stopped.
    The arse fae London saying it’s not for sport,it goes in to food chain in London Aye fecking London ya bam at £100 a pop more like. Means feck all to us up here.


  108. G H Graham says:

    Where else in Scotland would two parochial, narrow minded north British branch managers with zero business experience pick up £1/4 million per year plus unlimited expenses & a generous pension scheme?

    Sturgeon & Murrell are attempting to avoid the potentially damaging consequences of this Holyrood inquiry because of a deep desire to retain their position of power, maintain the political status quo & pick up another £1.5 million to £2 million in earnings & pension contributions over the next five years.

    Forget MI5 plants or deep throat subversives. This is nothing more than two greedy bastards getting carried away with themselves.

    The vindictive, lesbian love club side show is simply an inevitable consequence of working long hours with like-minded, inward looking bureaucrats.

  109. Dunadd says:

    I can confirm the email containing the NS statement was delivered to me on 24 August 2018 at 14.41.
    Nothing on 27th.

  110. mr thms says:

    The Fisheries Act 2020 only received its Royal Assent on the 24th November!

    “.. equips the Devolved Administrations with greater fisheries management powers. This means each Administration will tailor their approach based on the specific needs of their industries and waters, enabling a move away from the inflexible and cumbersome Common Fisheries Policy.”

    Confirmation of a newly devolved ‘reserved power’ .

  111. crazycat says:

    @ Daisy Walker at 10.34

    She was informed that legally, the SNP had no jurisdiction over AS, as he had resigned from the party.

    Surely he didn’t resign till after the complaints procedure was triggered (29/08/18)? The day after his own judicial review started, in fact.

  112. Shug says:

    If she fails a vote of confidence can we have an election

  113. paul says:

    Mark russell 10:44pm:

    “If I was in a relationship with someone who behaved like Alex Salmond admitted during his trial, I would seriously attempt to change his sex with shearing scissors.”

    …or before you pull out the shears you might question the nature and ambitions of the co-respondent.
    Could they have been leading?
    Is only one sex predatory?
    Is only one sex obliged to decency,the other auto victimhood?
    While I do not know the complainers, they hardly come across as ingenues from the descriptions in court.

  114. yesbot says:

    Mark Russell@ 10:29 pm

    Your comparison..

    The only Open thing Nicola has championed is permitting others to ride rough shod over female rights and squandered the impetus for independence!

  115. Sandra Nel says:

    Scunnered with the SNP leadership. Murrell made an arse of himself and Nicola. Time for change – we deserve better.

  116. CameronB Brodie says:

    I’d hate folk to think I’m setting out to undermine the SNP, but here’s a look at “Keeping a watchful eye: Doctrines of accountability and transparency in the regulatory state by DR. MARTIN LODGE”. Which I think might prove instructive reading for the SNP’s NEC.

  117. Mark Russell says:

    “…or before you pull out the shears you might question the nature and ambitions of the co-respondent.”

    I make no comment regarding the complainants’ case- only what Alex Salmond admitted in evidence. Understand human nature and behaviour – the personalities and traits are there for all to see. Salmond is not a serial killer or a sex fiend like Savile or Epstein – although you might think so given the exposure and persecution – he’s just an ordinary human being with the same failings as most of us.

    But under the kind of magnifying glass scrutiny we see here and elsewhere in the media – the obvious reality becomes completely distorted – and deeply damaging.

  118. Quinie frae Angus says:

    @Daisy Walker at 10.34pm

    Thank you very much, Daisy, for setting out the sequence of events so clearly and concisely.

    That’s really helped me understand exactly what has gone on here, in a nutshell.

  119. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Crazycat

    AS, in addition highlighting to NS the the course of conduct she was proposing was illegal, including offering her access to his own legal advice confirming same, also, repeatedly offered her/Scot Gov the opportunity to resolve the matter in a legal and proportionate manner via legal arbitration.

    It was when these offers were refused, and NS continued down the ‘tainted by legal bias’ route, that AS instigated his legal appeal and at that point resigned from the SNP.

    So, you make a good point, why, when first informed, and determined to ‘deal’ with these historical (and later to be proved ‘inaccurate’ complaints, did NS not require AS to resign from the SNP – as this was the one tool that she had the authority to use?

    I’m going to suggest that at this time, the whole matter was one of leverage and negotiation between all parties involved.

    Considering that AS repeatedly offered a legal and proportionate means by which the complaints could be dealt with appropriately – can it really be argued that NS (however well she may have intended it) made operational decisions ( 1 x expensive civil ‘tainted by bias’ procedure and a 12 charge – not guilty – ‘reeks of political trial/frame up’ criminal trial) for which she has shown not the slightest sign of unbiased response to the the decision of the jury – can it really be argued that NS demonstrates the qualities and skills needed to lead the Independence movement.

    She sure as hell never had Alex Salmond’s back – and I’m not talking about doing him favours, only ensuring that the whole process was scrupulously fair. Given how ruthless the Unionist movement is against the whole Yes Movement – that is unforgivable.

    And its probably the issue in a nutshell. She had a duty as First Minister and as leader of the SNP to ensure that all legal procedures taken to deal with complaints against one of our own, and anyone else for that matter, were scrupulously fair. She actively signed off on a procedure that was legally determined to be the exact opposite of that…. against one of our own.

    The exact timeline, dates, venues, who knew what, when and where, and how many times they have to revisit the inquiry to amend their evidence with the facts…. It is absolutely succeeding in making unravelling all of the above incredibly difficult.

    But bottom line – she bent over backwards to go gunning for AS – when there were more suitable legal methods to deal with it, and she signed off on an illegal witch hunt against one of the Yes Movements biggest players. The buck stops with her, just as much as it does with any leader. Male or female.

  120. Quinie frae Angus says:

    One of the most chilling things about the whole trans/gender/woo woo stuff that a phalanx of SNP personnel seem to be encaptured by, is that it is a phenomenon that is occurring elsewhere in the world, simultaneously. Now teenagers and young people are regarded as distinctly “uncool” if they don’t join in on the bandwagon and adhere to the “groupthink”.

    And then I find this.

    It’s truly sinister. The members of the public who are still unaware or uninterested in what’s going on here, need to waken up.

    That so many of the SNP & Scot Govt employees and benefactors choose to wilfully follow this ideology, without – apparently – offering any reasoned or honest response to anyone who questions these aspects of the controversy, is not just infuriating – I believe it to be criminal.

  121. crazycat says:

    @ Quinie frae Angus at 12.44

    I’ve raised this with Daisy (my post at 11.56) but she’s not had time to reply yet – she probably keeps more sensible hours than I do.

    Her interpretation relies on the following sequence of events:

    1) NS is told about complaints
    2) NS tells complainers she can do nothing because AS has resigned from the party
    3) NS also says employment law doesn’t cover the complaints
    4) New procedure is introduced.

    But Alex Salmond had not resigned at that point.
    He resigned on 29/08/18, the day after his judicial review began, and therefore by definition after the new procedure was implemented.

    Therefore, point 2) cannot have been a motivation for introducing the procedure, surely? Point 3), possibly, hence the retrospective nature of the new rules, the unacceptability of which I entirely agree with Daisy about.

  122. Daisy Walker says:

    One last thing – didn’t realise how late it was.

    With regards sex pests, and sex offenders. They do not stop, not ever. And this makes sense if you consider, from their perspective, they are not doing anything wrong.

    One common denominator for the real sex offenders, is once the enquiry is ongoing, scratch that surface and a whole can of worms is revealed.

    Think Epstein, Saville, and all the others. As soon as one realistic complaint comes out, an avalanche of other victims come out of the woodwork.

    Nothing screams ‘innocent’ louder with regards the AS allegations than the shock with which they were met – Scotland is a small country, everyone knows someone, who’s worked with so and so. He was never a fella that the woman who worked around him had to ‘watch out for’.

    Nothing screams louder about his innocence of criminality – than the fact that 22 cops, working for over a year, came up with diddly squat, in terms of evidence. Best description of the trial – was a trial looking for a crime. Had that Police report been about any other person – the PF would have binned it for lack of a crime, never mind lack of evidence.

  123. A Person says:

    -Quinie frae Angus-

    Gender theorists are sexually interested in children? That’s about as surprising as the sun rising in the east!

  124. crazycat says:

    Oops! Major cross-posting fail on my part here!

    Sorry, Daisy.
    I agree absolutely with your comments at 1.23 – and hope you aren’t right now replying to mine at 1.34!!

  125. crazycat says:

    @ Daisy

    I also agree with all you say at 1.34.

  126. CameronB Brodie says:

    I hope I’ve not stoked hostility towards gender theory, which is essential to good WOKE practice. Genderwoowoo as I see it, is believing that not only gender-identity is more significant than a person’s sex, but that this identity trumps the sex-based rights that are the legal response to the biological differences between the sexes. Which is simply factually wrong, and a self-justifying rejection of gender equality.

    So here’s a look at “The Vulnerability of Heterosexuality: Consent, Gender Deception and Embodiment”.

    “This article considers the institutional frameworks that privilege heterosexuality, police notions of sex and gender and individualize discussions and responsibilities around consent. In doing so, Vulnerability theory is drawn upon and added to through the introduction of a richer conception of embodiment.

    By understanding embodiment as a product of corporeality, discourse and institutions, vulnerability theory is better equipped to engage with the complexities of LGBTIAQ identities. The article traces these developments by engaging with a series of recent criminal law cases concerning deception as to gender.

    It then reflects upon the ways in which institutions such as law, the family and educational systems focus on individualizing responsibilities around consent rather than focusing on their own role in creating the conditions under which non-heterosexual sex is disincentivized, constructed as predatory and ultimately criminalized. It concludes by demanding a new approach from the state that moves away from carceral approaches towards educative programmes grounded in substantive equality.”

  127. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Crazycat

    I’m not keeping the wisest hours tonight that’s for sure.

    And I have not checked the timeline, or the multiple versions of witness statements and amended statements with regards exactly who, when, what, where.

    So, I’m not trying to be all seeing on this.

    From memory – officials close to NS became aware at the end of 2017 about complaints.

    Nov 2017 procedures began to re-draft official policy to take into account retrospective offences and staff.

    I’m not aware of what – if any updates NS gave the complainers (she is not alluding to providing them with direct updates).

    Again, from memory – it appears that Linda Evans and Judith MacKinnon may both appear to have had inappropriate contact with the complainers – inappropriate because they were also involved in the investigation. And there may also have been some collusion with the complainers about the new Scot Gov procedures.

    NS signed off on the new ‘retrospective’ procedures in Dec 2017.

    If looked at in the cold light of day – and for the sake of argument – why would a trained lawyer – undertake to sign off on what is Employment Law/Procedures – to make the act retrospective.

    Employers have enough problems ‘policing’ the staff issues that they already have, attempting to police historic claims, with new laws, about staff no longer on the pay roll, is just bonkers, not to mention unworkable from a legal ‘natural justice’ perspective.

    However – whether it was end of May 2018 or start of April 20018 – NS officially became aware of the complaints.

    Between then and August 2018 there were numerous messages between her and Alex whereby he repeatedly offered to make himself available for Arbitration, and informed her the process she was invoking was unlawful – as it indeed turned out to be. And expensive.

    This is not a Leader of a Yes / Independence Movement. Her absolute duty as FM and Leader of the SNP was to ensure that the Process to deal with these complaints was Fair and Lawful. That’s it. And she did not. She, and her immediate staff, put a lot of effort and are still putting in a lot of effort into Not.

  128. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Crazycat – no worries.

    The way the info and evidence is dragging out at the inquiry – its just impossible to keep track, and you made a good point.

    I think what I’m trying to do, for myself as much as anyone, is get down to the core important bits, that cannot be spun in anyway.

    Hopefully got to the crux of it. Nicla should have done a lot better is the nicest way of putting it.

  129. David F says:

    Is anyone else richly entertained by the rapid descent of Mark Russell from his “Let’s all be reasonable and consider this from the perspective of human beings everybody…” to his “Let’s get out the shears and cut off his FUCKIN’ KNACKERS!”

    What AS actually admitted to was one drunken consensual fumble that didn’t go any further.

    He also accepted – under oath – that some of his behaviour over the years might have been considered “inappropriate”. However, we now live in a society where “He touched my arm through my cardigan in a pub ten years ago. Or maybe it was eleven years ago. I can’t really remember…” constitutes grounds for charges of sexual assault. In that context, I don’t see how any man could ever claim under oath that none of his behaviour had ever been “inappropriate”.

  130. CameronB Brodie says:

    Sorry for the OT, as this would probably be better suited to the previous thread. We need to sort this self-ID nonsense PDQ, IMHO. So here’s a look at “Gender, agency, and embodiment theories in relation to space”. Which I think applies to Scottish sovereignty as much it does gender equality.

    “Paying attention to ‘lived experience’ (to be further explained below), also prompts inquiry into the role of agency in the construction of gender. Hence, the concern is to explore gendering practices as lived experience rather than as fixed subject positions. This means paying attention to women’s subjectivities1 and agency, that is, their personal capacities to feel, reflect, intend and act within the particular social relations and historical contexts in which they live their lives, drawing on scholars such as Lois McNay (2003; 2004), Saba Mahmood (2001; 2005) and Sherry Ortner (2006).

    In other words: Agency is a universal capacity to act, but it is socio-culturally mediated, i.e., agency is locally defined. The need to understand agency as the capacity to act according to the demands of the specific socio-cultural context is crucial; where each context comprises the complex interaction between the local and a variety of wider global forces.

    According to the scholar (Lois McNay, 2004), the continual process of becoming a subject results from a complex interplay between the phenomenal nearness of lived experience and social structures of power and inequality. She places into the centre of analysis agency as lived experience in relational terms. This approach to agency means to privilege people’s own views and voices in an experience-near analysis of the processes of making woman – or manhood in daily life, which is vital in relation to method. The relationship between norms and personal experience in this approach is central.”

  131. twathater says:

    I notice from all the reports that bozo and gollum gove are now celebrating the fact that they have solved the GFA problem by allowing NI to be in the EU and under their regulations and trading ability , whilst simultaneously still being part of the great uk

    I may be wrong but is there NOT some part of the TOU that states SPECIFICALLY and CATEGORICALLY that ALL parts of the UK must be treated equally and fairly and that no part should be given an unfair advantage over the other parts

    I notice the blowhard blackford was at his usual moaning and whinging that NI is getting to stay in the EU whilst Scotland is dragged out by the scruff of the neck , it wisnae fair but husnae done anything about it
    I also note that none of our stalwart defenders from the SNP independence party weren’t too vociferous or outraged enough to tear themselves away from ignoring emails from their constituents about tranny issues to deal with this abomination

    I actually had faith in Joanna Cherry that following her success in the prorogation case that she would be all over this and other breaches of the TOU but as usual it appears that rocking the boat and challenging the scum at WM is NOT an attractive proposition

  132. Al-Stuart says:


    It’s irritating enough to have to spend a cumulative 3 hours each year scrolling past your endless obsessive-compulsive need to post self aggrandising irrelevant off-topic links that often pollute up to 25% of each thread.

    Now you have started a new habit in a desperate attempt to seem relevant.

    Cameron, your are now wasting much space by copy-and-pasting large, textually voluminous chunks of irrelevant prose from your links onto the main BTL threads of this website

    For the love of God, PLEASE STOP”.

    My right hand has repetitive strain injury scrolling past the never ending spam you dump here. As you are clearly a wnaker, you will understand the difficulties that repetitivel strain injury causes Pam and her five finger factory of fun?

    Your ridiculous interloping links to the…

    “Sexual fetish of the Amazonian sperm frog on biological terminolgical inexactitudes when co-habiting with the Peruvian hedgehog and the dangers of shagging anything with many spikes.”

    … has nothing to do with either the thread upon which you deposit your pseudo academia and feckless links. Nor to be utterly blunt, are you contributing anything of material help to the cause of Scottish Independence.

    PLEASE go and start your own website blog. I am absolutely sure that if you think all these ridiculous farcical links you post are clicked on by any folk in significant numbers then you will have motivation to start your own website.

  133. Breeks says:

    Boris Johnson extending talks with Europe until Sunday, as a No Deal cliff-edge Brexit looms…

    Meanwhile in the political backwater of some lifeless old UK region called Scotland, a nominally sovereign people do absolutely nothing to save themselves except fixate interminably on the words of liars, fraudsters and useless charlatans whom they elected to office.

    Vote SNP??? Fkg make me. Go on, I dare you.

    I’d rather spend my time exploring the length and breadth of Scotland to find a cliff edge that might be suitably high enough to throw them from. I’m thinking of quarries more than sea cliffs, to avoid scaring seabirds or sullying the name of any natural beauty spots.

  134. David F says:

    Al-Stuart says:
    10 December, 2020 at 4:08 am

    We need to sort out all this total lack of self-awareness nonsense. Might I suggest:

    History of Anosognosia; Gainotti G.a,b; Author affiliations; Bogousslavsky J, Boller F, Iwata M (eds): A History of Neuropsychology. Front Neurol Neurosci. Basel, Karger, 2019, vol 44, pp 75–82 (DOI: 10.1159/000494954)
    A History of Neuropsychology; Editor(s): Bogousslavsky, Julien (Montreux) Boller, François (Washington, DC) Iwata, Makoto (Tokyo)

    “The choice of the term “anosognosia” to denote the observed phenomenon was important, because referring to “lack of knowledge of the disease” (anosognosia), he not only emphasized the separation between “lack of knowledge” and “disease, ” but also suggested a general use of this term, because disease can refer to many other disabilities besides hemiplegia… continues droning on for hundreds more words…

  135. Breeks says:

    Another round of applause for Nicola Sturgeon and her SNP, doing SFA to save Scotland from this…

    NOTHING! Since 2016. Plenty of time to sign rainbow flags for Trans-Nutters though. Gotta get your priorities right, eh Nicola?

    Maybe she’ll find the time to sign the white flag she waved back in January. That must be worth at least 50p on EBay.

  136. A Person says:


    Yes, you are right. The Treaties of Union require unfettered free trade throughout the British state.

    Now, I say “treaties” plural because in NI’s case the relevant treaty is that between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland in 1800 establishing the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (now “and Northern Ireland”). But the 1707 treaty between Scotland and England establishing the Kingdom of Great Britain is identical on this point.

    Johnson’s deal with the EU leaves NI as part of the EU single market, and for economic purposes part of the Republic. It is a breach of the treaty- as the knuckle-drafters of the DUP are realising, too late. Maybe we will become independent when Johnson leases us to China- it’s looking a more likely route than having a referendum at the moment!

  137. Strathy says:

    It looks like the inquiry might get a mention at FMQs.

  138. Alf Baird says:

    CameronB Brodie

    “Genderwoowoo as I see it, is believing that not only gender-identity is more significant than a person’s sex,..”

    It also appears to be the case, to gender promoting groups at least, that gender identity is even more important than national identity. This is not helpful to independence at all because Scottish national identity, which is primarily determined by (Scottish) culture and (Scots AND Gaelic) language, is the key emotion for those seeking independence.

    Language, as a determinant of national identity, is often the most common rationale for peoples seeking self-determination and Scotland is no different. Fundamentally, the desire for nationhood is a cultural emotion (Fanon 1967) and has absolutely nothing to do do with gender.

  139. Al-Stuart says:

    David F., Thankyou. Now that link WAS helpful. Also I now know there is a word for the camspan phenomena… Anosognosia. Plus and elegant wee touch of humour as the penultimate rejoinder.

    There is a case for being gentle to some folk afflicted with an illness. But given the affliction appears to be Anosognosia and the Anosognosiac specialises in droning on at how informed, brilliant and well educated they are, perhaps a best friend might let the Anosognosiaker know they are continuing in a way that is grinding on those lesser mortals trying to distil the golden nuggets from within the BTL section and the meadow muffins that the Camspam Bakery keep cooking and serving.

  140. Muscleguy says:

    The case against him was throw enough mud and if some sticks then the others might come along on the balance of probabilities. They expected the attempted rape headline charge to stick. Except the defence proved she cannot have been there are the time. Had her arm in a cast at the time.

    They also demonstrated that her police interviews and in court she changed her story a lot. The women of the jury would have sat up and listened at that point I’m quite sure.

  141. Socrates MacSporran says:

    From the twitter message highlighted by Strathy above, it looks as if maybe Colonel Lady TRuthless will be going after the Murrells at FMQs today.

    I trust your blinkometer is functioning correctly Rev? You may need it.

  142. Bob Mack says:

    Women in the Salmond investigation only two complained in some time in or prior to August 2017. By November 2017 that number had risen to double figures.

    At this time none of them according to McKinnon wanted police involvement. They were satisfied at action was going to be taken by Scottish government on their behalf. What action?

    Suspension? Public disgrace? Certainly not prison.

    The saga drifted on till in late December 18 when the ruling of the review found the whole thing illegal. In the interim we know that McKinnon among others, had started to persuade
    the reluctant complainers to go to the police. Why now?
    Why not originally when they knew there were a volume complaints of a serious nature ?

    They were trying to ruin Alex. That was their main aim. When and only when their process was questioned did they try to persuade these women to take an alternative route.

    It should have been done immediately and not as a fall back in case your way failed.

    Sadly these women who may be users themselves, were also used in the process. They were a trap ,sprung when the original outcome they expected had failed.

    Justice and a jury was it for what it was. The current inquiry and blogs like Wings, Dangerfield, are by the day, exposing this charade for what it was.

  143. Famous15 says:

    Sex is simply defined.

    Gender is what you wish it to be.

    Having feminine gametes at puberty can be chemically interfered with.

    BUT post traumatic serious assault by r@pe you for sure want simply NOT to be examined by a person of the same sex,in trousers or skirt, that SEXually attacked you.

    All these years of police improvements will be destroyed in a vote and we will be back way beyond the outrages exposed in the Thames Valley documentary over forty years ago.

    Surely not by the SNP? Vote for the amendment!

  144. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Just finished watching the new Netflix 4-parter about Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

    It’s arguable that the high profile of this case helped start what eventually became the MeToo movement.

    True or not, the case was certainly well known. The idea that anyone even considered trying to have Alex Salmond painted as a beast of that sort is just sickening.

  145. Famous15 says:

    And for those saying there are no trans examiners in Scotland currently. Laws are meant for all time.

    Ten years ago would you have envisaged the SNP in the gametes grip of the Woke? AND jumping up to their every absurd wish. Well?

  146. Muscleguy says:

    When Salmond was in charge, no. With Sturgeon it was a surprise that she did not choose to defend women since she claimed to be so much of a feminist. It is clear the TRA’s got to her early, long before any public announcements.

    If bfore all this you had told me that governments around the world would jump to avoid being called names I would have laughed at you. But we live in such a world. It makes Putin’s Russia look a sane and sensible place.

  147. Tom Platt says:

    For FM Nicola to have ever seen Anchor(Scotland) as a threat and trying to stitch him up would just be a pure nonsense starting point to trying to understand what is happening here.

    Why not see this as much more likely to be a U.K. civil service attack to try to ruin both Alex Salmondand Nicola Sturgeon.

    Gender Bill is a potential distraction.

    Scotland needs its own home made Civil Service!

  148. Bob Mack says:

    @Tom Platt,

    As I posted ydsterday, you should watch Nicolas interview with Sophie Ridge, where she makes it very very clear she believed Alex was ghilty, and still does.

    That is from the First Minister who signed off the Leslie Evans process. She was at fault,

  149. Ronald Fraser says:


    Stop trying to justify everything your hero Sturgeon does.

    As usual, you talk utter fuckin shite.

    Get back to the wee Gingerbread Man were you belong and let us get on with the business of bringing Sturgeon down.

  150. Famous15 says:

    Ronald Fraser why are you frothing at the mouth? Calm down.

  151. Hatuey says:

    Tom Platt: “ Why not see this as much more likely to be a U.K. civil service attack to try to ruin both ”

    You don’t get to choose what you “see”. It isn’t a game.

    Reality matters. Facts matter. Evidence matters.

  152. Republicofscotland says:

    Breeks @5.44am.

    Breeks who else can we vote for, the Greens? I doubt they’re much better, but what’s the alternative the Tories, the LibDems or Labour no thanks.

    No we can give our list votes to whatever other indy party we want, but I think we should give the SNP our constituency vote, the entire party isn’t rotten, there’s just a few bad apples that need to be removed from the barrel. Also there’s the NEC which appears to have more independence minded folk in it, and I know polls aren’t the be all, and end all, but they’re in our favour.

    So thinks aren’t brilliant but they could be a lot worse, a few changes in the right places and things might just slot into place.

  153. Dave Somerville says:

    I, like thousands of others, cancelled my SNP membership at the beginning of the year, after it became clear Sturgeon was not Interested in fighting for Scottish Independence.

    By doing this, don’t you think we fell into the Murrell’s grand plan of getting shot of the “troublemakers”???

    Because at the moment, we can’t do a single thing to influence the direction of policy or any decision making.

    So howz this for a controversial change of direction in our thinking.

    Why don’t we re-join the SNP on the minimum payment possible. I think it is about a pound per month.

    It’s the last thing the Murrells would be expecting, for us to rejoin en masse and upset all the evil plans they have got in store for the up and coming election.

    I have had this change of mind after seeing how difficult it was just trying to get people like Joanna Cherry elected to the NEC.

    As I have said, I think with our mass cancellations, we fell right into the Murrell’s trap.

    So I am seriously considering rejoining the SNP in January, just for the sole purpose of giving the good guys within the Party all the assistance they need to get indyRef2 back to the top of the agenda.

  154. Robert Louis says:

    Breeks at 0544am,

    I have to say, i agree with your anger at the utter failure of the SNP to do anything to save Scotland from this brexit nonsense.

    Still, they witter on about sometime early in the next parliament, they “would like to see” an indyref. Nothing definite, you understand, merely a ‘desire’, or a ‘wish’ It is simply not f***ing good enough.

    People in Scotland are rightly angry at their enforced removal from the EU by English Tories, wholly against their wishes. In just a few weeks, Scots will be forcibly stripped of their EU citizenship, rights and freedom of movement – and ALL at the hands of a cretinous bunch of lying murderous Tory poshboys in England. And let’s remember, this colonial English government, currently destroying Scotland has no mandate here, the Tories last had an electoral majority in Scotland in 1955.

    Poll after poll, after poll showing a majority in Scotland NOW want independence. Which part of that does Nicola Sturgeon not understand?????

    What are the SNP doing? whine, whine, whine, whine. They have democratic mandate, after democratic mandate, and still they do nothing.

    For heavens sake, SNP and Nicola Sturgeon. Wake up. PLEASE, wake the f**** up.

  155. Daisy Walker says:

    I was tempted to re-join the SNP after the NEC ‘victory’. But that plus my votes are the only tools I have to express my absolute disgust at their conduct and course.

    If I re-join now, it will be taken as support for the ‘wheesht for Indy – LOOK AT THE POLLS, don’t scare the horses, Nicla has a secret plan’ brigade.

    21 food shopping days till Brexshit.

    How many mandates did we give them. And in return we lose Devolution, have our economy devastated and woman rights and safety compromised.

    Sweinney and CosyFeet are my election area – I will NEVER vote for either again, and I have voted SNP all my voting life.

    I deepy fear (and seriously hope I’m wrong) the rebellion of the NEC has just introduced gradualists who are just a little bit less gradualist than the ones they replaced.

  156. WhoRattledYourCage says:

    The Lamont Amendment being addressed can be viewed in Holyrood sometime after 2.30 p.m.

  157. Nell G says:

    It seems to me like the SNP are actively trying to lose votes, just enough so not to gain an overall majority to pursue a S30 but retaining power so they get another term in government. All other parties are unelectable and they know this.

    They will blame Wings and other Independence figures for not backing Nicola. TBH unless something monumental happens before Brexit I think we’re ducked one way or the other. I have little faith the truth will come to light in time as they seem to have the whole system rigged.

  158. MaggieC says:

    Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

    Update on Written Evidence page , Written submission received from Angus Robertson on 8th December 2020 ,

    If anyone doesn’t know that this is the time that a female staff member set off the airport security scanner and had to take of her shoes for scanning and Alex Salmond jokingly said “ They must be killer heels “ and that’s the entire Airport Concern .

  159. Donibristle says:

    A bit like the Hero of Haarlem, Peter keeps sticking his fingers in Dykes but to no avail. The flood of lies will eventually engulf the Hole in the Story Gang.But it’s taking its good time. Hope I’m awake at the end of it.

  160. David Caledonia says:

    If you do not have a womb and a pair of mammaries then you are not a woman, its as fecking simple as that

  161. MaggieC says:

    From Kenny McAskill in the Scotsman ,

    Scottish independence: The old SNP is back and pressure is mounting on Nicola Sturgeon and co .

    “ It’s safe to say that the elections to the SNP National Executive held last week didn’t produce the outcome the leadership had been seeking. “

  162. @ Dave Somerville at 11.27am: I will be more than happy to rejoin the SNP, and I will most likely do so just as soon as Sturgeon and Murrell and their acolytes are gone. However, I absolutely will not be giving them my support, tacit or otherwise. They MUST go.

    Incidentally, a lot of people seem to be suggesting that Nicola Sturgeon will continue as leader beyond the next election. I very much doubt that. She is a lame duck, rapidly haemorrhaging support, and I don’t believe there’s any way back from that. Once people lose respect for her, that’s it; it’s gone. And besides, we haven’t heard from Mr Salmond yet.

  163. Sarah says:

    @ Dave Somerville, Daisy Walker: Dave please do as you suggest. We members pushing for independence and to clean up the party need all the help we can get. The cost for pensioners is £5 p.a.

  164. Colin Alexander says:

    Now the backslapping and well-deserved celebrations at *some* of Sturgeon’s clique getting voted off the NEC is subsiding, as yet, nothing concrete has been achieved in the real world.

    Things are exactly as they were a few weeks ago, except in a few days time Scotland will be under the complete power of Westminster’s unlimited legal power ( which means unlimited power for Boris Johnson’s Tory Party over Scotland), with no EU Law to limit them in how they mistreat Scotland. That’s as well as the Brexit trade issues.

    Mike Russell was elected as president of the SNP. A “champion” of Scottish independence, supporter of privatisation of the Scottish NHS; and a chief colonial administrator for the English Empire’s Scotland colony.

    A Tartan Tory, s30 Order, British colonial administrator is president of the SNP. Alister Jack with a yellow rosette.

    Just for the record, What did Mr Russell reply to the requests that he support the Johann Lamont amendment?

  165. Dan says:

    Hey Dave Caledonia, now that the dentists are beginning to re-open, maybe you should go and get a wisdom tooth or two installed!

    Maybe you could explain in your definition where women that have unfortunately had mastectomies or hysterectomies fit in.

  166. Sarah says:

    @ Michael laing: if you joined the party now you could be pressing the NEC to act on the inappropriate actions by HQ etc and help to change things at the top.

  167. MaggieC says:

    Ruth right in at Fmqs about P Murrell on Tuesday’s appearance at the Committee

  168. ebreah says:

    Re: Rejoining SNP

    Some here are reluctant to rejoin the SNP and/or vote SNP in the next election. I am afraid that is thinking with the heart. Most here are willing to lend/give ISP their votes next Scottish Parliament election. Due to the d’Hondt calculation, you need SNP to win big on the constituency seats. The general idea is, bigger the wins, the lesser the chances for SNP to get seats via the list votes. We saw this in Glasgow.

    Roughly ISP must get around 10-15K votes in every electoral region in order to get 1 MSP through to the Parliament. This is very doable BUT SNP HAS TO WIN all or most of the constituency seats in the said region.

    The question now is, can ISP campaign effectively and cause the SNP’s list votes to be transferred to them?

  169. Robert graham says:

    Ruthless getting under someone’s skin
    Pay attention to the body language and answers given or in fact avoided
    Squeaky bum time oh dear

  170. Robert graham says:

    Oh dear I think the term is
    Trouble at Mill
    Uncomfortable few minutes for mrs Murrell
    Cringe worthy I believe

  171. Robert graham says:

    Humsa siting behind
    Thank fk I am not in the frame .

  172. Socrates MacSporran says:

    I thought TRuthless soft-pedalled on the FM.

    She never once mentioned the possible breach of the Ministerial Code – she didn’t press on the was it an SNP matter or a SG matter – which is where the FM is weak.

    The Unionists are keeping their powder dry until closer to the Holyrood Election. They want to keep the FM in the job, so they can really press home their attack when it is too-late for the SNP to be rid of her and the Woke Junta.

    And, then, Rheingold Leotard stands up and goes off on a tangent.

  173. bipod says:

    So at nicolas daily briefing yesterday she warned people not to book summer holidays next year. Why? because the government has no appetite to reduce any of the restrictions and the Scottish governments vaccine plan is so woeful and sluggish they won’t be able to begin mass vaccinations until late next year, if they really wanted to end the restrictions as soon as possible they would be doing something a bit more ambitious. Clearly getting the country back on its feet isn’t the number one priority.

    This should be a warning for all the lockdown zealots who say we are on the last stretch and we just need to suffer it until April when things will go back to normal. No such thing will happen because at the rate they are planning on vaccinating people they won’t have even vaccinated all NHS staff by April, the restrictions will continue throughout next year as nicola has already indicated to continue “fighting” the statistical panicdemic.

  174. Bob Mack says:

    There is one important element they cannot answer about Alex Salmond. When John Hynd found the exclusion to discipline former Ministers. At this point Leslie Evans informed her bosses at Whitehall that the FM wanted to make this possible.

    Not Leslie Evans. Whitehall told Evans not to do this. They were against it. In spite of this it was done.

    Did Evans deliberately defy her bosses on her own initiative,or was she protected from that because the FM supported this action.

    Therein lies the answer to this whole business.

  175. cirsium says:

    @Daisy Walker, 1.57am

    Good post on one of the key issues. What puzzled me at the beginning was how a qualified lawyer could think it was acceptable to approve a set of rules which was to be applied retrospectively.

  176. The unicorn says:

    Rev, you have done a huge service for the independence movement and I applaud you for your forensic examination and exposé of the pivotal facts in what has for all attempted purposes been an assassination attempt of the firmer FM. The actors involved in these actions and the GRA woke movement are a virus within the SNP and their flank is utterly exposed. It’s time to finish the job…………where are you Alex ?

  177. CameronB Brodie says:

    I’m supprised you went to all that effort to communicate your opinion of me, as you must know by know I don’t take you too seriously. So away and play with yourself.

  178. Daisy Walker says:

    @ ebreha – re thinking with the heart.

    You make a good point. I will try and keep the heid, but it sort of feels like broken heart time for me re all of this.

  179. Astonished says:

    Dan – I’ll bite.

    You know full well that Dave Caledonia meant no disrespect to the females who have had surgery. And I am certain those females would be much happier with Dave Caledonia determining who can use their safe spaces.

    My question for you Dan – Can someone possessing a Y chromosome ever become female ?

  180. Astonished says:

    I just watched the tory twitter feed regarding the murrells ( Not a habit I indulge in usually).

    I see they’ve latched on to the point I made earlier. Hopefully this is the beginning of the end for the murrells.

  181. CameronB Brodie says:

    ….Know by now.

    What is it about certain individuals btl, who feel they need to instruct me as if I’m an errant child under their authority? Being talked down in this was would be amusing, if it wasn’t so painfully pathetic, and highlight a profound lack of vision on the part of those who would seek to lecture me.

  182. Sarah says:

    @ Daisy Walker and ebreah: it was pointed out recently that if you separate the heart from the head, you die. So we need both.

    I hope I remember this at the next campaign for independence for if an interviewer asks me “are you voting Yes with your heart or your head?”

  183. ben madigan says:

    @ twathater and A person who wrote about the relevance of the 1800 Act of Union to NI and Scotland’s potential post-brexit position
    The 1800 Act of Union was replaced by the 1920 Government of Ireland Act, establishing the partition of Ireland and 2 separate states on the island.
    This in turn was replaced by the 1998 British-Irish Treaty based on the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement, which established NI’s semi-detached status from the UK, removed the physical impact of the NI-ROI border and set up several joint NI-ROI bodies.

    NI’s current position re Brexit was achieved on this basis and hard diplomatic work by the Irish Government and parties which united behind the Government’s policy.

    Historically I suppose you could say NI’s current status was due to the achievements of Ireland’s continual resistance to the 1800 Act of Union from 1803 onwards, both by constitutional means and by physical force.

    Whatever arguments Scotland can put forward to claim the 1707 Treaty of Union has been breached (and there are many, I agree), they should not relie on comparisons with NI, given their very different histories

  184. ebreah says:

    Re: Daisy Walker@12:51pm

    I know it does. I definitely know something was wrong during the GE2017 campaign. And it took me a while to actually process the whole Alex saga. But here we are and this is the hand that we are being dealt. I totally believe, mathematically ISP can easily win 1 MSP each region (or 2 in Glasgow). However that depend on us understanding and beating the system. And ISP may be more important in the coming months. As some have said, MSM is just waiting for the most opportune moment to destroy Nicola. She however can expect no sympathy from me. This is her own bloody doing. There is no one to blame.

  185. CameronB Brodie says:

    Alf Baird
    Linguistic theory is the key to most social emancipation, not just Scotland’s self-determination. Cognitive linguistics in particular. as this maps language to the processes of the minds, thereby enabling us to accurately interoperate the meaning and authenticity of our social reality. That’s why Scots have grown up being gas-lit by the British state, which is determined to sustain the legal fantasy that Britain is one nation. So here’s a look at “A Third View of the Black Box: Cognitive Coherence in Legal Decision Making”.

  186. Hatuey says:

    Astonished: “I see they’ve latched on to the point I made earlier.”

    What point?

  187. Astonished says:

    Hatuey : Peter murrell said it was scottish government business i.e. nowt to do with him. Nicola sturgeon said it was SNP business and thus no record need be kept.

    He just threw her under a bus.

  188. A Person says:

    -Ben Madigan-

    I’ll admit, I hadn’t even considered that! The GFA is an international agreement and the 1920 Act was negotiated with the new Irish government led by Michael Collins so both will, as you say, supersede the 1800 treaty. My bad!

  189. Tony Little says:

    Just watched a video of Ruth the mooth at FMQ and for probably the first time, she really had Nicola on the defensive. Not Ruth’s fan … well, ever, but she had NS squirming. I am more convinced than ever that this will bring the whole house of cards tumbling down. BUT, it meeds to be quick. We have an election in 6 months to win

  190. twathater says:

    @ Ben Madigan 1.40pm and A Person, apologies Ben if you thought I was in any way demeaning NI and their agreements within the uk, I have no problem with a united Ireland, in fact I relish it happening (although I don’t want even more bigots coming to Scotland we have enough of our own, they can relocate to their maisters country)

  191. ian foulds says:

    Tony Little at 4.04pm OR anyone

    Possibly – but who are viable, capable contenders to take Scotland to Independence in May. assuming Ms Sturgeon is away (and hopefully Mr Murrell and Ms Evans are also not there)? Notwithstanding the latter two should have nothing to do with Scot Gov.

  192. ben madigan says:

    @Twathater and A person – many thanks for you courteous replies.

    I agree Scotland, Independent or not, does not need any Loyalist Unionists from NI.

    They can stay in a Reunited ireland on the same terms as every other citizen. If their supremacist mentality prevents that, they can set sail for England and live there, never being considered equal to the “real” English

  193. velofello says:

    Where else can you read literature like ..his big minging coupon, and Saint Nicola of Wiznyme.

    Hats off to David Caledonia, I enjoyed your test.

  194. velofello says:

    @ Mark Russell; old saying …a standing cock has no conscience… but it does need encouragement.

    Takes two to tango/tangle.

  195. Robbo says:

    Stu noticed my earlier comments have been deleted presumably as I dared not to go along with the mob here baying for NS’s blood. Is this what it is coming to now that you edit out those that disagree with you and you have the audacity to preach that honest debate and openess should be at the heart of our common goal? I have supported this site for years now and contributed to Salmond’s legal challenge but because I do not follow your agenda that is enough to stifle debate. I won’t be returning.

  196. velofello says:

    Robbo: Rev Stu’s reply of no interest to you?

  197. Dan says:

    Astonished says: at 1:15 pm

    Dan – I’ll bite.

    You know full well that Dave Caledonia meant no disrespect to the females who have had surgery. And I am certain those females would be much happier with Dave Caledonia determining who can use their safe spaces.

    My question for you Dan – Can someone possessing a Y chromosome ever become female ?

    No idea what’s so baiting that you felt the need to bite when I was merely pointing out the use of such simplistic base language isn’t really that helpful when describing what a woman is.
    There’s already a definition in the dictionary for what a woman is, so in my view there’s no need to be distracted to the point of using incorrect terminology that could be deemed upsetting, demeaning or derogatory.

    “People who menstruate” is another term banded about by those that wish to deny biological reality to describe women. This also falls into the stupid bracket because what of the women that have reached the menopause, or those that have other health issues or conditions that prevent them from menstruating.
    Of course they are still women too, just like those that have had to endure mastectomies of hysterectomies.
    I just don’t see the need to be distracted by utilising less accurate wording when discussing these subjects.
    Just look at today’s amendment passing on the very subject of the importance of using accurate descriptors.

    FYI I’ve stated plenty btl on here already for folk to know that I don’t buy into any of this genderwoowoo stuff.

    Hopefully the above resolves any perceived issue you may have had on where I was coming from. 🙂

  198. Mark Russell says:

    velofello says @ 5.59pm “old saying …a standing cock has no conscience… but it does need encouragement. Takes two to tango/tangle.”

    I can barely remember but I’m sure you have a point. That’s why you have to be really careful. There’s nothing wrong with flirting and sex – we should indulge a lot more instead of killing each other – but you have to be responsible and try not to hurt others along the way.

    What was disclosed at the AS trial amounted to nothing on the sexual abuse scale. I’m astonished the Crown considered there were grounds and evidence to support the charges – from what was heard in evidence. The jury were to be commended for their verdict.

    Had Alex been a single bloke – or had he and Moira separated/reached an understanding – then this would be nothing more than a fart in a gale. I knew Alan Clarke for a couple of years before he died and he was still touching up the nurses right up to the finishing line. It was more ‘Carry-on up the Castle” than anything sinister – and that was fine. That was just part of his character and he didn’t ever conceal it.

    Alex gave the impression of a devoted husband – and was a brilliant politician. I really admired him – particularly his speeches during the Iraq crisis and subsequent events. No wonder the British Establishment feared him. With Winnie Ewing, they transformed the SNP into a real political force for good. We have much to thank him for.

    When Nicola Sturgeon came along – it really was the “dream team” for Scotland’s representation – and after devolution, it was hardly surprising the SNP would go on to dominate Scottish politics in Holyrood and Westminster.

    For me, the during his evidence-in-chief at the trail – none of the incidents regarding the complainants were serious or credible enough to warrant any allegation of sexual abuse – particularly rape.

    But I was still left with a sense of deep disappointment. I don’t know Alex or Moira, but I really felt for her listening to his testimony. I remember thinking “what a daft bugger” – but there was also a feeling of betrayal.

    I’ve thought about this since – I guess you have to separate the speculative thoughts with their relationship, but for me, that conduct fell far short of what Alex is capable of and has proved on many occasions. I felt for him. That cannot have been a pleasant experience – and I’m sure, despite the verdict, he would have preferred none of this to be made public. Who would?

    It’s a pretty traumatic experience when someone close to you in charged with serious criminal offences. How they react is dependant on so many things. We don’t know the real history between the principles in this tragedy – we may find out and everything will be illuminated for sure – but it’s just unfortunate that this drama is taking place when there is so many other critical things we need to be doing right now.

    But hey, don’t let me spoil the party.

  199. ClanDonald says:

    Would it be possible to find out via FOI if Rape Crisis Scotland influenced the Scottish Government to use the word ‘gender’ when the parliament’s committee had already recommended “sex”?

  200. velofello says:

    Mark Russell: a thoughtful response Mark. Myself, even as a teenager I didn’t have a hero, I don’t place anyone on a pedestal.

    From the lyrics of My Old Friend The Blues – Lovers Leave, and Friends Will Let You Down.

    Lucky me, I’ve been married + 50 years.

  201. Mark Russell says:

    There’ll be a few stories in there too. Here’s one for you.

    I visited a couple two weeks ago – in their late 90’s. They’ve just celebrated their 25th wedding anniversary – and neither was married before. ‘Tom’ was born in Yorkshire 1923 – his Dad a miner and lay-preacher during the great strike. In 1930 – his Dad left for America to become a church minister in Pennsylvania. A year later – he set a telegram to his wife telling her to travel from Liverpool to Boston with the children, but a week before they left, another telegram informed them he’d been killed in an “automative accident”.

    Tom’s mother married again and moved to Blackpool and remarried. Tom was a headteacher in a local school until retirement – and never visited the USA. After retirement, he met a neighbour – another teacher – and they lived with Tom’s mother until a decade ago. There are no other relatives.

    When I called – his table was covered in old cuttings and photographs. I didn’t know anything about his childhood or his Dad until then – he never spoke of this before. He has only one photograph – of his Dad standing outside a church in Hawthorn, Pennsylvania – after he was appointed his ministry in 1932. It was a postcard photo – if you remember them. It’s all he has.

    In May this year, Tom wrote to the ‘Minister” of the PA church and explained his connection. He wondered if they could locate his Dad’s grave snd perhaps send a photograph. He had enclosed $20 to cover postage!

    There was no reply – and wrote again in August, but has heard nothing since.

    Tom doesn’t have a mobile, computer or any internet device. ‘Maisie’ typed his letters and they were sent ‘Air Mail’.

    I have a few friends in Pennsylvania – and later that night, had a notion to see if I could find out a bit more about Tom’s dad – from online church records & the like. He had a very uncommon surname. So, I did a search on Google.

    Top entry was a blog from a woman in California – a history of her family – and a section about her father in particular. Tom’s Dad wasn’t killed in an automotive accident – but became a prominent evangelical minister and politician. He married again in 1936 – had six kids, then remarried again in 1949 and had three more – one of whom was the blog author. Her Dad was by then, a senator during the JFK administration – and died in 1974 in a rest home in Arizona.

    She has the very same photograph of her Dad as Tom has – the postcard outside the Hawthorn church. There are other pages about his life too – he was a great friend of Billy Graham, it seems. But with quite a secret…

    So what should I do? Do I tell him or not?

    He’s in reasonable health still, but this would be a great shock – with all kind of implications. He doesn’t think he has any living relatives, but he has several step-brothers and sisters and a few dozen nieces and nephews – who also know nothing off Tom. It could be incredible – but it could also be hugely destructive. What would he think about his Dad?

    Perhaps innocence is bliss. Maybe it’s best that we don’t know everything and that some things remain private and confidential. But on the other hand, Tom was searching for answers to a mystery – looking for closure of sorts. But should I tell him?

    Isn’t life funny? Obviously his Dad never thought his secret would be discovered – and I wish it hadn’t been me – but that’s the internet and public records for you.

    I guess he’ll be disappointed – and maybe a little betrayed – but as he was only six or seven when his Dad left, it’s only a small part of a life with many highlights. I’m sure that once he gets over the shock, he’ll find it possible to forgive and understand too. We all have our failings after all.

    But I still don’t know whether I’d like to test that. Sometimes it’s best to let sleeping dogs lie.

  202. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Mark Russell,

    I don’t envy you that one – what a decision.

    I think people can feel when something is not right. It might well be a missing piece of the jig saw puzzle that now fits. I wonder if his mother ever suspected.

    If his living relatives are likely to communicate with him in a positive way, that might well make up for it.

    I’d rather deal with the known things than the false, personally speaking, but that is me.

  203. Corrado Mella says:

    When all this unravels and the true character of Mrs Murrell comes to the fore, my continued remarks about gender not being a discriminant for better politicians will finally be proven.

    I promise I won’t gloat when it happens.

    Who am I kidding?
    I’ll repeat “I told you so” forever on loop like a broken record.

    Sadly, the abundant money and unfettered power that politics offer are highly attractive to a set of very determined sub-humans, mentally impaired by psychiatric disorders in the psychopathic spectrum (narcissists, sociopaths and full blown psychopaths).

    They’re compulsive liars, have no empathy, decency or morals. They act with impunity and the belief they’ll never have to pay for their misdeeds.

    This makes these defectives also highly likely to have multiple skeletons in the closet, to be blackmailed with by bigger barstewards than them.

    They’re a liability we sane humans must dispose of, in short shrift, from everywhere.

    Keep looking for them: they’re everywhere.
    Find, uproot and toss them away.

  204. stonefree says:

    @ Corrado Mella at 2:05 am

    I agree with your post I believe the following is very accurate

    “This makes these defectives also highly likely to have multiple skeletons in the closet, to be blackmailed with by bigger barstewards than them.”

    I would add it continues further up the tree each level controlling their minions

  205. Daisy Walker says:

    @ Mark Russell, re your dilema.

    I would put money on it that your neighbour’s mother strongly suspected something was not right. A lay preacher in another country, dyeing suddenly in a strange land before their young family could join him. There would have been at the very least large amounts of letters of condolence, if not a whip round.

    Ultimately it is his story.

    Is a possible solution that you put all the information you have gathered in a sealed envelope, explain to your friend that the information you uncovered is not as expected/potentially very hurtful – and leave it for him to open the envelope or not.

    In that way you are not being put in a position of gatekeeper with regards another families history.

    kind regards to you and your friend.

  206. Mark Russell says:

    @ Daisy Walker

    Thank you for your consideration. There is of course, sensitivities with the folks out in the USA too – I have the contact email of the blog author and it would be easy to send her a note about her half brother – but it would likely give an unknown amount of grief and sorrow for them also. Particularly given their father’s history.

    Perhaps a word on the quiet with Tom’s wife might be best. Will have a think.

    Thank you again.

  207. Wullie B says:

    Got two more emails, one from Jamie Halcro Johnstone saying it was Edward Mountains job to contact me as I was in his area blah blah blah, and one from John Finnie the Green MSP, looks like the Greens had a generic email to send out, looks almost like Andy Wightmans word for word, so looks like Patrick Harris had them well under the whip regarding the vote, so will never vote Finnie again, can see the ISP hopefully taking his seat

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