Here comes the flood
Back in the 1980s there was a hit game for the ZX Spectrum home computer called Worse Things Happen At Sea. In it you play a robot whose job is to get a heavily-laden cargo ship safely to port, except that more and more disasters keep befalling it.
It springs leaks, it veers off course, the engine overheats and the robot’s power runs down, until eventually the catalogue of catastrophes overwhelms the harassed metallic custodian and the boat slides down into the murky depths.
We wonder if that feels familiar to anyone at the moment.
Because having been desperately suppressed for so long, the trickle of information concerning the badly-botched stitch-up of Alex Salmond by the SNP and the Scottish establishment is turning into a torrent that even an army of robots couldn’t hold back.
The least dramatic of today’s developments is the release of a deeply embarrassing statement from party CEO Peter Murrell, in which he admits to being the author of the leaked texts urging people to “pressurise” the police to go after his former boss.
Murrell’s excuse is so feebly pathetic that any rational reader could only conclude that he thinks his audience is, to put it gently, educationally subnormal.
Let’s just remind ourselves of those texts:
We’re not going to compound the gross insult to the intelligence of Wings readers by discussing that any further. Anyone who thinks that those texts match up to Murrell’s description of them is probably reading the wrong website.
More interesting is another blog post from solicitor advocate Gordon Dangerfield today, which looks at documents just released regarding why the Scottish Government caved on the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond about the initial investigation.
Dangerfield methodically wades through the Scottish Government’s explanation and observes that, quite remarkably, at no point does it admit that anyone did anything wrong. At every step it claims that every individual involved acted with the utmost propriety and professionalism, at the end of which somehow the Scottish Government nevertheless had to completely abandon its case as being biased and unlawful without it ever going before a judge, at a cost to the taxpayer of a million pounds or more.
(The Scottish Government refuses to admit how much it actually spent on it, but as we know Mr Salmond’s costs were well over half a million it seems wholly reasonable to assume that the Scottish Government’s were of a similar order, including the £118,000 it does admit to spending on external legal advice.)
But still there’s more. Yesterday we received a response to a Freedom Of Information request about the ongoing separate inquiry into whether Nicola Sturgeon’s comments to Parliament on the subject broke the Ministerial Code.
The First Minister had referred herself back in January 2019, after opposition leaders suggested she’d misled the chamber about when she knew of the allegations against Mr Salmond. But the independent panel has still produced no report, and we’d asked what was taking so long and when we might expect its findings.
“I wish to know the resolution of the investigation referenced below, instigated by the First Minister in January 2019. If no resolution has yet been reached, I wish to know (a) why, given that 20 months have passed, and (b) when a resolution should be expected.“
The reply, as we’ve come to expect from the Scottish Government’s FOI team, offered no actual useful information. Instead it directed us to two other documents, one of them a Parliamentary answer from 31 January 2019, just two weeks after the referral:
“The First Minister’s self-referral under the Ministerial Code has been discussed with James Hamilton, the Independent Adviser on the Code. Mr Hamilton has concluded that there is a potential risk of prejudice if the First Minister’s self-referral under the Ministerial Code were to proceed at the present time. It has therefore been agreed that the inquiry under the Ministerial Code should also be deferred while criminal investigations are active.
Both the Scottish Government review and consideration under the Ministerial Code will recommence once criminal proceedings are no longer active and the risk of prejudice has been removed.”
Fair enough. But Alex Salmond was acquitted in late March, which is now more than six months ago. What could possibly still be taking so long?
In the Guardian story linked above, the following sentence appears:
This, if you think about it, is quite strange.
The Scottish Government must have known perfectly well that the inquiry would be likely to compromise the trial, and therefore would have to be put on hold until after the latter was completed. So it’s very odd to give the panel a remit focused on avoiding such a risk, knowing the panel wasn’t going to convene until the trial was already over.
The second document the response directed us to was the actual remit subsequently given to the investigating panel. It was drawn up by the Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, and what it leaves out is more interesting than what it includes.
The ONLY thing the panel was told to establish was whether Nicola Sturgeon tried to influence Leslie Evans’ original investigation into the allegations against Salmond. It has strikingly NOT been asked to establish whether she lied to the Parliament, which was the concern actually expressed by the leaders of the opposition parties.
Sturgeon has repeatedly insisted, very explicitly and unambiguously, in Parliament and to the media and in several FOI responses, that the first she knew of the allegations was in a meeting at her Glasgow home on April 2:
But we now know this to be a categorical lie, because the remit that today’s FOI response directs us to openly and officially admits that she met with Geoff Aberdein – Salmond’s former chief of staff and the man who by this point had been acting as his go-between in matters relating to the allegations for some weeks – at her Holyrood office on 29 March.
A meeting the Scottish Government had previously expressly denied:
The inclusion of the meeting in the list officially destroys the Scottish Government’s farcical previous insistence that it was about some other subject.
(And in any event Aberdein told the High Court on oath during his evidence in the trial that it was about the allegations.)
Ridiculously, the First Minister’s written evidence to the commission, submitted five weeks ago but only revealed today, pretends that she forgot about the March 29 meeting until being reminded of it in January or February of last year.
But the official FOI denial of the meeting above was published on 31 July 2020, so she must have also “forgotten” to tell anyone else about it after that reminder, because the Scottish Government was still telling people no such meeting had taken place almost 18 months after she supposedly remembered that it had. So we know that’s a lie too.
And the First Minister’s written submission also admits that the 29 March meeting WAS in fact in relation to the allegations – not just a friendly casual catch-up in passing – in flat contradiction of the denial issued by an official Scottish Government spokesman to Sky News just two months ago:
Incidentally, one of the things that doesn’t initially seem to make any sense about the lie is “Why bother to deny a 29 March meeting when you’re going to admit to one on 2 April? What’s so important about those four days?” And the answer to that is that it’s not the date that’s important but the location.
The meeting on 29 March took place in the First Minister’s office at Holyrood. That fact alone necessarily legally makes it government business, not party business, which must be officially recorded (which we know it wasn’t).
(You’re simply not allowed to use the First Minister’s office for party matters.)
That’s why the meeting was denied for so long – because the failure to record it is itself a serious breach of the Ministerial Code. And the Ministerial Code takes an extremely clear position on the subject of knowingly misleading the Parliament:
Which is, cynical readers might perhaps feel, precisely the reason why the panel has so conspicuously NOT been asked to rule on whether the First Minister did so or not.
But we suspect that the opposition parties, and perhaps even some SNP MSPs, will be unwilling to let the matter drop. Even in the grim bin fire of democratic accountability that is 2020, it is not tenable under any circumstances for any Parliament to be led by someone officially shown to have lied to it.
No matter what else arises from the five-alarm fiasco around the Salmond affair, it is now beyond the tiniest shadow of credible doubt that the First Minister stood up and knowingly lied to the Holyrood chamber, and continued to propagate that lie for the best part of two years, before finally admitting it in an obscure document quietly released last month.
(She appears, ironically, in today’s Times abasing herself with gushing praise for the Scottish mainstream media, presumably hoping against hope that it will protect her, and hilariously pledging to answer questions honestly and fairly, just like she promised to give the inquiry committee anything it asked for.)
With goodness only knows what explosive revelations still to come when all the main players – Sturgeon, Murrell, Liz Lloyd, Geoff Aberdein and Alex Salmond himself – go before the committee, if she has any conscience at all she’ll resign now before any more damage is done to the integrity of her office.
I doubt she has much of a conscience. We all have some elements of psychopathy, but Sturgeon and Murrell must be near the problem end of that spectrum.
Does this same Ministerial Code apply at Westminster?
So we can the FM and head in to potentially the most important election in Scotland’s history devoid of leadership? If we are a democracy, and the SNP secure an overwhelming mandate, despite how exasperated you are with the existing ones, they haven’t replicated 2011, there is no choice but for a section 30.
I get where you are coming from with the above, but how do you reconcile us being closer to independence than every before with tearing down the SNP in its current form?
“So we can the FM and head in to potentially the most important election in Scotland’s history devoid of leadership? “
There are seven months until the election in which to choose a new leader.
Thanks for another informative read. Somewhat depressing that Wings is making a strong case for Sturgeon to resign, in the sense that I think she is a competent and principaled leader in many respects and I had held her in high esteem for the first few years of her tenure. Following the threads here it’s clear that indepdence has lost its track under the current leadership, without even mentioning the semi-bungled stitch-up of Salmond. I mean, why FFS, he did so much for the cause and there was never any evidence.
That aside. Could someone remind me – were there any important events between 29 March and 2nd April. Besides the misleading of the parliament, what is the significant point of difference between the two narratives? Both meetings at Sturgeon’s home? Was Liz Lloyd present at both? Why didn’t Sturgeon just come out with a blanket excuse like getting her days mixed up in the diary?
The UK’s Ministerial Code is separate but broadly the same:
link to assets.publishing.service.gov.uk
Cock up or conspiracy? How consequential was the Geoff Aberdein meeting? What was to be gained by this meeting not being mentioned?
Am I missing something?
I think it would be very dangerous for the independence cause to loose Nicola Sturgeon at this point.
But her husband falling on his sword? Not so much.
“Would be good to know Met looking at events in London”
This totally sinks Mundells craven explanation ‘re the police answering complainers questions rather than the SNP.
What would be good about it?
“But I want to be First Minister for another 5 years”
“What was to be gained by this meeting not being mentioned? Am I missing something?”
Oh FFS. You’re missing 20 months of deliberate sustained lying by the First Minister and her government to the Scottish Parliament. As to why they didn’t want to disclose that particular meeting, you’ll have to ask them. Good luck getting a straight answer.
Oh, and also: “I thought Scotland should be independent but now someone else is leading the SNP I’ve totally changed my mind” is a sentence uttered by nobody ever.
[…] Wings Over Scotland Here comes the flood Back in the 1980s there was a popular game for the ZX Spectrum home computer called […]
The second text – “the more fronts to firefight on” – is disturbing.
For someone in a position where they could possibly influence events, it’s actually downright sinister.
While we allow politics and the act of serving democracy and the people to be flooded with money (the evil incarnate, sole reason for all the horrors that befall humanity), the worst defectives will be attracted to politics.
Invariably, the most ruthless and downright bastard narcissists, sociopaths and psychopaths will rise through the ranks of power, either within a party, beside it or as a public servant; and thanks to their absolute disregard for others’ well-being, blatant lack of empathy, innate ability to lie and feign emotions, and misplaced sense of entitlement, they will reach and hold onto power, and abuse it to their personal advantage.
If we want to save humanity, we must make power unattractive to these sub-humans and shove them in the reject pile.
Two people presumably living under the same roof totally oblivious to what the other one is doing.
Aye right
I smell shite
Beyond Reasonable Doubt
Won’t Fly
All the above might convince some people as being wrong and perfectly reasonable answers have been given in response to any questions asked,
Aye Head in deep freeze and Zips up the back , God and this response is supposed to convince , well maybe a inmate of Broadmore or Carstaires but the General Public now that’s pushing it .
Pretty Damning.
If we loose NS now it would damage the independence movement!
Really? Really?
We should launch our independence based on lies?
Ever heard the saying you are what you eat?
We should conduct ourselves now as we mean to go on. If a FM lies to Holyrood then a resignation is the only answer.
If its a place in history she wants she has to call and win a referendum or a relevant election.
To be just another first minister for another 5 years like Jack mcwhats his name or Joanne lama what’s her face is lot a legacy worth having.
Does she want a place in history???
I find it quite difficult to listen to Sturgeon now.
Weasel words.
I’m not clear on why she should lie – what are the implications of her being aware of the case before admitting it in April? What is being hidden?
Rev Stuart wrote:
“if she has any conscience at all she’ll resign now before any
more damage is done.”
You’re doing sterling work Mr Wings and thanks a million. So much of it is so meticulous and yet often so blood-boiling: all bad for the blood-pressure.
I think we have no problem in assessing whether Ms Sturgeon has a ‘conscience’, we must be aware, by now, that she is unconstrained by such tediousness. It will be interesting to see how much power she accords herself and equally how much protection others afford her. From hereon the journey should speed up very quickly. The more slowly facts unfold the more people/factions involved in the illegal affairs. It remains to be seen which buses are fuelled and driven by which people in order to flatten folk. It’s my humble guess that the Murrells won’t be slow in trying to allocate their own vehicle for such a purpose.
Shug says:
7 October, 2020 at 1:03 pm
“If its a place in history she wants she has to call and win a referendum or a relevant election.”
I can see another way in which she may have already earned herself a place in history:-)
I can’t imagine Ms Surgeon being forced to step down for lying to Parliament after all the lies told in Westminster. I read the different codes (thanks Stu) and am frankly surprised that there are any Tories in post in either Parliament. However, I agree Nicola needs to go, and Peter, and the the sooner the better. We need to get this over and done with NOW instead of closer to the election.
@ ‘Ronnie says:
7 October, 2020 at 1:06 pm
I’m not clear on why she should lie – what are the implications of her being aware of the case before admitting it in April? What is being hidden?’
That is a very good question. Good luck getting a straight answer from NS. If she’s prepared to lie to parliament, she’s not going to tell us the truth is she.
Deputy FM – John Swinney is not coming out of this smelling of roses either.
aye Daisy (@ 1:19pm)
It implies there’s a smoking gun lying about somewhere
“A free and fearless press is more vital than ever”
Nicola Sturgeon
Nice idea but Covid panic shows the media jumps when officialdom says so.
Free and fearless critique of government policy on this matter is almost non existent.
No wonder you have to turn to alt.
link to off-guardian.org
The US.
link to statnews.com
Even Sky news.
link to news.sky.com
None of the above are likely to be among Sturgeon & Co ‘likes’.
Free and fearless, but only when ‘toeing the approved official line’.
Consider: “There is no term of office for a First Minister; he or she holds office “at Her Majesty’s pleasure”. In practice, however, a First Minister cannot remain in office against the will of the Scottish Parliament; indeed, the Scotland Act explicitly requires the First Minister to either resign or seek a parliamentary dissolution (and with it, new elections) if his or her government “no longer enjoys the confidence of the Parliament.”
Does a First Minister who is held to have lied to the Scottish Parliament “no longer enjoy the confidence of the Parliament?”
Might such a situation preciptate a Scottish Parliamentary election prior to next May?
Faites vous jeux!
“What was to be gained by this meeting not being mentioned?”
Ask yourself who else was there.
She’s never going to resign in the short to medium term. We know how power hungry her and her husband are and there’s no way they are going to give that up without a very long, protracted, ugly fight, taking the whole ship down with them if they will. And I’m afraid that the media are going to see Sturgeon as the lesser of two evils in this affair and not do their job informing the public. And even if they did, there is more headline grabbing news out there ATM ie pandemic, and I fear a lot of these stories will be loaded on the Scottish public in the sea of news. I think it’s down to us and other like minded indy supporters to spread the word and pass it on. Inform, inform, inform
As an aside and nothing more, I was struck by the ‘tone’ adopted by Peter Murrell in his ‘submission’ to the inquiry.
The content is for the Convener of the Inquiry Ms Linda Fabiani (who has announced that she is standing down next year).
The correspondence is headed
‘Written Submission from Peter Murrell, Chief Executive, SNP
Then addressed ‘Dear Linda’
Then signed ‘Yours sincerely
PETER MURRELL
Chief Executive
4 August 2020
This has more than a little (and not very subtle) indication of ‘power play’ to me .
The rest of it is worth reading and I’ve copied it here for those who may not have come across it yet.
link to parliament.scot
FFS yourself.
You clearly don’t know if the Aberdein meeting was of any particular consequence or why hiding the meeting somehow benefited the FM.
I presume he told the FM of the allegations but, hearing details directly from Alex Salmond a couple of days later is what would have stuck in my memory. In the absence of motive, I prefer cock up.
And who, FFS, mentioned people changing their mind about independence?
But envisioning the loss of a very popular FM perceived by the majority of the voters as highly competent and able only months before a critical election is incomprehensible.
PS what does FFS mean?
@Ronnie,
She told parliament the first she knew of this was in April.
In fact it turns out she knew in March, but denied it on several occasions. Politically thieves her a few days breathing perfectionism strategy ‘re who to support and how to minimise damage to the party.
Given that you also have to believe she never spoke about potential party damage to her husband the Chief Exec of the party.
No doubt in the interlude sides were picked and strategy laid out for going forward.
More than one lie was told in this murky business.
I do not understand the number of people who really believe that Nicola Sturgeon is the ONLY person to lead Scotland. The people of Scotland deserve the best and Nicola Sturgeon is NOT the best.
“Murrell’s excuse is so pathetic that any rational reader could only conclude that he thinks his audience is, to put it gently, educationally subnormal”
I feel the tables have now turned and it is the audience thinking this of Murrell after reading his statement! I guess it could have been worse, he could have said he “misspoke”.
My predicatext runs amok today.
So it boils down to nicola said in hollyrood that her first knowledge or meeting with alex was on a certain date..it turns out there was a meeting a few days before said date..and nicola has said in her submission to the enquiry she had forgotten about that one.well got to be honest if that’s what all this vitriol and hate is about then we have lost the plot.the torys are breaking international laws about to subjugate the whole of scotland.have rapists still at Westminster are about to throw millions on the dole.and we are expected to worry about this ? Really..unless I’m missing something this is pish.i was expecting evidence that nicola said get alex on a memo
told the police by txt get alex.phoned the judges put him in the slammer for ever.seriously it looks like some people are exaggerating sturgeons wrongdoing exactly the same way the alphabet sisters have done.is their lies being told yes and I suspect its Mr Murrell and his little gang of McCann Lloyd Evans and summerville to me that’s where it starts and ends. i am expecting the usual britnats that have infected this once great blog to spout their usual pish.but luckly as has been said by many only @3% of people read this.half of them are britnats.unless said memos appear il just switch off till something that isn’t wishful thinking appears.
Ok Stu, question for you.
What’s NS going to do ?
Double down on the denials, brave it out until the next Covid scandal/ Brexit shenanigans take over all media stories late this year/ early next year and desperately try and hold on until May’s elections ?
Come clean now ?
The last thing we want is to reduce our Parliaments integrity to the level of that shower of shite in Westminster. Bring on an enquiry, deal with the pants on fire brigade and a bet the Scots will still vote Aye the next chance they get.
Nicola Sturgeon knew that the Government had acted illegally and conceded as such in 2019.
Lying about trivia can make some people think that it’s all trivia and I think a lot of people do fall into that trap.
There are people who may be up for prosecution at the end of all this and I assume that they’re all jockeying for a position at the back at the moment. These few days may be something or may be nothing in relation to Mr Salmond but it’s certain it will have total relevance to a case that Ms Sturgeon is concocting. She played a very high stakes game.
Les jeux sont faits
I presume TRuthless reads WoS. In which case, jumbo bucket of popcorn for FMQs tomorrow.
“I can’t imagine Ms Surgeon being forced to step down for lying to Parliament after all the lies told in Westminster.”
Please spare us any shitty whataboutery. The issue is that ministers are very rarely OFFICIALLY found to have lied. Any time they are, they resign.
“What’s NS going to do ?
Double down on the denials, brave it out until the next Covid scandal/ Brexit shenanigans take over all media stories late this year/ early next year and desperately try and hold on until May’s elections ?
Come clean now ?”
I suspect the former. I cannot see a way she can succeed, but we live in truly terrible times.
Where is the wings party??
I will not be voting for some loony left wing socialist republican nonsense.
I will consider a Wings party of Alex gives it the thumbs up
“unless said memos appear il just switch off till something that isn’t wishful thinking appears.”
Let me help you with that.
@Stu Hutch,
So Nicola Sturgeon NEVER talked to her husband about any of this? Is that what you are trying to say.
She was utterly oblivious to her husband and his “gang” trying to stitch up Alex?
Are those the qualities of a good leader? Constant ignorance of everything happening.Good luck with that.
Perverting the course of justice is an offence committed when a person prevents justice from being served on him/herself or on another party. In England and Wales it is a common law offence, carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment,not sure about Scotland.Surely trying to push the Police into harassing and arresting an innocent man falls into that category.
And there’s been no talk about Perjury either. If he was found not guilty in a criminal court, then surely the evidence being given was untrue. Does it not follow that the Alphabet Soup lied in court ?
No wonder Sturgeon (Emperor Commodus) moved heaven and earth to prevent Joanna Cherry (General Maximus Decimus Meridius) from entering the Holyrood arena.
Are we not entertained?
Who cares about the SNP and Sturgeon? I LOVED THAT GAME!
“Bob Mack says:
7 October, 2020 at 1:35 pm
My predicatext runs amok today.”
just as well it didnt autocorrect to ‘finger ring’ (being a ring worn on a finger not a thumb)
Imagine the horror
I am interested in language and find the following so disrespectful coming from a FM about a former FM/friend. “My other reason for wanting to meet with him proactively at this stage was the SNP conference that was about to take place over the following days in Aberdeen. I assumed he would be there (though as it turned out, I don’t think he did attend) and I didn’t want to be ‘CORNERED’ by him during it”.
CORNERED = to get a person or an animal into a place or situation from which they cannot escape. Would it not have been more dignified and respectful just to say “the Conference did not allow for privacy”. From my experience I feel her words are actually those of a “Rottweiler” in the Crown Office.
Stu hutch @1:38
Paragraphs! Or Rev Stu will be most annoyed.
As for your ridiculous defence of Sturgeon. You’re telling us she’s blameless, but her husband, her chief of staff, her friend who is also a senior minister and the top civil servant she appointed and rewarded are the baddies.
What next from you? That Stalin was really a good bloke, it was his underlings who were responsible?
Not many folk are lucky enough to have friendships spanning 30 years.
My pal, who I’ve known since secondary school (in my case, 40 years) calls me, asks to see me as soon as possible, sounds distressed. It’s to do with multiple allegations of serious sexual misconduct.
A few months later, someone asks me when I first heard about the ‘allegations’ against my friend. I ‘forget’ where I was when I first heard because, well, er, let me think back, oh I remember now, that’s right, I was unusually busy with paperwork that day.
Aye.
Right.
She will not resign until she is instructed by her British state handlers.
Only when she is no value to them , or when the information against her is released , by them, to damage the indy movement, will they drop her like a bowl of eggs!
Robert Graham says:
7 October, 2020 at 12:58 pm
“Two people presumably living under the same roof totally oblivious to what the other one is doing.”
But do they still live under the same roof?
Chan e na tha mi a ’cluinntinn
Forensic examination Rev.A good read well done.
Alex Salmond to Nicola Sturgeon re his excellent prospects of judicial review success:
You are a lawyer and can judge for
yourself the prospects of success which I am advised are excellent. This will follow
ANY adverse finding against me by the PS in a process which is unlawful..
I’ll permit myself a moment of naivety here:
Is it at all possible NS knew, as the process unfolded, that she’d been duped by individuals but that her ‘High Office’ hubris prevented her admitting this and, importantly, confirmed she was still an underling to the great man? What a realisation?
When she finally resigns – whether down to misleading of Parliament or otherwise – I think she’ll claim ‘attempting to protect everything we’d worked for in Scotland, but was let down by xyz’ – and go out in her personal blaze of martyred glory.
Whatever, the buck stops right on her lap and Scotland’s infinitely worse-off than when Mr Salmond handed over a healthy set of reigns to her. She blew it.
“Yet if he should give up what he has begun, seeking to make us or our kingdom subject to the king of England or to the English, we should strive at once to drive him out as our enemy and as a subverter of his own right and ours, and we would make some other man who was able to defend us our king.”
– Extract from The Declaration of Arbroath, 6 April 1320
The leader is only fit for purpose as the leader for so long as they demonstrably represent and defend the sovereignty of the Scottish people. Determinedly subjecting our sovereignty to an English Section 30 ‘permission’ fails that test.
Alex Salmond clearly states there was a conspiracy against him.
Evidence is slowly emerging that this is probably true
Some ,indeed many ,want us to believe Nicola was not part of that and had no knowledge about any of it. (Nuremberg defence). I’m sorry. It’s inconceivable.
How did the party I supported for more years than I care to remember come to this? Something specific must have led to Alex Salmond’s being snared. There might have been occasions when he overstepped the mark in relation to the women he worked with, and he admitted those, but, if there was anything else that was lying dormant, and we don’t know that there was, in reality, albeit he did apologize for behaviour that had been reported to a line manager, the women went on working for and with him.
So, it had been dealt with in-house, informally, and there is no suggestion that it ever happened again. You don’t accept someone’s apology then resurrect the same thing again down the line – ergo, something specific triggered subsequent actions or the retrospective nature of the new procedure was intended to punish him and ensure his alienation from the party, or both.
The retrospective nature of the new procedure was intended to do what, exactly? It could only have been used to snare Alex Salmond, because no other former FM has been snared by it, but was it for what he had done or for what he might do – stand again, for example? Or was there a festering sense of unfinished business and grievance still rattling around that could be utilized to keep him at bay, away from the party?
Whatever, the best laid schemes, as they say. If you are going to behave in this way, you really have to make sure you don’t get caught. Better still, you don’t hound someone beyond the call of duty, which Margaret Ferrier is now experiencing, and hand the moral ground to your opponents.
The new procedure was flawed, and the civil case fell; the evidence appears to have been tainted, and at least one of the women compromised, and the criminal case fell. This is a thread that appears to run throughout the SNP hierarchy: one of using procedures to push through legislation that is not sound and, in some cases, drives a coach and horses through previous, still extant legislation.
To put the best face on it, perhaps Nicola Sturgeon was hesitant about implicating Mr Salmond, or about being SEEN to be implicated in his downfall, and that is why she was less than willing to admit that she knew about the allegations before the meeting, where she admits to be told about them, and left the field to the civil servants – in itself a flawed decision? The does imply a misleading of parliament, either way.
Whatever, this needs to be clarified and dealt with soon or she will not survive till the end of the year, fawning MSM or not.
Stu, you said:
“No matter what else arises from the five-alarm fiasco around the Salmond affair, it is now beyond the tiniest shadow of credible doubt that the First Minister stood up and knowingly lied to the Holyrood chamber, and continued to propagate that lie for the best part of two years, before finally admitting it in an obscure document quietly released last month.”
But Sturgeon stated in an annex as part of her response to the Committee published today that the meeting with Aberdein did not involve discussing the complaints, merely that Aberdein was personally asking her to speak to Salmond as a matter of urgency. She states that she had suspicions regarding what the subject matter of this conversation with Salmond would entail, but that Salmond himself was the very first person to tell her about the complaints/accusations at this meeting, held on April 2nd. link to thenational.scot
Her alibi for the confusion around these two dates, if true, would clear up any accusation that she lied to parliament.
The whole thing stinks, I am not defending either party, I just want to know the truth. And it seems that in light of her new alibi, you’d probably want to comment on that, as it would render much of this post moot – perhaps you’re writing a new post presently, but regardless I’d like to hear your thoughts on this other than that she’s lying or it’s her word against his.
For instance, has Aberdein ever stated (on record or publicly) that he informed Sturgeon of the complaints on March 29th, or has he ever stated what was discussed at that meeting? If so, could you provide this information to us, or if not, could you ask him if he’s willing to comment?
This just seems like a glaring hole in the argument you’ve set out here.
Thank you for your work so far, I really appreciate your blog and I follow it daily. I also really appreciated your twitter account 🙁
If Nicola was to go/pushed what is the process rev for selecting a new leader?
With all the stitch ups etc would we not get more of the same or even worse ?
Can’t wait for Douglas Ross to be the one to lead us through this, the largest public health crisis, followed by the largest economic crisis, in living memory.
Excellent stuff – scalpel sharp analysis which is great to read and painful to come to terms with, but truths we must face up to and address if our movement is going to succeed. The current SNP leadership is a serious roadblock to our independence and you are doing a great job of exposing it for what it is – rotten to the core. Time for Sturgeon to go. We need a new and more radical pro-independence individual and leadership at the top of the SNP. Now won’t be a moment too soon.
When someone lies, they have to be conscious of what the truth is & that is often their downfall since they have to carefully construct a facsimile of the truth which does not lead anyone to the real truth. The more complex the lie, the more that construct has to be fireproof, impervious to any line of investigation that breaks through the wall. Every brick has to hold or light might get through.
When they construct their narrative it has to shut down any avenue which they think might give someone else cause to suspect. It is why someone’s lies might be revealed by their determination to conceal a detail which might seem initially to the casual observer to be a small matter. That casual observer might then be alerted to the fact that there is something bigger behind that lie which the liar is so desperate to conceal.
A dim & distant memory from the past resurfaced with all of this, of an act called the Black Theatre of Prague.
‘A key principle of black light theatre is the inability of the human eye to distinguish black objects from a black background. This effect results in effective invisibility for any objects not illuminated by the ‘black light’.’
(It is still popular in Prague, apparently.) All I can remember from childhood is being entertained by the complex activity of many characters on stage & then when ordinary light was turned on, to be astonished, like the audience, by the fact that all this was an illusion created by only one or two actors who had been on stage all of the time, but clad entirely in black so that they were invisible.
All lot of what goes on in politics is like a black light show.
The British state is within the SNP. You’d have to be gey gypit to believe that Scotland alone is granted refuge from their perfidy, that the very country who’s independence puts an end to the UK is somehow afford the protection of fair play.
When Salmond first gave up the SNP leadership every journalist in the UK searched for the dirt and found nothing, and yet we are now told to believe that he is one of the most unforgivably evil men ever, and the useful eejits of woke in the SNP hop and froth and demand that you don’t think other.
The best weapons we have to achieve independence is openness and truth, yet Sturgeon et al have created the mire Westminster operates best in, and set the conditions for the continued UK exploitation of our precious resources.
Do you want people who can’t even be open and truthful to their own party members negotiating the terms of independence with Johnson and Cummings and MI5?
The SNP is full of good people capable of asking questions. Raise your voice even if it trembles.
Stu, do you not mean they denying it 18 months after she ‘remembered’? (January / February 2019 – July 2020)
*they were
Jeezo, one nips out for a 30 minute shift on the chainsaw to cut firewood and comes in for a cuppa to read yet more on this matter.
A Flood?
Think someone better call Moses Tidal Barrier & Ship Welding Services to see if they can tame these troubled waters and patch up the hull on this rusting vessel.
There’ll be no Mercy for the Sisters with This Corrosion! 😉
Ignore my comment and questions from 2:17pm, I missed the crucial paragraph from your blog post today which shows Aberdein stating on record that the allegations were discussed at the meeting on 29th March.
Stellar work, Stu, really. It’s equally as mind-boggling and unsurprising that the media is not picking this story up. An absolute farce.
I see that Liz Lloyd’s Written submission has been published , this is an interesting part of it ,
“ she cannot remember if it was mentioned in passing “ .
Have all the parties involved in this suddenly developed amnesia because they all seem to be conveniently forgetting what they’re supposed to remember ? .
“ I had no contact with Nicola Richards in relation to the development of the complaints procedure. My limited engagement with James Hynd on this issue has been set out in his evidence. I have no recollection of discussing the development of the procedure with the Permanent Secretary or Barbara Allison, however we would be in touch or meet on a regular basis to discuss the ongoing business of government, so I cannot be absolute that it was not mentioned in passing. “
link to parliament.scot
Sylvia,
I spotted that word and took it, like you, to have some underlying meaning and as a sign of distaste for him. But that is pretty tenuous.
“Stu, do you not mean they denying it 18 months after she ‘remembered’? (January / February 2019 – July 2020)”
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU MEAN.
@Maggie C,
Incredible. Top aides and civil servants who can only seem to forget events related to one topic.
On everything else they quote chapter and verse.
EDIT: chatted to a couple of people and realised why hiding the 29 March meeting rather than the 2 April one is important – it’s because the March one was on Scottish Government premises, which means it was government business (you’re not allowed to do party business in the Parliament), but it wasn’t recorded as such, so they had to try to conceal it. Have added that to the article.
Me @ 2.48 pm
Continuing on from previous post , I know that some of the links to the evidence published today have already been posted but I’ve put them all together here for easy reference .
Written submission from Nicola Sturgeon ,
link to parliament.scot
Written submission from John Swinney ,
link to parliament.scot.pdf
Additional written submission from Peter Murrell ,
link to parliament.scot.pdf
@Ronnie et al:
Rev explains that Nicola denied she knew in March but admitted she knew four days later, because admitting she had discussed the allegations in March would mean admitting she used her Gevernment office, to discuss party issues, something that is not allowed under parliamentry rules.
She was getting caught up in her own web from the very start and we have only saw the tip of the iceberg.
I can’t help feeling that there’s an attempt to throw some stale meat to the wolves to put them off the real scent, but to the conspiritors who will definately be looking in I will say this:
We love Alex and will never ever stop standing by his side and never stop making sure we completely clear his name, which BTW the court case should have done, but because you were so determined to destroy him, you went bleating to your friends in the press to further demonise him.
So now the only way to clear Alex Salmonds name, is to make sure each and every one of you faces a trial and possible (I hope) jail term, for your disgusting conspiracy.
You are in a fight that won’t end well for you!
Am I the only one thinking “just get on with it and resign Nicola so we’ve got time to avoid that big iceberg” “No, no, I’m going to cling on till we’re at the bottom of the sea”?
By the way, this update from Keatings’ S.30 legal case doesn’t help support the belief that indyref is coming anytime soon under Sturgeon. link to r.mail.crowdjustice.co.uk
Stu, she forget being told about allegations against Alex Salmond, during a busy day with FMQs. Seems plausible to me. I often forget things, as every human being. Do you seriously think Nicola should resign?
1 SNP look on course to win a historic victory next year, with record number of seat.
2 she’s never been more popular & trusted by people (including those from outside Scotland).
3 Indy is between 53-56% in the most polls.
I’m sorry Stu but to suggest she should resign is way way off the mark.
Sturgeon’s lies must have surely broken the Ministerial Code, she must stand down if that is the case. Both she and her husband Murrell, have acted in a duplicitous manner in my opinion. Both cannot be trusted.
Sturgeon spoke for eighteen minutes today before making the announcement the whole country was waiting to hear. I maintain she is an egomaniac.
Furthermore, this claim of forgetting is almost trolling in its sheer brazenness.
It really boils down to this- Has NS done Wrong? Answer – YES – so doesn’t matter what else happens where this is still fact – so she should follow the rules just as she expects us to……end of.
An overpaid CEO who says he needs to express himself better. Is he fit for the job?
Frankly, I find his conduct appalling. There is something very nasty about this man.
Why, then, did she lie? Why?
People lie in order to hide the truth. What truth, then, was intended to be hidden behind the lie?
Was it simply that the earlier meeting compromised her in terms of the respective hats she has to wear as party leader and first minister of the government?
Maybe. I can’t rule that out. Can anyone?
I think this is all a bit of a distraction from the central and more important questions that are at the heart of all this, as much as it’s convenient to have dishonesty on the record.
I wouldn’t be satisfied if Sturgeon resigned over this.
It seems to me unless I misunderstand this but the March 29 lie was really quite trivial,
I’m not saying the fact she lied to parliament was trivial but what she lied about was nothing more than a minor indiscretion, I don’t think that in itself should be a resignation matter
Even if Sturgeon and Murrell were both squeaky clean we still need shot of them, for they’re not interested in obtaining Scottish independence.
Just saw the shocking news that NS is forcing all hospitality venues to shut at 6pm, and pubs are also not going to be allowed to sell any alcohol. She may as well just close them all down, this will be a fatal blow to the industry, you can’t just keep turning the industry on and off again without expecting there to be massive damage. It has also got to be asked where are all the new infections coming from? Because it looks to me like they are all coming from schools and hospitals, very few are originating or being spread in pubs and restaurants.
NS says these new measures are backed by the science and there is no alternative, but that is obviously a lie. There is no scientific evidence to back these measures whatsoever, this is purely a political move.
sorry….pretty much denies us the chance of ever enjoying our Right to Health….
Max Planck Institute for the History of Science
Working Group (1995-1998)
Natural Law and Laws of Nature
link to mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de
A Curious situation maybe someone can recall it better than me. , I seem to remember a lifeline was thrown in the form of advice against doing what was being proposed was offered by the Mandarins at Whitehall ,
I seem to remember they advised against using any widening of the proposed new guidelines of employee harassment to include former ministers or in this case former First Ministers , First Minister could include only Include one person ,
They anticipated this could happen and could only have included again one Person.
It defies belief this warning was totally ignored ,it was that Stark it might have had a big bloody flashing light and a sirens attached ,
A oversight Christ on a bike these highly paid and apparently well educated people missed this ?
Ah that’s what happened to all those Mandates she forgot where she put them.
“Stu, she forget being told about allegations against Alex Salmond, during a busy day with FMQs. Seems plausible to me. I often forget things, as every human being.”
Do you often forget hearing that your mentor and best friend of three decades has been accused of the attempted rape of people you both know? Sober the fuck up.
“I’m not saying the fact she lied to parliament was trivial but what she lied about was nothing more than a minor indiscretion, I don’t think that in itself should be a resignation matter”
A minister lying to Parliament is ALWAYS a resignation matter. The Ministerial Code could not possibly be any more explicit about that.
The last article about a Free Press , is very telling.
Salmond whenever questioned about the press always said:” We have to live with them”. In other words , they are a bunch of shysters.
That Nicola is now courting the 99% unionist press will be her undoing. The unionist press have no place in the independence movement. Because they are not a free press. They report their opinions , they don’t report the news. They are not our friends, they are our enemies. Every newspaper sold in Scotland is owned by millionaires and unionists.
The fact that Nicola employed Murray Foot of the Daily Retard , as a press adviser. Gives you an insight into what she is up to. Courting the enemy hoping for cuddles, when we know that they are just waiting like hyenas to devour their prey.
I hope that Craig Murray and Rev Stuart Campbell will not mind me doing this but I’m posting these posts from Craig Murray’s twitter for anyone not on twitter as they make for interesting reading ,
“ I have written to Linda Fabiani and the committee with a list of the documents and suggestion they should request them from the Crown Office.
The Crown Office has said they will prosecute anybody who reveals or transmits the documents. “
“ The Murrell WhatsApp messages so far released are not the most damning ones by any means. “
“ It is those about the efforts of this senior SNP group to (ahem!) assist the police in organising and obtaining “evidence” that are truly shocking to any honest person. “
“ Smearing? Murrell has admitted the Whatsapp messages are genuine.
99% of people in the SNP are brilliant. A small clique at the top decided to frame Alex Salmond. Those same people appear to have a less than intense interest in actually pursuing Independence.. “
Link to Craig Murray’s twitter ,
link to mobile.twitter.com
The crown office should be made to publish the relevant papers to this whole “ affair “ and then we the general public could see exactly who was involved and what actually happened instead of it being hidden away .
My post re. Kelsen on Natural Law appears to have vanished. That kind of completely disables my potential to show folk how the law works.
It seems to me that Nicola Sturgeon could have told parliament about the March meeting and accepted what, I assume, would be a slap on the wrist and minor recompense to the taxpayer. Something like “Geoff Aberdein asked to see me, not the other way around…”
If I am right that the consequences would be relatively minor, why did she lie?
Jeez!! Here’s me up to 90 watching Mrs. Murrell single handedly destroying the hospitality and tourist trade in Scotland then I come here and read all this??
Surely her position’s untenable now?
Skip.
The answers in the article above.
“The meeting on 29 March took place in the First Minister’s office at Holyrood. That fact alone necessarily legally makes it government business, not party business, which must be officially recorded (which we know it wasn’t).”
RepublicofScotland, I agree with that, but what is the penalty for conducting party business at Holyrood? Presumably, it was a relatively short meeting and if Geoff Aberdein called on her at short notice, holding the meeting there seems like a relatively minor error of judgement.
Stu has established for us that telling a lie to parliament is a resignation matter. She could have admitted the error of judgement and taken a bit of flak for it. Non-political folk would most likely have shrugged their shoulders. So what was so important to keep secret that she lied to parliament?
Mist – What I find baffling , is that the death rate is not directly correlating with the daily infections.
My question being. Is Covid-19 now not as dangerous as it was 6 months ago?
Do we need to re-evaluate the risks? Are we basing the risks on what happened before , and not the present.
The measures taken a few weeks back , haven’t reduced the infection rate. So if these ones have no impact will there then be further restrictions.
It seems to me that this is like trying empty a toilet cistern with a tea spoon. But do we need to empty it at all? Is it an exercise in futility?
There’s not much point in having a healthy hospitality and tourist trade in Scotland, if it is supported by a failure to protect public health. This bug isn’t simply fatal to some, it is likely to cause long-term health problems for those who recover. Don’t be fooled by those that appear concerned, public health sustains democracy, so needs to be privileged in policy and practice. Try to remember that “heard immunity” may not be possible, and would be a completely unethical approach to supporting public health and the universal rule-of-law, as it rejects the core legal principle of “equality in law”.
Tell you what, how about some of you shouting for the resignation of Waffle Johnson and the most corrupt, inept, useless, lying, self serving, narcissistic shower of thieves this country has ever had to endure.
Its only because of the other useless clown running the USA, that the light is deflected from Johnson and Co.
Yes Sturgeon and the Scottish Government have problems, but hey, get real with the “pointing the finger at corruption”.
Nigel @ 2.19
I suspect we will need more than just a different SNP leadership if we are ever to see independence. Most of the current SNP MP’s and MSP’s appear at best lukewarm on independence and owe their positions to a rotten leadership and its closely controlled vetting process; by all accounts next May’s cohort will be even more dire. Their only aim is to run a colonial administration, and inflict oppressive laws on folks. Scots might as well vote Tory.
Most SNP MP’s and MSP’s are not nationalists; real nationalists would have used their successive national elected majorities to assert Scottish sovereignty by now. Real nationalists would also have done something about the British civil service which still runs Scotland and its many institutions.
Scotland needs a Real National Party and real nationalist politicians who refuse to participate in colonialism.
Sturgeon appears to have broken ministerial code on several occasions.
Holding party political meetings & conducting party business inside Bute House is strictly forbidden. No wonder she “forgot” all about the meeting with Aberdein.
And blatant lying to parliament which here is an unarguable, provable fact is also an infringement of ministerial code.
Isn’t it amazing how many times Alex Salmond referred himself, consequently never found wanting, yet Sturgeon with at least two serious strikes against here, and to the best of my knowledge, has never referred herself once?
You might also wonder at the claim that she & Murrell apparently never discussed any of this with each other. Then again, you’d have to live in the same house for that lie to be plausible.
“So what was so important to keep secret that she lied to parliament?”
Well I’d imagine whatever was said, if/when revealed wouldn’t show Sturgeon in a good light.
The ice is cracking, the SNP fence-sitters are thinking of speaking out. And the woke are eyeing each other wondering who first to throw under the bus.
An honourable man in murrell’s position would have resigned long before now.
And regarding lesley evans I can only surmise malfeasance in public office is no longer a crime.
Nicola has also got to resign.
What is very ironic is that labour and the tories would have swept this all under the carpet. A show trial is never a good look.
THE BIG QUESTION IS WHY DID THEY CHOOSE A SHOW TRIAL ?
To put it simply A.S.. Was found not guilty so those who accused him were found to be guilty except in one not proven case so why are the rest of them not being charged with deformation of character ???they have all shown that they are unfit to hold office hence the hiding of their names Cowards the lot of them I wonder if they still have the cheek to go to a church on Sunday’s or the courage to lookin a mirror???
-Gary45%-
First of all, even my dog knows that Boris Johnson is a buffoon. For us to spend our time repeating this would be a bit unnecessary. Preaching to the choir is too easy.
Second, we could make the case for independence more vigorously if there was any prospect of a referendum any time soon. Due to the duumvirate’s lack of interest in this, there isn’t going to be one,
Third, while my contempt for Johnson would be difficult to surpass, even he has not tried to put Theresa May in jail.
Alf – As much as Jim Sillars gets on my wick. He is what I would describe as an old fashioned nationalist. I don’t agree with him on the EU though.
One thing he has been saying since 2014. Is that Nicola hasn’t advanced or addressed the problems in the last referendum. She also hasn’t moved WM one inch regarding actually having a referendum.
Mhairi Black is an example of someone who is a modern SNP MP. She isn’t an instinctive nationalist. It’s more a means to an end for people like her. In other words she is more interested in socialism than nationalism. She thinks independence is the best route out of capitalism. Not that Scotland should simply be independent because she is Scottish.
There are loads of young MP’s with micro agendas. That’s a consequence of old Labour moving into the SNP. They bring their baggage.
For me personally. I don’t think I have been anything other than a nationalist. Even at primary school I felt it. I might not have understood politics, but I knew who I was and where I came from.
It’s in my political DNA.
And who has came out of this with the greatest of integrity. Alex Salmond. I expected nothing less. A huge contribution to the Independence cause. He has kept quiet and behaved with the patience of a Saint.
CBB,
“ This bug isn’t simply fatal to some, it is likely to cause long-term health problems for those who recover”
That is wildly inaccurate. Most people will have no idea they have or have had the virus.
It was admitted in court that there was a conspiratorial WhatsApp group to keep Alex Salmond from returning to frontline politics.
I think Salmond doesn’t want to damage the cause. That’s why he has been so kind to Nicola , when he could have destroyed her.
However , even his patience will run out. He probably concludes as we do. That removing the Murrells is the only thing that might save Scotland.
Nicola winning another majority in 2021 , will not advance the cause. Because she has already given up on independence.
She has allowed the narrative to take seed that we require another majority. We fecking don’t. We just need to use the ones we have.
“Nicola winning another majority in 2021 , will not advance the cause. Because she has already given up on independence.”
Big Jock.
We need Sturgeon (and Murrell) out before the next Holyrood elections take place, I for one would like to see Joanna Cherry as our next FM, she’s definitely independence minded.
Agreed Big Jock,
What amazes me regarding independence is how easily the narrative has been shifted to after another election. There are only a few still arguing for the SNP to fulfill their current mandate on the subject.
Ah well, I’m off out for a walk.
Big Jock
Yip, the new brood are all in her and Murrells image. And national liberation aint their bag, for sure.
It might occur to us who we would prefer to be on Scotland’s ‘UK Withdrawal Negotiating Team’ if it ever gets that far:
-Sturgeon, Swinney, Lochhead, Matheson, Yousaf, Sommerville, Freeman
OR
– Salmond, MacAskill, Neil, Cherry, Craig Murray, Rev Stu, Tommy Sheridan
A ken wha A wad want oan Scotlan’s team! (Sturgeon’s team widnae even get that far)
Astonished @4:18pm
I think they got caught up in the whole #MeToo fervour and wanted a big name scalp to burnish their credentials. Weinstein II if you like.
@breastplate,
Most people will have no idea they have or have had the virus.
That’s the crux of the problem right there, IMO. You can be asymptomatic for DAYS, happily going about your daily business and exposing dozens or hundreds of people without even knowing it.
-Alf Baird-
Good point.
Matt Hancock once considered a career as a jockey.
link to spiked-online.com
Truly the horses had a narrow escape, not so the humans.
Who’s afraid of the big bad virus…..nobody with a yoctogram of sense, whether common or not.
@JGedd 2:25
Brilliant post! Thank you
Do Sturgeon and Murrell have chinthe tattoo’s on their upper arms.
“The 77th Brigade has been accused by a member of parliament of targeting the Scottish independence movement and its supporters. In 2019, Scottish National Party (SNP) MP Douglas Chapman repeatedly claimed on Twitter that the Brigade was “working against elected MPs and parties” in a “highly organised” manner, “attacking and undermining our democratic choices”.
Chapman’s tweets prompted such a deluge of abuse from other users that he deleted some of the postings.
Opposition to Scottish independence is a viewpoint shared by some of the Brigade’s known members who serve as reservists in the unit. These include former Conservative MP and armed forces minister Mark Lancaster (the unit’s Deputy Commander) and current Conservative MP and chair of the House of Commons defence committee, Tobias Ellwood (a Lieutenant Colonel in the unit).
Both Lancaster and Ellwood have voted consistently against all legislation transferring further powers of any kind to the Scottish parliament.
Also reported to be part of the Brigade is Kate Watson, Labour’s unsuccessful candidate for Glasgow East in the 2017 and 2019 general elections. She was formerly the operations director of Better Together, the principal “No” vote campaign group in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum.”
link to dailymaverick.co.za
CBB. Show me the evidence thats this is caused by the hospitality industry! Odd how this latest spike coincides almost exactly with schools and Unis going back.
“I think they got caught up in the whole #MeToo fervour and wanted a big name scalp to burnish their credentials. Weinstein II if you like.”
Stuart Mackay.
Stuart forgive my interruption (If talking about Salmond) but I’m under the impression the fit up was to stop Salmond ever coming back into Scottish politics and leading the country to independence. Something Sturgeon and Murrell have no intentions of doing.
Framing an investigation remit in terms that avoids the major issues is typical of investigations in Scotland.
Choosing an investigator sympathetic ( biased) in favour of the body is also common.
The report then finds minor faults or partially upholds some complaints or rejects all complaints.
“The elephant in the room” glaring misconduct complaints are not part of the investigation.
The body can then claim the issues have been investigated and it’s all done and dusted. Case closed. End of Story.
Any further complaints that the real issues were not examined are then deemed to be “unreasonable persistence”.
The complainant is then deemed to be the guilty party if they press for the real answers and threatened with sanctions or legal action.
——————————————-
Being told your mentor and biggest political ally for years is under investigation for serious misconduct. Of course that’s the sort of thing that can easily slip your mind.
“Memory problems”. The professionals’ stock answer to accusations of misconduct and lying.
It’s the professionals’ equivalent of the neds’ solicitors’ ldefence: My client was intoxicated at the time and has no recollection of the alleged incident, My Lord.
Martin Keatings’ new email to supporters of Peoples Action on Section 30 raises some very serious questions about the SG’s approach to independence, including its questionable “draft” bill to be included in the SNP’s Holyrood election manifesto.
Breastplate
Most folk might be under threat of little risk of sever illness, but that does not mean that our environment is safe yet. I don’t think we can’t tell who is most prone to infection yet (happy to be corrected). Apart from those who are in lower wage brackets so tend to work in environments where H&S might not be well respected. Those who recover are prone to a higher risk of long-term health problems related to our autoimmune systems. Or have you got evidence to the contrary?
Physiology and Pathology of Infectious Diseases: The Autoimmune Hypothesis of Chagas Disease
link to intechopen.com
Stuart MacKay and republicofscotland.
I had not considered the #metoo angle. Show trial found guilty bask in glow of “righteousness”. yeah I can see that. Thank God for the honest, decent jury.
I think an investigation would have furnished enough to keep AS out of politics. They wanted showboating and public humiliation.
Again; Thank God for the honest, decent jury.
Can anyone answer my question at 2.17pm
Cheers.
Mungo Armstrong
I think you have me back-to-front. I’m not blaming our hospitality or tourist industries for anything, I’m simply point to the logic of prioritising the security of public health in public policy.
Mungo Armstrong@4.56
Certainly, the current spike coincides with the Uni’s opening up.
But the rise started 2 weeks after the hospitality opened up on the 14 July, and has continued to steadily rise.
Add to that, the “how do we get around the rules brigade”, and this will just keep going on and on.
Have they learned nothing about the political culture of Great fucking Britain? Those willing to remain schtum and tolerate sleaze and corruption so as to, in their minds, enable a higher-end i.e. a landslide victory for the SNP in next May’s elections, ought to be called-out for the unprincipled, devious sleeveens that they clearly are.
JaMuR: it was said a couple of threads back that 100 members from 20 branches are needed to nominate a candidate for the Party leadership. And this procedure is done before the National Conference.
I don’t myself know the procedure. But I wish someone would stand and get on with this – I think being FM and SNP leader is too big a job for one person right now because there is the independence project to be driven on.
-Astonished-
And thank God, indeed, for the jury system handed down to us by our ancestors from time immemorial. Only a thing in Scotland and the English common law systems. Everywhere else you are tried by a judge (a government employee) alone.
Mark my words, they will come for this next.
@crisiscult, 3.17
Thanks for posting that update from Martin Keatings. The exposure of the underhand dealings of the Scottish Government is useful.
Gary45% “ Tell you what, how about some of you shouting for the resignation of Waffle Johnson and the most corrupt, inept, useless, lying, self serving, narcissistic shower of thieves this country has ever had to endure.”
As opposed to shouting for the resignation of one of his key accomplices?
@bipod, 3.29
NS says these new measures are backed by the science and there is no alternative
My first reaction was to quote the late James Sanderson “Bunkum”. My second reaction was to ask “whose science?” The advice of Professor Fergusson and SAGE has caused immense and irreparable collateral damage. Why continue to follow it?
@Sarah says:
7 October, 2020 at 5:23 pm
“I think being FM and SNP leader is too big a job for one person right now because there is the independence project to be driven on.”
Fair point, but goes against “protocol” across global democracies. I can’t of any country leader that was not also the leader of their party.
Such a situation is probably asking for trouble, and could cause a lack of public confidence. The key factor would be is the FM implementing policies for the benefit of the entire population, or simply to drive independence through?
The other question would be who would be the true leader? The Greens have suffered with their ludicrous “co-convenor” positions in the past.
Appointing someone to public office for the role of planning independence is a tricky one as well. Unless there is a “Yes” vote, how can the expense to the taxpayer be justified?
I’m not against the suggestion, merely thinking out possible issues it would cause.
I see Wings has updated the article and furthered our understanding of this particular lie. As I suspected, it was more to do with the two hats which Ruth Davidson alluded to rather than any underlying conspiracy.
It is plainly obvious to me that a part of the Independence movement is after the scalp of the first minister.
Can I ask them who they think would be the new leader to take us to the next stage.
The obvious choice to me would be Joanna Cherry but I cannot really see her gaining the support for the YES vote that Nicola Sturgeon has built up over recent years.
The rest of the candidates are IMO just nobodies or yesterday’s men/women.
The “long term effects of covid” thing is a total red herring that has conveniently came up now that it has been decisively proven that for the under 55 demographic this virus is about as dangerous or less dangerous than flu. Of course there are some long term symptoms but that is true of every respiratory virus it is not unique to covid.
There is just so much wild conspiratorial speculation around so called “long covid”, I have seen people claiming that it can change your “mental state”, cause joint pain, cancer, cardiovascular disease, dementia and I even read a story this morning claiming it may cause male infertility. It is just another form of the covid hysteria, in a few months time we won’t be hearing anything about it.
The rule of six, mask wearing and all the other restrictions clearly have not worked or made any difference at all. These new restrictions will not work either. I know people intuitively think that if we all wear masks, reduce contact with people and shut down everything that must stop the spread of the virus, but the reality is much more complicated than that. There is still no evidence that shows any correlation between lockdown and successfully controlling the virus.
Not all experts agree with the governments current policies. Over 5000 experts and medical practitioners have signed a petition calling for a more focussed approach link to gbdeclaration.org
This is like living through a live version of A House of Cards, what amazes me most about the whole sordid affair are the amount of Indy supporters who feel we should just ignore the fact that a small cabal of power hungry people tried to destroy an innocent mans life and not just any man, one who has spent his life fighting for his people and his country and the only real threat we had to the union, some may be willing to forgive and forget, I certainly am not, I want to see every one involved end up in the docks, Scotland should never forget or forgive these rogues.
Maybe she could write a Book about it!!
After all its all she has achieved in the 6 years at the Helm. She reads plenty so writing a Book will be no problem.
I have a title ‘ From Here to Oblivion’ is my choice
@gullaneno4
Cherry is indeed the obvious candidate, and streets ahead of the FM both intellectually and in terms of her outlook.
She has the added advantages:
– not having lied to parliament
-not being in hock to a-scientific gender woo flat-earthers
– wanting to take the fight to the enemy rather than sit about for the next 5-10 years on the promise of that Gold Standard #indyref2 being graciously allowed by Westminster
Perhaps the question you ought to be asking is why wouldn’t anyone sane prefer Cherry to be in charge?
Stuart Mackay: “I think they got caught up in the whole #MeToo fervour and wanted a big name scalp to burnish their credentials. Weinstein II if you like.” Definitely part of this whole fiasco. Vengeful, hateful, jealous manhaters in government wanting revenge on one of the most important Scottish men in history, knowing they could never reach his achievement heights, and riding on America’s ideologically retarded coattails as usual. Why have they not learned yet that impersonating American idiocy leads nowhere but the gutter?
The remit literally says
– 5 (ii) whether there code has been breached?
How does that equate to the panel not being asked to check whether the code has been breached?
“World beating track and trace by the 1stJune 2020” was the cry from Waffle Johnson.
£12 billion spaffed away, feathering the nests of his Tory cronies,+ another £370 million wasted on PPE which will be in the back pockets of even more Tory cronies, and Sturgeon is the baddie in this sorry saga?
The UK is FKD because of Johnson and his sorry excuse of a government, I accept the Scottish Government are not perfect, but its Champions league compared to Johnsons Sunday pub league.
On the covid-19 restrictions, let’s clarify what’s actually going on.
1) the big driver of increasing infection rates is schools, but more recently colleges and universities. Everyone knows this. The data is there for all to see.
2) the new restrictions won’t make a blind bit of difference; transmission rates will continue to rise dramatically and we will probably need to go into full lock down for longer than would have been necessary if people faced the truth of point 1 above earlier.
3) despite the daily song and dance act, Sturgeon has very little influence over any of this. The strategy comes from head office in Westminster.
Instead of telling us the truth, Sturgeon couldn’t resist the temptation to jump in front of the cameras and do her Mother Theresa act. Being liked is her obsession and it overrides everything.
Had she told us the truth, it could have been part of a hugely compelling argument for independence; more compelling than even Brexit. Instead we have this diseased mess and a pile of crap about young people and pubs.
I am almost starting to enjoy this for the reason that it is obvious that while these people are vicious nasty bullies in the extreme they are also hilariously incompetent and thick as pig shite.
None of them were picked for their competence or intelligence and it is really showing. Their evilness is only matched by their ability to fuck everything they try to do majestically up.
For example Murrell’s excuses… wow he actually thinks people will believe that risible shite. He will be telling us he does not sweat next.
@ Beaker: you are right – this is a difficult subject to find an answer to.
The government does govern “for the whole country” BUT this doesn’t mean they are neutral/consensual – it is always government according to the policies of the party in power.
So independence should be the “flavour” of an SNP government.
Nicola is always saying that she has to concentrate on governing, and on covid, so she is not, and cannot, be working for independence at the same time. Apparently she is abandoning that aspect – not merely delegating it to her deputy leader, Keith Brown. And no-one seems able to make her change her priorities.
Clearly she is also determinedly sticking in place, as is Peter Murrell. So really perhaps what we need is a Leadership
challenge – but no-one is coming forward to do it.
My thinking in suggesting separating the Leadership role from
the FM role was to take the controversy out from Nicola being sidelined in the work for independence because so many Members think she is attracting No voters to Yes and fear that votes will be lost in the 2021 election.
Does a party leader need to cost the public purse? I wouldn’t have thought so. Is it not a party cost? [I would do it free!]
Gary45%, when you described the Scottish government as “Champions league”, did it occur to you to explain why you believed that?
Or do you just shout random crap in support of Sturgeon without compunction? Is that what you are reduced to?
I see public health ethics and the principle of equality of law are coming under attack again.
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): Pathophysiology, Epidemiology, Clinical Management and Public Health Response
link to frontiersin.org
When the schools are closed for the holidays, transmission rates will drop. When they go back, they’ll rise again. That’s pretty obvious to anybody and shows that Mrs. Murrell and the rest of them are just playing a big game because if they weren’t, they’d do something serious.
They won’t close the schools because people will have to take time off work and look after the kids. It’s the economy, stoopid! Mind you, that won’t be much of a problem for those in the hospitality sector because Mrs. Murrell is doing her best to relieve them of any employment obligations.
So, they keep on with this charade that the schools are safe to remain open.
It’s a fucking game.
The fact Murrell wanted police to investigate and presumably believed the complainers is not evidence of a stitch up
The fact Sturgeon hasn’t got a meeting date right, or even if she’s “lied” to Parliament about that isn’t evidence of a stitch up either.
Looks more to me like a leadership that wanted to cut Salmond loose the minute they heard the nature of the allegations and how it would blow up the party and cause if they were seen to help him.
Margaret Ferrier for new leader of the SNP because she obviously doesn’t give a fuck what anybody thinks and that’s what independence needs, someone who can just focus on the matter at hand and not allow outside distractions to bother them.
She is just playing us.. BADLY!
From Martin Keatings today..
“ Now onto the troubling issue
As you are all aware, the Scottish Government withdrew from proceedings, indeed this is what has caused the disruption with re-writing the record and the primary reason we’re having to move the by-order roll hearing to the 4th of November while a formal amendment procedure is going on (compulsory 4-week time limit).
On the 1 st of September, the First Minister stated in her programme for Government speech that she intended to bring a “draft bill” before the Scottish Parliament before the next election. You will note the term “draft bill” not “bill”. Which means it will simply be published, not voted on. We have established that this bill is anticipated to be laid before the parliament in the first 3 weeks of March 2021.
Unfortunately, the words spoken during that speech do not seem to track with what we are seeing in this case.
At page 126 of the programme for Government, it makes mention of there being no “moral” or “democratic” justification for the UK Government failing to acquiesce to an order in council under Section 30 of the Scotland Act 1998. It is noted, however, that that passage did not include the words “legal justification”. Indeed, it is also noted that on that same page it states, “it will clearly not be possible to organise and hold an independence referendum that is beyond legal challenge before the end of the current Parliamentary term next year.” Which is a clear admission by the Scottish Government that they expect the UK Government to challenge any bill for a second referendum when it is put to the Scottish Parliament formally.
The First Minister has for all intents and purposes stated the SNP’s intention to stand on the promise of this draft bill, which should the Scottish electorate cast its votes in the forthcoming Scottish Parliament elections, the SNP risks perpetrating a fraud on the electorate if the election campaign is conducted on the basis that Scottish National Party is asking people to vote for it to carry out a measure in government – to introduce an independence referendum Bill before the Scottish Parliament – but where there has been no legal clarification as to the constitutionality of the Scottish Parliament legislating for such a bill.
In other words, the SNP is saying it will put a bill to the Scottish Parliament either, with a section 30 order (which there is virtually no hope of getting) or a bill without a section 30 order which it knows would be immediately challenged by the UK Government creating exactly the same scenario as what happened with the continuity bill – and the exact scenario we’ve been warning about for the past year. That is the same as promising something it knows it may not be able to deliver, while also giving the UK Government an open goal to trash any bill it might put forward. It is the 2021 version of “give us a mandate”.
link to r.mail.crowdjustice.co.uk
Just remember my “cunning plan” of sacrifice from a few weeks ago.
Independence will get a massive boost when Joanna Cherry takes over.
How does it feel living in a dictatorship? Hope you all Have a good supply of masks
see if you’ve got evidence of a stich up go and tell us what it is because somebody not getting a date right isn’t it.
Schools are off from Friday. Except Edinburgh which is next friday. Hard to believe the bairns have been back for twa months already.
@Ross
From where most of us are standing, the party seems to be making a pretty good fist of blowing itself up now, having tried and failed to fit Alex Salmond up.
Believing in the face of the evidence now that they are just incompetent not actually criminal isn’t the recommendation you appear to think it is.
@Andy – Without using evading language, what’s the evidence of criminality please? More than willing to be convinced.
Helen Yates @ 5.49
“I want to see every one involved end up in the docks”
I used to work in Leith Docks and, ‘forshore’ (excuse me, Graeme Souness), some folks did end up there.
Ross the Sturgeonite SNP staffer is back to try and spin things. Except he’s pure rubbish at it.
@Andy in additon to my question above, i should note I like Salmond and I’m glad he was found not guilty but there is absolutely no evidence that the party sought to put him behind bars. People keep saying this without any evidence and the more they say it, they more they believe it.
@ Rev Stu EDIT: chatted to a couple of people and realised why hiding the 29 March meeting rather than the 2 April one is important – it’s because the March one was on Scottish Government premises, which means it was government business (you’re not allowed to do party business in the Parliament), but it wasn’t recorded as such, so they had to try to conceal it. Have added that to the article.”
I have my doubts about this reasoning.
Playing devils advocate, suppose I was an employee in Westminster, and I wanted to make a formal complaint of harassment / civil or criminal against a recent former Prime Minister, a member of the current PM’s party. Only someone of a PM’s rank would be able to ensure fair procedures were followed.
Likewise, if my employment roll within that government was in a position of trust to Government ministers (of any rank) and there were reasonable causes to suspect I was making false / malicious allegations, once again it strays into the realms of Government business.
I would suggest an allegation of that nature becomes both party and PM/Government business, including from the point of view of employment law.
In addition, it was at the height of initial Covid lockdown procedures, with emergency demands on the FM’s time. For her to have left HR for a neutral (and of necessity) discrete venue would have taken several hours out of her day – which anyone in her position under those circumstances, simply would not have had available.
In view of that, I’m sure she could have declared this meeting for all of the above reasons and if fault was found – offered up genuine apologies.
Has Mr Murrell produced the letter of resignation from Mr Salmond?
In his public statement, Mr Salmond writes that he will re-apply for membership once his name has been cleared. Surely, as very old acquaintances and colleagues, Mr Murrell would have had the courtesy (if nothing else) to respond to such a letter and surely Mr Salmond wrote a letter of resignation to the SNP and surely the SNP needed to contact him to return a portion of his subscription to the party? Mr Murrell must have had some communication with Mr Salmond about all of this.
haha i’m an SNP staffer for asking for evidence. it’s not spin that wings has erred here. He says the remit doesn’t include checking if the code has been breached when 5 (ii) of his evidence literally says just that…
that’s just one inaccuracy.
OK, let’s get real. Murrell takes the rap and resigns. She states her intention to retire and in return for the party letting her go quietly, she drops GRA bollocks and purges the NEC of the woke entryists. Then Joanna Cherry can take over and get the whole independence issue back on track.
@Ross,
Your hiding behind facts that cannot be revealed by court order and which would explain many things.
If the Rev and Craig Murray, who are both in the know, tell you there is much to be revealed, you should pay attention.
-Ross-
If Sturgeon and Murrell were just sitting in their house one night and got told that Salmond had been charged with sexual offences, then yeah, fair enough, cutting him loose would have probably been the necessary thing to do, for the overall good of the party and, okay, for their own self-preservation.
But their involvement goes rather deeper than that, doesn’t it?
Furthermore, Sturgeon’s forgetfulness about her meeting with Aberdein is…questionable. I can only speak from experience but I can remember fairly accurately where I was and what time it was that I heard certain bits of shocking news. It’s not a bit of juicy gossip, it refers to an allegation that a man she worked alongside for years raped her close colleague. You remember things like that.
Besides which, does she not claim “I do not recall when and where I met Geoff Aberdein”, implausible though that is. She claims, “I do not recall my meeting with Aberdein at all”- something which I find virtually impossible to believe.
Ross says:
7 October, 2020 at 6:27 pm
@Andy in additon to my question above, i should note I like Salmond and I’m glad he was found not guilty but there is absolutely no evidence that the party sought to put him behind bars. People keep saying this without any evidence and the more they say it, they more they believe it.
How naive can you be?
What do you think the punishment for attempted rape is?
So many, many SNP members are a cross breed of Lemmingsheep and it does NOT help the cause of Scottish Independence one iota.
Can you give ONE instance of how the party attempted to assist Mr Salmond in his ordeal? And has the party made any statement since? Mr Murrell is so careful to separate Government from Party business and yet not once has he said that the SNP would be delighted were Mr Salmond to rejoin them now that the trial is over. Time to find the key to wind up your brain Ross.
Daisy, I believe the meeting was in 2018, not this year. See the grey bit in the article, just below the YouTube video. So I disagree with your COVID argument.
If it was government business, shouldn’t it have been in the diary? With FOIA, I should imagine it is critical that this be kept up. I try to believe that issues such as this are more incompetence than conspiracy. However, I find it hard to believe that she forgot about the meeting with Geoff Aberdein. Even if she did, surely she should have come clean as soon as someone jogged her memory? I cannot imagine that the penalty for conducting party business (and I take your point it may have been government business) is more serious than having to resign over telling a lie to parliament.
Gary45% @ 5.58
Champions league?
The tories and their cronies haven’t pocketed the billions, its all in offshore accounts accruing interest, so that when brexit goes through,theyll come and buy everything they can in Scotland.
all thanks to Scotlands inept “leaders” action over the last 6 YEARS!
O/T
On a previous thread Scozzie was kind enough to reply to my post.
And in my reply,i finished with,WTAF,it should have read, WTAF are the SG playing at?
My humblest apologies if misconstrued
link to ucsusa.org
Quote from the above “The news media needs to responsibly cover COVID-19 news by interviewing health experts, directing readers to official sources, and debunking disinformation. Social media companies have taken some steps toward removing harmful disinformation from their sites, but more must be done to improve transparency and to reduce the echo chamber effect”.
I BELIEVE THAT’S CALLED CENSORSHIP.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is plainly concerned about suppressing opinions that do not accord with its own.
Daisy Walker says “it was at the height of initial Covid lockdown procedures”!! Daisy, do wake up! In attempt to justify the FM’s behaviour you’ve blamed Covid. Only problem is- the meeting was in 2018-Covid was this year 2020. Try again! But 10 out of 10 for “loyalty to the Party Leader”.
Thanks Sarah and I agree with you.
Balaaargh,
I understand your point of view, however where you see a problem, I see an opportunity.
The people who are at less risk from the virus (under 50s) than we all are from the flu should be allowed to go about their business normally (I am not in this category). These people will not be a burden on the NHS.
Those at a higher risk should protect themselves from the virus.
There is very little downside to this and there are plenty of positives.
CBB,
No environment is completely safe, just acceptable risk factors.
Poor Alex Salmond. All the Nicola luvvies telling him and us to prove his allegation against Nicola and the rest whilst fighting with his hands ties behind his back by court orders preventing him from revealing the truth.
I believe Alex to be an honourable man.I believe what he said outside the court. I believe him rather than Nicola.
@Bob Mack
Agreed.
Ross says:
7 October, 2020 at 6:06 pm
The fact Murrell wanted police to investigate and presumably believed the complainers is not evidence of a stitch up
The fact Sturgeon hasn’t got a meeting date right, or even if she’s “lied” to Parliament about that isn’t evidence of a stitch up either.
Looks more to me like a leadership that wanted to cut Salmond loose the minute they heard the nature of the allegations and how it would blow up the party and cause if they were seen to help him.
……………………………………………….
How come you’re so certain it wasn’t a stitch up Ross?
It took well over a year to come up with an attempt at a Moorov prosecution.
One of the charges was dropped before it came to trial
Another of the ‘charges’ wasn’t even a charge because it took place abroad and the Scottish courts had nothing to do with it.
We know what happened to the remaining charges:-)
Want to know what I think?
The Scottish Government internal cabal tried to get in on the ‘me too’ act and make a name for themselves.
Somebody mentioned Mr Salmond and one other person joined in. The plea of ‘consent’ was accepted against one of those people and it was heard in court that she had sex with Mr Salmond a year earlier. Once the gossip of ‘me too’ had been slipped to the newspapers there was no going back for some folk.
However, I’m no lawyer, but I think that charges of rape and sexual assault have to be brought by individuals and cannot be brought by a company on behalf of individuals, therefore the Government involvement in collecting and collating information against Mr Salmond was illegal and he could have taken them all to the cleaners. I can’t help but feel that after the Inquiry, Mr Salmond allowed breathing space for them to retract and apologise – instead they concocted a whole string of accusations, just so that they wouldn’t be shown up to be useless idiots. They chose sending Mr Salmond to prison over saving face.
That’s my narrative and I’ll stick to it for now. However I’m with Heraclites and I am prepared to change my opinion should further evidence come to light.
The only things I doubt I will ever change is my admiration and respect for the way Mr Salmond has behaved and conducted himself throughout this sorry business. AND my admiration for Stuart Campbell, another man who sticks to his word and his principle whatever the world may try against him.
I’m not claiming I’m right. BUT Mr Salmond has never wavered in his declaration of ‘innocence’ and he has shown himself to be strong , honest and able to face his own demons. These are not the traits of a man who could be accused of being a sexual predator, which is what the Moorov doctrine was attempting.
The ‘woke’ (for want of a better description) brigade around Sturgeon have shown themselves to be poor philosophers and philologists but they are very good at being downright nasty and their self-centred egotistic attitude towards anyone who doesn’t agree with them makes them capable of carrying out awful deeds with complete self-justification.
When the truth comes out on this, and I mean the whole duplicitous truth and nothing but the duplicitous truth, as I’m sure it will, the way Sturgeon strings Salmond along as evinced in the materials released today could make her look very bad indeed. I’ll just leave that there, though, for now…
It is completely unacceptable that the first minister thinks reference to a hashtag (#metoo) in some ways validates any aspect of her decision making. Is she really that lightweight? Or is this a desperate attempt to convince us that she was motivated by some ethical considerations rather than the selfish and ruthless pursuit of power?
In the released materials, note the repeated references to attempts to direct Salmond attention to the supposed substance of the allegations rather than process. But Salmond knew the substance was crap and he was never going to be tricked like that.
This is really tawdry stuff, well and truly in the gutter.
Breastplate @ 7.12pm.
That very much sounds like – “stay in the hoose ya auld bat you’ve hud your fun”
Do you think that old people over 50(gasp,50) old as you say! should stay in and the young will sort it all out?
Let me tell yi, 90% of the over 50’s service a huge part of the economy with shekels during day and night!. How the effing fuck is that going to solve anything?
The under 50s don’t spend their day at pubs,restaurants, shops and other facilities do they,well 95% don’t.
The duplicitous Sturgeon and Murrell, will try and ride out this storm by focusing on the machinations of the Tory government towards Scotland via thing s such as the Internal Market bill.
Her trusted lieutenants will help push this head turning agenda until the next Scottish elections ,by then Sturgeon and Murrell will hope that this whole sordid affair will just be a distant memory, and they can get back to pushing their unpopular wokest policies, and lining their pockets.
Independence won’t even come into it.
Get Salmond and Cherry back in sharpish. Clear out the woos. Sorted. Needs to be very soon.
Ayrshire Bob,
Tell me and take as much time as you need, is it better for society to have everyone self isolating regardless of risk or to have only the people at risk self isolating?
CBB at 6.05 – You kindly provide a link to help educate us. It provides 360 articles x 2648 authors.
Could you slim it down a bit, please?
*Rob that should be, my apologies.
Breastplate
We are faced with the choice of taking a relaxed approach to public health, and so privileging short-term economic recovery over sustainably robust economic health. This is one of the driving motivations of the radical right, who do not support the principle of equality in law. Or we can priorities public health and support the potential to realise the principle of equality in law, and the subsequent sate of democracy that entails. 😉
P.S. the principle of equality in law does not empower minors with the capacity to give legal consent to gender re-assignment, as they lack the mental capacity to conceive the holistic scale and scope of the decision they are being empowered to take. Insisting they are capable of making such life changing decisions when not sufficiently competent, undermines child protection law.
Equality and
discrimination :
understand the
basics
link to archive.acas.org.uk
sog
I’m doing my best mate. This bug is nasty and we’re not going to get around it, and discriminating on the basis of biological vunerablity to a particular disease simply won’t help. So the only way we can get on top of it is be privileging the security of public health in public policy. I’m afraid it’s not my job to make sure that happens though.
link to openscholarship.wustl.edu
Sorry CBB,
Your whole argument is premised on your belief that you are right, I simply disagree with you, I’ve disagreed with you for a goodly amount of time now, certainly enough to know that you are steadfast in your view no matter what information is laid before you.
So let’s just agree to disagree.
@Breastplate,
“These people will not be a burden on the NHS.”
That statement is a stunning generalisation of the risks involved.
“Those at a higher risk should protect themselves from the virus.”
What do you think we’ve been doing? And to further Ayrshire Bob’s point, have you looked at a population pyramid for Scotland recently? We’re not talking about a few folk in care homes, this is pretty much half of Scotland’s population!
No need to take a long time.
Simple,we’re all equal are we not? When you start separating age groups in society then we’re done for.
I’m not sure non-government usage of the FM’s office on 29th March is the reason for the lack of clarity, there are probably informal conversations that take place all the time. Who was privy to the conversation that took place ? Nobody was there in a ‘party’ capacity as I understand it. GA & the Gaffer did not know who the accusers were at this point, not all of them anyway, it was apparently a Government investigation, as far as they knew. I hope nobody was lurking. Who keeps the diary ?
Hi Daisy Walker at 6:27 pm.
You typed,
“In addition, it was at the height of initial Covid lockdown procedures, with emergency demands on the FM’s time. For her to have left HR for a neutral (and of necessity) discrete venue would have taken several hours out of her day – which anyone in her position under those circumstances, simply would not have had available.”
As others have pointed out, the meeting under question took place on the 29th March, 2018.
For those who wish to refresh their memory of who was at that meeting and to show that this matter wasn’t just reported in Scotland, check out this page from the Shropshire Star.
link to archive.is
To get the important context of that 29th March meeting, at this link to the Garavelli article, read the short paragraph that begins,
“The second woman was Nicola Sturgeon. She too was said to be on the witness list though never called. And yet, she was omni-present. Every time her name was mentioned, political journalists pricked up their ears.” (The interesting bit is after that quote.)
link to archive.is
That paragraph is quite far down the page.
Do you know what.
Above all else, the Murrell’ S administration is tired. Sturgeon ran out of good ideas 4 years ago. She has nothing dynamic to offer Scotland. It’s just constant tinkering with limited powers.
Bringing Cherry in would give us fresh ideas. Above all else it would bring the real nationalists back on board. It will increase the turnout at the election. We won’t mind Joanna asking for a mandate, because she has never had one.
Nicola has had at least 3 , people just can’t be arsed playing her games anymore.
Getting rid of Sturgeon will not destroy independence. It will save it.
Breastplate
I’ve no problem with that, but my perspective is critically informed and legally sound, so is capable of supporting public health. Your’s isn’t. Apparently.
Inquiry
An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Volume 53, 2010 – Issue 3
Equality in Law and Philosophy
link to tandfonline.com
Been many years since I have commented here. Anyway. One for the road.
Anyone who still doubts there’s a serious problem at the heart of the Sturgeon/Murrell control of the party is sadly deluded.
I have watched since 2014 and raised concerns with media, elected members and party members and yet few took any real interest. Vividly remember, in 2015, raising the dearth of reporting on the husband/wife situation with a well known journalist who said; ‘yes I agree but no one will go on the record’ WHAT?
As a recent Chris Cairns cartoon on Trump illustrated, chickens come home to roost.
Sadly the SNP is a pretty unhealthy party; elected members brief against colleagues, regularly tip off the media,operate in cliques and currently have little or no appetite for another independence referendum.
The power at the top is Nicola Sturgeon/Peter Murrell/Sue Ruddick/Shirley Anne Somerville/Liz lloyd and assuming he’s still there SNP lawyer Scott Martin – who has heard of him? Have you? Yet he’s still listed as the secretary and a director of Yes Scotland.
The sooner this current set up is dismantled, the better. I am not an SNP member, never have been but am a supporter of an independent Scotland.
Balaaargh,
No it is not a generalisation, the risk factor to the under 50s has been measured at 4 to 5 times lower than the flu amongst the general population.
I’m arguing that we don’t need to imprison nearly an entire nation in another lockdown like some people are calling for.
What have we been doing so far?
I don’t know what we’ve been trying to do, I have no idea what the strategy is now, I knew what it used to be but I’m quite willing to listen to somebody who knows what we are trying to do.
What is the strategy?
Is it containment?
Is it delay? If so to what end?
I’m all ears
CBB,
Yeah, I get it , you’re right and I’m wrong.
@ A Person at 5.23
I read that and thought “don’t they have juries in the US?”
So I checked:
link to en.wikipedia.org
Some jurisdictions do indeed only use judges, but there are many others where jury trials take place in some circumstances.
I also looked at this : link to en.wikipedia.org
and discovered something I didn’t know –
“Once all the prosecution evidence has been given, the jury may at any time, of its own motion, decide to acquit the defendant. Few juries will realise that they have this power unless advised by the judge. Such judicial intervention is deprecated by the Court of Appeal and, as of 2007, is rarely exercised.”
(In the equivalent article about Scotland, there is no mention of this power.)
Ayrshire Rob,
I’m not discriminatory, the virus is.
Breastplate
Yes, that’s correct. Otherwise you would be able to prove me wrong. No?
@Sarah says:
7 October, 2020 at 6:03 pm
“So really perhaps what we need is a Leadership
challenge – but no-one is coming forward to do it.”
Probably because it is a high risk move, and as things currently stand there is not enough cause – although that could change in a heartbeat.
There seems to be a lot happening just now, some of which could damage the SNP. Maybe everyone just wants to lie low until things calm down a little.
@Alwi 7.39: Chung with clicky-ba? I enjoyed that. Hotspur?
I’m finding it strange that we have new restrictions in urban areas in Scotland yet London, with more than twice our population, has none.
CBB,
Is that the exact same way that you proved me wrong?
Patrick Roden says ” We love Alex and will never ever stop standing by his side and never stop making sure we completely clear his name, which BTW the court case should have done, but because you were so determined to destroy him, you went bleating to your friends in the press to further demonise him.
So now the only way to clear Alex Salmonds name, is to make sure each and every one of you faces a trial and possible (I hope) jail term, for your disgusting conspiracy.”
I agree wholeheartedly, Patrick. They started digging a hole with their smutty made-up allegations, and then they just kept on digging. Even though they lost the first court case, such was their venom that they just had to keep on digging. They lost the criminal court case, and yes, they have kept right on digging with the help of the likes of Garavelli in the press. Well, that hole they dug is just about big enough now to bury them all, and here’s hoping they get the shove at the perfect time. All of them. Women like the alphabet soup disgust me, they bring all women into disrepute and undermine the potential for justice in real genuine complaints of horrible sexual assaults.
And still the level of betrayal by politicians that so many of us trusted and even admired – swinney, robertson, sturgeon, et al – hurts. They all deserve all bad things which are hopefully coming to them now.
Definitely time for popcorn now, things are becoming interesting again.
Had campaign leaflets for 2021 election from John Scott and Douglas Ross today. Not surprisingly they have the same ideas as a large number of posters on here, that the SNP are bad, not to be trusted and need to be damaged as much as possible.
Apparently support for Independence is polling around about 55%, the British Nationalists are worried and this time want to keep talk of Scottish Independence on the back burner.
Many years ago I was told by a fellow SNP member that the place to go for good information on the ’cause’ was here, doubt if he’d push it forward now.
When you stand side by side with Ruth, Richard, Willie and almost all the MSM in an effort to ensure the SNP fail to win a majority, then Independence for Scotland certainly is not your main goal.
I am proud of my local MP Philippa Whitford, she is an excellent representative for our area. Philippa without doubt like all the members I have came into contact with in the SNP are there because they believe in Scottish Independence.
Without the SNP there would be no fight for Scottish Independence.
Without the SNP there would never have been a devolved parliament.
Without the SNP competent government, support for Scottish Independence would never be at the level it has reached.
Without the SNP this site would never have existed.
SHAZBOT!
Further to my comment at 8.08pm, I’ve just realised that I can link directly to that paragraph in the Garavelli article:-
link to archive.is
Clearly the virus disproportionately effects older folks, that is one of the unique things about this virus. Rather than taking a more focussed approach and advising (not requiring or mandating) that everyone in a vulnerable category should isolate or take precautions if they feel vulnerable, we are using the sledge hammer approach of forcing everyone to lockdown even if the risk posed to them is extremely negligible. That is not a long term sustainable approach.
I wonder if the people complaining about age discrimination here had the same outrage when nicola unilaterally banned students from going to pubs and restaurants. I doubt it.
Old Pete @8.38
There are good people within the current SNP including your local MP. The problem is the hierarchy who seem intent on ensuring independence never happens and that they keep their well remunerated colonial posts. Wake up Pete – nobody enjoys kicking the SNP but at the moment the Murrells and their acolytes need kicked out. Otherwise we will be kowtowing to Boris and his ilk in perpetuity.
I mentioned yesterday about Covid taking over threads – I hadn’t been aware this was happening.
Anyway, again reading comments about schools and universities being to blame for increases.
Not sure the data supports that theory. A quick glance at the Covid Daily dashboard and the last weeks new cases broken down into age groups is roughly:
15-24 years @1600
25-44 years @1300
45-64 years @1400
65 years + @440
That seems to imply that cases are widespread – yes schools and unis, but also workplaces, pubs, restaurants etc and that the elderly are continuing to self isolate regardless of actual rules.
Have a look at the data, this is what I was looking at
link to public.tableau.com
Breastplate
Exactly what background do you have in contemptary legal philosophy, phenomenological legal analysis, or policy design? I’m not being a conceited arse here, you are simply refusing to acknowledge I have professional insight you lack.
Handbook of Phenomenology and Medicine pp 87-108
The Phenomenology of Health and Illness
link to link.springer.com
-Crazycat-
The majority of the jurisdictions which use juries are former British colonies where English common law was imposed. So USA, Canada, India, Australia, NZ, Singapore, South Africa.
Most of the other countries appear to use them in very limited scenarios or in some cases (like Argentina) they have been introduced recently.
The emphasis on jury trials in Scottish and English systems stems, if I’m not mistaken, from the seventeenth century and fears about the king sending people to prison which culminated in the Civil Wars and the 1688 convulsions.
But you’ll see that Singapore has recently abolished jury trial by claiming that juries can be bused. They’re a major check on state power imo and should be guarded.
@BDTT –
Thanks for the link.
In the paragraph following the one you highlighted –
‘If she is found to have breached the ministerial code then her position will be challenged.’
That seems fair enough.
And it seems, from what we have seen today, that she did just that. Because she lied to the Scottish parliament.
Nicola Sturgeon had months to prepare her submission for the committee and account for discrepancies re significant dates and meetings. ‘I forgot’ is the best she could come up with?
Her ‘explanation’ is, literally, unbelievable.
It makes no sense to most indy supporters that she got herself into this situation and perhaps it never will, but the bare-arsed fact remains – she lied to the parliament and that is a breach of such magnitude that she must resign.
There’s no wiggle room here, and those casting around for excuses are either in denial or (unwittingly perhaps) condoning the misleading of parliament.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens tomorrow at FMQs.
(I take it there is a FMQs scheduled for tomorrow?)
There’s no one in lockdown.Hasn’t been for months. Stop f’ing lying.
So you don’t think the weans need a clip room the ear noo and again, naw.
Get them in the army and they’d be in for a shock if the think a couple weeks out of a pub is end of the world.
Aye and btw ,I like a bevvy like a lot of blokes but don’t drink in house.So
CBB,
Are you saying that only people who have a background in contemptary legal philosophy, phenomenological legal analysis, or policy design can be correct?
“I’m not being a conceited arse here”, I would also disagree with that statement.
@Breastplate,
“the risk factor to the under 50s has been measured at 4 to 5 times lower than the flu amongst the general population.”
Nice straw man, I never mentioned flu. You’re going to need to give evidence for that claim which gives a better definition of what that risk actually is rather than you stating “these people will not be a burden.”
“I’m all ears”
Nice deflection from my second point. I’ve already stated my view that this pandemic is a perfect example of the trolley problem. Other countries seem to have handled it much better, it’s not just about poor government measures but the buy-in and support from the population which decreases day after day in the UK.
Ayrshire Rob,
I’m sorry if this is confusing for you but some people on here have already been talking about the need for another lockdown like we had months ago.
No, I don’t think kids need a clip round the ear.
Ah I see Breastplate. So are you emulating there that covid is 4-5 times more more deadly that flu? Lol
Don’t tell bipod and ottomanbo whatever.
To Old Pete, Fuck off. It’s not the SNP that is at fault, just the leadership. Without this site and the WBB, we would have not even come close to winning in 2014.
If you’ve ever taken in anything that the Rev has been pointing out for years is that you should ALWAYS read past the headlines.
‘So what do the Great Barrington Declaration authors suggest we should be doing? “Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open…. Extracurricular activities, …, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open,” they write. Sound familiar? These are – more or less – the policies that the UK government has been following since September’
link to archive.is
Breastplate .No one wants to be locked down ,but when some people act like like arses and don’t follow simple instructions to try and mitigate things and help,this is the result. It was actually for your ally the ‘bipod’ that hates anything the Scot government does cos-for obvious reasons ,they ain’t wearing a yellow mask that’s for sure- tory through and through.
Here’s another letter to the committee, from Liz Lloyd.
I don’t understand why a government website, designed to be viewed publicly, doesn’t date the submissions. Unless I’m just missing it altogether, I don’t see any date on the letter, or beside its link. Likewise, the ‘new’ material from Nicola Sturgeon, Murrell and John Swinney earlier today would not have been immediately obvious to anyone who wasn’t familiar with what was already at the bottom of that list.
Anyway, this is worth a read, if for no other reason than it gets increasingly nippy as it goes on. (‘I’m a special advisor don’t you know – how very dare you ask me about that stuff!’)
link to parliament.scot
Hi Ian B.
Did you tie that paragraph in with the first link I gave at 8.08pm?