The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Justice in chains

Posted on January 26, 2021 by

As we write this, we still wait for Scotland’s hopelessly compromised Lord Advocate to decide whether he, as John Swinney has already done twice, will refuse to obey the will of the Scottish Parliament by releasing data demanded by the Fabiani inquiry.

We suspect he’ll surprise everyone and the information WILL be released, because according to analysis by Craig Murray it’s actually completely useless, and the Scottish Government has undeniably been red-hot when it comes to deluging the committee with vast screeds of junk documentation it hasn’t asked for and doesn’t want.

By coincidence, that same Craig Murray will go on trial in Edinburgh tomorrow for his liberty, for the crime of allegedly telling readers of his blog the truth about the shameful failed conspiracy to imprison Alex Salmond for crimes he didn’t commit – a conspiracy, remarkably, for which nobody has yet been held to account in any way despite the most obvious of grounds for suspicion of perjury, and which the Scottish Government is still frenziedly trying to conceal.

Speaking of liars, we thought it was probably time to update the list below.

On 17 January 2019, the First Minister told the Scottish Parliament that she, her administration and her party would “co-operate fully” with the parliamentary inquiry into the Scottish Government’s handling of false allegations made against Alex Salmond.

She further assured the Parliament, unambiguously and without any qualification, that the committee investigating the matter “will be able to request whatever material they want, and I undertake today that we will provide whatever material they request”.

So let’s see how that’s been going.

In the interests of completeness we should note that the ground had been prepared in advance of the First Minister’s statement, with a large number of refusals of Freedom Of Information requests prior to her answer in Parliament, all on the same date.

20 SEPTEMBER 2018

Scottish Government refuses to answer any of six questions relating to the allegations against Alex Salmond, or even to confirm or deny holding information.

Scottish Government refuses to provide information relating to possible complaints about the conduct of Alex Salmond.

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of any communications between the First Minister and a special adviser relating to allegations against Alex Salmond.

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of communications between the First Minister, Leslie Evans and Peter Murrell relating to allegations against Alex Salmond.

Scottish Government refuses to confirm or deny holding information regarding communications between government officials and civil servants relating to allegations against Alex Salmond.

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of communications between ministers and staff relating to the allegations against Alex Salmond.

Scottish Government refuses to confirm or deny holding any information regarding communications between the First Minister and Alex Salmond on any subject in 2018.

Scottish Government refuses to confirm or deny holding any information regarding communications between the First Minister, Leslie Evans and Alex Salmond on any subject in 2018.

Scottish Government refuses to answer eight questions relating to communications between the First Minister and Alex Salmond in relation to allegations against him. 

Scottish Government refuses to confirm or deny holding any information regarding communications between the First Minister, Peter Murrell, Alex Salmond and any other Scottish Government ministers or staff relating to the allegations against Mr Salmond.

Scottish Government refuses to confirm or deny holding any information regarding communications between the First Minister and Alex Salmond regarding allegations against him in 2018.

Scottish Government refuses to confirm or deny holding any information regarding the outcome of any discussions between the First Minister and Alex Salmond regarding allegations against him in 2018.

Scottish Government denies Nicola Sturgeon knew anything about the allegations against Alex Salmond before April 2018. (Also here.)

——————————————————————————————–

The following list is all the acts of obstruction the Scottish Government has undertaken SINCE the First Minister’s pledge to “co-operate fully” on 17 January 2019.

——————————————————————————————–

7 FEBRUARY 2019

Scottish Government refuses to answer questions regarding the conduct of the initial investigation into allegations against Alex Salmond.

8 FEBRUARY 2019

Scottish Government publishes Liz Lloyd’s diaries for five dates in April, June and July 2018. The entry for 2 April does NOT include mention of any meetings with the First Minister, Alex Salmond or Geoff Aberdein.

This is despite the First Minister subsequently telling Parliament that she had held a meeting at her private Glasgow home with all three of them on this date, from which her husband, the SNP’s chief executive Peter Murrell, had been excluded because it was government rather than party business.

13 FEBRUARY 2019

Scottish Government refuses 31 of 32 requests for details of Liz Lloyd’s diary, on various dates between January and August 2018. No reason is given for the refusal. The only information disclosed from the 32nd request is which newspapers Lloyd claimed expenses for on 2 April 2018.

13 FEBRUARY 2019

In response to a request for details of the First Minister’s diary on 2 April 2018, Scottish Government provides a completely blank sheet of paper.

It also declines to provide information for several other dates.

23 MAY 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of any communications between Liz Lloyd (or other Scottish Government staff) and the Daily Record newspaper in August 2018, when the Record broke the story of allegations against Alex Salmond.

10 SEPTEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of legal costs relating to the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond.

10 SEPTEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of its internal legal costs relating to the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond.

10 SEPTEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of legal costs relating to the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond.

13 SEPTEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of communications between the First Minister and Liz Lloyd, between August 2018 and January 2019 on the subject of the allegations against Alex Salmond, citing cost reasons.

It also refuses to detail the costs to the Scottish taxpayer of the judicial inquiry raised and won by Mr Salmond, and numerous other requested pieces of information.

13 SEPTEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of its legal costs relating to the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond.

25 SEPTEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to disclose information relating to its legal advice in connection with the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond.

26 NOVEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to provide details regarding its legal advice about the judicial inquiry brought by Mr Salmond in respect of the allegations, or about the contractual arrangements of Leslie Evans.

16 DECEMBER 2019

Scottish Government refuses to say whether it has assisted any investigation into the leak to the Daily Record in August 2018 of confidential information relating to the allegations against Alex Salmond.

4 JUNE 2020

Scottish Government refuses to answer several questions relating to the allegations against Alex Salmond, in particular concerning the Permanent Secretary, Leslie Evans.

(Evans, curiously, also has a habit of “forgetting” meetings attended relating to the allegations against Mr Salmond, this time involving Liz Lloyd.)

NOTE: most of the above went unnoticed and unreported in the media, because neither of the inquiries into the Scottish Government’s handling of the affair – the Holyrood one led by Linda Fabiani or the James Hamilton one – had yet officially begun their investigations.

Once they were both properly under way, the Scottish Government’s constant interference in the process started making the newspapers.

8 JUNE 2020

19 JUNE 2020

Scottish Government flatly refuses to answer 12 questions concerning meetings between Nicola Sturgeon, Alex Salmond and Geoff Aberdein, who arranged them, who was present and what was discussed. In most of the 12 cases it does not even provide a reason for the refusal.

30 JUNE 2020

Scottish Government publishes First Minister’s diary for 29 March 2018, containing no mention of meeting with Geoff Aberdein. It also publishes a completely blank diary page for her chief of staff, Liz Lloyd, on the same date.

31 JULY 2020

Scottish Government denies knowing anything about a meeting between Nicola Sturgeon and Geoff Aberdein on 29 March 2018. (Like all the other denials prior to 8 October, this document CANNOT be found on the Scottish Government’s FOI page by searching for the word “Aberdein”.)

6 AUGUST 2020

11 AUGUST 2020

17 AUGUST 2020

19 AUGUST 2020

26 AUGUST 2020

28 AUGUST 2020

2 SEPTEMBER 2020

3 SEPTEMBER 2020

6 SEPTEMBER 2020

7 SEPTEMBER 2020

8 SEPTEMBER 2020

10 SEPTEMBER 2020

11 SEPTEMBER 2020

13 SEPTEMBER 2020

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of WhatsApp and other messages between Leslie Evans and various civil servants and special advisers in connection with the investigation.

16 SEPTEMBER 2020

Scottish Government refuses to provide information regarding supposed civil service policy relating to allegations against Alex Salmond.

16 SEPTEMBER 2020

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of its legal advice regarding the judicial inquiry brought by Alex Salmond.

20 SEPTEMBER 2020

Scottish Government refuses to provide details of any communications between Nicola Sturgeon and her former special adviser Noel Dolan in connection with the allegations against Alex Salmond.

22 SEPTEMBER 2020

29 SEPTEMBER 2020

8 OCTOBER 2020

Scottish Government denies hiding documents about the investigation from the search function on its Freedom Of Information website, despite being provided with a list of 16 such documents which evade all text searches, when those same searches work for documents about anything else.

8 OCTOBER 2020

Scottish Government denies holding any information about a meeting between Nicola Sturgeon and Geoff Aberdein on 29 March 2018, despite already having published official documents confirming that the meeting took place.

The First Minister had previously claimed on 4 August 2020 that she “had forgotten that this encounter had taken place until I was reminded of it in, I think, late January/early February 2019“.

29 OCTOBER 2020

4 NOVEMBER 2020

10 NOVEMBER 2020

18 NOVEMBER 2020

20 NOVEMBER 2020

25 NOVEMBER 2020

1 DECEMBER 2020

9 DECEMBER 2020

16 DECEMBER 2020

Scottish Government refuses to admit knowing about the meeting between Nicola Sturgeon and Geoff Aberdein on 29 March 2018 that the Scottish Government had already admitted and instructed James Hamilton QC to consider in his inquiry.

30 DECEMBER 2020

Scottish Government denies existence of any official briefings to the First Minister about the allegations against Alex Salmond in March, April, May or June of 2019.

30 DECEMBER 2020

Scottish Government denies existence of any official briefings to the First Minister about the allegations against Alex Salmond in June, July, August, September, October or November of 2019.

21 JANUARY 2021

22 JANUARY 2021

[EDIT] 5 FEBRUARY 2021

[EDIT] 5 FEBRUARY 2021

[EDIT] UNKNOWN DATE

To be honest, readers, this is still an incomplete list, because the task of keeping up with FOIs in particular is just overwhelming and we simply don’t have the time or the resources to track and monitor all of them, particularly given the structure and interface of the Scottish Government’s FOI website which – whether by design or incompetence – conceals large numbers of relevant results from its search function.

But it still details a staggering 58 separate obstructions to the work of the committee since the First Minister’s promise not to obstruct it in any way, or 71 if you include the “preliminary” ones. Just imagine if they HADN’T been co-operating fully, readers.

We hope that Craig Murray will turn out to be merely the latest of a growing line of failed attempts (following those against Alex Salmond and Mark Hirst) by the rampantly incompetent Crown Office and the Lord Advocate to collect SOME kind of scalp to show for the thousands of police hours and millions of pounds in public money that was wasted on the botched stitch-up of the former First Minister.

But as the Scottish establishment continues to frantically try to interfere in the course of justice, in the week of Burns Night a verse from one of the bard’s lesser-known poems has been going around Scottish political Twitter. It’s one that in a better Scotland would run through the blood of every journalist in the nation:

And it’s one that should be remembered by Yes supporters too. Because if your cause can ever be damaged by the truth, your cause is worthless.

Print Friendly

    236 to “Justice in chains”

    1. Brotyboy says:

      Just one of the reasons why I want Independence is to rid ourselves of corruption in Government.

    2. Lenny Hartley says:

      Wow, surely there must be a judge led enquiry into the enquiry?

    3. Wee Chid says:

      I worry for Craig that they will find him guilty and then when people protest we will be told “Well you accepted the findings of the court when Salmond was found not guilty, so you should accept this ruling too”. what a shit heap. I’m with Renton “It’s shite being Scottish”.

    4. Stuart Macdonald says:

      Wow!!

    5. Republicofscotland says:

      When laid out like you have laid it all out above, the Scottish governments guilt is stark, and there for all to see. Not only that, but the Scottish governments sheer and utter contempt for the inquiry, and the Scottish public in general in obstructing and
      not revealing the truth is breathtaking.

      We didn’t vote for Sturgeon and her clique for this.

    6. Scott says:

      I’m growing increasingly concerned that this whole thing will be a white wash and that nobody will be held accountable or at the very least only minor officials will fall on their sword, Sturgeon will say “lessons will be learned” and will just move on…

    7. 100%Yes says:

      There is a woman in Scotland who is divisive, arrogant and a Dictator. When is the MSP, MP and members of the SNP going to step up and ask Sturgeon to leave, they’re all spinless for allowing this to happen without speaking up.

    8. Republicofscotland says:

      As for the bold Craig Murray, the Scottish government may be rife with corruption, the Lord Advocate may have gone rogue, but the judiciary has seen through both attempts to imprison Alex Salmond and Mark Hirst, I have confidence in those facts, and that the judge presiding in Mr Murray’s case will acquit him.

    9. Davie Oga says:

      Staggering. I hope someone has a letter off to James Hamilton about misleading Parliament over cooperating with the inquiry.

    10. Shug says:

      And not a word from the unionists?????

    11. shershonshez says:

      No reason to think independent Scotland would be any more or less corrupt than other countries. Difference is there’d be no-one but ourselves to blame or to fix it.

    12. Polly says:

      Well done on keeping up so far, even when it’s overwhelming. You’ve done a good job of listing them. Particularly irritating that all this should have come about during the premiership of a person who always claimed to be purer than pure and more transparent than most.

      I too hope Mr Murray is cleared, but I fear this one may have some repercussions even if it ends in a minor offence being upheld. I wish him all the luck in the world.

    13. David R says:

      I used to tell my kids “never trust anyone that wants to be a politician” I unfortunately fell into the trap of thinking that the ones in the SNP were different.

    14. Sharny Dubs says:

      The reference is continually made to “The Salmond enquiry” when in fact it is of course the enquiry into the government procedures of the false accusations against Salmond.

      Salmond still worries WM and the MSM will do its bidding. Hell mend them.

    15. Hugh Jarse says:

      I think that’s called a catalogue of cover up!

      Send it to every hack in the land.

    16. Skip_NC says:

      So what does the Scottish taxpayer pay Liz Lloyd for? Two days when we know she was doing something and her diary is completely blank. Here in the USA, she would be facing obstruction of justice charges. That carries a short prison sentence.

    17. Bob Mack says:

      “Justice is every mans business” Conan Doyle.

      The statue of justice may blindfolded because our government aided by civil servants and the Lord Advocate have poked out her eyes.

      Yet people tell me to forgive Nicola. Let her keep power and go on as if nothing happened. Sorry. No can do.

      If the very thing that helps define a civilised society is worthless in the eyes of that society then all is lost.

      Justice becomes the preserve of only those who can create it ,control it, and influence its outcomes.

      That is a very bad place to be.

    18. robertknight says:

      Setting the Gold Standard where an ‘Exercise in Arse-Covering’ is concerned.

      But, all joking aside…

      THIS IS WHY THESE BASTARDS DON’T DESERVE MY VOTE AND SHALL NOT BE GETTING IT!

      ALL THE ‘DEAF, DUMB & BLIND FOR INDY’ CAN KEEP ON KIDDING THEMSELVES!

    19. Graham King says:

      I truly appreciate you continuing to document and remind us of this catalogue of obstructions.

      Nauseating and infuriating hypocrisy by those involved.

      Thanks!

    20. Desimond says:

      I spent Saturday having a “The Godfather” day.

      After watching the movies and reading above, just makes me think of the Hearing scenes where the Senators think they have Michael bang to rights.

      They have key witnesses lined up, evidence aplenty but one by one, everything falls away and ultimately its Michael asking them to apologize to him after he pulls various strings to escape conviction and walk away scot free.

      By the end of Part 3 of course, Michael is riddled with guilt and has to confess his sins before ultimately paying a heavy price.

      Coincidentally, watching Sofia Coppola try and act almost made me cringe as much as hearing John Swinney protest and deny.

    21. dramfineday says:

      It doesn’t look bonny when it’s laid out like that does it? “Oh, what a tangled web etc.” However, the tangle’s shape is being exposed, even if it’s only by revealing what they don’t want you to know.

      I wonder how the participants feel, every day, seeing stuff like this laid out like that? Plus the fact that it’s not being “let go”. I bet this site is their first call each day. It must be the mental equivalent of a dose of Ex-Lax.

    22. Captain Yossarian says:

      Talking about the millions of pounds of public money wasted on malicious prosecutions by this Lord Advocate, is anyone aware of how much the malicious prosecution of the Rangers FC administrators has cost us?…..some say 10’s on millions. Why is this not in The Herald or Scotsman?

    23. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      Simply shocking unacceptable corrupt behaviour by the SNP lead Scottish Government.

      The conduct of the government screams “of course we are guilty of trying to falsely prosecute an innocent man now we are hiding from the investigation into our serious crimes”

      There cannot be any other explanation if there are those who seek to defend this government I would honestly like to hear an explanation regarding this article.

      It appears to me that there are several senior members of government and hangers on who are due decent jail time.

      Police Scotland need to take an interest in this rather glaring conspiracy, the failure of the police to act tends to corroborate their involvement in the crimes.

    24. deerhill says:

      So everytime the Parliamentary Inquiry asks for information, all they get is “NA NA NA NANA”!

      That money they gave to the dead tree press was a good investment. Has shut them up well.

    25. Kevin Cargill says:

      It’s like I’ve been saying for some time now. I am deeply worried that all of these political/legal machinations are being coordinated and choreographed with the ultimate aim of completely discrediting the Scottish justice system. At some point the UK Supreme Court will be brought in to sort out the mess then claim Scotland’s inability to clear it up itself is another nail in the coffin of Independence.

    26. Bob Mack says:

      @Captzin Yossarian.

      Thus far over 20 million. The two men however are also suing the police for wrongful arrest and harassment. I think the amount is 8 million.

      Whitehouse tells the story that as he was waiting to be interrogated a detective ventered the room and before even asking a question started to sing The Billy Boys at him.

      Endemic.

    27. James Horace says:

      I still think the Murrells will wriggle free from this, and will continue to control the party for years to come.

      Please prove me wrong!

    28. fillofficer says:

      breathtaking revstu !

      the whole of the establishment machine is in cahoots with their colonial administration

      when craig’s case is dismissed, the dominoes will start to fall, hopefully

      appreciate all yer efforts, of late

      proper journo

    29. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Talking about the millions of pounds of public money wasted on malicious prosecutions by this Lord Advocate, is anyone aware of how much the malicious prosecution of the Rangers FC administrators has cost us?…..some say 10’s on millions. Why is this not in The Herald or Scotsman?”

      I mean, literally the first link in this article is to a column in the Herald about it by Iain Macwhirter.

    30. Ron Maclean says:

      Corruption – misuse of public office for private or political gain. (Professor Rose-Ackerman)

      Nicola Sturgeon is leader of the SNP and First Minister of Scotland.

      The buck stops with her.

    31. Effijy says:

      As the cover ups run out and the corrupt officials are revealed
      the only remaining form of defence remains to be
      “A Big Boy made me and then he ran away”

      Absolutely Pathetic and a damning indictment on what the law and justice is in Scotland.

      No better than any Dictatorship or Banana Republic.

      If the Advocate of incompetence dates to come down on Craig tomorrow
      he should have a lengthy term in prison for his actions as this debacle unfolds.

      He could provide the prisoners with more sports than Sky TV.

    32. Frank Gillougley says:

      Complete corruption and utter contempt.

      And the judge who will preside over Craig Murray will pronounce that there is no case to be answered to, quicker than a kwikfit fitter.

    33. Kat says:

      What a damning indictment of just how far our government & the SNP have fallen short in all of this. Fare takes yer breath away it does.

      Question: has NS ever used the words “I first learned of the allegations…”?

      Seems to me whenever asked she starts “Alex first told me of the allegations…” or something similar.

      It just strikes me as deflection to reply this way whenever she is asked when she first knew of the allegations. Or am I just having a senior moment here.

    34. L says:

      What needs to happen now for the complainers to be charged with perjury and for Sturgeon and co to be charged with trying to imprison an innocent man?

    35. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Question: has NS ever used the words “I first learned of the allegations…”?”

      No. When that exact phrasing has been used in FOI requests, it’s always been evaded in the manner you describe.

    36. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “What needs to happen now for the complainers to be charged with perjury and for Sturgeon and co to be charged with trying to imprison an innocent man?”

      A new Lord Advocate and Crown Agents, I suspect.

    37. Bob Mack says:

      @Kat,

      Its understanding political speak or as the rest of us here call it ,evasion

    38. John Digsby says:

      I’m with Scott on the whitewash. They’ll get away with it, like all politicians do.

      I hope I’m wrong, but the pessimism is strong with this one – I can’t see how the process unstick without a sensational release of documents. A whistle-blower, essentially. Can’t see it happening though.

    39. lumatrix says:

      100%Yes says:
      ‘ they’re all spinless for allowing this to happen without speaking up.’
      You may have missed it but one of the SNP rules that NS brought in was that members could not crit other SNP members. So if you crit an SNP member you can be ejected from the SNP. Neat yeah?

    40. Davie Oga says:

      Captain

      I can recall seeing a figure around 30 million somewhere. There are several people being compensated.

      Policing alone for Salmond stich up must be around 20 million by now. Add all the rest and you could be looking at a figure above 50 million as it stands.

      If there is more malicious prosecution compensation who knows…….

      I don’t think that it is an exaggeration to say that at least 100 million will have been spunked away in an effort to keep The Murrells’s in the manner they have become accustomed to.

    41. Breeks says:

      How much of this can be back dated?

      I mean, this cosy setup between the Scottish Government and Lord Advocate hasn’t just raised questions of probity over Alex Salmond, the same setup “steered” Scotland straight past it’s Constitutional Rights and Sovereignty, and delivered Scotland subjugated in the UK and out of Europe.

      How can we have any confidence whatsoever that Scotland’s interests were given due priority and diligent protection throughout these proceedings?

      I find myself wanting a Steward’s Inquiry into the trail of incompetence and subjugation of our rights, and what Constitutional advice was given to the Scottish Government from the Lord Advocate throughout Scotland’s Brexit debacle?

    42. Alf Baird says:

      Well done Rev, a brilliant overview.

      Scotland’s ‘justice’ rot is widespread, also considering the recent Angiolini report: https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/angiolini-review-a-devastating-indictment-of-police-complaints-system

      Might be worth considering the ‘governance’ role of unelected law officers in pushing dubious and oppressive legislation through Holyrood these past years, in the process piling up lucrative ‘business’ for the legal community. As Mandela said, state institutions are all too often used to oppress the people.

      Following your apt Burns quote, Frantz Fanon said: “make me always a man who questions”.

    43. Livionian says:

      Independence will not rid us of corruption such as this as others have suggested, there will still be an exhaustive amount of work to be done to clean up our political system after indy, we will have to get our own house in order. But goodness it will be the only way to get the process started

    44. Daisy Walker says:

      I was wondering why they were blanking out entire days from diaries, but of course, if you only blank out 3pm -5pm on Tuesday 23rd for example, it gives everyone a signpost for that time period when they can start looking for other evidence as to who was there at that time, etc.

      This is going to drag on and on for years realistically, if it goes to. Judge led enquiry.

      If the information was published abroad, would that get us (the yes movement) unstuck, and able to concentrate on Indy again?

      It has certainly been successful in tieing up AS, just when Scotland needs him most.

      I’m still trying to get my head round, and understand the wheesht for Indy mindset.

      Is it possible, that for a large number of them, the reality of Scottish Independence, scares them silly. Far better then to always be in gradual pursuit, than have to deal with the real thing.

      If the yes movement is not brave enough to use every democratic means to achieve Indy, they send out a very palpable message to the undecided, and unconvinced, that large sections of the yes movement are also undecided and unconvinced. That is the divide and the flaw that breaks us.

      As much as the corruption in Scot Gov needs sorted, I suspect that if NS went on TV and did a full hour long full confession, and admitted full knowledge and guilt – the wheesht for Indy lot would say she was forced into it, and make all sorts of excuses, and the Sometime Never Party would continue as they currently are.

      Anyway. My second vote is in the bag for ISP.

    45. wullie says:

      Does somebody give Mr Murrel a real hard polish before he appears in public. Looks helluva shiny and un-natural.

    46. Hugh Jarse says:

      If the FOI Act gives certain rights of access, surely there’s some sanction for those who withold information without proper justification?

      If it becomes known at a later date, that the reason for withholding or redacting was spurious, is the official to be held to account?

      Anyone got the time for a looksy?
      Sorry, but I’ve got proper work to do constructing walls.

      The point?
      Prefacing requests for information with the relevant section will, at very least, give the official pause for thought.

    47. Mia says:

      “I still think the Murrells will wriggle free from this, and will continue to control the party for years to come”

      The fear here is not just that the Murrells may remain for a few more years – we now know how corrupt and dishonest they are. The fear is how their corruption, the corruption of Sturgeon’s government, this alleged conspiracy and all this hidden damning evidence might affect the credibility of future SNP leaders, their ability to lead meaningfully and to negotiate on Scotland’s behalf.

      The dirty laundry has always a way to emerge at the most critical times whenever the English establishment needs a helping hand to distract from shenanigans in Westminster or to put a break on Scotland’s independence. But it could also be kept on standby as a lever to force any particular future negotiations involving Scotland’s precious assets, if Scotland becomes independent, against Scotland.

      In other words, how do we know that hiding this evidence today will not be compromising and transforming any future SNP leader, into a British state puppet for fear of it coming out at any point destroying the reputation of the party? How deep and wide is the sewer?

      Hiding this evidence now may be at all effects rendering the SNP forever toothless and might tie the hands of future SNP leaders. In other words, it is the hiding of damning evidence today rather than Sturgeon’s government corruption what might completely finish the SNP tomorrow.

    48. kapelmeister says:

      It is folly to have a government’s chief legal advisor also functioning as chief of criminal prosecutions. As long as you have First Ministers of goodish character it probably isn’t too much of a problem. As soon as you have a vicious and solipsistic Nixon type character as First Minister it’s a recipe for utter mayhem.

    49. TNS2019 says:

      Impressive journalism. Very impressive.
      Respect.

      We clearly need to up our own game: https://www.tns2019.org/new-blog-1/2021/1/26/an-absolute-fcking-omni-shambles

      Salmond/Rangers administrators/Mark Hirst/Craig Murray/the TNS fiasco

      Distinct pattern emerging.
      Not our Scotland.

    50. Astonished says:

      “if your cause can ever be damaged by the truth, your cause is worthless.”- great stuff.
      .
      I think this should be written on the wall of the parliament.
      .
      I cannot vote, or help the SNP in their present state. I think we have to accept that we will lose the May election because most SNP MPs and MSPs are too spineless to stand up to the woke.
      .
      And the NEC are worse than useless.

    51. Strathy says:

      Stunning work, Stuart.

      When put together, the evidence of the cover up is immense.

      On the Rangers case, Captain Yossarian –

      A headline from The National on 14 November 2020,

      ‘Rangers bosses’ court cases against the Crown may cost up to £100 million’

    52. Captain Yossarian says:

      The Fabiani Inquiry only sits one day a week; this website runs 7-days a week. The Inquiry hears folk telling lies and invites them back 3 or 4 weeks later to tell more lies. Hence, these Holyrood Inquiries are designed to fail. Surely all at Holyrood know that?

      There was an inquiry a few weeks ago about excessive nursing home deaths and did it have anything to do with the discharge from hospitals into nursing homes of Covid patients. Most seemed to be certain that it was to blame. The inquiry found that it wasn’t to blame. Statistically, there was found to be no linkage. They must think we are all daft.

      However, Jackie Baillie is an age-old politician that only backs certain winners. If she is certain that Murrell lied under oath, then he probably did and that might be enough to bring the house of cards down.

    53. Donibristle says:

      Quite a record of hindering justice !
      What’s almost as astounding is Sturgeons stubborn clinging to the ever flimsier and indefensible lies used to cover the shite up, as if she’s unawares of the smell.
      There are so many players in this conspiracy that it beggars belief that there is only the one “shite” being covered up.

    54. Jim F. McIntosh says:

      It seems like its a plan thats all coming together pretty well. The collapse/ corruption of the justice system and police and the mistrust and doubting of the SNP to create a minority Holyrood parliament that cannot go for indy but retain Nicola in power. Job done Westminster happy Nicola happy and no way out of it for true indy supporters.But an even worse case would be that they expose and use the corruption of the SNP administration to (temporarily) close down holyrood to clean things up.

    55. David Rodgers says:

      This should not be viewed as an indication that Scotland is somehow too corrupt or whatever to be independent. In that case every country in the world would fail on that or similar criteria eg tax evasion, arms industry, etc. Judges have so far found for AS and Mark Hirst anyway. However maybe we need a change of (SNP) FM in the near future with a concomitant change in the civil service.

    56. Bob Mack says:

      Sadly, we are now all very aware that the concealment from public view of this important evidence are not about protecting the women involved. They go much higher than that.

      They are protecting the establishment who launched themselves blindly into an action believing they had acquired the biggest scalp of them all.

      They al! had something to gain but instead they now all have something to lose. I would imagine that there was a very tight group in each Dept who knew about the facts as they seemed at the time.

      I can envIsage the surpressed excitement as they talked about how to make this prosecution happen in the interests of justice of course but each holding their own secret reason for wanting to see Alex go down forever. They spurred each other on with nobody able to say STOP.

      It wasn’t public interest. It was personal and it made them act in concert the way a gang does when they find a target.

    57. Bob W says:

      It’s incorrect to say that the Judge in Alex Salmond’s trial, found in his favour, that was a jury of his peers. However it was the Judge in the judicial review.

    58. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I hope I’m wrong, but the pessimism is strong with this one – I can’t see how the process unstick without a sensational release of documents”

      James Hamilton QC has everything he needs to find that Sturgeon misled Parliament. Unlike the Fabiani committee he has Geoff Aberdein’s evidence, and has corroboration backing it up. He’s also stated that whether she misled Parliament is now something he’s explicitly investigating. If he DOESN’T find that she lied, there’ll be little option other than to conclude he’s crooked, rather than just being obstructed like the Holyrood committee is.

    59. Lulu Bells says:

      Wow, when you see it set out like this you wonder how the hell they can continue to get away with it.

      Bob Mack @12:10, absolutely agree, 100 percent with ‘They spurred each other on with nobody able to say stop’.

      The internal gubbins of the SG work like that, everything is down to a process as Evans has been at pains to make clear. No one is responsible, we just follow the agreed process and no one is allowed to stop that process once it is started.

    60. Lindy says:

      There is a power of work gone into this Stu.
      If it wasn’t for you, Craig and Mark etc, how would we know what was really going on?
      So thank you, and all the best for Craig tomorrow.
      It’s surreal to see honest men being hauled through legal proceedings for exposing corruption of an SNP lead Gov. For the first time I am ashamed of what Scotland has become.
      My biggest worry is that the UK gov will use this as justification for limiting our parliament. They can now say, see the nationalists can’t be trusted with governance, we need to take back control.
      I have little doubt this has been part of the Brit plan from the start, but shamefully our FM and her cabal have been willing participants. NS has shown the kind of people she trusts and has colluded with. She has surrounded herself with talentless sycophants, and tried to exclude anyone with intellect, talent or integrity. This ultimately leading to the smearing of AS and the gagging of bloggers who see through it.
      I firmly believe that your case with Kezia was all part of the attempt to smear any influential opponents. It hasn’t escaped my notice how cosy the relationship is between Dugdale and the FM’s cabal.

    61. Daisy Walker says:

      OT

      Craig Murray’s trial tomorrow folks.

      He has a new article up today which has the link to follow the trial if possible.

      And he needs money for the legal fees.

      Nothing will rattle the bad players more, than seeing that financially we’ve got his back.

      Good luck tomorrow Craig.

      If you are allowed to produce your evidence and witnesses, I’m sure there would be no case to answer… what a shitty state of affairs and a shitty state we have become, when the strength of the prosecution relies almost entirely on ensuring the evidence does not get out.

      Since the trial can only be heard over the phone, and isn’t that a shitty little trick…. can you send out a message when the trial gets to the bones of the thing, or even a heads up for when it starts, stops for lunch etc.

    62. Kenny says:

      Thanks for all your brilliant, forensic work, Stuart. I’d like to contribute more thoughts (vent spleen), but this past couple weeks I’ve found myself busy as hell.

      She’ll not be there long; the evidence, pressure from yourself and other bloggers, public, (some) MPs, MSP’s, Press and mounting criticisms from legal profession is now becoming irresistible, overwhelming. This dam is bursting – she’ll be swept-away in an ugly gore-fest of scandal and disgrace. Good.

      Cheers.

    63. Annie 621 says:

      Thank you Stu for all you do here.

      ” You hurt the ones that I love best,
      And cover up the truth with lies,
      One day you’ll be in the ditch,
      Flies buzzing…..”
      ..Your corrupt ways have finally made you blind..

      Idiot Wind, spat out, Bob at his best.
      From beginning to end this song gets it.

    64. Davie Oga says:

      “Question: has NS ever used the words “I first learned of the allegations…”?”

      She uses the word initially in her statement released on the 18th of Aug 2018.

      https://mobile.twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1032932323132690434

      ‘initially from Alex Salmond’

      The wording comes across as quite deliberate.

    65. Terry says:

      @rev Stu

      100% this –
      “And it’s one that should be remembered by Yes supporters too. Because if your cause can ever be damaged by the truth, your cause is worthless.”

      I keep trying to tell the deluded and worse, the ones who admit it’s a conspiracy but happy to wheesht for indy. Lies are bad – an usually unravel. The only ones who might get off with lies are the rich and owners of the MSM. Anybody spring to mind? It certainly ain’t the snp – try theTories instead.

      Like castles built on sand a movement built on lies will collapse.

    66. Nally Anders says:

      Brilliant work Rev.
      All will doubtless be deployed in a timely fashion before the election.
      I can never forgive Sturgeon.

    67. Robert graham says:

      Not sure If I should comment because all previous have disappeared anyway
      Not one reference to this post that details every move by our trusted SNP Government , that’s right the contributors on La La Land despite being frequent viewers of Wings posts , silence ok Ladies still sticking with this SMP Government ?

    68. David Caledonia says:

      These people are now our second parcel of rogues in our nation, lets make sure we never have a third parcel delivered to us
      Voting for the present SNP is a worthless act and will only prolong our fight for independence, we need to get rid of them
      Every time that utter clown George Galloway yacks about the scottish government he always uses the term The scottish nationalists never the scottish government or scottish parliament
      He is the kind of clown that people in england listen to as if he is the whole truth and nothing but the truth, when in fact he is a nonentity everywhere in the so called united kingdom he goes
      Why anyone in scotland would vote for his party when he is coming here in cahoots with a tory toerag is beyond me, but I suppose some poor souls will vote for anything that is against scottish freedom

    69. James Horace says:

      George Galloway and Andrew Neil seem to be hinting at something massive happening at somepoint this week. They have both beem fairly specific that it will be this week.

      Can you see anything large being revealed this week Stu?

      And if so, do you have any hints about what it may be?

    70. John Digsby says:

      @Rev
      Doubtless you’ve mentioned it (in which case apologies), but I didn’t realise Hamilton had Aberdein’s evidence – this being the document withdrawn from Fabiani’s inquiry?

      If so, hmmm. Though I don’t really trust that the SNP won’t circle the wagons against such a finding. The fitting up is what justice demands be exposed, but in reality won’t be. Anyone know when Hamilton reports?

    71. Nally Anders says:

      Craig Murray is needing a top up to cover his legal fees.
      A very worthwhile cause.
      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/a-time-of-trial/

    72. Prof Wright says:

      It’s amazing that the vast majority of people up to thoer necks in this scandal are female feminists. And those handful of men you are also involved are also mainly feminists. What went wrong with the SNP and the Scottish Government? Feminism. Rather than a focus on independence and centre-left politics, the SNP leadership has focused on modern feminism, and its angry, divisive, tone deaf and vindictive approach to equal rights. We are still often told (by feminists) that if women rules the world there’d be no wars and life would be better for everyone, but if we look at the ‘success’ of Thatcher, May and now Sturgeon’s woman-dominated cabinet and senior civil service leadership, it shows that at the very best, women are just as corrupt, combative and calculating as men, and in many respects in relation to this particular saga, they’re as corrupt and calculating as they come. It is clear that feminism is behind the Salmond saga. Feminists wanted to bring him down and used the sisterhood to try to do that. They have highlights all that’s wrong with #MeToo’s trial by media and popular opinion and highlight precisely why we cannot just ‘beleive women’. We have to beleive the proven truth, not just what someone alleges to be the truth. What this sorry affair has show is that all political parties have wrong’uns in them. That politics is a dirty game, no matter how hard some may claim otherwise, and that women are no more or less capable of underhand power play tactics than any man. For me, independence cannot come soon enough, not just because it’ll rescue Scotland from this increasingly calamitous Brexit, but it’ll almost certainly see Scotland’s politics rejuvenated as the SNP loses power and other parties pick up former SNP-voters, now that the constitutional question will have been settled.

    73. Sharny Dubs says:

      I keep getting “recommended viewing” on utube with pods along the lines of BJ scuppers NS Indy plans or NS under pressure over £700K “diverted” government funds, or George Galloway predicts Sturgeon resignation over Brexit compensation claim, bla bla.

      All half truths and innuendoes nothing regarding the enquiry, I wonder why?

      They only chink of light being Marr.

    74. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Doubtless you’ve mentioned it (in which case apologies), but I didn’t realise Hamilton had Aberdein’s evidence – this being the document withdrawn from Fabiani’s inquiry?”

      Yes.

      “Anyone know when Hamilton reports?”

      Like the Fabiani inquiry he’s duty-bound to report before Parliament officially dissolves in late March.

    75. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “George Galloway and Andrew Neil seem to be hinting at something massive happening at somepoint this week. They have both beem fairly specific that it will be this week.

      Can you see anything large being revealed this week Stu?

      And if so, do you have any hints about what it may be?”

      Neil has certainly been talking very belligerently, but non-specifically, about some sort of “fightback”. I know what’s triggered it – because the same thing happened to Wings – but I don’t have any idea of what his planned retort might be. I can’t see why it wouldn’t be this week but I don’t know any more about that than you do.

    76. John Digsby says:

      Thanks for clarifying for me, Rev. Seems I’ve been focused on the wrong inquiry!

    77. Heaver says:

      “Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
      26 January, 2021 at 11:29 am
      “What needs to happen now for the complainers to be charged with perjury and for Sturgeon and co to be charged with trying to imprison an innocent man?”

      A new Lord Advocate and Crown Agents, I suspect.”

      .

      Forgive my ignorance, but if a different govt results from the May elections, will they appoint different Advocate and Agent?

      If so, it could be that the only way for ccertain people to avoid jail is if the May elections are declared a plebiscitary on independence – go for broke.

      In other words, the only way to keep kicking the corruption can down the road is to ride the independence tiger.

      Could be interesting.

    78. Why the blazes would anyone still be listening to an utter irrelevance like George Galloway?

      He’s like one of these old school North of England comedians still hawking the same tired old act round the circuit to an ever dwindling audience and an even “dwindlinger” number of laughs, all the while blissfully unaware that the venues get smaller each time.

    79. Jim says:

      Just donated £20 to support Craig Murray. Good luck tomorrow Craig.

      If you can, please donate what you can afford to help Craig.

    80. Captain Yossarian says:

      Don Vito Corleone’s lawyer (he was called his Consigliere) was Tom Hagan, played in the film ‘The Godfather’ by Robert Duval.

      There’s more than a passing resemblance between Robert Duval and James Wolffe. Just remove the glasses, think of what James Wolffe looked like 20-years ago?

      There you are then: James Wolffe, Consigliere to the Murrells.

    81. Al says:

      Starting point – I don’t doubt the collection of evidence pointing to something dodgy going.

      That said – I still don’t understand why NS refused to acknowledge the meeting with GA and a complainer. I totally understand that by not doing so she has breached ministerial code and assume Hamilton will report the same.

      But I don’t understand why she did that? If she had originally admitted to it – then yes – there would be another breach in that she didn’t record the meeting early April. But I mean she could have worked her way out of it by saying she felt appropriate to have meeting to understand AS position – and ‘only’ go to LE when it became clear AS was going to judicial review. I mean – it would still be a breach – but on the face of it I think the general public would have sympathy with her position.

      So why did they take the decision to omit mentioning March meeting? I’ve seen it said because to allude to that meeting would show NS was aware from the very earliest moment about the procedure/ the allegations etc – but I’m not sure how it does? Again – to the public she could easily say she had no idea, the meeting with Somers and complainant was not known by her, and first she heard was March. I struggle to believe that but absent an incriminating email or someone breaking ranks again I think the general public would buy it?

    82. Sharny Dubs says:

      @Dave yup Sums up Galloway nicely, and the clunking fist comes to mind to

    83. Stuart MacKay says:

      Rev. Stu,

      > because the same thing happened to Wings

      I guess,one day, we’ll be able to add it to the bill that the cover-up has cost the country.

      I’d be happy to see it traded for an extra day in jail for all involved for every Pound wasted. No, let’s be generous, an extra year in jail for million Pounds wasted.

    84. true scott says:

      I’d hate to see us pull up the drawbridge and set sail for EU only to find ourselves as Turkey 2.0
      This mess stinks.

    85. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “That said – I still don’t understand why NS refused to acknowledge the meeting with GA and a complainer.”

      Dear lord, how many times do I have to walk people through it?

    86. Bob Mack says:

      @Al,

      Your timeline has to include the fact that the most serious complaint was made to Mr McCann of the SNP in 2017 . This was on Guy Fawkes night.

      This was the most serious complaint that made it to court.

      You would have to belidve that Mr McCann who actually was proven to state he was sitting on the complaint for future use, did not tell either Mr or Mrs Murrell of its existence.

      Something that would affect the optics of how the public would see the SNP ?. Laughable.

      Yet Nicola claims she only heard allegations months later?

      Again laughable.

    87. Andrew Morton says:

      But, y’know, let’s just lock this in a cupboard until after independence because otherwise the Yoons might find out about it.

      Wheesht for indy!

    88. MaggieC says:

      Every single person involved in this needs to resign and resign now because this is out and out corruption involving certain members of our Scottish Government and certain members in the headquarters of the Snp party .

      This is not the Scotland that we want to live in and certainly not the Scotland that we wish to have for future generations ,

      I wish Craig Murray all the best for his court case and all being well it will hopefully be dismissed tomorrow .

      Finally thanks to Rev Stuart for his honesty and integrity in investigating and reporting all of this for us .

    89. true scott says:

      No government should be able to do what this government is doing, laid bare above – irrespective of party. Most systems of government evolve with checks and balances over time because of cases like this. The levers and buttons available to – in this case The Murrels – simply should not be available to them. Parliamentary reform is needed.

    90. Republicofscotland says:

      This from the ultra BritNat Galloway.

      “Things are about to change. I know things that I can’t say here now because of the flurry of legal moves that have been made by SNP leaders to protect themselves.”

      This as well.

      “The truth is coming out. This coming week there will be a dramatic event, which may bring the house down for the Murrells, for the First Minister of Scotland.”

      I wonder if there’s a BritNat mole waiting in the wings (no pun intended) ready to whistleblow.

      https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/galloway-predicts-sturgeon-will-be-plunged-into-crisis-within-days-may-bring-her-down/ar-BB1d4pgL?ocid=msedgntp

    91. Daisy Walker says:

      Al,

      Had the meeting on 29/317 with NS, Geoff Aberdein and others been lawfully recorded, it would have listed the names of all the people there, in a professional capacity, to start the process of officially investigating/dealing with the complaints.

      If at a later stage, one of the person there went on to become an official complainer against AS, it would have been one of the strongest, and first pieces of evidence AS defence team would have looked to obtain.

      One cannot be part of the official enquiry, privy to details of other complaints and complainers, and at a later date, decide to dredge up some historic event from your own experience and add it to the list.

      If one had a legitimate complaint /experience to make then right at the start, they should have excused themselves from the proceedings, and let neutral others do the enquiry procedure.

      It might be that this is why this pre arranged meeting is not recorded anywhere in the official recotds – which is in and of itself a breach of the ministerial code.

      That details of the meeting came out, under oath, in court, and most likely have been corroborated, appears to have forced NS hand, into admitting the meeting during FM question time, and her ‘popped his head round the door, I simply forgot’ nonsense.

      Equally, since that meeting, which she has declared to parliament is in the public domain, for the Inquiry not to call Geoff Aberdein to give evidence, and at the very least ask him, ‘did you just pop your head round the door, or was it a formal, very serious, prearranged meeting’, and is Nicola telling us porkies, is utterly pathetic and corrupt. Toothless bunnies, but likely to be rewarded for it.

    92. Republicofscotland says:

      Oh well, I guess we’ll never know the truth of it now.

      “Twitter deletes post which identified Alex Salmond accuser as tech giant is urged to apologise”

      https://archive.is/SyP4B

    93. Wee Chid says:

      Prof Wright says:
      26 January, 2021 at 12:54 pm
      “It’s amazing that the vast majority of people up to thoer necks in this scandal are female feminists”

      No they are not. They are willing to walk over the hard won, sex based rights of biological women in order to appease misogynistic, autogynephile males. They are not “feminists”.

    94. Al says:

      Dear lord, how many times do I have to walk people through it?

      Have read all your stuff – and still don’t see an explanation for this.

      Bob Mack – I agree it is entirely implausible that this wasn’t shared up the chain – but absent any evidence then NS will ride it out.

    95. Al says:

      Daisy.

      Thank you very much for that – and yes apologies I must have missed this being alluded to elsewhere.

      And yes agree – the fact that GA evidence is not being seen by the committee means there should be an extremely large disclaimer attached to any report produced.

    96. TruthForDummies says:

      The problem with the April 2nd meeting is in Alex Salmond’s evidence.
      There he asks her to intervene to fix the process which from Salmond’s POV is perfectly reasonable, because he would expect NS to be the one accountable for breaches of ministerial code
      NS said she would ..

      Now at this point total responsibility for the ministerial code had been handed over to Lesley Evans and it was a civil service procedure that NS had just agreed to intervene in – which is I believe a breach of ministerial code.

    97. Gregor says:

      Context worth remembering:

      Craig Murray is also key witness in the DNC Russian hacking hoax/world mass deception (R.I.P. murdered DNC whistle-blower Seth Rich).

    98. Ronnie says:

      “The reference is continually made to “The Salmond enquiry” when in fact it is of course the enquiry into the government procedures of the false accusations against Salmond.”

      think the proper name is the Salmond Stitch-up enquiry

    99. true scott says:

      Ronnie -totally agree. Arrived on this site late last year assuming Salmond was guilty or at least that there was no smoke without fire. Convinced of his innocence now – but honestly not sure how deep into the popular mindset this is penetrating yet. It’s still political algebra to a lot of people – and it needs to be rendered down into political arithmetic – complete with a timeline and photos of the culprits looking ‘culprity’ (no shortage of those) next to arrows showing who did what and when.

    100. James Che. says:

      Even if we no longer have NS as first minster in Scotland, when it comes to corruption the light is shone without doubt on a myriad of civil servants whose names cannot be denied in this farce, the interference from civil servants has created the perfect storm for Scotland and its people,
      If I wanted anything to be seriously changed in our future it would be our disassociating from the Westminster run Scottish government.
      The Scottish/Westminster run goverment in Scotland is not ours and due to this large elephant in room we can not run this country of Scotland, with its style of false government and false justice systems.
      I presume that is the point of it,
      No matter whom is being setup or whom is withholding information, the coverup aided by a wolf in sheep’s clothing will always be seen not to favour the Scottish people,
      To try disintangle the wheat from the chaff would leave hardly a genuine body standing in the place, and many years of hide and seek, finger pointing, ducking and diving, and subterfuge.
      Thus in every sense does what the devolved government was meant to do, when the plan first formed in the minds of the opposition all those years ago.To put the spoke in the wheel of independence.
      All the sheep in wolfs clothing are slaughtering us innocent lambs from the inside, the inside of a fake pen.

    101. frogesque says:

      Silk, comes from worms to be worn by worms.

    102. true scott says:

      …and Stu, fully aware that you have just created a compelling timeline! I’m talking about something a lot simpler to reframe these events for those who see this level of detail as impenetrable.

    103. Paul D says:

      I share the concerns highlighted by Lindy at 12.23:

      “My biggest worry is that the UK gov will use this as justification for limiting our parliament. They can now say, see the nationalists can’t be trusted with governance, we need to take back control.”

      I saw Pension Pete quoted as saying that “rolling back on devolution is a ridiculous proposition that no serious politician would entertain.”

      Well Boris isn’t a serious politician, but he is a gambler. I could see him using this self-inflicted scandal as a pretext for reversing devolution.

    104. Bob Mack says:

      “Women who play with fire should always be aware that smoke

      will get in your eyes”. Mae West.

    105. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      Is anyone aware that the name of one of the accusers has been online for what will be a year in April?? Things are really making sense to me now. I did begin to suspect this person a while ago. What a bunch of amateurs. Poor Alex. Smurrells need to go and the rest of the rot with them. I don’t know why I’m so shocked, we were warned!

    106. Hugh Jarse says:

      Afterwards, to clear up the widespread corruption…
      We could look to South Africa, and its Truth & Justice commission.

    107. crazycat says:

      @ Wee Chid at 1.43

      Hear hear.

    108. Bob Mack says:

      Its pretty mad isn’t it when us Independence supporters have had to shell out hundreds of thousands of pounds from our own pockets to defend other Independence supporters and lobbyists from the Government they all helped to elect in the first place !!! Im going doo lally.

    109. James Horace says:

      I agree with True Scott.

      The level of detail you have collated is exceptional Stu, but for 99% of the public, it will mean very little.

      Even though things look extremely serious for Sturgeon and the government, the cut through to the general public has been astonishingly poor.

      How can things be suitably condensed for the layman?

      It would be nice to get to a situation where media outlets are able to grab peoples interest with this. Right now, the vast majority of Scots dont quite understand what sturgeon has done wrong. This needs to change.

    110. Hugh Jarse says:

      FFS This is farcical.

      I was sniffing around looking for ‘Aberdein/Sturgeon’ stories on Google.

      1st page, ‘people also search for’ seems to be in contempt.

    111. Andy Ellis says:

      O/T but looks like Joanna Cherry is now in the sights of the woke Wahhabis for anti semitism after they failed to get her for transphobia:

      https://mobile.twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1354060337318920192

      Be interesting to see if the party has the moral courage to stand up to this kind of othering and ban or sanction those responsible for disgracing the movement like Out For Indy?

    112. Effijy says:

      O/T. Listening to the dramatic rises in unemployment on the news,
      it answers a question posed in Asda last night.

      There is a small corner where sell by date and damaged foods are put out late
      in the day. There are many Asian looking people speaking different languages
      who seem to congregate there waiting to see what is next to be added.

      I do know there are many refugees in that area.

      Last night I witnessed a wee flurry from white native Glaswegians going for goods
      that staff were attempting to put on a shelf.

      Is this the new unemployed, the new Brexit price increases, the newly self employed with zero
      government assistance driving these people to battle for cheap food?

      Are these the lucky ones that have a little money and trying to avoid Foodbanks.

      We use Danish Lurpack spreadable butter ever since tasty Scottish Pride dissipated.
      It normally sells for £4 and £3.50 on offer.
      It was £5.50 last night. Is this the signs of EU food escalating due to Brexit?

    113. Mia says:

      “You would have to believe that Mr McCann who actually was proven to state he was sitting on the complaint for future use, did not tell either Mr or Mrs Murrell of its existence”

      He might not have needed to:

      Document CPhase1FN10/XX047 submitted to the parliamentary inquiry is a timeline updated on the 6 December 2017 that has two separate entries for 5 Nov. Considering this timeline was attached to an email sent by NR to JMac on the 6 Dec 2017 (part of the same document indicated above), which was after the 5 Nov, you have to assume the entries for 5 Nov in that timeline were accepted as correct on the 6 December 2017.

      The timeline entry for the 5 Nov reads:

      “NR/JMac meet Ms A. Sought views on draft policy – whether this have helped her at the time and how to put in place safeguards for the future” [Redacted]

      Now, either this Ms A is the same woman that reported those allegations to the SNP or is a different one, we don’t know. But if is a different one, it is one hell of a coincidence that both women reported the allegations at the same time, one via the SNP and the other seemingly through Sgov officials.

      Furthermore, the entry in the timeline indicated above says “meet”. This meeting should have been arranged before hand, suggesting that if this person approached the Sgov that day, it was really quick for them to arrange the meeting on the exact same day. Let’s remember there wasn’t a pandemic then to hide behind, so you would have to assume these people were busy. The letter by the Permanent Secretary to advise civil servants of the review of the procedure was only sent on the 2nd November 2017.

      So where did this meeting took place, when was it arranged and by whom? Because if it was neither NR nor JMac who this person contacted to first and arranged this meeting, somebody else might have known about this complaint then. Who? And when was the first time Ms A established contact with somebody (anybody)from the SGov regarding the complaint?

      The second entry in that timeline for 5 Nov reads:
      “NR/Perm Sec 1:1”.

      Did NR told the Perm Sec of the developments of the meeting with Ms A during this 1:1?

      Are we expected to believe that neither NR, nor JMac nor the Perm Sec and/or whoever arranged the meeting between Ms A and Nr/JMac did inform their superiors so that information could filter through up to the FM?

      Are we expected to believe that the civil servants took upon themselves to ask a complainer for feedback about writing a totally brand new procedure against former ministers that had no precedent neither in the UK or Scot governments or the even anything remotely similar for former civil servants in the entire UK?

      Now, when is it that allegedly the transfer of control over the complaints procedure from Sturgeon to Evans took place?

      Was that before or after the 5th November 2017?

      Because if it was after 5 November 2017, in line with the ministerial code and if I am not mistaken, ensuring the complaints procedure was lawful fell squarely at the feet of the FM. It is therefore to me unconceivable that NR, JMac or the Permanent Secretary herself would hide from the FM a meeting like this.

      Has the committee requested every communication between NR, JM, Lesley Evans and the FM from the 2nd October to the 7th November, the 2nd October being when the permanent Secretary sent the letter to the civil servants and the 7th November being when allegedly the first draft of the policy was completed?

      If not, why not?

      I agree. That we are expected to believe Ms Sturgeon did not know already by November 2017 of this is laughable.

    114. Alf Baird says:

      David Rodgers @ 12:01

      “This should not be viewed as an indication that Scotland is somehow too corrupt”

      Correct, it is not the Scottish people and nation per se that is corrupt. This is self-evidently the actions of a powerful establishment elite in Scotland, including what Osborne referred to last week as ‘the arms’ of the state which currently hold Scotland tight in its grip – police, copfs and civil service.

      What Cesaire referred to as the ‘respected bourgeois’, although as we can see there is little to respect; ‘establishment Scotland remains mostly privileged, unionist, Anglophone and vehemently anti-independence. And we can also see how this establishment behaves, like a wild animal, in the way in which it seeks to willfully and unlawfully destroy a nationalist native hero of the independence cause, and others too.

      Independence is necessary to remove this rotten unionist establishment elite which owes its allegiance not to Scotland, and to bring about a more equal and just society. Independence is therefore far more than a change in government or altering this and that policy.

      Scotland, like any other newly independent former colony, will need to look very carefully at who it appoints to lead and manage its many social institutions; institutions which, as Mandela said, can readily be used to oppress the people, much as we are witnessing here. And this oppression is nothing new, it just so happens to have been rather well revealed, by Rev Stu, and others.

      At the end of the day fowk cannae ser twa maisters – as we can surely see, and that is the crux of the matter, the raison detre of independence for any oppressed people, and the national priority that is to overcome such oppression.

    115. Mia says:

      @Mia
      When it says 2nd October, I meant to write 2nd November.

    116. Sharny Dubs says:

      I get the feeling that many “wannabes” (Galloway and co) are anticipating the fall of NS and her cabal and are somehow trying to position themselves to have been relevant in the outcome.

      See I told you so, kind of thing.

      Whether they are actually aware of something or not they are trying to insert themselves into the narrative. Political chancers.

      Not that we did not know that already

    117. wee monkey says:

      Riots all over western Europe as vaccine shortages finally hit home..

      https://www.ft.com/content/c9bbc753-97fb-493a-bbb6-dd97a7c4b807

      If that’s not a shambles as regards the EU I don’t know what is.

      The Astra Zeneca vaccine, which is getting the EU all excited, isn’t even approved for use in the EU yet.

      The EU vaccination rate is 20% of the UK’s.

      The UK vaccine rollout needs to be finished by September.In the EU it won’t even be half finished.

      According to the FT report the EU now has combined orders of 760m doses of the two-shot BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, but just 355m of those are confirmed to be delivered by September.

      So late ordering of the vaccines (they ordered in November we did in July), crippling centralisation and approval regimes, lack of investment funding into the vaccine programme, and now it seems possible legal issues with the vaccine producers.

      So how would you feel you are being served by your EU overlords as you sit under curfew as everywhere else opens up in the spring and summer ?

      Apart from Germany of course, as they went outside the EU and bought their own supplies.

      Some animals, it seems, really are more equal than others…sound familiar??

      Now, who is sitting on a stockpile of vaccine and is just DESPERATE to curry favour with the EU??

      Wonder who has the keys for our vaccines?

    118. Garavelli Princip says:

      Alf Baird says:

      “At the end of the day fowk cannae ser twa maisters”

      Lorimer’s magisterial New Testament in Scots (Matthew 6:24)Braw. renders it thus:

      Nae man can sair twa maisters: aither he will ill-will the tane an luve the ither, or he will grip til the tane an lichtlifie the tither”

      Jist braw

    119. Lothianlad says:

      Whilst sturgeon has been covertly working for the unionist establishment. They, the unionist establishment, has been keeping ther powder dry.

      They will unleash this just before the elections in MAy.

      Maximum damage will be done to the SNP and the Yes movement because of the actions of this horrible woman and her cabal.

      Imagine if the word independence was pushed everytime an SNP politician was interviewed, and fundraising to beef up the ring fenced indy fighting fund.

      Imagine if an SNP first minister asserted Scotlands soveringty at every turn and galvanised Scotlands indy support.

      Yes, imagine how the polls would be in favour of indy by now. Setting up the legalities and process for regaining independence and our place in the international community. ??

      Yes that’s what I thought the snp should be doing with all this huge support and mandates.

      I’m sick to the core at what that hunt and her cabal have done to AS, MH and CM. And the rev.

      Let’s clear these corrupt bastards out , and destroy the corrupt establishment that has lied to the people for so long.

      Start by outing the SNP careerist and woke at every turn and replacing g them with true indy supporters.

      Time sadly is tunnig out. But the canals days are numbered.

      Oh, and a message for the careerist unionist SNP politicians in Midlothian…. were on to you too!

    120. Stranger says:

      Thanks for the investigations. I particularly like when you reply to comments, however would you please mind to include the name of the person you’re replying to. Cos the comments aren’t threaded it can be a bit hard to work out what your reply means.

      Given that Salmond is one of your sources, do you know if he’s confident that the cover-up will be exposed before the deadline to register a political party for the list?
      btw when is the deadline?

    121. Craig P says:

      Something good that may come of this.

      The Scottish Government hate people knowing what they are up to, even if they aren’t actually up to anything. It’s a mindset of default secrecy that isn’t particularly helpful in a modern democracy. It’s fuelled by a paranoia over what The Scotsman newspaper will say about them, but since when has anyone cared what is written in The Scotsman?

      When this scandal finally breaks, the civil service will face massive pressure to become more transparent. Let’s hope for a permanent change in that direction.

    122. Samuel says:

      Wee monkey

      Is any other place other than to he UK waiting 12 weeks between jabs.

      So it’s obvious the UK are going to be ahead of other Nations.

      The UK also started vaccinating earlier because the EU is made up of 27 Nations, so it takes longer to legislate for.

      And if any country wants my Oxford english rat’s pish vaccine, then they are welcome to it.

      It is completely untested over a 12 week gab between jabs,,,and there is not a chance of me injecting that rat’s pish into my arm.

      I will not be a guinea pig to any english experiment.

    123. robertknight says:

      O/T

      Did Gwangi Broon get locked back inside his enclosure?

      Haven’t heard any more roaring and hissing from his direction since pointing out that BawJaws is running a failed State.

      Irrespective, I’m sure a field in Fife is now devoid of sheep following his last outing.

    124. Iain Wee Brocher says:

      Too many Yoons here today. Anybody who strokes Andrew Neils or George Galloway’s dicks are obvious Yoons.

    125. Clive Scott says:

      Been a while since I last looked on Wings. What a shit show this once pro Indy site has become. The bile against the best leader the SNP has ever had is simply absurd.

    126. Stu Foster says:

      Stu

      You mentioned Andrew Neil might be on to something this week, but what about George Galloway, he seems very sure of himself regarding an imminent event this week regarding Sturgeon.

    127. Stu Foster says:

      Iain Wee Brocher says:
      26 January, 2021 at 3:41 pm

      “Too many Yoons here today. Anybody who strokes Andrew Neils or George Galloway’s dicks are obvious Yoons”.

      Jesus, what is that all about mate?

    128. Bob Mack says:

      @C!ive Scott,

      Who cares what you think. About anything.? You are a Nicola fan boy and that says much about your ability to think in the first place. That is being kind.

    129. Iain Wee Brocher says:

      Can I have what you are smoking Clive Scott? That or you are another obvious Yoon.

      Sturgeon has been good for one thing Clive Scott and that is burying the Referendum she had had a mandate after mandate for.
      She has also had a dreadful Covid 19 in comparison to nations of comparable size. She has hid behind that virus to cover up her incompetence and treachery. She also failed miserably to stitch up Alex Salmond who did actually get us a Referendum.

      Where is our Referendum Clive Scott?

    130. Ron Maclean says:

      Before we go any further we need an honest, hard working, independence seeking leader with the skills and toughness necessary to drain a stank of unknown depth. One with a boiler suit as well as a dinner suit would be a welcome change.

    131. Robert graham says:

      Clive @ 3:41
      Nope not taking the bait because that’s what it is isn’t it Click Bait
      Pretty amateurish attempt most folk sussed you out , seen it all before away back to La La Land

    132. Ian Brotherhood says:

      I tweeted link to this post earlier, with the following message:

      ‘If you’re an indy supporter who’s still in denial after reading this – or, even worse, can’t/won’t read it coz of who wrote it – then your arse is oot the windae wi a big Ken Dodd hat on it.’

      Unbelievable as it sounds, have just had to block one and others will surely follow, for doing exactly that.

      ‘Ahm no reading that cause Wings, Bath,’ etc.

      Whether we like to admit it or not, these diddies (like Clive at 3.41, above) are part of the indy movement.

      What on earth we’re meant to do with them is anyone’s guess.

    133. Captain Yossarian says:

      @Clive Scott – many would say Alex Salmond was the best leader the SNP has ever had…..by a mile.

      Once folk like Salmond have left the political stage, you leave them alone. You are deferential to them. You don’t hunt them down like Sturgeon and her team has done.

      It is the worse type of political behaviour. Worse even than Trump. If lies are told under oath, then a prison sentence may result from that and Peter Murrell is in the invidious position already.

    134. SilverDarling says:

      Looks like the SNP wokies are out to destroy Joanna Cherry as an anti-semite now.

    135. Mia says:

      “Been a while since I last looked on Wings”
      Well, I am sorry to say that you have not been missed.

      “What a shit show this once pro Indy site has become”
      It has become a shit show because it is showing all the shit Sturgeon’s government and Sturgeon’s SNP has been sitting on since at least November 2017. Exposing this level of shit is stressing and a very unpleasant job, but somebody has to do it.

      This site has done an exceptional job at exposing the corruption of Sturgeon’s government, COPFS and the article above should be a reference index for any wannabe journo from now on and a standard to follow.

      It is disgusting that the allegedly MSM “professional” reporters have left it to underfunded pro independence bloggers to do all this hard work and to inform the public because the “professionals” could not arsed to get the truth out. One has to wonder if this was what the “subsidy” they got not that long ago was for.

      “The bile against the best leader the SNP has ever had is simply absurd”

      You are absolutely right. The bile against the best leader the SNP has ever had and possibly will ever have that has emanated from the current exceptionally corrupt and unfit for office leader, corrupt SNP executive office, corrupt civil servants, corrupt organisations subsidised by the Scottish government and acting as their personal mouthpieces, unionist reporters and even SNP MPs for goodness sake has been not just absurd, but utterly disgusting.

    136. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      You mentioned Andrew Neil might be on to something this week, but what about George Galloway, he seems very sure of himself regarding an imminent event this week regarding Sturgeon.

      Not a scooby what he’s on about. I do hear that Sky News are currently legalling something explosive relating to Murrell text messages, though.

    137. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “What a shit show this once pro Indy site has become.”

      Still pro-indy, dear. And still anti-lying and anti-corruption, same as always. Now fuck off.

    138. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Too many Yoons here today. Anybody who strokes Andrew Neils or George Galloway’s dicks are obvious Yoons.”

      Off you pop, little troll.

    139. Hatuey says:

      Alf, the people of Scotland aren’t oppressed enough to see things as you do. Certainly not enough of them are. Not enough of them are angry enough to do much at all, to tell the truth. I wish it was otherwise.

      We can only hope that things improve in the future, or should I say deteriorate.

      It’s always lightest just before the sunset…

    140. Bob Mack says:

      @Silver Darling,

      Yes It appears so. Imagine a world where all trace of past horrific human actions was obliterated ,sanitised, and barred from discussion. What would we become ?

      You have to read , hear ,and see evil to understand it in all its poverty. When you deny those things hoping it will vanish forever you just create them for the future.

    141. James Barr Gardner says:

      One of the main reasons why Scots want free from London Rule is it’s rampant corruption !

    142. Sarah says:

      @ Silver Darling: despite Joanna having tweeted her involvement with Holocaust survivors. I don’t swear and am a pacifist but I am sick at the irresponsible and corrupt personalities – and the cowardly 100+ Parliamentarian members who go along with it.

      One person – the Leader – backed by her sycophantic cronies is preventing the people having a voice. How the hell did this happen?

      It must be sorted out now. All the good guys on this site must email every MP/MSP and tell them to stand up against the wicked vile behaviour in the SNP. And party members must email the National Secretary and everyone else in National office/executive.

    143. MaggieC says:

      O/T Latest from Martin Keatings ,

      Update on Peoples Action on Section 30

      I’ve been informed by counsel that the court will supply the judgement to the parties in #peoplesas30 ahead of public disclosure for the purpose of internal use. This will likely be at least 24 hours before it is made public.

      This means several things. Firstly, I will be able to tell you that public disclosure is imminent and when to expect it, and secondly, if legal actions require to be taken, they will likely have already been initiated by the time everyone will see the judgement etc.

      No word as of yet when Lady Carmichael’s ruling will be forthcoming. But I will let you all know as soon as I find out.

      As always, I hope you are all safe and well and will contact you as soon as I know more.

      Sincerely

      Martin Keatings

    144. Sarah says:

      @ Rev at 3.56: “Sky are legalling something re Murrell text messages”.

      Whoopee!! Some good news at last. Many thanks. I’m no fan of Sky but they are big enough and rich enough to tackle our “problem”.

    145. Sarah says:

      @ Rev: PS I’d love to have your sources of information!

    146. lets hope Alex’s revenge is served as cold as a covid vaccine! cause I need cooling down!

    147. Mia says:

      I wonder if the “big” news Galloway and Neil were boasting about could have something to do with the Martin Keatings case?

    148. Beaker says:

      Someone implying that Wings is not pro-indy?

      The difference between Wings and the current SNP leadership is that people are free to discuss a variety of subjects, without being told to keep quiet.

      Remember that Labour conference a few years ago when a member was hustled out of the hall? There was a huge backlash.

      The SNP decided to silence hundreds on Sunday.

    149. Sarah says:

      @ Beaker: I remember that happening at a LibDem conference too. It was cringingly awful.

    150. WhoRattledYourCage says:

      O/T fae the sad, boring disintegration ay the auld Scotland and oor trust in politics. It’ll aw work oot better, trust me; useful early-new-country political fallibility lesson. Loaday cunts talking pish roond here recently; chasing waterfalls indeed. New piece ay mine thit middle-aged guys might get a kick ootay. Forgive, me, Stu. 🙂

      https://whorattledyourcage.blogspot.com/2021/01/stopcock_16.html

    151. TruthForDummies says:

      I tell the truth on twitter just facts not opinions and the wheesht lot go mental. We are trying to warn them but they won’t listen at all.

      I said the other day MPs and MSPs have to be extra careful because NS et al will be looking for a diversion. And it looks like Joanna Cherry is in trouble. Now we will see if Stewart Stevenson is in the leadership pocket but I can assure you if this was Angus McLeod JC would be suspended.

      Her crime she tweeted twitter telling them she is not happy with how they treat women and her example was a tweet by Sarah Philmore who the TRAs Hate and say is anti-Semitic because she once mentioned the Holocaust, in the context of dehumanizing people.
      This is similar ti Neale Hanvey.

      Joanna has reported OFI (probably Fiona R as she is Convener) but it’s a group account so they will probably get away what it.

    152. Willie says:

      Beaker the analogy of the octogenarian being physically ejected from a Labour Party Conference is a good analogy.

      The SNP leadership have become more censorious, more vicious, than the Labour Party ever became. The SNP leadership is a Cosa Nostra without doubt and like the mafia their tentacles run deep.

      The attempt to silence Salmond is testimony to that. And now the establishment that maybe encouraged our very own Scotia Nostra will use their criminality against them. No wonder Sturgeon has a haunted look on her face for she will sleep soon with the allegorical fishes.

      The sooner she is gone, the sooner we can restructure and refocus our movement, the better.

    153. Breeks says:

      Trying to think outside the box here…

      I wonder if there’s a case to be made for Constitutional Watchdog to oversee the activities of Holyrood. Obviously, Constitutional matters like Scotland’s capitulation to Brexit subjugation wouldn’t have got through the mesh, but when you add up the other “missing” components, like no impeachment protocol for Holyrood, no mechanism to remove a rogue First Minister… but then go further,… inadequate protocols governing when a Lord Advocate can operate despite obvious conflicts of interest…

      I’m thinking that if Scotland was to set up something like a Constitutional Senate, with say 100 seats, so it’s Constitutionally “quorate” according to the Declaration of Arbroath, and it swears allegiance and fealty to the Sovereign people of Scotland, such a Senate might act on multiple levels beyond Constitutional matters, and function in effect, like an Upper House or Second Chamber presiding over Scottish Constitutional matters and legislation. I don’t mean a Scottish House of Lords, (god help us), but something like the Seanad Èireann in Ireland, but very explicitly in Scotland’s case and circumstance, a Constitutional watchdog.

      Expensive waste of time? Not necessarily. There’s no reason why it shouldn’t be the Government in Waiting for an Independent Scotland, and amongst it’s Constitutional Watchdog activities, it might also carve out a roll for itself Internationally, aiming to pick up where the Scottish-UN Committee left off… Taking Scotland’s Constitutional predicament before the International Community and Council of Europe. Initially there would be no need to lumber it with running costs and chambers etc…

      In essence, you have the existing Scotland Act and Holyrood setup embracing Westminster’s Colonial encroachment over Scottish Sovereignty. Why not, as a sovereign people, instigate a “Scottish” Scotland Act if you will, a Scottish Protocol which codifies what Holyrood can and cannot do under Scotland’s Sovereign Constitution, just as the Scotland Act represents what Westminster will allow Holyrood to do.

      And like Westminster’s Scotland Act, there’s no reason why the Senate’s “Scottish” Scotland Act couldn’t veto Westminster Edicts the way Westminster vetoes Scottish Democracy with Section 30 adventurism.

      The bottom line is, Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty would then have a tangible, and powerful, presence in Scottish Affairs, and raising the profile of Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty tremendously both at home and abroad, while simultaneously raising standards of conduct and ethics across the whole spectrum of Scottish society…. and thereby becoming an opinion to be respected when looking to secure International Recognition.

    154. Alan Mackintosh says:

      Hi Stu, my last post must have triggered a block. I was wandering around following google searches and came across this post from Craig…

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/08/the-alex-salmond-fit-up/

      It is primarily a piece from an investigative Journalist, with Craig giving an intro and a summary.

      An interesting point jumped out in the summing up and I wondered if this is something you know about? It appears that Craig has seen or has knowledge of it from my reading, but just wondered if it is something you are aware of. I

      “There is one question to the Scottish government which from my own certain knowledge (which I cannot publish pending the never-never trial) would bust the entire Salmond affair wide open:
      Could you please detail every contact between *** ***** and Police Scotland anent Alex Salmond?
      They will refuse to answer the question so long as the so-called “criminal case” is pending. Expect it to be pending for a very long time.”

      For others, it is well worth going back and reading Craigs posts again, given the knowledge we have now, as opposed to what we had during the initial reading.

    155. Mia says:

      If Nicola Sturgeon, and Murrell are forced to resign, who will take over as leader and CEO?

      If we don’t know how big the scope of this conspiracy against Mr Salmond has been or how many SNP people have been directly or indirectly involved in it because the government and SNP executive have been allowed to get away with not releasing the evidence, how on earth can we ever trust that whoever become the next SNP leader or chief executive taking over from Sturgeon and Murrel are not effectively Westminster puppets because they might have been splashed and compromised by Sturgeon and Murrell’s corruption and the damning evidence currently hiding that can be unearthed at any point?

      Can the real SNP realistically survive this as a pro indy party or are we going to be left with just another British state political arm?

    156. Alan Mackintosh says:

      Stu, obv, a vague answer is expected

    157. Black Joan says:

      Wings’ epic account of ScotGov obstruction brings to mind this blog from November 2018 with its revelations of SPAD censorship (& the SPAD directorate) at work. It observes:

      “The Scottish Government has repeatedly asserted that SPADs don’t ‘clear’ FOI responses (at one point a government minister told parliament that they only check for accuracy) but, as these documents show, this is categorically not true. It may be the case that they do not technically possess any formal clearance powers, but the amount of influence they exert over the release or otherwise of sensitive information, and their function as ‘gate-keepers’ between officials and ministers (at points refusing to allow officials to submit material to ministers until specific changes have been made) means that they are in effect clearing FOI responses.”

      https://jamesmcenaney.co.uk/2018/11/03/sensitive-scotgov-documents-cast-new-light-on-spads-foi-role/

    158. Kat says:

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
      26 January, 2021 at 11:28 am
      “Question: has NS ever used the words “I first learned of the allegations…”?”
      No. When that exact phrasing has been used in FOI requests, it’s always been evaded in the manner you describe.

      Aye thought so, she did it again on Marr last Sunday. Of course he didn’t correct her, just let her body-swerve the real question.

      It’s a dirty little trick she seems quite fond of cos it allows her to avoid admitting in public, and on the record, the Aberdein meeting. Even though she knows we all know about it she keeps on doing it.

    159. Sarah says:

      @ Mia: “who will take over..”

      Keith Brown is Deputy Leader of the SNP.

      Chief Executive is an employee of the SNP. I don’t know if he has a deputy. The Chief Operating Officer is Sue Ruddick per Craig Murray’s blog on 24.1.21.

      I “enjoy” your comments btl, by the way. 🙂

    160. Doug McGregor says:

      Does anyone know if the SNP’s new NEC has started working yet ?

    161. You know, I attended the second day of Stu’s trial. Never met the man, though I was sat a couple of rows behind him in the court. Got a fucking parking ticker for overstaying my Edinburgh welcome, but it was worth it, even though I was unemployed at the time and it bit into my nonexistent finances quite a bit. Stu’s was a pure free speech trial, to me, and I have been a free speech advocate my whole life; I will be writing more aboot this on my blog, shortly. I did, however, meet Craig Murray outside and shook his hand for his forensic of analyses of subjects. Kezia Dugdale (remember her?) should not have won that day. And I wish Craig Murray nothing but the best tomorrow. Going by this worthless pathological manhater government’s track record, he’ll be fine. Fingers crossed.

    162. Breeks says:

      Clive Scott says:
      26 January, 2021 at 3:41 pm

      …. The bile against the best leader the SNP has ever had is simply absurd.

      This sounds more and more like the Neighbourhood Watch in Hot Fuzz… “For the Greater Good!” “The Greater Good!”…

      ”The best leader we’ve ever had….”

      Aye right. Weren’t they paying attention when Alex Salmond was running the show? (Because they’re obviously not paying attention now).

    163. SilverDarling says:

      @Bob Mack and @Sarah

      It is utterly predictable. They sit and wait for a gotcha that satisfies their knee jerk inability to think critically or look at context.

      The toxicity and persecutory nature of this group of people borders on levels not seen since the Salem Witch Trials.

      The despair of people lost to social contagion and delusion who can only point the finger.

    164. Alf Baird says:

      Garavelli Princip @ 3:13

      Aye, Lorimer’s is a braw buik, an nae dout aboot it. A hiv a copy masel.

      Scots have a great deal to consider when it comes to our Scots language about which, as the linguistic expert Dr. David Purves noted:

      “Scotland’s loss of political and economic independence provided the conditions to misrepresent Scots language as no more than an incorrect or corrupt dialect, rather than the distinct language of a whole people”.

      This is basically what is otherwise known as ‘linguistic imperialism’, the aim of which is to remove and kill off a language (linguicide). This of course represent a form of cultural oppression, and not least because language is a human right, as well as forming the basis of a people’s very identity.

      Thay tak awa oor langage an tak awa oor naition an oor identitie an aw!

    165. Stu Foster says:

      Regards what Galloway knows.

      “Not a scooby what he’s on about. I do hear that Sky News are currently legalling something explosive relating to Murrell text messages, though.”

      Thanks for prompt reply Rev.

      Please God, bring down Sturgeon and Murrell ASAP.

      The Bonnie and Clyde of Scottish politics.

    166. Breeks, who’s this ‘Alex Salmond’ you talk of? I looked at the SNP website, I see no mention of this person.

    167. Andy Ellis says:

      @Truthfordummies 4.19pm

      It will indeed be interesting to see how the SNP deal with Cherry’s complaint against OutForIndy. From her tweet she obviously had been in direct contact with Stewart Stevenson and was promised a speedy response. I assume the OutForIndy twitter account is probably run by more than one person?

      It is of course entirely to be expected that the Wokus Dei will try to use any weapon to try and silence opposition. They failed to mobilise enough support behind the laughable attack that Cherry and those who supported her were transphobic, so they’ve looked at how allegations of anti-semitism were weaponised by their co-evals in Labour, and obviously hope they can use that in conjunction with their spurious “TERF” narrative to other, silence and ultimately expel people like Joanna and those who support her.

      SNP members have a choice: either you deal with these extremists and expel them from the party, or you see them eat the party from within, and do the same to the SNP as a small coterie of fringe nutters did to Labour. Look at the responses to OutForIndy’s tweets: there are a few dozen toxic individuals in positions of influence who need to be given ultimatums: either they stop abusing mainstream members and supporters who disagree with their deeply regressive a-scientific woo-woo, or they leave.

      Stevenson and the “new” NEC need to show us things have changed.

    168. Hugh Jarse says:

      Where are Deeth and the deviants going to hang their hats when (not if)they get emptied?

      Back to Labour I suppose.

    169. Dan says:

      Johann Lamont putting down an amendment to Hate Crime Bill.

      https://twitter.com/mbmpolicy/status/1354075991560302593

      Andy Ellis says: at 2:43 pm

      O/T but looks like Joanna Cherry is now in the sights of the woke Wahhabis for anti semitism after they failed to get her for transphobia.

      In that case it seems an appropriate time to link to this again…

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/two-woke-princes/

    170. Sharny Dubs says:

      Breeks@4:28.

      Sounds good, but how could we go about setting up such a senate?

    171. robertknight says:

      Breeks @4:28

      Agreed – I think we’re suffering from the side-effects of a Unicameral Legislature.

    172. Stuart MacKay says:

      Breeks,

      Something in between the Seanad Éireann and the Supreme Court of the USA would be interesting.

      tl;dr; the Supreme Court can deal with constitutional issues and keep the government and the president in check while the Seanad is more like the House of Lords and is really only used to get the Dáil to think a little harder about what it is doing.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seanad_%C3%89ireann
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_supreme_court

      I’d be more for a Supreme Court which actually has some teeth and would appear to be a useful weapon in dealing with government which was playing fast and loose in following the law.

      You’d have to arrange it so the court could not be co-opted by politicians. The approach taken by the United States in giving a seat for life is useful for continuity and perspective – imagine if the SNP had a similar structure the takeover by the Woke Wahabbis would have been much easier to repulse. However we’ve all seen how appointments are intensely political. Some other way of smoothing over the bumps in political trends should be found.

    173. Davie Oga says:

      I wouldn’t expect them to suspend Cherry.
      Only thing these fuckers are concerned about now is trying to hang on for dear life to get over the line in May. A Cherry expulsion could cost them a point or 2.

      The idea that they could hide everything and it wouldn’t come out before the election is just another example of the inane, non sensical decisions that have passed for strategy since Salmond’s resignation and the ascendancy of the Louis the 16th tribute act.

      If you start at a base of 50%, the perpetual shit show on display only has to cause 10% of SNP voters to stay at home, spoil, or go rogue to destroy any hope of a majority. Then you have chicks with dicks driving women away. It doesn’t have to be a lot of women who use their vote to register their disapproval. Even 2% takes you down to 43%.

      If I get the opportunity to bet on seat bands I’d be looking at 40-43% if Tricky hangs on. A rapid change of leadership may have slight bearing on the matter but the time for that is closing fast.

      I’m actually surprised they didn’t go for the plebiscite route to try and get people back on board and then just delay, refuse to follow through, Covid crisis, etc.

      They have fucked it and they know they have fucked it. All that matters to them now is crossing the line and keeping their pet Lord Advocate in place.

      Apols for the pessimism but it’s hard to see an upside to any of it.

    174. Hatuey says:

      Stu Foster: “ Please God, bring down Sturgeon and Murrell ASAP“

      Would that resolve it?

    175. Molly's Mum says:

      Sharny Dubs says:
      26 January, 2021 at 10:55 am
      The reference is continually made to “The Salmond enquiry” when in fact it is of course the enquiry into the government procedures of the false accusations against Salmond.

      That’s why I’ve always referred to it as “The Inquiry into the Harassment of Alex Salmond”

    176. AYRSHIRE ROB says:

      Isn’t it great that the UK government are so good at graphs.
      Hey, look here how absolute shite we are at controlling pandemics.

      It’s not a pandemic any longer it is a ‘endemic’ and will never stop. Too late.

      Corona shot and flu shot every year now. Well done Boris.

    177. Beaker says:

      @Davie Oga says:
      26 January, 2021 at 5:07 pm
      “I wouldn’t expect them to suspend Cherry.
      Only thing these fuckers are concerned about now is trying to hang on for dear life to get over the line in May. A Cherry expulsion could cost them a point or 2.”

      If they suspended her the SNP will be fighting itself of 3 fronts.

      And I thought the Tories were the masters of political backstabbing.

    178. Andy Ellis says:

      @Stuart MacKay

      I’m not a huge fan of the idea of having a second chamber: a lot of smaller countries do without them – the Danes abolished theirs not that long ago. I do think we need to look at your idea of having a US style Supreme Court and promote the idea of a separation of powers.

      Perhaps rather than have an elected or appointed second chamber, and in keeping with the digital age, we should have a second chamber of ordinary voter delegates appointed from the population in general (chosen to be representative of the population as a whole) who are paid by the state and whose employers have to give them the time off? If it’s good enough for trial juries, why not as an oversight chamber…..?

    179. Robert Louis says:

      Oh, you’d think she has something to hide.

      This is, by definition, a total failure of leadership. She should go gracefully, and let the party and indy movement move on. Independence was clearly never her priority, and it still isn’t.

    180. Willie says:

      And here’s another thing about Ms Sturgeon our media star heading earthbound like a falling star.

      Her police force has been mandated to hand out fines, force their way into family homes, arrest people walking the hills in a show of strength and strong leadership.

      And now she says that school children may have to repeat a year due to inadequate teaching being put into place.

      Not exactly a success story as we deliver the highest per capita death rates in the developed world. But tell me this, major industries like the utilities industries, essential shops like supermarkets, all have people who interface daily with many many people. Why are these big employers not having regular tests on their employers.

      Better still why are essential workers not being vaccinated.

    181. Allium says:

      The organised pile-on against Cherry right now isn’t exactly subtle, and bot-heavy. Desparate times. They are losing all grasp of the narrative.

    182. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      I suspect the Wokoharam will go to the Greens @Hugh Jarse says at 4:54 pm

      If Cherry gets suspended she should jack the SNP and join an Indy List Party that would make a huge difference and help cement the fact that The Independence Movement is larger than the SNP

    183. Cath says:

      It’s amazing that the vast majority of people up to thoer necks in this scandal are female feminists. And those handful of men you are also involved are also mainly feminists. What went wrong with the SNP and the Scottish Government? Feminism.

      Nah, they’re not feminists. The kind of women who want rid of women’s rights, women’s sports and to allow male rapists into female prisons are not feminists. Nor are women who make false sexual harassment allegations, creating a situation where women are far less likely to now come forward and less likely to be believed if they do. These are not feminists – they’re divisive.

    184. Liz says:

      The pile on is astonishing, so many 77th brigade types plus the usual immature students who haven’t a clue about life.
      Stewart Stevenson better deal with O4I fast.

      Plus more Sturgeon wokeism to the fore.
      https://twitter.com/ForwomenScot/status/1354078116281524226?s=20

    185. kapelmeister says:

      Davie Oga @5:07

      “…and the ascendancy of the Louis the 16th tribute act.”

      Nice one! Although I reckon more Napoleon the 14th.

    186. North chiel says:

      “ penny beginning to drop “ here Rev Stu . Is it now the case that the “ Westminster establishment” ( through the” Whitehall employed UK civil service “) “ surrounding” the FM , now potentially have “ the goods” on said FM ( and associates) re the “ alleged “ conspiracy against AS . Possible criminal conspiracy charges “ down the line “ could certainly be an incentive for “ a controlling influence “ gentle breeze “ fanning from Westminster towards Holyrood ? Is this the REAL REASON the unionists “ appear” to wish our FM to remain in post ?

    187. Hugh Jarse says:

      JWT You’re probably right, but are the Greens stupid enough to allow an entryist takeover ?

      Given how niche this repulsive group are, and organising a new party is beyond their intellectual ability anyway, their route to power and influence is vanishing.

      They have done enough damage to our society already. Decades of progress for women and LGBT people rolled back, by teenagers with internet access.
      If gay bashing makes a return, these clowns will be responsible for it.

    188. Stuart MacKay says:

      Andy Ellis

      Some kind of forum that was apolitical (if that’s possible) where people could air all kinds of issues would be an interesting experiment. We could call it a “National Assembly” – that would negate the term being used by One Party State zealots who think that they are the One True Path to enlightenment independence.

      For example, right now that would be a great way of finding out why the soft noes are soft noes and side-step the problem of the talking sock puppets that Westminster has in place.

      Also it should certainly be able to challenge the government in some form. The GRA and HCB would never have seen the light of day if that were the case.

      Now that we live in interesting times there’s certainly plenty of material to work with.

    189. Willie says:

      So Fiona Robertson is apparently back on the NEC with Rhiannon Spear apparently back and heading for a position on the Highland Region list.

      Can anyone confirm?

      In truth this is good because people like Rhiannon Spear will guarantee votes for the ISP that might have stupidly gone as an SNP 2 vote. That together with the standing of high profile candidates to contest SNP DNE’s ( or Do Not Elects ) will in combination help ensure that we get the Indy representation that we require.

      And in the DNEs there is absolutely no reason why existing high profile, well respected SNP MPs should not stand against existing weak / soft / lazy / compromised existing members. There are plenty of MPs and indeed who could stand in Hollyrood seats.

      Let’s take back control. Nothing to stop us.

    190. Ottomanboi says:

      Another edifice of ‘expertise’ built on sand.

      The World Health Organisation has released a memorandum which potentially completely undermines all the “pandemic” case numbers worldwide.
      On the 13th of January, they put out a memo, stating that a single positive PCR test should not be used for diagnosing Sars-Cov-2 infection.

      https://off-guardian.org/wp-content/medialibrary/who-pcr-test-feature.jpg?x56463

      The jab junkies are not going to be happy.

    191. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      Cath 5.32
      Well said

    192. Effijy says:

      The First Minister seems completely oblivious to the incredible
      Number of times Rhiannon Spears has been rejected by party members?

      Why doesn’t she finally give her a job on a plate where you need no experience
      Make her the new Lord Advocate!

      Half Whits like Annie Wells and Murdo Fraser got seats eventually and they must
      be an inspiration to those who can’t read the sign posts.

    193. Stuart MacKay says:

      Hugh Jarse,

      Stirring up hatred is their prime objective. How else could they sustain their outrage?

      I do wish they’d come up with something more creative though. The woefully overused accusations of racism, anti-semitism, etc. are amateurish and rather tiresome. BTW, when did sexism fall out of fashion?

      Somebody should remind them that if you cry wolf too often, then, when the wolves do arrive, nobody will listen.

    194. Mia says:

      “Would that resolve it?”

      This is the same question I have been asking myself non-stop since yesterday. We are putting all our hopes in Sturgeon and Murrell being ejected from the party as if that would suddenly resolve all problems and get rid of the rot. But how far down and sideways is this rot gone and how on earth can we ever trust that everybody who gets some form of control over the party in the future have not already been compromised too by this, effectively acting as British state puppets to avoid disclosure?

      There is a very uncomfortable whiff about this sudden rush from unionist MSM vultures to join the news feed frenzy. They didn’t give a shit about it not that long ago and all the unearthing work was left to the pro indy bloggers to do. So why the sudden interest now that the thick of it is out? Is it because the bloggers are digging far too efficient and far too deep and may make somebody else other than Sturgeon, Murrell and the Lord Advocate uncomfortable?

      The number of MSPs stepping down in this election is also, at least for me, alarming. What is going on? What do these people know that they think it is best to abandon ship rather that stay and see independence delivered, what they have been working all these years for, if the pinnacle of their careers which is delivering independence was just around the corner?

      I don’t know what those unionist media vultures are after but being staunch unionists as they are, this can only be a damage limitation exercise. Is also the stepping down of so many MSPs a damage limitation exercise to their credibility?

      And the thing is, if the British state is now ready to dispose of Sturgeon and Murrell’s services to put a lid on the amount of evidence that is reaching the public, it might well mean they might have already another puppet/puppets lined up somewhere down the ranks of the SNP ready to take over the duties of gatekeeper/gatekeepers of the union. Well, if I was the brains of the British state and the SNP was the main threat to the integrity of the state, that is exactly what I would do and would certainly use the hidden damning evidence at my disposal as a form of “encouragement” for puppets to toe the line.

      I mean, it is not like it would be the first time the British State has used old dirty laundry as a behavioural control tool for politicians of all persuasions, isn’t it?

    195. MaggieC says:

      Re Harassment and Complaints Committee , Update from the Committee page ,

      The Committee will next meet on Wednesday 27 January at 12:30pm when it will consider its work programme in private. This meeting will be held virtually.

      From the Correspondence page ,

      Levy & McRae acting on behalf of Alex Salmond responded to the Convener’s letter on 26 January:

      https://www.parliament.scot/HarassmentComplaintsCommittee/General%20documents/20210126LevyMcRaetoConvener.pdf

      .
      Rev Stuart ,
      .
      Could you please remind Alex Salmond that if he needs a crowdfunder he only has to say yes to it and there will be plenty of people willing to contribute to it .

    196. PacMan says:

      Prof Wright says: 26 January, 2021 at 12:54 pm

      It’s amazing that the vast majority of people up to thoer necks in this scandal are female feminists. And those handful of men you are also involved are also mainly feminists. What went wrong with the SNP and the Scottish Government? Feminism. Rather than a focus on independence and centre-left politics, the SNP leadership has focused on modern feminism, and its angry, divisive, tone deaf and vindictive approach to equal rights. We are still often told (by feminists) that if women rules the world there’d be no wars and life would be better for everyone, but if we look at the ‘success’ of Thatcher, May and now Sturgeon’s woman-dominated cabinet and senior civil service leadership, it shows that at the very best, women are just as corrupt, combative and calculating as men, and in many respects in relation to this particular saga, they’re as corrupt and calculating as they come. It is clear that feminism is behind the Salmond saga. Feminists wanted to bring him down and used the sisterhood to try to do that. They have highlights all that’s wrong with #MeToo’s trial by media and popular opinion and highlight precisely why we cannot just ‘beleive women’. We have to beleive the proven truth, not just what someone alleges to be the truth. What this sorry affair has show is that all political parties have wrong’uns in them. That politics is a dirty game, no matter how hard some may claim otherwise, and that women are no more or less capable of underhand power play tactics than any man.

      For any idealogical system to work, everybody needs to play by the rules. The problem is that a lot of people don’t and it is ripe for exploitation. You just need to see that with the well known saying Patriotism is the last refuge of a Scoundrel.

      This is particularly so in ideologies based on equality where the individuals involved have no power or influence and have to use underhand power play tactics to order to get on.

      The problem is how do we know if these tactics are being done for the ‘greater good’ of the cause or like the scoundrel hiding behind patriotism, are doing it for personal gain? IMHO, that is the greatest flaw of modern centre-left politics that is based on equality.

      To get around this, there needs to be focus on a getting a written constitution that guarantees rights of every individual regardless of gender, colour, religion, sexuality etc.

      As to these wrong’uns, this is going to be a lot harder to deal with in this toxic woke culture that we live in. However, the solution isn’t to throw the baby out with the bath water and rejecting the beliefs that most people involved in the indy movement are committed to.

    197. Andy Ellis says:

      Interesting that the @outforindy tweet Joanna Cherry complained to the National Secretary about remains in their twitter feed. It hardly strikes me as the actions of a pro-active leadership that they let this kind of thing stand, knowing that the QC this party body is grossly defaming could well take legal action against those controlling the party affiliates twitter account.

      This is of course entirely of a piece with the SNPs shameful moral cowardice in the face of abuse, bullying and othering from trans rights extremists, directed chiefly at women inside the party. It seems Mr Stevenson and the new NEC are no more capable of tacking these woke extremists than the previous lot?

    198. Contrary says:

      Well, ,,,, that’s quite the list – very useful ta.

      @Mia

      Re: the timeline CPhase1FN10/XX047 – Nicola Richards stated in her testimony that the final dates are wrong, the 5th of Nov is actually 5th of Dec. Things make a bit more sense then – and Gordon Dangerfield has written about the important events surrounding that 5th Dec 2017 date – a total recast of the procedure where Nicola Sturgeon’s role is completely removed from the former ministers section. Very little other indications this was planned or done – total cover up. For a major change, you’d have thought there would be official meetings and records.

      @ Breeks,

      And Upper Chamber of Citizens? With oversight over parliament and government. 100 people chosen in the same way juries are, to serve a year only.

    199. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      Big hitters like Cherry, MacAskill and even AB MacNeil, AS etc etc won’t let us go down the pan. That’s my wee chink of light and I’m holding onto it, not blindly but I’ve got a wee bit faith there.

    200. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      Joanna Cherry is brave. Patel is arrogant ad infinitum

    201. Tinto Chiel says:

      robertknight:”I think we’re suffering from the side-effects of a Unicameral Legislature.”

      On top of that we have no free press in Scotland and a Lord Advocate who sits in at cabinet meetings, so no separation of powers there. These two factors alone make corruption and authoritarianism almost inevitable.

      It’s a terrifying thought that we would know virtually nothing about the plot to destroy Alex Salmond and the corrupt nature of the Scottish Govenment had it not been for this site and Craig Murray’s. The shut notebooks in the press gallery at AS’s trial would have ensured that.

      No wonder the SG leadership thought up the Hate Crime Bill. That would dispose of two serious problems for them.

    202. Alain Graham says:

      And now the SG do not accept the findings of the CALMAC enquiry. Utterly corrupt. Awaken up Scotland. We are being taken for mugs !!!!

    203. Hatuey says:

      Mia “ They didn’t give a shit about it not that long ago and all the unearthing work was left to the pro indy bloggers to do. So why the sudden interest now that the thick of it is out? Is it because the bloggers are digging far too efficient and far too deep and may make somebody else other than Sturgeon, Murrell and the Lord Advocate uncomfortable?”

      No. It’s because the 11 point plan hinted at an alternative to the section 30 process.

    204. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      Tinto
      Why was this allowed to happen in the first place? Westmidden?
      Surely the Law makers in Scotland must have known this was a compromising position?

    205. Astonished says:

      A thought just struck – I think the yoons are about to throw the murrells and the woke under a bus. As they now accept that they can no longer keep this scandal hidden.
      .
      .
      Expect the trials will be late April or early May.

    206. holymacmoses says:

      Wee monkey
      So late ordering of the vaccines (they ordered in November we did in July)

      https://www.cityam.com/which-covid-vaccines-has-the-uk-government-ordered/

      I’ll leave you to read the facts about when the UK ordered the vaccines monkey.

    207. Gregor says:

      Alex Salmond offers new date to Scottish Parliament inquiry:

      “Despite reasonable requests, he has been refused any assistance with legal costs but has been expected to provide extensive assistance to your inquiry, which could not and cannot be done without legal advice. That advice has proven necessary particularly in light of the risks of prosecution he continues to face if he provides you with all the relevant information you have requested, a situation which he considers unacceptable in the context of a public inquiry which is specifically designed to establish the truth.

      “This, despite the fact that the Scottish Government has pledged full co-operation, yet apparently continues to renege on that undertaking for reasons which appear only to serve their interests and not that of the public.

      “For the avoidance of doubt, that approach has nothing to do with preserving the anonymity of complainers. It was our client who sought the initial anonymity orders at a hearing on 4 October 2018 which the Scottish Government did not even attend and also approved the section 11 Order of Lady Dorrian at the trial.

      “Unlike the Scottish Government and the witnesses they have chosen to support, our client does not have the benefit of a state funded legal department or external legal advice provided at public expense.”

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/19040711.alex-salmond-offers-new-date-scottish-parliament-inquiry/

    208. Big Jock says:

      I still think it would be interesting to see Sturgeon’s reaction of Boris agreed a Section 30.

      She would probably resign!

    209. Saffron Robe says:

      SNP: the say one thing and do another party.

    210. Beaker says:

      @Big Jock says:
      26 January, 2021 at 7:35 pm
      “I still think it would be interesting to see Sturgeon’s reaction of Boris agreed a Section 30.
      She would probably resign!”

      Speaking of which, saw a post on Twitter earlier giving odds on will resign first out of Johnson, Sturgeon and Drakeford.

      Perhaps the cunning plan is for Johnson to resign soon, given his comment today that he accepts full responsibility for the COVID deaths. If he does that, what’s the betting that the media then turn on the other two and ask why they don’t do the same?

    211. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      PADDY POWER

    212. David Holden says:

      Tinfoil hat time. I am not even sure with the attacks on Ms Cherry and the various appointments of rejected members back to the NEC that the wokey faction are not trying to split the SNP as their best chance to delay Indy. I doubt even the most hardcore yoons cannot see that Indy will happen and the only thing they can control is the timing and how nasty the split will be. If we have to build a new Indy party and fight for a few more years the result will be the same as Scotland if history is anything to go by will become independent. How our relationship is with our friends South of the border is post Indy will depend on those in charge at Westminster at the time and it does not look good at the moment.

    213. Andy Ellis says:

      Interesting that the @OutForIndy twitter feed has been silent for the past 6 or 7 hours……I wonder if one of the grown ups has had a word?

    214. cynicalHighlander says:

      @ Gregor says:
      26 January, 2021 at 7:17 pm

      “Unlike the Scottish Government and the witnesses they have chosen to support, our client does not have the benefit of a state funded legal department or external legal advice provided at public expense.”

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/19040711.alex-salmond-offers-new-date-scottish-parliament-inquiry/

      Sums up the current SNP self interested only

      Can I also reiterate what has been said before people are prepared to aid financially when asked so please ask.

    215. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      We will regain our Right.
      The nasty has just re-fired itself.
      This is just the start.
      Scotland is full of fierties.
      We need to do what’s right.
      Unfortunately we have the woo woo auld nic cabal.
      It will not stop US.
      We need to be strong and fight against those who wish us ill.
      Scotland will become Independent I have no doubt about that.
      It’s going to be a scrap.

    216. Tinto Chiel says:

      @Jacqueline McMillan, “Why was this allowed to happen in the first place? Westmidden?
      Surely the Law makers in Scotland must have known this was a compromising position?”

      I’ve read that while Alex Salmond was FM, the Lord Advocate did not sit in cabinet because of the dangers of conflict of interest but I don’t know if this is true. He was certainly aware of the problems of having a FM married to the CEO of the SNP and said so (possibly one of the reasons he was eventually targeted for attention).

      I certainly don’t think WM had anything to do with it. This is a home-made quagmire of crapola: Londinium wanted nothing to do with any retrospective catch-all legislation (which curiously has been adopted by the SG to trap only one person: Alex Salmond).

    217. wull says:

      TNS2019 says: 26 January, 2021 at 11:48 am
      ‘Impressive journalism. Very impressive.
      Respect.

      ‘Salmond/Rangers administrators/Mark Hirst/Craig Murray/the TNS fiasco

      ‘Distinct pattern emerging.
      Not our Scotland.’

      ‘Distinct pattern emerging here …’ And you can add to the list, almost ad infinitum.

      Couldn’t the famous Moorov Doctrine be applied to this? Why mot?

      Love to see it. The irony of it … Hoist by their own petard.

      Breeks raises an important point about the need for a second chamber, with powers of constitutional oversight.

      Obviously, this presupposes that we need a constitution too, based on the clear affirmation of the sovereignty of the people – not the parliament, and not too long (for clarity’s sake).

      It would have to enshrine clear separation of powers. This is one of the things that has obviously gone hugely wrong in this case. We need to learn from it – pronto!

      One of the many lessons we need to take from this concerns the means that need to be taken to prevent the police in Scotland being used as a political weapon by whatever government happens to be in power. It must be made absolutely impossible for governments mobilise the police against whoever they perceive to be their political opponent.

      In this regard, the amalgamation of all Scotland’s police forces into one seems to have failed us miserably. Did we underestimate some of the advantages of having diverse police forces within Scotland? For one thing, they could have kept an eye on each other.

      They could even blow their whistles against each other, when necessary. That is, if one Force saw another Force allowing itself to be manipulated by those in political power for purely political ends, it could raise the alarm. A second chamber could also play an important role here, provided it is composed of genuinely competent and independent-minded people. And not the thoroughly awful Party hacks and political has-beens that stuff the House of Lords.

      If we did have a second chamber, even if it did not have to sit full-time, I would even give it the Holyrood building. And get a Scottish architect to build a new chamber in Scottish style further North, nearer the geographical centre of Scotland. Perth would do, and be historically appropriate, though I suppose some would prefer Inverness.

      We don’t need to keep reinforcing a Scottish version of England’s South East problem. And we do need to take positive steps to overturn our hugely unbalanced over-concentration on the Central Belt.

      There are lots of ways this can be envisaged. Instead of discouraging ourselves and spending too much time verging on despair, maybe some ‘envisaging’ – creating the vision of what Scotland can and will be – would lift our spirits.

    218. Derek says:

      @Contrary says:
      26 January, 2021 at 6:17 pm

      “And Upper Chamber of Citizens? With oversight over parliament and government. 100 people chosen in the same way juries are, to serve a year only.”

      I’d thought of that too; wasn’t decided on the length of service or number of people involved though. I’d also wondered about it being one of many options available as a form of national service, but rejected that as you’d want a wide age range for representative views.

    219. Mc Duff says:

      This is a remarkable indictment of the SG and the justice system. Like others I believe that those involved in this corruption should be prosecuted for their crimes. Sickening.
      Thanks again rev.

    220. StuartM says:

      “An upper chamber of citizens chosen at random”

      You’ve got more faith in your fellow (hu)man than I do. My experience working with fellow committee members in non-profit organisations was that even people with university educations can hold mutually conflicting opinions because they’re too mentally lazy to think through the consequences of the actions they propose. After all why let facts and logic get in the way of your preconceptions? If supposedly educated people do this we can’t expect others to be better.

      I once watched a man reading a newspaper on a rush hour train. He turned the paper over and started reading from the back, After 4-5 pages he discarded the paper – he’d read the sports pages but none of the news. A work colleague was inordinately proud of his university degree, could tell you chapter and verse about the football but was completely ignorant about current affairs. We all know people like that. My nephew told me that his university student housemates never read a book or newspaper unless it was required for their course, and one of them has since gone on to do a PhD! To expect members of the public chosen at random to make logical decisions on complex legal questions is absurd.

      Why not simply have a Senate that is based on proportional representation Scotland-wide to complement the constituency-based lower house? The very point that it was necessary for people BTL had to explain how list members are calculated demonstrates that the current system needs to be scrapped. A system that is designed to create hung parliaments isn’t fit for purpose.

    221. StuartM says:

      Rev, kudos for the great work you’re doing on exposing Sturgeon’s corruption. Unfortunately you’re preaching to those of us already converted. Until the general public hear about this corruption and perversion of justice on their TV screens nothing much is going to happen.

      Perhaps you and Mark Hirst could collaborate on an article outlining the cover-up and the corruption of the COPFS and try to get it published outside the UK. The US press, Al-Jazeera or RT come to mind, in that order of preference. If overseas news media start following the story one of the news outlets will be tempted to break ranks. Once one does the others will follow.

      We can’t wait for the glacial pace of the Parliamentary Inquiry or the storm will break on the eve of the May election. Something needs to be done to precipitate the crisis now.

    222. wee monkey says:

      holymacmoses says:
      26 January, 2021 at 7:14 pm
      Wee monkey
      QUOTE
      “So late ordering of the vaccines (they ordered in November we did in July)

      https://www.cityam.com/which-covid-vaccines-has-the-uk-government-ordered/

      I’ll leave you to read the facts about when the UK ordered the”

      It’s difficult to work out what your are trying to get across. Are you saying the EU was JUSTIFIED in NOT ordering vaccine earlier ( when the rest if the world was scrambling to do so) for some reason and waited UNTIL SEPTEMBER??

      ALL a mute point because it sounds like they are about to STEAL Scottish vaccine supplies anyway.

      From that bastion of right wing journalism..

      https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/25/eu-threatens-to-block-covid-vaccine-exports-amid-astrazeneca-shortfall

      Now, as some would say, facts, facts facts. The EU attempted to impose their own administrative control, twice, that’s where the monolith caused the delay whilst the UK and others just went straight ahead and put their populations first…

    223. twathater says:

      Breeks and others talking about another chamber THIS is an excellent article written in the Orkney News called “DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLY”
      On January 15th 2021 and is required reading, there is one comment written by myself re the HOUSE OF CITIZENS

      https://theorkneynews.scot/2021/01/15/doing-politics-differently/

    224. Pixywine says:

      Stonewall Sturgeon. If no one else has coined that I claim it.

    225. Andy Ellis says:

      @Stuart M

      I remain unconvinced of the necessity for, or wisdom of, an upper chamber for a nation of 5 million, tho’ I’m open to persuasion.

      The main issue for me is that there are checks and balances. I’m not convinced an elected senate wouldn’t just turn into another set of sinecures for the usual suspects. It’s easy to be cynical about the “man or woman in the street”, but perhaps there’s a place for their views as a group of people who aren’t part of the establishment, parties or “business as usual” apparatchiks.

      I get your point that there are some roasters: I’ve served on a jury, and it is true that you get all sorts. Some of the stupidest people I know have doctorates though, so it doesn’t always follow. We don’t have to expect philosopher kings to lead us: the point surely of any such “second” chamber is to stop the untrammelled power of one branch of the legislature. I accept that the separation of powers should also ensure the independence of the judiciary and a supreme court which is a-political.

    226. richard richardson says:

      The Sturgeon promise to fully cooperate with the Committee inquiry was made whilst the police investigation was underway. She clearly expected criminal convictions – hence the promise to release documents now reneged on.

      “It is important that we respect the processes in investigation of those complaints. That means all of us respecting the fact that, as well as the inquiries that we are talking about today, there is an on-going police inquiry. I hope that we all respect that in how we conduct ourselves over the time to come.”

    227. Contrary says:

      Derek at 9.48 pm

      Re:“”And Upper Chamber of Citizens? With oversight over parliament and government. 100 people chosen in the same way juries are, to serve a year only.”

      I’d thought of that too; wasn’t decided on the length of service or number of people involved though. I’d also wondered about it being one of many options available as a form of national service, but rejected that as you’d want a wide age range for representative views.”

      I thought a year would be a good length of time – not long enough to get embedded and be open to corruption/lobbying, and those that were already dodgy would be gone soon enough. Choosing juries in Scotland is an already established method of choosing (sort of) random people, and with already established ways of wriggling out of the service if needed (essential work, vested interests, ill health, etc etc).

      It would cause disruption to each person’s life so needs to have some kind of ‘civic duty’ emphasis I reckon – just as there is for juries – as well as established salary and return to work guarantees at the end of it. There would need to be a swathe of rules and regulation outlining duties and responsibilities, and how they’d perform those – but I think the concept would need to be getting seriously considered before going into that level of detail. You could have 6-month staggered appointments, so a change over of 50 people every 6 months, to add some continuity.

      Because it would be ordinary citizens, doing their civic duty, they’d all (theoretically, and statistically should in the majority) have a vested interest in ensuring good governance: they wouldn’t be deciding any of the policies etc of elected representatives, but ensuring those policies or legislation weren’t causing harm to their lives and that of their families, or guide it onto a better path. It would mean citizens get a direct say in how government and parliament is run – I’m thinking of it as a sort of dispersed head of state. So, not just that theoretically the people are sovreign, indeed we are, or the House would be (even if it’s just 100 people at a time, for a short spell).

      I like the concept anyway – if we can get out of the bogging filthy morass of the Union, we might get a chance to put some ideas into practice – and if we can get a ton of feasible concepts, on lots of the things we need to establish as a renewed nation, spoken about & considered now, we can be convincing everyone (well, a majority) that independence is the right way to go. Things like this – a Ctizens House – could be a good ‘quick fix’ to many of our electoral problems, where we don’t need many changes to the familiar running of parliament, and voting, right from the start, but could lead to seriously good reform in the future – which can be done in a considered and gradual way.

      That is, don’t propose massive change of all institutions immediately, but set things up, put provisions in place, so that they can be improved in a way that the populace actually wants.

    228. Contrary says:

      I mean, imagine the current situation as above, where we had a House of Citizens – as soon as someone says ‘is it in the public’s interest?’ Well – let the House vote on it, because they are ‘the public’!

    229. StuartM says:

      Ideally the upper house should act as a check on untrammeled power by a government with a large majority in the lower house – sound familiar? But only if in itself it has legitimacy through being elected ie not the HoL.

      A conscripted body of citizens is one of those ideas that sound good in theory but are bad in practice such as:
      – proportional representation
      – US primary elections to choose the candidate
      – choosing the parliamentary leader by vote of party members
      – electing a President in a parliamentary democracy

    230. StuartM says:

      @Contrary

      It’s well established that when an experienced manager takes over a new operation – eg a division of a large corporation – it takes 18 months for them to get on top of the job and become fully effective. And that’s for someone who is already a proven effective executive. You are proposing to take someone who has no relevant prior experience and expect them to understand and vote on complex issues, then after 12 months when they MIGHT have become somewhat good at the job you’ll turf them out and replace them with a fresh batch of ignoramuses.

      There’s an old saying “one volunteer is worth ten pressed men”. A number of your conscripted citizens are going to be resentful and/or uninterested in the job, others just find it over their heads and baffling. Others will just rely on their preconceived prejudices. As I said before, I am astonished at how many supposedly educated people are incapable of joined-up thinking and impervious to facts and logic.

      Comparisons with jury duty are not valid. Sitting on a jury usually only involves 2-3 weeks and the judge instructs them on the law. Even then juries often struggle to understand complex financial fraud cases (as do judges as well). Their employer can usually cover a 2-3 week absence but can they afford to keep it open for a whole year? Not a chance, and if you’re going to mandate it by law you’re going to place an intolerable burden on many small businesses.

    231. ian foulds says:

      As always, superb work Rev.

      I doubt the Scottish Government representatives involve and their lackeys can, hand on heart (if they have one – they definitely have a barefaced cheek), can defend the accusation that their (in)actions have been nothing less than despicable.

    232. Derek says:

      @StuartM says:
      27 January, 2021 at 12:06 pm
      @Contrary

      I wouldn’t say conscripted as much as “invited to participate”; the option is there to decline for whatever reason. The jury-type selection procedure made sense to me too because it doesn’t consider who you are. I appreciate that people may have to find accommodation in order to do so, but we have a fine selection of council housing to choose… oh, hang on. That’s another thing!

      It’s well established that when an experienced manager takes over a new operation – eg a division of a large corporation – it takes 18 months for them to get on top of the job and become fully effective. And that’s for someone who is already a proven effective executive. You are proposing to take someone who has no relevant prior experience and expect them to understand and vote on complex issues, then after 12 months when they MIGHT have become somewhat good at the job you’ll turf them out and replace them with a fresh batch of ignoramuses.

      Well, kind of. You’re taking a load of people who may – or may not – be adversely affected by legislation passed and asking them to discuss it. You could have a house lawyer to help out with the language, too.

      There’s an old saying “one volunteer is worth ten pressed men”. A number of your conscripted citizens are going to be resentful and/or uninterested in the job, others just find it over their heads and baffling. Others will just rely on their preconceived prejudices. As I said before, I am astonished at how many supposedly educated people are incapable of joined-up thinking and impervious to facts and logic.

      That’s why you don’t coerce, you invite. That’s why the option to decline is important, too.

      Comparisons with jury duty are not valid. Sitting on a jury usually only involves 2-3 weeks and the judge instructs them on the law. Even then juries often struggle to understand complex financial fraud cases (as do judges as well). Their employer can usually cover a 2-3 week absence but can they afford to keep it open for a whole year? Not a chance, and if you’re going to mandate it by law you’re going to place an intolerable burden on many small businesses.

      Given the length of time involved, workplaces should be ok. If you’re a talented employee, you’ll be hard to replace – but you shouldn’t be irreplaceable. Finding someone to work for a year or two shouldn’t be too difficult, plus the natural turnover of staff in workplaces should allow a simple return.

    233. Prof Wright says:

      “Wee Chid says:
      26 January, 2021 at 1:43 pm
      Prof Wright says:
      26 January, 2021 at 12:54 pm
      “It’s amazing that the vast majority of people up to thoer necks in this scandal are female feminists”

      No they are not. They are willing to walk over the hard won, sex based rights of biological women in order to appease misogynistic, autogynephile males. They…

      Absolute twaddle. This is everything to do with ambitious, vindictive, career driven women and one brand of feminist pitched against another brand of feminist. The whole thing reeks of a pitched battle of feminist doctrine vs feminist doctrine, where the sisterhood has circled the wagons to defend and go on the offensive against Salmond. Part vendetta. Part #MeToo. The anti-Salmond scandal’s exposure of calculated, vindictive feminism is to women as toxic masculinity is to men.

    234. StuartM says:

      @Derek

      “Given the length of time involved, workplaces should be ok. If you’re a talented employee, you’ll be hard to replace – but you shouldn’t be irreplaceable. Finding someone to work for a year or two shouldn’t be too difficult, plus the natural turnover of staff in workplaces should allow a simple return.”

      You have obviously never run a small to medium-sze business. If an employee is hard to replace they are even harder to replace on a casual basis. If you were a skilled worker – an electrician or a plumber say – would you take a casual job with no permanency benefits over a permanent job? Even workers who don’t want to work a 40-hour week – mothers with school-age children being the classic example – want permanency of employment. Consequently people only accept casual employment status while they look for a permanent job and the employer is faced with continual staff turnover. The business is hit by staff recruitment costs, management time spent interviewing applicants, training, hiring temps to fill the gap, etc etc. Then there’s the casuals you hire who turn out to be unsuitable and the lost productivity while the person learns the job. If I hire someone on a permanent basis, am I expected to fire them when you come back from your year away?

      The only operations that can easily cope with employee absences of a year or more are very large organisations with enough staff turnover that positions become available on a very frequent basis or those who don’t care about costs or efficiency, which in the latter case pretty much limits it to government organisations. Even those find it difficult to replace people in senior positions eg general manager, accountant, chief design engineer. But generally the smaller the business the more difficult and disruptive an absence is. Suppose you’re the owner of a small business and it’s you who are selected. Who’s going to run your business in your absence? If you’re a one-man band all your customers will have found other suppliers and you’ll have to start again from scratch.

      Making service in the Citizens Assembly voluntary means that whole swathes of people will simply decline and you’ll wind up with a completely unrepresentative group. Imagine if serving on juries was voluntary – you’d wind up with juries made up of retirees and those in it for the pay & perks.

    235. Hugh Paterson says:

      I’m not voting for a potential Sovereign Scottish government or leadership that fails to be open and spends millions hounding people that disagree with the “chosen ones” view. We’re trying to dump Westminster for a better future Scotland, what’s the point when this lot are as bad if not worse.



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




    ↑ Top