The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Quick Questions For Colin

Posted on October 28, 2020 by

TO: Colin Beattie MSP, National Treasurer, SNP
DATE: 28 October 2020

Dear Colin,

I note that today you’ve sent an email to SNP members on the contentious topic of the party’s supposedly “ring-fenced” referendum campaign fund, which we’ve learned for the first time today has a grand official name – the Referendum Appeal Fund (which from here on we’ll call the RAF for short).

The email also contains some rather offensive implied smears about my website and myself, but I’m quite used to being abused on the internet so I’ll let that slide. As we’re both on the side of Scottish independence, rather than getting involved in a tit-for-tat slanging match I thought I’d try to reach a constructive consensus.

I notice that in your email you invite people who have “any questions” on the subject to contact you without hesitation, and while I’m not a member of the party I believe I do speak for a considerable number of people who are, so it would likely also save you a lot of tedious copy-and-pasting if you replied publicly to me as their representative.

(And because, y’know, if you don’t then you’ll probably get about a thousand individual emails from members containing the text below anyway, which doesn’t seem like a productive use of anyone’s time.)

My first question is a simple one, and if the proposal it contains is adopted it would render all the others moot and draw the matter to an immediate and highly satisfactory conclusion, so I hope this will only take a minute.

——————————–

(1) The SNP currently owns the old Yes Scotland brand, website and company, which is still live. It appears to be controlled by the party solicitor Scott Martin.

To avoid any future confusion, why doesn’t the SNP simply transfer the entire RAF to the account of Yes Scotland, and divert any future donations through the yes.scot website to the company’s account rather than the SNP’s?

This would provide a visible separation between referendum funds and SNP political funds. Anyone whose primary interest was independence could donate money to Yes Scotland through the yes.scot site for that purpose, while anyone chiefly motivated by Queer Theory, thoughtcrime, stopping people from getting two-for-one pizzas and imprisoning former First Ministers for crimes they didn’t commit could donate to the SNP through its own existing donations page, located here.

There would be no reason for any noticeable admin costs – Yes Scotland would have only one source of income (donations), no outgoings (until such times as the imminent second referendum, naturally), and Mr Martin’s only task would be to file a simple short statement of its account balance every year, which he has to do now anyway. It seems an obvious, elegant and complete solution.

——————————–

Should the above proposal be inexplicably rejected, the following questions arise:

(2) If the RAF is indeed ring-fenced and available for use “at a moment’s notice”, why does the SNP not simply denote it as such in the accounts and avoid all this confusion and bad feeling, as suggested today by senior SNP councillor Chris McEleny?

(3) Why, for that matter, does it not publish it as a live running total on the yes.scot site, as it did with the 2017 ref.scot fundraiser? Is there a reason it should be secret? Surely it would boost the morale of the entire Yes movement to know beyond any doubt that it had a healthy fighting fund ready for instant deployment.

(4) How did the money in the RAF come to be “woven through” the accounts in various unexplained places, given that it all comes from only two sources – the 2017 ref.scot fundraiser and the 2019-present day yes.scot one – and the SNP apparently knows to the exact pound how much is in it? Why would all of those funds not be recorded under the same category?

(5) The yes.scot website used to state that all donations would be used to produce a book called “An Independent Scotland: Household Guide”, to be distributed to every household in Scotland. It now contains simply a generic statement that donations will be used to provide “Yes campaigners” with “materials”.

Are all donations through yes.scot still being directed to the RAF? If so, which area of the SNP’s accounts would they be included under? Donations? Prepayments? Some other? If they’re NOT being directed to the RAF, on what date did this change?

(6) What was the balance of the RAF on 31 December 2017, 31 December 2018 and 31 December 2019?

(7) The SNP’s total net current assets according to the 2019 accounts are just under £272,000. How then can the party claim to have a fund of almost £600,000 available to spend “at a moment’s notice”? Is it being held “off the books” in some way?

(8) And finally, given that questions were being asked about this money as far back as January, why has the SNP taken so long to issue even this rather weak attempt at an explanation, allowing the matter to fester damagingly for months?

I look forward to your response.

Regards,

Stuart Campbell
Editor
Wings Over Scotland

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 28 10 20 17:57

      Quick Questions For Colin | speymouth

    411 to “Quick Questions For Colin”

    1. Willie Anderson Anderson says:

      I have already emailed Colin to ask my own questions! I would like to see the separate ledger as I have donated!

    2. Giesabrek says:

      First off, a belated happy birthday Stu! Hope you enjoyed it despite the circumstances with covid.

      Secondly, you might want to ask why the information about the RAF wasn’t released until now – you have been questioning this for a few months now, if I’m not mistaken, with regards to the SNP’s accounts not being released by the Electoral Commission until yesterday? Why did the SNP wait until today to address the concern?

      And talking about the Electoral Commission, has any reason been given for the extremely late release of the accounts? I believe you had said they claimed to have the accounts months ago but weren’t publishing the for some undisclosed reason?

    3. cynicalHighlander says:

      I think I can see tumbleweed in the distance.

    4. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “And talking about the Electoral Commission, has any reason been given for the extremely late release of the accounts? I believe you had said they claimed to have the accounts months ago but weren’t publishing the for some undisclosed reason?”

      They said they wanted to publish all the main parties at once.

      “you might want to ask why the information about the RAF wasn’t released until now”

      Good point, added.

    5. The Isolator says:

      Zinger…thanks for asking on my behalf Stu, as I really can’t be arsed getting into any detailed dialogue with these scheisters.

    6. Sharny Dubs says:

      I would not hold your breath.

      However for all you donators perhaps just copy and paste these questions into your enquiring email.

      Saves a lot of typing.

    7. newburghgowfer says:

      Funny how all the delusional hierarchy read your website to find out the truth on the street so they csn get their own Hand Christian Anderson to conjure up a response for the faithful steeple to stop any doubts they have.
      Personally I reckon the No to Indy Party have no chance of winning Holyrood next year. All the people I talk Indy with are sick to the back teeth of the Parties motives now.

      Good work in calling out their lies and look forward to the next instalment.

    8. Sarah says:

      Excellent – short and sweet. Should save me emailing.

    9. Ian Brotherhood says:

      There’s a lot of messenger-shooting going on today.

      Have just blocked approx the 10th ‘indy’ supporter of the day, angrily insisting that the money hasn’t gone missing, it’s just ‘resting in another account’ somewhere.

      This stushie is all Wings’ fault, naturally…

    10. Robert SLAVIN says:

      Thank god for wings forensic work on this issue it’s not going to go away I’m sure there a great many SNO members like myself looking for salient answers to the questions posed

    11. Republicofscotland says:

      Don’t hold your breath for a reply on this one, I’d imagine Beattie and other shifty SNP characters utterly despise you for your wonderful revelations from within the party.

    12. LeggyPeggy says:

      First of all belated Happy Birthday Stuart ,

      I don’t know how Colin Beattie can say that he’s contacted every member because I’ve not received an email from him yet . They’re not slow in sending out emails when they want to raise funds .

    13. Molly's Mum says:

      Thanks for the link to the SNP email Rev.Stu

      As a long standing member of the SNP, it was good to see it given that the SNP haven’t sent me a copy of my own as yet

      I know SNP HQ are notoriously poor at answering queries from members and branch officials, so it’s good to know I can rely on you to keep us informed rather than the party I pay money to, vote for and keep in business year in, year out

      Maybe we should just vote for you and cut out the middle man….hmmmm

    14. Ian McCubbin says:

      Sounds like a very workable set of suggestions.
      ??

    15. David F says:

      Your Q7 is important given that half of the net assets are fixed assets that couldn’t possibly be made available at a moment’s notice (unless they’re going to sell all their computers the minute a referendum is announced).

    16. Monsieur le Roi Grenouilleverteetprofonde says:

      Can you publish the email you received? ?There are frequent complaints about ordinary indy supporters sending abusive material-it might be useful to see it the other way round.

    17. SOG says:

      Stuart, you are also representing people like me who used to be members and might rejoin, in my case if I see a return to sanity and open-ness.

    18. “I’m not a member of the party I believe I do speak for a considerable number of people who are,”

      Stu, that is a remarkable claim.
      It smacks of well,
      When are you going to get back on the saddle, sir, if ever?

    19. Black Joan says:

      Magnificent

    20. Steven Park says:

      It’s just resting in Father Ted’s account.

    21. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Can you publish the email you received?”

      TRY CLICKING THE SODDING LINKS.

    22. JSC says:

      Do we know how much the Alyn Smith vs Brexit Party debacle cost the SNP in legal fees? The BBC article at the time states he “agreed to pay a “significant” contribution to Mr Tice’s legal costs, and will also make a donation to the Help for Heroes charity” although I’ve got some doubts that the shifty Smith alone would entirely bankroll this. Maybe the campaign piggy bank gets raided when lawyers come knocking

    23. Effijy says:

      Reply coming just after the world is clear of Covid 19?

    24. Douglas says:

      The answer to Q1 & Q7 involves the SNP going back to being in debt with commercial borrowing.
      The RAF has been a handy interwoven mechanism to replace these loans with an interest free loan.

      It sort of makes sense but wasn’t what the donors signed up for, I don’t remember seeing:

      ‘Donate here to give the SNP an interest free unsecured loan that will only be called in if they ever get round to IndyRef (p.s. we’ve got lots of controversial policies and other ways to delay that day) and if you don’t watch out the money will be interwoven away’

    25. Mac says:

      “Anyone whose primary interest was independence could donate money to Yes Scotland through the yes.scot site for that purpose, while anyone chiefly motivated by Queer Theory, thoughtcrime, stopping people from getting two-for-one pizzas and imprisoning former First Ministers for crimes they didn’t commit could donate to the SNP through its own existing donations page, located here.”

      Ha ha.

    26. Mist001 says:

      Been through the links, can’t find any email address for Colin Beattie which is disappointing since I would quite happily copy and paste your questions and send them to him directly.

      Any chance of his email?

    27. Taranaich says:

      From Mr Beattie’s email:

      “The current strength of our financial position, for example, enabled us last year to win a landslide in the General Election, secure our best European election result ever, and contest a parliamentary by-election.

      All three of these events were unforeseen

      It seems incredibly disingenuous to call the 2019 European Election “unforeseen” given that it took place in the exact time it was scheduled to, with only a short period following the EU Referendum where it appeared the UK would not participate. Not to mention the SNP insisted that Scotland would stay in the EU, suggesting that they had every intention of contesting the 2019 election even if the UK had left.

      I’m getting really fed up with this.

    28. kapelmeister says:

      This RAF doesn’t show up on radar.

    29. David Gray says:

      They could just photocopy a current bank statement showing the balance in this RAF account.

    30. Betsy says:

      Ian Brotherhood says:
      28 October, 2020 at 5:23 pm
      There’s a lot of messenger-shooting going on today.

      Have just blocked approx the 10th ‘indy’ supporter of the day, angrily insisting that the money hasn’t gone missing, it’s just ‘resting in another account’ somewhere.

      This stushie is all Wings’ fault, naturally…

      Isn’t there just. You’d think if this was all just internet conspiracy nonsense as they appear to implying, they’d have been quick off the mark with a point by point rebuttal.It’s not like this is unexpected, questions have been raised for months now. After all it can’t be much fun being accused of mislaying funds, you think they’d be falling over themselves to come up with the perfectly reasonable explanation I have no doubt they have for us all.

    31. Vestas says:

      For some reason I’m reminded of Father Ted and “the money was only resting in my account”….

      Now I wonder who the “Father Ted” would be in the SNP?

      No prizes for guessing 😉

    32. v1cr says:

      Look here for Mr Beattie’s email link:
      https://www.parliament.scot/msps/currentmsps/98288.aspx

    33. Big Jock says:

      Well well Mr Beattie.

      I have been a member of the SNP since 1988. I know you are reading this. So no more diversions, no more obsfication, no more chicanery.

      I demand to know where my money is. Show me the money!!

    34. David Morgan says:

      this is depressin stuff, am gonna watch father ted

    35. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “This RAF doesn’t show up on radar.”

      Take the rest of the evening off while I steal that.

    36. Stuart MacKay says:

      Transferring the money to Yes Scotland is an excellent suggestion but, sadly, I think they’d all prefer to rot in jail than take good advice from your good self.

      Still, it would go a good way to rebuild good faith and perhaps just a little trust along a road that’s getting longer by the second.

      A belated Happy Birthday. Keep ‘en coming.

    37. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Do we know how much the Alyn Smith vs Brexit Party debacle cost the SNP in legal fees?”

      We don’t, but from personal experience I can say with very great confidence that it’ll have been tens of thousands.

    38. Big Jock says:

      Are they employing Gordon Gecko’s accountant. They must be with the amount of creativity going on.

    39. Lenny Hartley says:

      Belated happy Birthday rev, im not very good at reading accounts so maybe somebody can help me? Can some Branch Treasurers confirm following is the case?
      As far as I am aware SNP HQ holds Branch funds at HQ . each branch is credited around a pound a month per member, these funds are to be used for Election leaflets and others costs incurred in pursuit of Elections, days of action etc. so if a branch gets 1000 leaflets then their HQ account is debited the cost of producing and delivering these leaflets. As the 2019 accounts claim around 125,000 members and Due to Covid there has been no Branch activity for around 8 months around 1 million pounds should be in the Branch accounts held at HQ. Where do the Branch accounts show up in the HQ accounts? We need to know so that if In this years (2020) accounts £500,000 or so is debited from the Branch accounts And credited to A Referendum account we know why Branch funds have been depleted.

    40. Lothianlad says:

      Stu, let me assure you, your questions and scrutiny of the SNP leadership and those in well paid positions are causing them a coronary attack!!

      Keep up the great work.

      Also, like I have mentioned before, the NEC are very happy with the set up in Midlothian!

      They have 1500 – 2000 members and a careerist cleek of nature deniers and anti independence devolutionists run the show.

      If you have time to scrutinise the MP and his side kicks, you will no doubt have further questions.

      Midlothian will be exposed.

    41. Tannadice Boy says:

      Rev Stu
      Just popped in for a mo to say well done. Brilliant analysis. How much does a contribution to your fund raising cost to gain a wings badge? You deserve it. As we say in Dundee you are running circles (actually it’s another expression which I won’t quote on a family website) around the SNP. An organisation I barely recognise now. I am glad I checked in for a moment. I am busy with extended family issues, somebody has to do it because nobody else is taking a care. Interesting times. Well done!

    42. Robert Graham says:

      Well that’s News to me this guy is a MSP

      Eh can’t remember ever seeing him or hearing about him in all the years I have been following and contributing to various Independence supporting causes I wouldn’t recognise this guy if he popped up in my soup ,
      I mean obviously someone might know him but I just wonder how many more faceless individuals are lurking in background doing their time and causing little or no change to well anything , they appear to be just there, they probably wouldn’t be recognised in their own street, I guess most of us have come across the same kind of people instantly forgettable but I still wonder does the SNP need so many low flying objects . This political lark looks like a real sweet deal just talk a load of guff with a certain amount of conviction and reasonable clarity then off you go , Result .

    43. MaggieC says:

      O/T Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

      We now have the written report from yesterday’s meeting ,

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=12898&mode=pdf

    44. Christian Schmidt says:

      Well I would be surprised if you get an answer to that, or if any member who just cuts + pastes the text.

      But I think these are interesting questions, so I’d hope Cllr McEleny will get a response, or any member that rephrases these into a form that my old English teacher would approve…

    45. jockmcx says:

      A birthday present!

      nice and scottish!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knCBvA2glRU&pbjreload=101

    46. Lothianlad says:

      @ Robert Graham,

      There are plenty of these individuals lurking about in the background. Very well paid and never, or nearly never campaigning for independence. Why would they?
      Devolution has been good to so many of them.

      Midlothian is riddled with them .

    47. Bob Mack says:

      Is Father Ted looking after it? ” Dougal ,the money was just resting in my account” sort of thing.

    48. Bob Costello says:

      I think they have shown where the money is. They say that donations are “woven through” the figures in their annual accounts. Now as their financial accounts do not have sufficient amounts of cash in the bank, that means they have spent it and if they are saying that this money can be made available at a moments notice they must have a loan facility set up with either a bank or private individual. Therefore they should show proof of this arrangement or go to jail for embezzlement.
      The other point is that this money was given for a specific purpose, therefore, cant be used for another purpose without the doners permission.

    49. Jan Cowan says:

      Just so thankful we have you to rake through their dishonesty. It’s so disappointing to know that the present SNP leaders are no better than many of the politicians in London. But we can sort the problem out. Bin the lot and get a move on with Joanna, Alex, Angus (Brendan of course!)and so many other worthwhile SNP politicians.

      Thank you again……and many happy returns of yesterday.

    50. AndSpouse says:

      I haven’t received email

    51. Breeks says:


      (4) How did the money in the RAF come to be “woven through” the accounts in various unexplained places….

      Isn’t this quite literally the diametric opposite of what ‘ring fencing’ actually means?

    52. Bob Mack says:

      The “resting money” has just been given coma status.!!!

    53. Hercule says:

      If the RAF is hypothecated funds (accountancy posh for ring fenced)why is not hypothecated in the accounts?

    54. Margaret Lindsay says:

      Great work again! I’d appreciate an answer to the Rev’s questions Mr Beattie, as I donated to the original fund, but became dubious when the next one was announced, then utterly disgusted by the conduct of some SNP officials ( see Mhairi Black, Mhairi Hunter, Fiona Robertson etc), and left July 2019, after repeated emails questioning the aforementioned conduct were ignored. Will this be another case of donators being ignored? The ball is in your court as I know you will be reading this.

    55. pipinghot says:

      My first thoughts on reading this was that they paid off their overdraft with the ring-fenced money and just put it through their accounts leaving a 90,000 balance. They can borrow on their ‘overdraft’ if ever their was to be an indi 2.

    56. Alison Brown says:

      Can you share Colin’s email? We also donated (twice) to this referendum fund. Thanks I’d like to also ask a few questions.

    57. Asklair says:

      Cash is King, just show bank account statement where the peoples money is held. Until this is shown the only explanation is its spent.

    58. Mac says:

      What they mean by woven in I think is just that it is reported within the preexisting types of income they typically report on the P&L.

      If you look in the P&L you can see the different types of income they list. Membership, Donations, Fundraising Income, Investment Income etc

      It looks like it might be in the Donations line.

      Someone said they did the crowdfunder in 2017 and again 2019.

      Here are the Donations numbers.
      2016 – 402,502
      2017 – 1,423,657
      2018 – 323,936
      2019 – 904,695

      Not sure but it does fit.

    59. Lizg says:

      Let me get this straight …
      It’s looking like, the Yes movement pitched in money for our Indy Ref Two and Nigel Farage finished up with it to splash about..

      They had nae right !!

      Then some have the bare faced cheek to throw shade at the Rev for reporting it..
      Well let me report with absolute certainty, cause we are allowed to speak freely here.

      Stuart Campbell didnay – fucking – well – spend – the Indy Ref Two money ..
      The SNP did
      If it’s no there ,it’s no him ye should be lookin at… is it?

    60. Kenny says:

      For a Party used to not extending the common courtesy of a response to questions – not from their own MPs, let-alone members – this site sure has them suddenly fall over themselves to placate the growing concern. Seems, if we didn’t have their attention previously (we most probably did), we have it now.

      Were the SNP completely confident in their veracity and accountability, today’s rushed statement by Colin Beattie wouldn’t have been necessary, instead they’d have simply rolled- eyes; ‘It’s the pest again’, laughed it off and got on with the day-job of delivering you-know-what. They’re not rolling eyes now – are they?

      I know I shouldn’t, but I’m loving this, and I’m glad I’m on the right team.

      Any good coming from this will be the thought that it’s probably the last time any Party of Independence has the smug to try-on this degree – any degree – of corruption, for we’re capable for it – we’ll see them and we’ll hold them to account.

    61. David Lyon says:

      Unfortunately the unnecessary attempts at humour (pizzas and queer theory), along with smugly declaring yourself to be a representative of the people, undermine and discredit the letter and give all involved parties the perfect excuse not to answer it.

    62. robertknight says:

      Yes, we (the SNP), have an overdraft facility with our Bank, but that costs us money if we use it. Therefore, we’d rather use the ‘free’ overdraft facility afforded to us by income from ‘Referendum’ campaign. But we’re not going to let on that’s what we’re up to, because it may piss off a few of those who might otherwise be persuaded to part with their hard-earned.

      Seems the most likely scenario, if outright embezzlement is discounted.

    63. Helen Yates says:

      Oh this just gets better and better, you are a gem.

    64. Mac says:

      If there is a whopping overdraft offsetting the RAF money then they will have likely used the RAF money as collateral to guarantee the overdraft and reduce their borrowing costs and / or get access to a bigger overdraft. Maybe this is what really motivated them to crowdfund the RAF to begin with. Even if they could not spend the RAF money it would still be very valuable to them as collateral.

      That way they kinda get to spend the RAF money while also being able to say they are ‘ring fencing’ it.

      But you are not really ring fencing it if you are using it as collateral to borrow money that normally you could not afford nor access.

      Sort of like if you say send me 500k for an idyref2 fighting fund and we will ring fence it. But then on the QT you go out and use it as collateral to borrow 500k you could never normally afford and which you then spunk up against the wall on everything but fighting indyref2.

      They are such duplicitous feckers who lack a normal person ethical boundaries that I cant put anything passed them at this point.

    65. Ian Foulds says:

      Happy Birthday and many many thanks for your succinct message to SNP penpushers. I hope it bears fruit and truthfulness, at last.

    66. drookit says:

      “Do we know how much the Alyn Smith vs Brexit Party debacle cost the SNP in legal fees?”

      “We don’t, but from personal experience I can say with very great confidence that it’ll have been tens of thousands.”

      does the brexitparty accounts on the same EC site give a clue ?

      “15. GUARANTEES
      The Party has given indemnity towards legal costs of a third party. This amounted to £100,200 in total which was
      paid post period end.”

      http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/22611

    67. Effijy says:

      An over draught facility can be withdrawn quicker than it was arranged.

      There are only UK right wing banks they could use
      so they might be up for helping the Westminster Government that
      Allowed them Casino Banking, an £80 Billion bail out and
      Money laundering facilities,

      If this is what they are trying to call a ring fenced fund, they have nothing!

    68. ronnie anderson says:

      (The RAF doesn’t show up on Radar ) Thats because they’ve borrowed ah Stealth plane from the Donald

    69. cynicalHighlander says:

      I thought it had been blown away in a Typhoon.

    70. Kenny J says:

      I was going to ask if Colin Beattie was an accountant, but I see from Wiki, that he was a “banker”.
      Whatever position that might have been.
      Threaded through various accounts. If so, would there not be a total of £7oo K + as cash at hand.

    71. Astonished says:

      David Lyons @ 7.32pm

      No, it doesn’t .

      But you already knew that.

      If the SNP wokeratti have spent, or used, the ring-fenced money then the police and the media will jump on this…..unless they are yoons …..Oh ! wait …..unless they are very helpful to the yoon cause.

      We will soon see which way the wind blows. And let me say now I don’t see Glen “confabulator” Campbell reporting this at all.

    72. PhilM says:

      ‘Woven through’…or How To Make a Scottish Quilt…inventive use of a textile term…the word ‘crafty’ comes to mind…

    73. Hatuey says:

      I don’t really see what the big deal is about this money. They aren’t going to go for a referendum anyway. I mean, the money might as well be there for a referendum. What difference would it make?

      Actually you all have it back to front. The money wasn’t for the indyref2 campaign – the indyref2 campaign was for the money.

      They ring-fenced the referendum, not the money. Nobody can’t get near it. That’s why they talk about the section 30 process as if it was handed to them on stone tablets by God.

      Basically the opposite of what they say is generally the truth. Try it out.

    74. G H Graham says:

      In keeping with Sturgeon’s gender woo-woo doctrine, Colin Beattie has offered to provide ledger reassignment surgery.

    75. Lizg says:

      David Lyon @ 7.32
      Seriously…. you advocate polite and correct behaviour???
      That’s so 2014 …
      THEY SPENT the INDY REF MONEY .
      They have questions to answer no matter how they are framed.
      And don’t be forgetting they were shown ( led by the fecken nose ) a way out.
      Beg steal or borrow the money and stick it in that Yes Account the Rev mentioned.
      Because no body cares who’s right or wrong here…it’s no about egos.
      Getting the Yes movements money back into play is what matters right now.

      Although if Holyrood think they can mull it all over for thirty odd years and then apologise like Westminster always do….then they are very much mistaken I’d say… but that’s for another day.

    76. Sweep says:

      Belated good wishes on your continued ageing!

      I have some money ring-fenced for your present, it’s right here in my account… er…

      …oh shit

    77. Sylvia says:

      Colin Beattie was a banker in the ME & FE – who was the Bank he worked for?

    78. ElGordo says:

      Just received a response from Alyn Smith to an email I sent on the missing funds.

      He replied “The big hoose must stay open”

    79. Harry mcaye says:

      I received this in response to my questioning on Twitter. Make of it what you will, I don’t have any accounting know how.

      “If monies are invested they only have to record income from investments. I note that is accounted as £6,336 which suggests quite substantial investment.
      I also note in expenditure that over £520,000 was transferred out.”

    80. John Higham says:

      I made the effort today to send my long and detailed email to Colin ……. awaiting his response .

    81. Sylvia says:

      Harry mcaye@ 8:22 Out and in has to correspond on a balance sheet

    82. ElGordo says:

      Happy birthday to Stu,
      Stick your nose in this sham too,
      If they look like a flunky,
      and delay indyref 2

    83. Hatuey says:

      “ “If monies are invested they only have to record income from investments. I note that is accounted as £6,336 which suggests quite substantial investment.
      I also note in expenditure that over £520,000 was transferred out.”

      So where is the money?

    84. Sweep says:

      Oh, and congratulations on your promotion in the press. From ‘controversial’ to ‘well connected’! What next – ‘Vile’ to ‘Beloved’? Can’t wait!

    85. David Holden says:

      So far off topic we are into the Brodie zone but I have just watched the hustings for the candidate selection for Argyll and Bute. My intention on who I will vote for has not changed but it was a surprise when Ms Spears came over as the candidate for going for it without a section 30. I suspect she was a machine gun in a previous life as she fired off so many sound bites in a short space of time. Still Minto/Smyth one and two just not sure of the order. I have to hand it to Sarah Fanet as she spoke well and a fair bit of sense. Not sure I can sit through another of these so will maybe save myself for the final one on Sunday. Message ends.

    86. BLMac says:

      The money was given for a purpose.

      Surely if it has been siphoned off, then a fraud has occurred and a crime has been committed.

      One which the police could pursue…

    87. Davie Oga says:

      Sylvia says:
      28 October, 2020 at 8:11 pm
      Colin Beattie was a banker in the ME & FE – who was the Bank he worked for?

      Citigroup (USA) plus Standard Chartered (UK)

    88. Colin Alexander says:

      I didn’t get the email either but, I didn’t donate to the indyref funds.

      I have long believed another indyref was unlikely to happen under Sturgeon. I didn’t want another one anyway.

    89. Mike d says:

      Beattie looks as dodgy as his cockney twin who is/used to be? On eastenders.

    90. Strathy says:

      The RAF was woven through the generous remuneration packages of Her Scottish Majesty’s Ladies in Waiting and is now ring-fenced in their Maldives holiday fund.

    91. Bob Mack says:

      @David Holden,

      The old saying goes “When you want to help people you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself ,you tell them what they want to hear”

    92. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Comment of the thread!

      “In keeping with Sturgeon’s gender woo-woo doctrine, Colin Beattie has offered to provide ledger reassignment surgery.”

      PMSL @G H Graham says at 8:09 pm!

      🙂

    93. Harry mcaye says:

      Sylvia – His suggestion is it’s in another place and not accounted as party funds and I did say, surely that’s illegal.

    94. Lizg says:

      Strategy @ 9.03
      Minus of course an alleged generous stipend to keep Nigel Farage happy.
      Think About It..
      The Yes Movement of Scotland has funded Nigel Farages largesse…
      Was that really what we had intended happen ?
      They’ve taken us for fools

    95. Sylvia says:

      Davie Oga @ 8:11 pm Thank you – Please everyone look at the USA influence within the SG.

    96. Sylvia says:

      Harry mcaye I would agree with you.

    97. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Well, the “Missing Money” will either show up when it is required or it won’t.

      If it does show up, will it be because the CIA flogged some military hardware to the Ukrainians and sneaked the dirty dosh into Nicola’s account?

      Or was it hiding in plain sight in the accounts all along, as an asset in one column and as a liability in the other?

      If it doesn’t show up, will it really matter? … this bunch of shape shifters have squandered a lot more of our birthright than can be quantified in £.s.d.

    98. Frazerio says:

      What Breeks says. Arent ‘woven through’ and ‘ring-fenced’ not polar opposites?!?! I know this is off the scale naive, but arent accounts supposed to clearly show such things as ring fenced funds??? Rather than needing to use subsequent foggy language like ‘woven through’. This is soooo fishy.

      Im sure Polis Scotland are rapidly putting together a ‘RAF Team’. Maybe call it the Flying Squad!!!

      Sorry, but if you dont laugh…

    99. Betsy says:

      Given that the SNP claim missing money is still there, ready to be used, is it possible to obtain a refund if you’ve no faith they’re actually going to hold a referendum?

    100. Daisy Walker says:

      @ ‘drookit says:
      28 October, 2020 at 7:46 pm
      “Do we know how much the Alyn Smith vs Brexit Party debacle cost the SNP in legal fees?”

      “We don’t, but from personal experience I can say with very great confidence that it’ll have been tens of thousands.”

      does the brexitparty accounts on the same EC site give a clue ?

      “15. GUARANTEES
      The Party has given indemnity towards legal costs of a third party. This amounted to £100,200 in total which was
      paid post period end.”

      http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/22611

      ——

      Good detective work there Drookit.

      So, from memory Big Daddy Smith, put his foot in his mooth after the EU election, which he should have paid for out of his own pocket… but which SNP members have covered, and as a reward, he was parachuted into the Stirling constituency MP’s seat because he is one of the SNP’s ‘big hitters’.

      Once again, which part of the SNP party manifesto, or employment contract, covers the terms and conditions by which employees within the party receive free legal representation/and or cover for fines for offences caused.

      And it has got to be written down somewhere, or else, once again members of the SNP will have very reasonable cause to suspect their donations have been unlawfully misappropriated, and should be able to make a claim against Alan Smith for a refund.

      It is also one thing to get legal representative cover – and there are good arguments for having some form of employment insurance scheme for that, but it is another thing altogether to then add to that… and if you’re found guilty we’ll pay the fine/damages on your behalf.

      I do hope someone who is still a member of the SNP takes this up.

    101. mike cassidy says:

      Re Smith v Brexit

      The two sides agreed to keep their full financial settlement confidential, but the Brexit Party said Mr Smith had contributed “significantly” to Mr Tice’s legal costs as well as making a charity donation to Help For Heroes.

      https://archive.is/M4h3y

    102. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Frazerio

      The £6,366 investment income listed in the accounts, is a tale tale sign that they have some kind of investment.

      Bond interest rates are have not been very impressive for a number of years sub 1% being normal, which would suggest to me that they do have a big pile of loot salted away somewhere.

      And it will be produced when the time is right, to act like a vaccine, immunising them against further criticism from the rag-tag coalition of Lunatic Fringe Fundamentalists, deranged Conspiracy Theorists, aggrieved egoists, Yoon shills and Coronavirus deniers, they would have people believe us to be.

      I’m afraid Stu might be leading us up a blind alley on this one.

    103. mike cassidy says:

      I know sweet fa about accountancy

      So my question is

      If the SNP paid Smith’s ‘significant contribution’

      Are they not obliged to mention this specifically?

      Or can all legal costs be buried in the one number without obligation to breakdown that number?

    104. Terry says:

      Happy belated birthday to you Stu.

      I also have not received an email. I set up a monthly direct debit in 2016 and cancelled it when I left the SNP in mid 2019. However come the 31 Jan 2020 I wrote and asked for it back and said I would return it if there was a ref – as I’d prefer it resting in my account than theirs. Silence. Had to write several times to Ian McCann. Eventually he replied saying It was in a ring fenced fund for a referendum however he added that Boris was saying no to a section 30. Good excuse eh? Then came covid and Nicola said ref was off so I wrote again and asked for my money back to go to a food bank. Silence. Sad eh?

      Anyway it is indeed very Father Ted – “resting in my account” and all that. It’s also like the Eurovision Song Contest episode when Ireland enter father ted and Dougal cos they actually want to lose it. I’m feeling like father Dougal these days. Treated like a numpty. Lol

      Anyway once you know the truth you can then see the path ahead – cheers for that.

    105. Lenny Hartley says:

      Col.Blimp IV It its hidden in another account then thats a slush fund which is illegal . See previous post.

    106. Asklair says:

      “Bond interest rates are have not been very impressive for a number of years sub 1% being normal, which would suggest to me that they do have a big pile of loot salted away somewhere.” Would be easy for them to show that this is the people’s money but why use the term “woven”.

    107. Polly says:

      Very pertinent questions which do need answered. Keep up the good work.

    108. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Lenny Hartley & Asklair

      I would assume that the auditors would have had access to the relevant information (where the money came from/where it is now), I cant see them signing it off otherwise.

      Why they wouldn’t list it in the published accounts as fund-X or whatever, is beyond me, as is a great deal of what what passes for logic and reality in their alternative universe.

    109. Hatuey says:

      Col.Blimp IV says: “I’m afraid Stu might be leading us up a blind alley on this one.”

      What do you know? You’re just a guy.

    110. holymacmoses says:

      I would say that there is one person who would be able to work this one out and I know that Wings can contact him .

    111. James Barr Gardner says:

      It would appear that many in the cabal are operating out of their depth, time for a new broom to sweep out the crap.

    112. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Hatuey

      The donors all got a letter saying that the fund stands at £593,501 and can be deployed as rapidly as one of Saddam Hussein’s WMD’s and “Honest Guv” it is standard practice to lump everything together when preparing accounts.

      We are never going to know whether he was telling the whole truth, or whether half of it was spent on something else and when the time comes to spend it on the stated purpose, the shortfall would have been made up from other revenue streams or borrowing.

      And to be honest it never really mattered in terms of potential leaflets through doors or slogans on billboards.

      But he has taken the opportunity to claim to have exposed the “conspiracy theorists” as the charlatans and Yoon wreckers we are not, thus strengthening the Wokeie hand

    113. Hatuey says:

      Blimp, don’t you think Rev considered that, that it was a potential trap, etc? Don’t you think he’s looking before he leaps right now on everything he says? Don’t you think he knows they’d love to discredit him? And don’t you think he has sources (he has alluded to them)?

      It’s another slam dunk until we see ring-fenced funds. Might be worth reminding ourselves what ring-fenced doesn’t mean here; it doesn’t mean absorbed into the general accounts of the SNP.

    114. Skip_NC says:

      So there are two obvious possibilities.

      Possibility 1. They have a line of credit with a bank and will use that to replace the donated funds when (ahem) the time comes. (Brief pause to note that spellcheck changed “comes” to “conned.” Having looked at the accounts back to 2014, I suspect the credit line is about $500,000. The SNP is an unincorporated association. Anyone with a fiduciary duty to donors who relies on a credit line in this situation is a [insert choice of adjective] dunce. Seriously.

      Possibility 2. It went straight to a separate Accounting Unit. Hey, that’s ok. At least the money is still there. Excellent. Let’s celebrate with a few drams. It would also mean that the “woven through the accounts” line is a lie.

      Liars v dunces. Which is it SNP leadership?

    115. Abalha says:

      Fuck TWATTER locked me out for calling that cunt Irvine Welsh, eh a CUNT,

      My oh so offending tweet below, acht a Dee really but Hibs my 2nd Scottish team. Alison Balharry.
      ============================================================

      Fucking up the #Hibs eh and BTW does that cunt @IrvineWelsh give cash to ANY CUNT in #Leith who is currently having a fucking drug addled SHITE time, just an idle thought. Glory glory to the Hibeeeeeeeeees. ?????

    116. Lizg says:

      Col Blimp IV @ 12.39
      I think the point is that Indy Ref Two is being held back till there’s money for it.
      All those open goals of the past few years deliberately missed to hide the missing funds.

      Risking
      The future of our Country.
      Tory Policies on our backs for longer.
      Resources dissapeard into the private sector
      EU compatibility reduced
      All because the SNP spent the campaign money.

      If none of that is true …. If it’s not that they spent the campaign funds that’s holding us up.
      Then show us the money…. OR… bloody well admit that they have spent it and that ,it is what it is , so we can move on from there …
      We might no get a “booklet ” from SNP HQ but the Wee Blue Book Two is good to go and can *really * be in production at a moments notice.
      At least that part of our fighting fund is secure!

      All that “eyes on the prize ” stuff that many are fond of sayin to Wings ( who didn’t spend the Indy Ref Two money ) all that “sort this after Indy” rhetoric ( women have been getting told )applies here too…. doesn’t it ???
      And if no why no?..

    117. twathater says:

      I took the time to copy Stu’s post and questions and sent an email to Colin Beattie personally, as a couple of people posted rather condescendingly that Stu’s assertion that he spoke for a lot of members was questionable

      I am not an SNP member but I donated to the RAF which Mr Beattie condescendingly appears to overlook when he talks about sending emails to members, AS USUAL us non members do not need consideration or attention until funds are needed or votes are needed then we are all in it together

      But just to clarify Mr Beattie, Stuart Campbell does speak for me and I support his efforts to expose where the RINGFENCED funds are

    118. Hatuey says:

      Skip, sorry but with your option 1 it seems to be implicit that the money has been used elsewhere. That’s not ring-fenced, even if they promise to give it back when the time comes…

      And if option 2 is applicable, it should be easy enough for them to show proof of funds. If they could do that then I’m sure they would have by now. And they don’t seem to be saying that.

      Corporate accounts is pure artistry, as unintelligible to most of us as neoplasticism. Most of us do understand what was meant by “ring-fenced” though.

    119. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Bond interest rates are have not been very impressive for a number of years sub 1% being normal, which would suggest to me that they do have a big pile of loot salted away somewhere.”

      Sigh. No, they don’t, because if they did and it wasn’t in the accounts IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL.

    120. A Person says:

      -Abalha-

      Nineteen out of twenty Irvine Welsh fans are posh wee dweebs who think he’s “authentic” and that liking him makes them hard.

      -Rev-

      Belated happy birthday, keep up the good work, Woodward and Bernstein would be proud.

    121. Willie says:

      If Colin Beattie cannot say where the referendum money is, and how much it is, then it is not unreasonable to assume that the rmoney has gone.

      People are asking a simple questions and all they want is simple answer.

      So where’s the money Colin – spent, frittered away on Murrell’s big salary, spent on legal fees?

    122. Willie says:

      Meanwhile, the farce of the candidate selection continues with thousands of members still to receive their candidate selection papers.

      Yes that’s right, halfway through the voting process which started last Friday paper voting candidates are still to receive their papers. Yes, still to receive their papers. Maybe the party didn’t have the money for the stamps. Absolutely incredible!

    123. David F says:

      Abalha says:
      29 October, 2020 at 2:47 am

      Fuck TWATTER locked me out for calling that cunt Irvine Welsh, eh a CUNT…

      Genuinely cannot see how Twitter could possibly have taken exception to your innocuous remarks. Have a couple of drinks and you’ll feel better… 😉

    124. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Lizg says:

      “I think the point is that Indy Ref Two is being held back till there’s money for it.”

      If sins come in two categories Forgivable and Unforgivable – I would mark that one down as Unforgivable.

      While putting their own personal and sectarian interests ahead of their supposed goal of independence would seem to be a character trait of these people, I have yet to see compelling evidence of that being the case in this instance.

      So am tending toward a not proven verdict until such times as evidence to the contrary surfaces.

      Hatuey

      I don’t think Stu is infallible and I don’t think this line of attack is likely to land much of a blow – unless it prompts 30,000 to return the two books of Christmas Draw tickets they have been sent minus the twenty quid, which would be poetic justice of sorts.

    125. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Rev Stu

      The Auditors job is to count the beans and verify that there is the correct quantity and they have the correct labels on them.

      That interest income would have to have been matched to something and if not the IndyRef money, what?

      Beatie’s letter was shite and no substitute for transparency but I can’t envisage him slipping six grand of his own money into the pile under the guise of it being the interest payment for a non-existent investment.

    126. stuart mctavish says:

      If it transpires that donations ring fenced for indyref2 were indeed woven through the overall income and used to part finance the Brexit party then, given the McGarry precedent, both Smith and Beattie can expect to have the whip withdrawn, get humiliated by the Scottish press and be dragged several times before the Scottish courts.

      On bright side, being a prima facie matter for the UK Serious Fraud Office, it does provide SNP with added incentive to declare some form of independence before end of December.

    127. Abalha says:

      In reply to APerson at 0348 you say
      Nineteen out of twenty Irvine Welsh fans are posh wee dweebs who think he’s “authentic” and that liking him makes them hard.
      ============================================================

      Aye bang on.

      In reply to DavidF at 0433 – aye what part of calling Irvine Welsh a CUNT could be deemed offensive, as you say.

      Any doors didn’t just have a drink but spent the best part of 3 hours on the blower to an Iraqi-Canadian pal, hadn’t chatted in ages and feel much better.

      BTW appears I’m in the TWATTER sin bin, like ice hockey, used to go every Sunday to Dundee ice rink to warch the Rockets trounce the opposition,for another 6 hours.

      Acht well, means I can get on with a’ that housework I’ve been steadfastly avoiding.

    128. Abalha says:

      Aye and thae smart lads at the ‘Wings Scot Party’ dug around my old tweets, 10/19, and reposted this thread on some ofmy hassles at Yes Scotland BUT importantly details why I think Irvine Welsh is a CUNT.

      https://twitter.com/WingsScotParty/status/1321553275058032640

    129. David F says:

      @ Col.Blimp IV
      29 October, 2020 at 4:56 am

      That interest income would have to have been matched to something and if not the IndyRef money, what?

      It’s not interest income. If it was it would say so, and it would have to come from interest-generating cash deposits (which don’t exist). Cash deposits aren’t investments. There was no interest income in 2019.

      It says it’s investment income, and that means it must have come from disposals of or dividends on investments. But please don’t ask me how you generate £6366 on investments of four hundred and sixty nine quid – the same four hundred and sixty nine quid as the previous year. Just another mystery wrapped in an enigma in the SNP accounts.

    130. Kenny says:

      Is there anyone left who does not understand the NS way of operating?

      “Look, I’ve been completely honest with you…”

      “Scotland will not allow itself to be dragged out the EU…”

      “Stop Brexit!” [For England]

      Ringfenced? …. blink, blink!

    131. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Is FMQs on today or do they have another day off for some reason?

      *goes to check*

      Yes, it is on, and it starts at 12.20.

      Could be interesting.

    132. Grey Gull says:

      Ian B @7.43
      Could be interesting, indeed. Would love it if some of the SNP back benchers started to ask awkward questions…..but I won’t be holding my breath on that.

    133. Big Jock says:

      Grey – The only ones that might say anything. Are the ones like Republican Rose who are resigning next year. If the other ones say anything the Murrells will invent smear stories about them, and send to their friends in the Daily Retard!

    134. David F says:

      Casting around for some plausible explanation for the whole can of worms, one that might justify Beattie’s claim that the money is available “at a moment’s notice”, it occurs to me that:
      1. The SNP has spent the money on current expenses
      2. But they have an overdraft facility
      3. If they need the money they simply use their overdraft “at a moment’s notice”

      A couple of problems with this:
      1. It’s profoundly unethical and probably illegal
      2. The overdraft would then have to be paid back from future income / non-existent assets
      3. If I was a bank that had agreed an £500k overdraft with a political party, and the party came to request access to the overdraft, I would look at their dwindling membership and shrinking income, acknowledge that their Covid measures were crushing the economy and likely to reduce their income even further, and say… “Nah. You can’t have the £500k…”

    135. robertknight says:

      If, and it’s a big IF, IndyRef2 ever takes place – no laughing at the back – it won’t matter how much the SNP may (or may not) have in terms of funding if there is no campaign spending limit.

      Businesses in London and establishment luvies like J K K Rowling-in-it will just throw huge amounts of cash at the Naw Bags and the Yessers will be totally outgunned.

      O/T

      Article on RT News about UK Govt. being taken to court by a female prisoner who was sexually assaulted by a fellow inmate who is genetically male.

    136. Big Jock says:

      Anyone know who the MP is?

      I can only read the headline.

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/18829417.snp-mp-bid-quash-rumours-indyref2-cash/

    137. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      OUCH.

      Stuart, well done, you finally got one of these ENTITLED gravy train riders to reply to the MOST READ political website in Scotland.

      As this anonymous banker called Beattie has slandered swathes of us as conspiracy theorists perhaps ex-Councillor Beattie could reflect on the FACT that Wings Over Scotland is so well read PRECISELY BECAUSE STUART CAMPBELL SOURCES ALL THE FACTS herein.

      I resent political troughers taking aim at people on this website as conspiracy theorists because many of us deal in facts. I know the difference between right and wrong because Strathclyde Police spent £30,000 training me in law.

      I know for a FACT that ex-Councillor Beattie is a little bit DODGY. The proof? …

      EXHIBIT A: https://www.standardscommissionscotland.org.uk/uploads/files/1450358808LAMi1278_decision.pdf

      So here is my question…

      Dear Colin,

      (1). How did an ex-councillor and an ex-banker, two of the least reputable professions, manage to land the job as the SNP Treasurer?

      (2). Did you disclose the fact that you had been formally censured by the Public Standards Commissioner For Scotland to your current employer?

      (3). Please can you reply in full to Stuart Campbell? You “think” you are dealing with “conspiracy theorists”. Perhaps there are one or two about, but the risk management officer in your organisation should be looking at ever more expensive legal advice due to possible litigation headed to your door. You see Colin, your problem is arrogance. You believe you are right and everyone who questions or disagrees with the legal document you signed and submitted to various statutory authorities are “conspiracy theorists”.

      (4). Here is a fact for you to digest: If you fail to answer Stuart Campbell and many of our concerns, I just spent £320 an hour x 3 at my solicitors to explore the legal remedy to force an independent audit of your organisation.

      You and your sort claim your legal fees from the taxpayer. Me and my fellow “conspiracy theorists” along with the former First Minister Alex Salmond your friends tried to imprison have to pay our own legal fees. Yet such is the concern here that we pay our own fees.

      Colin if you fail to prove the RAF money is safe and NOT “woven” into your “flexible” accounts in a similar manner to the FACT YOU PERSONALLY BROKE THE LAW CONCERNING STANDARDS IN PUBLIC LIFE, THEN PREPARE TO BE INTERVIEWED UNDER CAUTION.

      I and many of us here have much better things to do with our time. You and your ilk have pushed your luck to the very edge.

      Prove the RAF money is RINGFENCED and NOT WOVEN or I for one will be walking into my nearest police station to make a formal complaint in regard to the concerns over the accounts document you signed.

    138. Balaaargh says:

      @Big Jock,

      It’s Kenny MacAskill.

    139. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Article you posted says Kenny MacAskill @Big Jock says at 8:23 am

      “Former justice secretary Kenny MacAskill wasn’t convinced. He also questioned why, according to the accounts, the party had spent £156,483 on legal fees last year, up from £38,676 in 2018. “There’s still huge questions to answer,” he said.”

    140. Contrary says:

      So, does this all mean that either:

      a) the SNP have added the ‘ring-fenced’ funds to their own coffers and so have committed an offence by effectively spending it (we can never know, because it’s just part of their cash) – not what people donated the money for. Or

      b) they’ve put it in a slush fund off the books, and so is illegal?

      Just another corruption scandal to add to the list then?

      Haha, I just had a thought there – is this why the Scottish government is asking for borrowing powers? They can do a bit of accountancy magic, and a little bit of that borrowing will appear in a Ring-fenced account at SNP HQ?

      No, I don’t know anything about accountancy.

    141. Big Jock says:

      Go Kenny…..

      Don’t let them away with this!

    142. Breeks says:


      Al-Stuart says:
      29 October, 2020 at 8:28 am

      .
      OUCH.

      Stuart, well done, you finally got one of these ENTITLED gravy train riders to reply to the MOST READ political website in Scotland…

      Hope you sent your letter snail mail Al-Stuart because that would make quite a clatter and a thump coming through the letter box. lol

    143. Muscleguy says:

      i have recently become Treasurer of this ISP Branch. Nae other bugger wanted the job so it was muggins heres turn.

      Should I raise funds for a particular purpose or deposit receipts from a fundraising event and the accounts submitted not include that amount or I spent the former on other things leaving the account with insufficient funds for the purpose I would expect to be questioned hard and even subject to a police equiry.

      I refer readers to the case of Natalie McGarry and the WFI accounts for an example of the type.

    144. Patrick Roden says:

      It’s feeling like we are getting close to the point when we will need to consider protests outside the Murrells and other residences, as well as the Scottish Parliament to tell them that they will not treat us like idiots without some payback.

      They really do drip with the arrogance that comes as a result of feeling untouchable.
      With the laws on their side, they think they can ignore us, and they mostly can, but if we start to make life a little less cosy for them, they may just start to think twice about how they treat us.

      Nicola, the fact that a growing number of YES voters now see the SNP under your leadership in ‘Them & Us’ terms, shows what a disaster you taking over has been!

      You are a complete disgrace.

    145. Breeks says:

      Wakey wakey Scotland.

      This is what is meant by the expression having journalists holding people to account for their actions.

      If you don’t like it, then go out and buy youself a Herald or a Scotsman, or spend an hour watching the BBC, and put yourself back to sleep filling your nostrils with all that nice and comfy anaesthetising BritNat propaganda.

      Me? I like being awake, even if it means being alerted to threats that are danger-close. As a nation, we have slept too long in our complacency.

      All those Independentists attacking Rev Stu are attacking the integrity of a Scottish journalist’s dogged determination to get to the truth without compromise, and that is a rare commodity you won’t readily find in any “Scottish” newsroom.

      Bring it on. I want Scotland to be a fiersome place for any and all who fancy themselves as rogues, or even the indolent lapdogs of rogues.

      Just cast your mind back folks… YES and the SNP of 2014 had nothing to fear from any quarter. It drew people to us when they didn’t really want to be drawn.

      Compare and contrast…

    146. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Colin Beattie was SNP group leader on Midlothian Council before becoming an MSP.

      Any idea who was involved/implicated in this?

      https://web.archive.org/web/20201029092246/https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/four-charged-aps21m-fraud-probe-midlothian-council-245859

      Additionally Midlothian Community Hospital (opened in 2010) was specifically called out regarding the PFI scandal.

    147. kapelmeister says:

      If it wasna for the weavers…

      We’d not just be funded for indyref2, we’d be having it.

    148. cynicalHighlander says:

      From the National

      https://archive.is/Ydvo3

    149. holymacmoses says:

      The donations figure on the statement of accounts confuses me

      £904,695.00

      http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Accounts/ST0022937

    150. Big Jock says:

      The ones attacking Wings and others for exposing the lies.

      Are the ones who don’t realise that Nicola and the SNP are being used by the media. Their first mission was to help destroy Salmond. They are backing Nicola at the moment because she is weak and no threat to he union. It also helps with their narrative that Salmond is a bad man.

      Their next mission will be to destroy the SNP and the independence movement. Once the Salmond enquiry is over. Nicola and Murrell will be chucked under a bus by the media.

      If this is to be rescued, then we must help remove the Murrells before the media do, and show that the party is going to be cleaned up from the inside.

      If things are left as they are. The whole world is going to cave in on top of the rotten SNP leadership.

      Better to expose it ourselves and clean it ourselves. Things are bad now , but how bad will it be if the Murrells cling on when the media frenzy reaches it’s peak pre-election.

    151. Desimond says:

      “The money is in an account up at my grannys bit, you widnae know it”

    152. Republicofscotland says:

      Beattie. I can assure you the ringfenced indy funds are there.

      Concerned. Where? in the accounts?

      B. Yes don’t worry the money’s safe to be used at a moments notice.

      C. But why can’t you just point out EXACTLY where the ringfenced indy funds are to put our minds at rest?

      B. Trust me I know that the funds are safe, and when our beloved leader Queen Nicola sets the date for indy ref two, I’ll release the funds, don’t worry.

      Concerned. (Scratching head, none the wiser).

    153. Joe Bloggs says:

      Story from a few years back : “Demand for probe into failed charity chaired by SNP MSP Colin Beattie” 30th August 2017 The Herald https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15502415.demand-for-probe-into-failed-charity-chaired-by-snp-msp-colin-beattie/

    154. Desimond says:

      @Col.Blimp IV

      An investment generating income….that raises 2 immediate questions

      Are the investment (bonds/certificates) generating returns listed under Assets?

      If its ring fenced “YES2” campaign monies generating investment returns, why are these returns being listed for the SNP accounts and not for YES Campaign? Would that insinuate the SNP are siphoning off any profit from this fund investment?

    155. holymacmoses says:

      I have an awful suspicion that the Murrells have people like McKinnon and Beattie in place should they need fall guys

    156. Stan Broadwood says:

      Patrick Roden 9.12am

      Been saying for months that a Demo should be held outside Bute House, but as per usual with “us Scots”, we are too fuckin feart.

      We are a Nation of fuckin shite bags and we deserve every bit of shit that comes our way.

    157. Big Jock says:

      Murrell calling his offshore lawyer as we speak!

      Surely this all makes sense. Nicola deliberately asked for a Section 30 knowing it would be refused. Then she backs away from indy ref 2 due to Covid. Then the economic effects of Covid. Time enough to try and claw some of the indy ref funds back from wherever they are.

      Delay , delay , delay. The SNP are all fur coat and nae knickers. They have not a bean to fight the indy ref. So they must stop it at all costs.

      Might also explain why they were so keen to stop Martin Keatings. If he wins then they have no reasonable excuse to delay. So the whole twisted plot is exposed.

    158. Skip_NC says:

      Hatuey, as you have probably realized by now, I am attempting to come up with the explanation most favorable to the SNP leadership. As you can see, it is gross incompetence at best. I am beginning to wonder if the audit fee is do high because they were presented with a sloppy (opaque?) set of books and had to do a lot of extra work so as to have a basis for their unqualified opinion. Which leads me to other thoughts that would be a matter for the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Scotland.

      After weeks of being told I had reached my free article limit at the National, I got to read the article linked above. Kenny MacAskill says the accounts are not very good. Does he mean the “bottom line” is not very good or is he criticizing the lack of information contained therein?

    159. Craig P says:

      It makes me sad to see the SNP in this state.

      Other parties are quite happy with murky finances – Labour’s various ‘muddles not fiddles’, the Lib Dems refusing to refund Michael Brown’s millions after he was jailed for fraud, the Conservatives and Russian oligarchs buying dinner with Ruth Davidson. The Conservatives and untraceable dark money donations funnelled via the DUP. The Conservatives and… well, you get the picture.

      What makes the SNP any different?

      It is this. The money in question came from ordinary independence supporters.

      I don’t know anything about accountancy, so have no idea how innocent this situation may well be. But if Colin Beattie can’t answer the substance of this question, can you see the SNP ever again being able to run a fundraiser?

      I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say that Colin Beattie today holds the fate of the SNP in his hands.

    160. Garavelli Princip says:

      “I note that today you’ve sent an email to SNP members on the contentious topic of the party’s supposedly “ring-fenced” referendum campaign fund”

      I’m a party member – have been for just about as long as Rev Campbell has been on this earth (belated happy birthday).

      I did not receive – and still await – Mr Beatty’s e-mail. I get plenty others on a regular basis – but for some reason, not that one.

      Wonder why?

    161. willie says:

      here is an analogy.

      Supporters give the SNP a 1,000 gallon reserve tank of petrol so that the fleet can be assured of moving when the call come. Tank to be set aside.

      SNP then take the reserve tank and use it to fill up all their day to day running vehicles.

      Supporter asks where is the hypothecated 1,000 gallon reserve tank. Oh it’s out there in the general fleet.

      Oh that’s all right then Mr Treasurer I’m glad you kept the petrol safe, sound and it its reserve tank. But what happens now that the day to day fleet is running low on fuel?.

    162. Livionian says:

      SNP members (if there are any left on here) copy and paste you know what to do. The truth will come out one way or another and for the sake of the reputations of the career wankers at the top of the party they should admit the truth in there own words rather than let others expose them

    163. Breeks says:

      Folks, if you can’t read an article behind a paywall, copy the web page address to your clipboard,… usually right click and ‘copy’.

      Open a new page, and type this into the space…

      https://archive.is/

      (Don’t Google it, because Google seems to want it kept hidden and puts a load of rubbish in the way and you just get lost, so it’s easier to type it, (or have it bookmarked).)

      Then, paste the web address from your clipboard into the archive.is spacebar…

      If the page has already been archived, it will ask whether you want to go to the archive or save a new one…It will take you there to read it, or if it hasn’t been archived, it will archive it for you in a minute or so and show the page when its done….

      If you want others to see it, just copy the archive link and paste it… job done.

    164. Graeme says:

      The Cambridge dictionary definition of fraud id
      “the crime of obtaining money or property by deceiving people”

      The deception here is those who contributed did so on the understanding the the money would be set aside (ringfenced) for the specific purpose of fighting an independence referendum, it did not say the money would be used for the day to day running of the party which appears to be the case as the money is nowhere to be seen on the balance sheet.that money belongs to the contributors which they entrusted to the party for a specific purpose, they were not asked if the party could borrow it
      Even if they intend to return the money through a loan or overdraft it is still a deception it is still fraud.

    165. WhoRattledYourCage says:

      I see Ross Thomson (remember him?) Has been cleared, unsurprisingly enough, of help-ma-boaby gropery. Maybe some of the more unruly elements of the SNP have been inspired by him to grab the family jewels.

    166. Kenny says:

      Breeks; good instructional.
      I’ve had that https://archive.is/ link saved to my Bookmarks bar for precisely the reasons you outline. Job done.

    167. Tam Fae somewhere says:

      Beware as I am not an accountant!

      Looks like the fund has been spread across some accounting units to reduce their overdrafts Sensible action from a financial perspective to reduce overdraft costs.

      The RAF could then be restored by using the overdrafts of the accounting unit. Simples.

      The banks holding the RAF overdraft facilities may even by part owned by Westminster and will probably hold the Westminster line. Result all overdraft facilities removed at referendum time and SNP bankrupt.

      How will run their campaign then???

      Apologies if the above is bollocks but that is what I see as a non-accounting person. Westminster can destroy the SNP at any point they want….

    168. Grey Gull says:

      Breeks and Kenny
      Thanks! Great tip.

    169. LeggyPeggy says:

      Me @ 5.28 pm yesterday,

      Update , My email from Colin Beattie must be lost in the *never ever land* like a fairy tale because I’ve still not received an email from him.

    170. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Further written evidence to the ‘Sturgeon Inquiry’ (another memory-related ‘clarification’ – whoops!) from Judith Mackinnon:

      https://www.parliament.scot/HarassmentComplaintsCommittee/20201029JudithMackinnontoConvener.pdf

    171. Desimond says:

      @Tam Fae somewhere
      The one issue with overdrafts is that they can be withdrawn at the banks discretion.

      Pretty sure using Paul Publics funds to ease Peters interest payments isnt quite the expectation of punters putting hard earned into “ring fenced” funds

    172. Peter says:

      As I understand it , MPs , MSPs etc are NOT employees of the party are they? They are public employees paid by the public purse.
      Why then would the party pay Alyn Smiths legal fees? Why is he NOT personally liable for his actions but Margaret Ferrier is?

    173. MaggieC says:

      Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

      This article from the Times about Judith MacKinnon ,

      “ Senior official apologises for misleading Alex Salmond inquiry “ ,

      https://archive.vn/LBzLJ

      And the written evidence page where Judith MacKinnon’s letter to the Committee is right at the bottom of the page ,

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/115516.aspx

      I always thought that misleading meant the same as being deceptive which means that you are not telling the truth .

      All these civil servants should have their desks cleared immediately , shown where the door is and told to leave without their pension rights etc and no further money paid to any of them .

    174. right curly says:

      @breeks : to get past a paywall, another trick is to turn javascript off – works for many sites but not all, and you may lose images from the page.

    175. Grey Gull says:

      Ian @11.43
      Thanks for that. Do you think all this forgetting and misdirecting is a deliberate attempt to muddy the waters or, as it has been suggested by others on here, that they are totally incompetent? Was talking to a pal about all this last night and she said, nobody’s that bothered. It’s only us folk who are political nerds who give a toss. Breeks said earlier journalists need to hold these folk to account and that is true. However, even if journalists did do their job properly, I’m not sure the average person in the street would care. Much more interested in Strictly and I’m A Celebrity. I despair!

    176. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Grey Gull –

      I really don’t know, but most folk know what ‘Watergate’ means without being able to name anyone affected or involved apart from Nixon.

    177. MaggieC says:

      Ian Brotherhood @ 11.43 am ,

      I see we’re on the same wavelength looking at the Committee pages for updates or as the saying goes “ Great minds think alike “ LOL .

    178. Grey Gull says:

      Maggie
      Interesting the Times is reporting this. Wonder what are the chances of it being mentioned on the Scottish TV news? Wonder if Ruth will make comment at FMQ? I’ll need to switch it on shortly. More importantly I want to find out if I can get a drink inside my local anytime soon rather than sitting outside with the thermals on!

    179. Abalha says:

      In reply to Grey Gull at 1143, hmm not sure I agree, was chatting to an older relative about it all today, she was appalled, in particular, at their lack of proper governance. When I told her that there was NO, by necessity, third party to oversee the candidates’ voting, she explained that in her church’s recent minister selection a 3rd party oversaw the counting, read out the results AND she says even the SWRI have third party oversight when electing committees. She could barely believe what she was hearing. Also that candidates in fewer than 6 contenders get to send 3 emails while 6 and over only 2. She’s a big indy supporter, never on social media, BUT she was very interested and plans to tell her friendship group. The referendum demonstrated if engaged people will get involved and perhaps more importantly politically participate as should be the case in any functioning democracy. Ours most clearly is not functioning.

    180. holymacmoses says:

      Committee on Governemnt lies:
      Judith McKinnon seems to me to be the most unreliable, devious and futile of the lot. Not as an ‘inventor’ of the procedure to try and entrap Mr Salmond, but rather as a person unfit to be employed in any capacity where other people have to rely on her ability and/or judgement.
      I think all the misleading as far as memory lapses are concerned is to do with how much might have been destroyed/hidden before it got to committee proceedings. I believe that they lie in the hope that the committee doesn’t have that particular piece of paper.

    181. holymacmoses says:

      Peter says:
      29 October, 2020 at 11:49 am
      As I understand it , MPs , MSPs etc are NOT employees of the party are they? They are public employees paid by the public purse.
      Why then would the party pay Alyn Smiths legal fees? Why is he NOT personally liable for his actions but Margaret Ferrier is?..

      You need to have WOKEN up to understand the answer to that question Peter:-)

    182. Liz g says:

      Grey Gull @ 12.01
      I’d say it’s all about trying to avoid giving the tv clip.
      An answer for broadcast and then the correction that won’t be seen by most .
      A tactic to be sure…

    183. holymacmoses says:

      Breeks says:
      29 October, 2020 at 10:44 am
      Folks, if you can’t read an article behind a paywall, copy the web page address to your clipboard,… usually right click and ‘copy’.

      Open a new page, and type this into the space…

      https://archive.is/

      Thank a million for this

    184. Ian Brotherhood says:

      It’s impossible to get into the mindset of characters like Mackinnon etc, but imagine you got wind of an inquiry into catastrophic processes which could easily have resulted in an innocent man going to jail for the rest of his life? i.e. processes you were closely involved in developing and implementing?

      My first action would be to break into a cold sweat and howl, ‘Oh, fuck!’ and my second would be to scour through every single bit of ‘evidence’ in my possession to see where I might have left fingerprints.

      The idea that any of these people could appear in front of that committee with anything less than perfect knowledge of their role is just risible.

      It’ll all come out eventually.

      In the meantime, this FMQs gets under way with a huge Alex-Salmond-shaped elephant sitting right beside Nicola.

      Oh dear, how fuckin sad…

    185. MaggieC says:

      Grey Gull @ 12.07 pm ,

      This from the Bbc ,

      Covid : Lockdowns return as Europe confronts second wave ,

      https://archive.vn/7L43H

      If you were in France or Germany you wouldn’t be getting out to have a pint or two , you’ll just have to remember to put your thermals on when you go for your pint . LOL .

    186. Patsy Millar says:

      Nup, no email! Belated Happy Birthday!

    187. Lenny Hartley says:

      Skip_NC Go into private mode on your browser, no cookies are kept so sites dont know if you have visited before so no limitbon numberbof articles you can read.

    188. Breeks says:

      Just a quick question, was it Colin Beattie who couldn’t remember how Peter Murrell’s salary was calculated?

    189. Elizabeth Stanley says:

      I don’t understand why all civil servants who were summoned didn’t give all paper work,emails & phone records for the past 3 years.

      That would be a needle in a haystack approach which would have kept the enquiry wrapped up for months.

      Their hubris will be their downfall. Strange that important stuff is so easily missing from their memories.

    190. MaggieC says:

      Breeks @ 12.47 pm ,

      Yes it was and I think its more a case of nobody knows how much Peter Murrell is paid and it’s from this here at Wings from Kenny McAskill ,

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/on-no-accounts/

    191. Ross says:

      I’m more concerned by the fact the coffers seem to be so low.

      It’s an organisation of anywhere between 80 and 120k donating each year.

      5 million is brought in every year but only 1.5 million is spent on campaigns. Would love to see the income to campaign figures over the last ten years. What was it in 2007?

      Understand there have been more elections but they aren’t every year and they have had a massive membership increase for 6 years. Where’s the money gone?

      They should be sitting on more than 200k in reserve.

    192. Grey Gull says:

      Thanks, Maggie @ 12.36
      Yes, I suppose I should be grateful for small mercies!

    193. Astonished says:

      So mackinnon tells( possibly winking as she says this)one of the 9 dishonest women who tried to stitch up alex salmond that she was likely to lead the interviews. This is corrupt. And I am glad that the judge saw through this lie -fest.

      mackinnon then e-mails this utterly horrible women B confirming this. I am surprised the word stitch-up wasn’t in the e-mail.

      THIS IS A SACKING OFFENCE. IT IS GROSS MISCONDUCT.

      The murrells have got to go. This happened on their watch. I am now of the mind that they knew all about the stitch-up and actively encouraged it.

      The good news is that mackinnon sent a correction. Which has been made public. It also strongly indicates that person B can no longer be completely trusted to keep schtuum.

      The first person to break ranks, tell the truth and explain the whole corrupt conspiracy and name all those who were involved. I will not denigrate them or demand that they go to jail. Old fashioned ‘turning Queen’s evidence’. But this is only for the first person to break ranks. The rest must be jailed and that includes mackinnon.

    194. MaggieC says:

      Grey Gull @ 12.07 pm
      Me @ 11.55 am

      I see the Herald is also reporting about Judith MacKinnon but as you say whether it makes it onto the Stv or even the Bbc news is another matter ,

      https://archive.vn/dsHZ6

    195. Ottomanboi says:

      All ya need2 know bt guys called COLIN.
      http://www.first-names-meanings.com/first-name/COLIN

    196. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @FMQs, James Kelly’s gonny ask a question so he is!

    197. Ian Brotherhood says:

      ‘Thank you First Minister, eh, naw, sorry, thank you Presiding Officer, ehm…’

      Aw, bless.

      He’s a national treasure.

    198. Graeme says:

      I don’t know how old Judith McKinnon is but by her photograph she looks young enough to be Alex Salmonds daughter, I wonder how she would feel if a group of people conspired to lock her father up possibly for the rest of his life for crimes they know he didn’t commit.
      If she gives that just a few moments thought she’ll know why so many of us despise her so much

    199. Skip_NC says:

      Lenny Hartley, thanks for that. I’ll give it a try.

    200. John H. says:

      O/T

      Jeremy Corbyn has been suspended from the Labour Party for mishandling the party’s anti Jewish stance.

    201. Stan Broadwood says:

      Sturgeon has her “close friend” Somerville at the back of her during FMQs.

      How sweet.

    202. stonefree says:

      @ John H. at 1:39 pm
      O/T
      I very much doubt Corbyn is / was anti-Semitic in any form, Merely someone to blame,

    203. fergus says:

      If a donation has been disbursed inappropriately, not for the purposes that donation was sought, is the donor entitled to ask for their money to be returned? That is a legal question, which might be on shaky ground, but what about the moral question?

    204. Lochside says:

      McKinnon lied under oath. The balance of probability that she ‘inadvertently’ misled the Committee is bullshit and she should be charged under whatever civil service code she is working under. Instant dismissal is too good. In a court of law it would be classed as perjury. A charge that the ‘Alphabet ‘ women should be facing now in my opinion.

      I wonder who instructed her to renege on her ‘evidence’?

    205. Republicofscotland says:

      “John H. says:
      29 October, 2020 at 1:39 pm
      O/T

      Jeremy Corbyn has been suspended from the Labour Party for mishandling the party’s anti Jewish stance”

      John the way the entire neoliberal neocapitalist media and politicians relentlessly attacked Corbyn on everything including policies, reminds of the way the whole system used to attack the SNP. However in the last four years or so under Sturgeon, the all out attacks from the British nationalist media especially has abated, the question must by why.

    206. Lenny Hartley says:

      Stonefree , you are considered Anti Semitic these days including by the SNP for criticising Israels genocide in Palestine, if thats the case them i am Anti Semitic and if I had a few mates round and said the above , our SNP esteemed justice Minister got to know about It, i could be jailed under his new hate Crime bill.
      They are a bunch of yer actual fascists. There are very few or no people in England less racist than Jeremy Corbyn.

    207. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Lenny Hartley –

      Hear hear.

    208. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      Blairites get their man. Never thought Jeremy Corbyn was much use, much like the Labour Party in general, now the right wingers have eventually managed to seize power they go in for the kill.

      There is a political party ready for splitting….much like the SNP!

    209. Breeks says:

      Astonished says:
      29 October, 2020 at 1:08 pm

      …. This is corrupt. And I am glad that the judge saw through this lie -fest…..

      THIS IS A SACKING OFFENCE. IT IS GROSS MISCONDUCT.

      The murrells have got to go.

      I struggle to accept that such a rancid and unrepentant conspiracy can be exposed and undone in a Court of Law, and yet not one of the lying conspirators faces any consequences for their actions.

      In my opinion, instead of being anonymous and protected by the Courts, they should each be facing individual criminal prosecution, the records and WhatsApp comments should have been seized as potential evidence, and every one of those involved should have been suspended and denied the means and opportunity to interfere with the evidence against them.

      That certain players face NONE of those consequences, and are even left in charge of the evidence submitted to the Inquiry frankly beggars belief. Bute House is a crime scene, but it’s nothing to do with Alex Salmond.

      “IF” this had happened in any other country in the world, there would have been a scandalous outcry, but here in Scotland, even grotesque and outrageous scandal is ‘filtered’ by our manipulative and selective media, and justice for Scotland is ‘doctored’ to suit the powered elites.

      These are the trials we have to endure as an occupied and subjugated Nation, with our societal infrastructure riven with rogues, cheats, and liars who are safe in their jobs because it’s ‘only’ lowly Scotland they are shafting.

      It isn’t just Sturgeon’s SNP which needs a ruthless clear out, but “Scotland’s” Civil Service, “Scotland’s“ Courts, “Scotland’s“ Media, and “Scotland’s” Devolved Government. They whole system is a racket that stinks of privilege and entitlement, and only flies a “Scottish” flag of convenience.

      Scotland also needs to assert it’s sovereign self defence mechanism and instigate it’s own Security Service to quantify and counter the external manipulations and interference with Scottish political affairs, and establish a Scottish News Broadcasting Service which it’s Scottish from it’s DNA upwards.

      Scotland is a Nation and entitled to a robust National defence infrastructure. We should already have these Institutions formed in lieu of Independence, and currently shadowing the activities of their “UK” counterparts.

      Devolution and Holyrood has failed Scotland completely and absolutely, and Scotland needs a Constitutional Convention to step outside the rigged British game, and stand up for Scotland’s Constitutional Integrity and Nation status.

      Impeachment of Holyrood would be a mighty first motion.

    210. Republicofscotland says:

      “Jeremy Corbyn was much use,”

      Jason.

      I can say it now Corbyn has gone, he was a bigger threat to Scottish independence that Sir Keir Starmer will ever be, Corbyn’s a socialist and he was all for implementing socialist policies that woul’ve changed England for the better in my opinion.

      The Blairites and the right wing politicians throughout Westminster desperately wanted rid of him, as did the the right wing politicians corporate buddies. The really sad thing is that so many folk in England don’t yet realise what they’ve lost by the departure of Corbyn, but under this Tory government they eventually will, well most of the will.

    211. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scotland will never emancipate itself if we allow the ‘Scottish’ government and ‘our’ legal Establishment to harm Scots law in a manner that enables Scots law to remain compatible with British constitutionalism, while simultaneously destroying the potential for justice in Scotland.

      https://law.anu.edu.au/sites/all/files/users/u9705219/bioethics_and_human_rights_2014_1.pdf

    212. Stoker says:

      I read this article and found the last 5 sentences quoted from Phil Mitchell’s Old Man (Colin Beattie) quite revealing and worrying about him, more specifically his attitude. I’m no financial advisor but I like to think I can smell a rotten one when I see it.

      cynicalHighlander says on 29 October, 2020 at 9:58 am
      https://archive.is/YzpRK

      Strange how, when reading this article, I could not help but remember all those different pictures of Sturgeon we’ve seen in various media outlets over the past 2 years. The ones of her sitting somewhere and looking as if she was mentally a million miles away. Looking haunted & very deeply worried about something. I’m sure you’ve all seen at least one of them?

      ‘Tam Fae somewhere @ 11:06 am’: Jeez-o I hope you’re wrong.

      ‘Big Jock @ 10:22 am’: Bang on the money me thinks. Especially this: “Nicola deliberately asked for a Section 30 knowing it would be refused.” Aye! Of course she did! And her reasons for doing so was to, as you say, claw back the money *but also* to buy some time to shove through some pet policy issues of the parties Wokeratie.

      Now it’s all going ‘Pete Tong’ aka Peter Murrell.

    213. Anon says:

      Obviously and understandably lots of people on here are concerned about the “ring fenced referendum fund” however there is something else which is of concern.

      That is the issue of the “going concern” basis. Simply put the going concern basis is the method used to prepare accounts where it is considered likely that the organisation can continue. In the case of the SNP that is, according to the Accounts the responsibility of the National Treasurer. However in all cases the Auditors, in this case Johnston Carmichael are required to carry out a risk assessment on whether or not the going concern basis is appropriate and comment appropriately. However Johnston Carmichael merely comment that preparing the Accounts on the going concern basis is a matter for the National Treasurer and that he “has not disclosed in the financial statements any identified material uncertainties that may cast significant doubt about the Party’s ability to continue”.

      The Accounts show that the SNP has Current assets of £1,097,122 (including Prepayments and accrued income of £879,488). Current liabilities total £1,224,744.

      I reckon in the eyes of most people, the resultant shortfall of £227,622 (1224744-1097122) presents a material uncertainty about the SNP’s ability to continue.

      Also, next time you go to Tesco for a loaf or go to RBS for a loan tell them that you have no cash but you do have some computer software you value at £282k or second furniture and computers you reckon are worth £133k – please let me know how you get on with that one!

    214. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Stoker –

      ‘Phil Mitchell’s Old Man (Colin Beattie)’

      LOL

      🙂

      For me he’s more ‘Roll-up, roll-up! See the Amazing Bearded Baby!’

      (Maybe that’s a ‘woke’ thing?)

    215. paul says:

      Lenny Hartley says:
      29 October, 2020 at 2:23 pm

      Stonefree , you are considered Anti Semitic these days including by the SNP for criticising Israels genocide in Palestine, if thats the case them i am Anti Semitic and if I had a few mates round and said the above , our SNP esteemed justice Minister got to know about It, i could be jailed under his new hate Crime bill.
      They are a bunch of yer actual fascists. There are very few or no people in England less racist than JC

      I’m coming to the opinion that the only devolved powers left to Scotland will be the COFPS and the prison service.

    216. ahundredthidiot says:

      Unless you want to live in a form of restriction for the next ten years, I suggest people stop getting tested.

      A friend left the queue the other day for fearing of being late for work, and guess what…….that’s right….she tested positive.

      This is beyond mental.

      Only a dark mind will not let a good crisis go to waste. Remember that when you lose your job and your pension.

    217. Hatuey says:

      Breeks: “ It isn’t just Sturgeon’s SNP which needs a ruthless clear out, but “Scotland’s” Civil Service, “Scotland’s“ Courts, “Scotland’s“ Media, and “Scotland’s” Devolved Government…”

      You could have added several more institutions to that list.

      Right now we are seeing our Scottish NHS and associated research facilities being compromised and subordinated to serve the interests of political power. Let’s be under no illusions – covid-19 has been weaponised for political purposes too. I wouldn’t know where to turn to today if I wanted an honest assessment of where we stood in regards to this pandemic.

      It’s a sort of contagion. The political head is poisoned and, when that happens, it’s just a matter of time before the body of government, with all its limbs that stretch into society and the lives of ordinary people, follow and succumb too.

      They’re even redefining words. Today we are being told to open our minds to interpretations of the word “ring-fenced”. And why not? If you have the power to change definitions of fundamentals like “male” and “female”, why stop at accounts?

    218. C Griffiths says:

      Stu, you say the email contains “offensive smears about my website and me” but it doesn’t mention you, it mentions “opponents” which could mean anyone. I do agree with you on Alyn Smith, he comes out with some stupid stuff sometimes.

    219. Iain Lawson says:

      I notice a few comments, not excusing but suggesting the money is being used rather than an overdraft. The difference is the SNP are claiming ownership of the money therefore this “debt” is not being listed as a liability in the accounts. If it were an overdraft it would feature in the liability column and the SNP would have gone burst over the year to the tune over well over £300K.

    220. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Regarding Corbyn, Anti Semitism and The Leader of ‘The Workers Party’ Sir Kier Starmer:

      https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/4555-the-case-against-keir-starmer

      “when the SNP proposed an investigation into Blair’s apparent lying in the run up to the war – bolstered by findings from the Chilcot report – Sir Keir voted against it.”

      Starmer voted for Trident in 2016, and worked tirelessly to secure Labour’s support for the Investigatory Power Bill, which expanded state surveillance and authorised the bulk collection of digital communications.

      As Labour Leader he whipped his members to abstain in the vote on the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill which allows Government Employees and informants commit crimes without the risk of prosecution.

      As DPP, Sir Keir tempered his love of liberty by fast-tracking the extradition of Julian Assange (a process now making its way through the courts).

      He flouted legal precedents by advising Swedish lawyers not to question Assange in Britain: a decision that prolonged the latter’s legal purgatory, denied closure to his accusers in Sweden, and sealed his fate before a US show trial.”

      Starmer also approved a decision not to prosecute any police over the shooting (execution) of Jean Charles de Menezes in Operation Kratos – described by critics as a “shoot to kill” policy.

      The Met had been trained/advised by Israeli security forces in the months leading up to this shooting in July 2005.

      Sir Keir Starmer also apparently helped paedophile Jimmy Saville evade justice in 2009. It’s claimed that the Police force referred four cases to Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service – headed by Kier Starmer.

      https://www.politicalite.com/lab/labour/new-leader-new-danger-keir-starmer-helped-paedophile-jimmy-saville-evade-justice/

      That’s before you look at his connections to Israeli lobbyists a personal donation of £50,000 from Sir Trevor Chin who has made donations to many leading Labour figures in the past including Tony Blair and Tom Watson!

      https://www.thecanary.co/exclusive/2020/04/17/keir-starmer-received-50000-donation-from-pro-israel-lobbyist-in-leadership-bid/

      And this from Starmer himself “I said it loud and clear — and meant it — that I support Zionism without qualification.”

      https://www.timesofisrael.com/keir-starmer-elected-uk-labour-chief-apologizes-to-jews-for-party-anti-semitism/

      BritNat Labour is the UK Establisments B-Team and they are being rehabilitated in the public consciousness via the BBC/MSM in preparation to replace the Tories, lest real change occurs which threatens their place at the top of the greasy pole!

      Note the constant media attacks on Labour have stopped now Corbyn has been binned and a self confessed Zionist (link above) Neo-Con has been installed as Leader (Imagine if Corbyn had hit a cyclist while driving a car)!

    221. Beaker says:

      @Ian Brotherhood says:
      29 October, 2020 at 3:04 pm
      “For me he’s more ‘Roll-up, roll-up! See the Amazing Bearded Baby!’
      (Maybe that’s a ‘woke’ thing?)”

      He reminds me of the “Chinheads” advert for McEwan’s lager a few (several) years back 🙂

    222. Republicofscotland says:

      Jockanese Wind Talker @ 3.27pm.

      Corbyn now suspended by the party, looks like the LFI, will push to have him kicked out.

    223. Rhoan Jagger says:

      @Iain Lawson

      From what I gather Iain, I think the assumption is that the money has been used to pay off an overdraft which now leaves the SNP in the black.

      I’m not particularly savvy with bookkeeping, but I would assume that an unused overdraft facility would not appear under liabilities on a balance sheet? I may be wrong though.

    224. Kenny J says:

      Off topic, but fun.
      Have a look at what is bothering MSPs just now.
      I thought April had rolled in early.
      Nane o that Salmond shite.

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/18831439.msps-urged-bring-new-law-curb-nosy-trampolinists/?action=success#comments-feedback-anchor

    225. Ian Brotherhood says:

      For those who have yet to catch up with ‘The Dangerfield Files’:

      https://gordondangerfield.com/2020/10/25/what-did-the-first-minister-know-and-when-did-she-know-it/#comments

    226. Abalha says:

      Just posted another thread with new intel on state of the SNP.

      https://twitter.com/ABalharry62/status/1321836423696232452

    227. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      Republicofscotland

      You say Corbin was a threat to Independence, yes I agree his socialist ideas would have attracted many in Scotland.

      He was not evil enough to watch the right wing and deal with the many right wingers which are now in Labour.

      Sir Keir Starmer will do just fine.

    228. Republicofscotland says:

      “Sir Keir Starmer will do just fine.”

      For Sir Keir Starmer and the LFI, not the the general public.

    229. rob says:

      I got this sent to me in FB
      https://www.facebook.com/groups/1957784261209810/permalink/2784559281865633/
      Biased Broadcasting, Banks & Companies-BBBC
      stShp2ons3horiead ·
      THE SNP has emailed all of its donors in a bid to “quash rumours” that money supposedly ring-fenced for indyref2 has already been spent.
      It comes after the Electoral Commission published the SNP’s 2019 accounts late last night.
      The paperwork reveals that the party has just under £97,000 in the bank, despite two major fundraising drives for an indyref2 fighting fund.
      However, the SNP treasurer, insists that there is £593,501 in the “Referendum Appeal Fund” which is ready to be deployed “instantaneously”.
      The pro-independence Wings Over Scotland blog has long accused the party of having spent the money “on something else.”
      This morning, in an unprecedented intervention, the SNP’s treasurer, Colin Beattie wrote to all donors.
      He said: “I felt it was important for me to get in touch today to quash rumours spreading on social media about one of our fundraising appeals.”
      Beattie insisted the funds “remain earmarked for the referendum and are ready to be fully deployed at a moment’s notice”.
      He added: “Since becoming national treasurer, I’ve worked hard to ensure ongoing prudence and financial control, striving to use your donations in the most effective and efficient ways possible.
      “The current strength of our financial position, for example, enabled us last year to win a landslide in the General Election, secure our best European election result ever, and contest a parliamentary by-election.
      “All three of these events were unforeseen, but thanks to donors like you and our inherent financial strength we were able to allocate £1.4 million at short notice to contest these elections.”
      He said the pary had moved “from being heavily in debt” to “operating in the black and with zero commercial borrowing.”
      “And that’s why I simply will not have this hard-won progress trashed,” he added.
      “Like all other political parties, the SNP does not separate out restricted funds in annual accounts. Any such donations are woven through the overall income figures each year.
      “The Referendum Appeal Fund has a current balance of £593,501 and we can fully deploy those funds instantaneously – guaranteeing maximum impact when vital funds are needed most.
      “I’ll leave our opponents to the social media conspiracies, but I wanted you to get the facts direct from me.”

    230. paul says:

      Jason Smoothpiece says:
      29 October, 2020 at 3:52 pm

      Republicofscotland

      You say Corbin was a threat to Independence, yes I agree his socialist ideas would have attracted many in Scotland.

      He was not evil enough to watch the right wing and deal with the many right wingers which are now in Labour.

      Sir Keir Starmer will do just fine.

      He will indeed.

      I suggest the algorithm that surrently replaces T and Q words replace ‘Sir Keir’ with ‘Blair’.

      I cannot see what harm or hate it would provoke.

    231. somerled says:

      @Skip_NC

      I am a CA and member of ICAS, you may be right about the Audit fee being high because of extra work is records are shoddy. However, its not something ICAS would be interested in as it is between Auditor and client and quite common. SNP Members should be asking why the fee is high.

      If these SNP politicians are the best Scotland has to offer (and i don’t see any suitable replacements) they are running their party and the Country into the ground. Why does anyone think it would be better if Scotland gets Independence?

      For weeks and months, Stu, Craig Murray & others have said how Sturgeon & Murrell are lying yet they cant be removed. Add in Humza Hate Crime and GRA reform and why on earth will people vote for these charlatans next year. You don’t have anyone better so i would rather we leave Independence until the next generation in 20 years time. And before anyone says Joanna Cherry- she isnt the saviour you crave. She didnt stop Brexit and couldnt get selected for Holyrood. She also thought James Rennie raping a baby boy was ‘unfortunate’ and didnt want to help investigate LGBT Youth Scotland.

    232. G H Graham says:

      Look, if a political organisation such as the SNP receives £1/2 million in cash receipts (that’s what a fundraiser is) & it adheres to accounting practices and the law, then no matter what it was used for; to pay off an overdraft, settle a debt, finance gender studies classes, meet legal expenses, etc, the amount must appear somewhere as a cash receipt; also known as a revenue, sales or turnover.

      A business collects money invariably in return for a product or service. Here it was specifically collected in return for an independence referendum campaign; a service if you will.

      If the money is instead held in a slush fund or in an “off the books” account, then that is plainly illegal.

      If you believe that they do not have an illegal account, then the money is either in their primary account or it isn’t. The only way that it can no longer be in the legal account is because it was spent on something else like virtue signalling assignments, gender identity training or something.

      And since the 2019 accounts clearly show net current assets of only £272,000, then the only conclusion anyone with half a brain can reach is that the indyref fundraising money has been spent.

      So everyone who donated has been taken for fools led by the one and only, Nicola (It wiznae me) Sturgeon.

      All clear now?

    233. paul says:

      You don’t have anyone better so i would rather we leave Independence until the next generation in 20 years time. And before anyone says Joanna Cherry- she isnt the saviour you crave. She didnt stop Brexit and couldnt get selected for Holyrood.

      Somerled, you are at the end of a thankless shift.

      Go home to those you pretend to protect.

      We are in it for the species!

    234. cirsium says:

      @Breeks, 10.40

      Thanks for the advice regarding reading an article behind a paywall.

      @MaggieC, 11.56
      Thanks for posting the draft minutes from the Harassment Complaints Committee. It made for instructive reading. From their testimony, it is clear that the two senior Civil Servants had no awareness that applying a Code of Conduct retrospectively was unfair and would cause legal problems for the organisation raises the question of the competence of the two officials.

    235. Gav says:

      Stuart, hope you had a good birthday. I’d just like to say that as a still paying member of the snp (I’ve defo been considering that position of late but at the time of writing I remain so) I can confirm that these are questions I absolutely would like answered.

    236. CameronB Brodie says:

      OT, but I thought some might be interested in a scientific view of antisemitism, that is unsullied by the pro-Zionist bias that is ingrained in English politics.

      https://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/openfordebate/2020/03/09/hath-not-a-jew-eyes-how-critical-race-theory-sheds-light-on-anti-semitic-discourse/

    237. Republicofscotland says:

      You probably couldn’t squeeze a cigarette paper between the difference in activities of the Tufton street crew in England, and the Charlotte street crew in Scotland

      https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/uk-increasingly-run-corporate-insiders-and-scotland-too/

    238. vlad (not that one) says:

      Gav @16:14
      Likewise, seconded.

    239. John Higham says:

      ………….. no reply to my email from Colin as yet, I guess his inbox must be a bit full

    240. Skip_NC says:

      Somerled, I agree with you about sloppiness, but what about opaque? I suppose my post at 10:22am (6:22am here in North Carolina) should really have mentioned “in due course, if more information is forthcoming,” or words to that effect. On reflection, perhaps that part of my post was premature.

    241. mr thms says:

      Republicofscotland @ 3:38 pm

      I wonder what Labour for Independence think of the article written by Kenny MacAskill and published in last week’s The Scotsman. The headline reads..

      “SNP must make alliances with Labour and the unions to ensure another Scottish independence referendum”

      You can read the article here

      http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/snp-must-make-alliances-labour-and-unions-ensure-another-scottish-independence-referendum-kenny-macaskill-3010350%3famp

      This bit is interesting..

      “Now it may not be possible to get all the union barons to convert but getting them into neutral or accepting the will of their Scottish members is possible. Work on that must commence.

      Similarly, disdaining pleas from Labour voices for another referendum is equally misplaced. How they voted in 2014 is as relevant as the SNP’s position in 1979. It’s where we go from here that matters. If they wish to argue for a referendum, then good. If it’s a multi-option referendum, so what?”

      That suggests to me the second best option will probably come first..

    242. shug says:

      somerled says
      How you doing sensibledave I have been missing your contribution. Do they give you a new name when you are on a different shift?

    243. Hatuey says:

      Bang on, G H Graham, message received and understood.

      Yet again, they did the exact opposite of their stated objective.

      If it was ring-fenced, they’d simply point and say there it is… they can’t do that because it wasn’t ring-fenced.

      Slab upon slab of lies and crap.

    244. shug says:

      I see the BBC is not telling us that the report being used by opposition politicians to question her very closely had concluded that those ‘transfers’ played no statistically significant part in the outbreaks in care homes and, in his terms, had no meaningful impact.

      The omission of the key conclusion of the report is to protect the opposition from the demolition of their campaigns to lay the blame for care home deaths at the door of the Scottish Government is bias by omission in its clearest form.

    245. MaggieC says:

      Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

      There are 3 new letters from the Convener ,

      On 29 October 2020 the Convener wrote to Liz Lloyd, Chief of Staff to the First Minister requesting additional written evidence and also to civil servants John Somers and Donald Cameron:

      Written evidence page where the links to the letters are shown ,

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/115516.aspx

    246. Donald Raymond says:

      Have the SNP spent the money or not? Or if we don’t know, will we ever find out? I don’t have a spare lifetime to read all the details. Can someone just tell me the bottom line?

    247. MaggieC says:

      Shug @ 5.04 pm
      Jockanese Wind Talker @ 5.11 pm ,

      This from the Bbc about Brian Taylor retiring at the end of October so he’ll be gone by this Saturday so he’s probably not bothered whether he reports the truth or just say’s what he wants in his last couple of days at the Bbc .

      “ BBC Scotland political editor Brian Taylor to retire “

      https://archive.vn/tadAl

    248. Lothianlad says:

      Somerled. I agree completely about joanna cherry.
      I remember her saying on the Andrew neil lunchtime programme that if no deal was imminent ” parliament” should revoke brexit.

      This was Not because Scotland voted remain, and as a Scottish SNP MP she was doing it solely in Scotlands interests, No, this was because it would be damaging to the “whole” country!

      She was very much part of and influential in the Stop brexit strategy.

      Independence was for her, at the time , secondary to stopping brexit.

      I believe she somehow fell foul of the current leadership and is now seen as the independence movements only chance.

      What you said about her response to the child abused by j. Rennie, sickens me to the core.

      Scotland needs real leadership. The SNP is not up to the job.

    249. Hatuey says:

      Thanks MaggieC. It’s indicative that three letters were sent out.

      There have been huge developments in the last couple of days. As these letters hint at, we now know high ranking members of the government had meetings with the complainers before (in November 2017) they even made complaints.

    250. Lothianlad says:

      Jockanese wind talker,

      Very revealing about keir stammer.

      His links to saville are particularly disturbing.

      Keep exposing them!

    251. Lothianlad says:

      I laughed loudly when george Robertsom stated that ” devolution would kill the SNP”!

      It became a bigger joke from 2007 until the present day.

      How ironic that given the events that have occurred since sturgeon took the reigns, particularly from 2017, that the SNP is imploding right now.

      We must make sure that independence is first and foremost our priority. clear out the careerists and the woke brigade, and take control of the strategy going forward.

    252. cirsium says:

      Yesterday I referred to a line from the film “All The President’s Men” “They’re not very bright guys and things got out of hand.”

      Did this party official not consider all the possible consequences of “weaving” the fund into SNP accounts?

      How did these Civil servants think that the retrospective application of a Code of Conduct was fair and legal? ttps://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=12898&mode=pdf

      Things seem to have got out of hand with industrial policy as well.
      https://sourcenews.scot/robin-mcalpine-the-renewable-jobs-failure-is-the-disaster-of-our-era-and-inward-investment-is-the-problem/
      https://www.energyvoice.com/opinion/254648/scotland-has-a-problem-when-it-comes-to-manufacturing-net-zero-technology/

    253. twathater says:

      Thanks Ian B and Maggie C for your links to MacKinnons BAD MEMORY in the link she said she misremembered that (she may have inadvertently told ms B that she MAY become the investigating officer) but in her previous written testimony held by the committee she TOLD Jackie Baillie that she did not tell ms B that she May become the I Officer so she is not misremembering, she is shiting herself that the lies are becoming harder to remember and control, as we all know to continue telling lies everyone involved must ALL remember to stick to those lies otherwise the excrement hits the fan

    254. Sensibledave says:

      Shug 4.58

      Our monitoring systems picked up some chatter that you were enquiring into my well being.

      My battalion is stood down at present. Nothing to do. Mission accomplished.

    255. Sylvia says:

      I was googling “employment lawyer-Scottish Government” – as mentioned at the Committee meeting yesterday. I found this job advert (now closed) 01 October 2019 at midnight. I truly thought I was reading wrong!!

      “We are currently seeking applications for 20 LAWYERS within the Government Legal Service for Scotland (GLSS) based in Edinburgh”. 20!!!

      See here! – https://applications.work-for-scotland.org/pages/job_search_view.aspx?jobId=14932&JobIndex=15

    256. North chiel says:

      “ Jockanese wind talker @0327 pm “ . Sir Keir pro Israeli position hardly surprising from reading his Wikipedia page including his ‘personal life ‘ entry.

    257. MaggieC says:

      Hatuey @ 5.53 pm ,

      Your welcome , It’s interesting that as more of these civil servants are called before the committee , it just shows how much they were all heavily involved in the setting up of their plan to go after Alex Salmond

      The whole thing stinks and as I said earlier they should be having their desks cleared and shown the door immediately .

      I’ve never believed a word about the charges that were brought against Alex Salmond and also many of my family and female friends didn’t believe the charges either .

      Everyone from the Scottish Government , Civil Service and the women who brought the “ supposed “ charges should all be up in court on perjury charges .

    258. deerhill says:

      As someone suggested some time ago, why does everyone not write to the treasurer and demand a refund of their donation to the “RAF”?

      If it is “instantly” available it should be no problem to Mr. Beattie to furnish a refund.

      If, on the other hand, people are met with quibbles and obfuscation, they are entitled to draw their own conclusions.

    259. CameronB Brodie says:

      Some may find the health of Scotland’s democracy to be a joking matter, though probably only those who support Westminster’s open hostility towards international law, and its’ institutional determinate to empower far-right English Torydum. As if England speaks for the whole of Britain.

      https://social-epistemology.com/2014/08/06/preserving-cultural-identity-and-subjectivity-for-a-psychology-of-multiculturalism-kwang-kuo-hwang/

    260. ` BBC Scotland political editor Brian Taylor to retire`,

      good riddance to BBC rubbish,

      one day, after we get our independence, these paid Brutish propagandists and misinformers need brought to account,

      their foreign paid services to denegrate, belittle and run down their own country will never be forgotten.

    261. Hatuey says:

      Of the five scandals listed below, which is most likely to bring down the Murrell Regime?

      1) the disgraceful handling of covid-19
      2) the disappearance of ring-fenced donations
      3) the apparent plot to imprison Salmond
      4) the diabolical failure to secure a second independence referendum
      5) stupid policies such as GRA and the Hate Crime Bill

    262. MaggieC says:

      Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

      The Agenda has been published for the next meeting ,

      Next Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints Meeting Date: 12th Meeting, Tuesday 03 November 2020 Location : The Robert Burns Room (Committee Room)

      1)The Committee will next meet on 3 November at 10:15am, when it will take evidence from Paul Cackette, former Director of Legal Services, Scottish Government; and then from Sarah Davidson, former Director General Organisational Development and Operations, Scottish Government.

    263. Scotspine says:

      Anyone hear John Beattie about 4.45pm today? Couldn’t believe what I was hearing. He run through the Scot Gov Covid levels using the Bullseye game show theme tune as background music. Simply trolling and taking the piss now.

    264. Tinto Chiel says:

      @Jockanese Wind Talker 3.27: an impressively-compiled “rap sheet” on Starmer.

      Re the anti-semitism smear tactic, we should remember Gareth Wardell was treated similarly (and almost instantly) by the SNP leadership, yet the party’s weird woo-woo wokelings can abuse opponents with complete impunity whenever they like.

    265. Stuart MacKay says:

      Hatuey

      6) all those operations and postponed treatments because covid had priority.

      OK, so it’s related to 1) and it’s a slow-burning issue that won’t get the headlines but my guess the people who were affected are pretty pissed off and are going to vote accordingly. Once the SNP takes a hit and most likely loses their majority then the wolves in the party will pounce – and no we won’t be better off for it.

    266. Dan says:

      Obviously a big loss for all the hetro ladies out there, but I’ll never I’ll never go #TappsAff again for fear of being accused of anti-semmitism. 😉

      On that subject…

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

    267. Robert Graham says:

      A lot o/t
      I wonder where the Labour Party are moving their headquarters to
      I guess its a toss up between
      Twickenham and Tel Aviv now that the plan is complete
      Who knows it’s anyone’s guess a lot of people now without a party to Vote for in England exactly the same as us in Scotland lots of parties with no credible leadership or visible Function

    268. willie says:

      Well we’ve had flatten the curve, route out of lockdown, circuit breaker and now the best yet….a firebreak!

      So, yes, we flattened the curve and we danced the steps out of lockdown taking all the carefully orchestrated steps.

      Now we’re dancing the steps back into lockdown as the numbers allegedly climb.

      It’s like the friggin hokey cokey putting our left foot in and our right leg out as we shake it all about. Thank fuck Tsar Nicola knows what she’s doing at the Daily Briefing.

      And now a ” Firebreak ” ………. boom boom!

    269. Lizg says:

      Dan @ 7.25
      As long as the Barba Papa rain cape is safe ( non negotiable as far as Im concerned )I’m sure we’ll be fine -:)

    270. cynicalHighlander says:

      Still no recepients of these imaginary emails sent by treasurer coming to light! Suprised not.

    271. mrbfaethedee says:

      @Grey Gull (12:01 pm) –
      “Do you think all this forgetting and misdirecting is a deliberate attempt to muddy the waters or, as it has been suggested by others on here, that they are totally incompetent?”

      Is a very good question.

      I think the submissions after misleading the enquiry are deliberate.
      It means they can present a ‘narrative’ account the way they want to; people ‘get’ stories best – better than facts.
      Then they correct their lie after the fact (arse covered), but the narrative is in place by then. The little correction is an atom by itself – nobody is out there rewriting the narrative to include the new truth (where the new truth might make the rest of the story less plausible).

      (well, thankfully Stu does often go to the trouble of showing the story with facts put back in place, it’s why they love him)

    272. holymacmoses says:

      Sylvia says:
      29 October, 2020 at 6:28 pm
      I was googling “employment lawyer-Scottish Government” – as mentioned at the Committee meeting yesterday. I found this job advert (now closed) 01 October 2019 at midnight. I truly thought I was reading wrong!!

      “We are currently seeking applications for 20 LAWYERS within the Government Legal Service for Scotland (GLSS) based in Edinburgh”. 20!!!

      This is a cracker Sylvia. Do you reckon all of the old ones have left, were sacked , didn’t exist?
      Good money, many I say:-)

    273. Sylvia says:

      holymacmoses @ 8:20 I would expect they were “expanding the team”!’Forewarned is forearmed’

    274. paul says:

      “ BBC Scotland political editor Brian Taylor to retire “

      No doubt on doctors orders.

      Obesity,financial or physical, is a great problem in our society though only the former creates long term problems.

    275. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Maggie C –

      Thanks for the heads-up about next Tuesday’s committee session.

      Just wondering if anyone can help get a chunk of it on here as I’m unable to – I’ve been trying to copy/paste the final page of the following link but it won’t let me.

      Annex: Note from James Hynd of 2 November 2018, “Interpretation of para 10 of Procedure”

      It’s an important page – can someone with the techy know-how please grab it for us?

      https://www.parliament.scot/HarassmentComplaintsCommittee/20201103SGHHCPublicPapers.pdf

    276. cynicalHighlander says:

      @holymacmoses

      Expanding the Wolfe pack.

    277. Effijy says:

      Update on Peoples Action on Section 30

      Dear Backers
      Conversations today with respect to the upcoming hearing on 4th of November 2020 have left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I apologise in advance for the tone of this correspondence but sometimes the band-aid just needs to be ripped of.

      Open Justice
      The first thing I will bring to your attention is open Justice. There seems to be a conceited attempt (that’s not a spelling mistake) to try and obscure what’s going on in this case from public view. Open Justice, that is to say the right for the public to see what is going on and for the parties to have the public see what’s going on, is not a vague nicety. It’s a human right enshrined under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
      So, many have asked what is going on in the case and I have tried to explain the different facets of it. But the fact is, the one bit of advice I can impart is that in order to defend your rights you need to exercise them. This is your case be a part of it by monitoring the proceedings for yourself.
      I highly suggest that anyone who is able, watch the proceedings on the 4th of November for themselves. I have been asked how you can do that and it is quite simple.
      This hearing will be conducted via video conference which means the public can view it and we have been assured that anyone who wants to see it, can. You can request access to view the hearing yourself by calling the Court of Session in Edinburgh or by sending them an email and telling them you would like access to the “Webex” hearing for the case Martin J Keatings vs Advocate General and Others (A76/20), Lady Carmichael Presiding on the 4th of November 2020.
      Contact details can be found here: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/the-courts/court-locations/court-of-session
      Many eyes make no funny business.

      If you happen to be a live streamer, news outlet etc and you wish to broadcast/stream/record proceedings then you can request to do so by completing this form and returning it to the court here: https://www.judiciary.scot/docs/librariesprovider3/judiciarydocuments/broadcast-protocol/applicationtorecordcivilandcriminalappealsandcivillegaldebatesfirstinstancenewsorlivestreaming.pdf?sfvrsn=48521c10_2

      Access to Justice
      In other news, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Lord Advocate and the Scottish Ministers (that is to say the Scottish Government) are deliberately trying to undermine access to justice in our case by trying to deplete our funds. We are the pursuers in this case and we’re represented by some of the most astute legal minds at Scotland and even we can’t tell exactly who is pulling the bloody strings.
      Tonight I have been told that the Scottish Government Legal Directorate will not concede expenses for the amendment procedure which has been ongoing for the past month to remove all references of the Scottish Government, caused by a motion for an amendment procedure by the Scottish Government Legal Directorate due to the Scottish Government withdrawing from the case.
      As you are all aware, the Scottish Government have supposedly withdrawn from proceedings. Yet, the Scottish Government Legal Directorate (their inhouse legal counsel) remain tied to the Lord Advocate under a constitutional abnormality that also makes the Lord Advocate a member of the Scottish Cabinet. Schrodinger’s cat to the rescue – The Scottish Ministers are both alive and dead simultaneously.
      Let me be clear. The Scottish Ministers were called to this case to represent the SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT. The Lord Advocate was called to this case to represent the SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT. The two are not the same and the principle of separation of powers between Parliament and Government in this sort of case means that it is inappropriate for the Lord Advocate to be representing both the parliament and the government. That’s because often the policy of the government is not the same as a parliament. If only this was Schrodinger’s Cat, at least we’d have the consolation prize of having the Scottish Ministers locked in a box.
      If you try to be a jack of all trades you end up doing nothing especially well.
      The Scottish Government has supposedly withdrawn from the case (note the word supposedly) but in the previous hearing, what we heard is counsel instructed for the Lord Advocate, advancing arguments of the Scottish Government with the input of the Scottish Government Legal Directorate.
      It’s such a mess that we have asked (and not yet received) in these proceedings the legitimate question of who exactly is in charge here – who is actually leading this proverbial donkey. The Scottish Government have declared themselves out! They should be out! Period!
      But the fact that the arguments being advanced by the Lord Advocate by counsel instructed by the Scottish Government Legal Directorate seems to suggest that they are batting for the other team by trying to advance arguments which play right into the hands of the advocate general (that’s the UK Government’s council – i.e. Boris Johnson and Co’s legal council) and that naturally leads us to rightly come to the conclusion that the Scottish Governments withdrawal is in name only. It’s the proverbial Scottish Government mud ball trying to cover itself in Lord Advocate coconut and pass itself off as a snowball.
      After all, if you were the Scottish Government (an SNP Government proclaiming to want independence) the last thing you would want is to be seen trying to deliberately undermine a case which would establish that it is legally competent for Scotland to hold a referendum without the permission of Westminster. And yet – here it is in full view – I eagerly await the 15 articles tomorrow and the intervention of “that MP who shall not be named” going on about a section 30 order that will never materialise.
      And there are many out there who will likely decry this post, loyal to the current SNP administration, but you need to be told the facts as they are –
      The facts are really this simple. There are only two ways to have a vote on independence (although there are subcategories). There’s a vote with permission of Westminster (like 2014) and there are votes without Westminster permission (a referendum without permission, an election as a referendum etc etc). Any plan which is not a section 30 referendum (with permission) is a referendum/vote without a section 30 (without permission) – It’s that simple.
      This case is simple as well – we’re trying to prove that Scotland DOES NOT NEED PERMISSION
      And the Scottish Ministers (Scottish Government / SNP Government) are deliberately trying to undermine that.
      Nicola Sturgeon stood in Holyrood and she said she intended to bring a “draft bill” to Holyrood for a second referendum. She stated that she intended the SNP to stand on that platform. However, even in her own plan for Government (which she was reading from at the time) at page 126. she made it clear that any vote without section 30 would likely be challenged by Westminster. That’s not the words verbatim but it is often referred to as a “referendum beyond legal challenge”.
      And here’s the crux. When that legal challenge happens, the question in that legal challenge will be “Does the Scottish Parliament have the constitutional right to legislate for a second referendum without consent?” – Which is exactly the point of the Peoples Action on Section 30 – It is to establish that the Scottish Parliament does have that power and that it does not need to go to Westminster and beg for a section 30 order which two prime ministers have already refused.
      In other words – The Scottish National Party is seeking to hinder a case, get to election time, promise a bill which it does not know is legally competent, get re-elected, get refused a section 30 order and then find their bill challenged leading to exactly the same case that we’re currently bringing – but don’t worry backers – if that happens you get to pay for the case 5 times.
      I’m sorry, but planning to campaign on the promise of a referendum bill which you know might not be competent and which you know will be challenged is at the least dishonest and at worst a fraud perpetrated on the general electorate.
      We know this bill exists – We’ve actively called on the Scottish Government to produce it. They know it will likely be challenged, so why don’t they want to establish that their own bill is legally competent? They are either being naive, stupid or are so consumed with keeping a firm grip on everything to do with the independence movement that they have been blinded to the most basic of logic! And they should be called out on it! The plan B advocates (referendum by election) understand this all too well, which is why their own motion at the SNP conference explicitly states in one of the ancillary paragraphs that they must ensure the legal competency of legislating for a second referendum without the consent of Westminster – In other words – they know that if we win our case – their plan B is a go as well! Is this the reason the SNP leadership are being so stupid with this case? Is it to try and quash their own in-house plan B being put forward by their own members? Only the SNP leadership can answer that question and only their members can push them to answer that question.
      If you haven’t already cottoned on, you backed this case through crowdfunding and Government have no issue with trying to deplete those funds, but ask yourself a question, whose money are they using to do that exactly?
      And the penny drops! The Scottish Government, the Lord Advocate, The Scottish Government Legal Directorate and the Advocate General representing the UK Government are all funded by your tax money. The Scottish Government and the Lord Advocate want you to pay for this multiple times. You’re paying for all sides this time, and guess what? If they get their way, you’ll pay for it all again when this so-called bill gets challenged by Westminster again. We’ve handed them the ability to ensure the competency of their own bill so they can go to the electorate in may and say: “This is our referendum bill – It has been legally established that we do not need the permission of Westminster – whether Westminster agrees with it or not, this bill will pass, a vote will happen!” – But nope! They have opted to shoot at their own foot and blow off everything between the kneecap!
      The Scottish Governments interventions in this case (bearing in mind they had the right not to intervene from the start) was to first seek a delay, then try to slip one in via the back door, then drop that motion on the last day and try to weedle out of expenses. Then when it was clear that statements (reported in the news due to a leak by one of the defenders) like “it’s not for the pursuer to stand in the shoes of parliamentarians” would become public and that we were actually proceeding with the case, they decided to drop out.
      Now it seems there dropout was not in fact a dropout, but in fact that the counsel for the Lord Advocate (who had also represented the Scottish Government up to that point) seems to be advancing items which the Scottish Government first sought to advance themselves (and which to be honest they really wouldn’t want to see their own members finding out what they were seeking to advance).
      And if you don’t believe this, I highly suggest you take a look at the court of session court rolls for the 4th of November, you will see that the opposing party is NOT the Lord Advocate, but the Scottish Government Legal Directorate. Yes! You guessed it, the By-order roll hearing to establish the process moving forward and also the hearing to have the record finally closed is occasioned by the Scottish Government Legal Directorate working for/under/over/around/inside the Lord Advocate.
      I guess what I am saying is, you might not want to miss the hearing on the 4th because it is going to be mighty interesting!

    278. cynicalHighlander says:

      21Annex: Note from James Hynd of 2 November 2018“Interpretation of para 10 of ProcedureParagraph 10 of the Procedure relating to the appointment of an Investigating Officer (IO) provides that: ‘that person will have had no prior involvement with any aspect of the matterbeing raised’.James Hynd (Deputy Director, Cabinet, Parliament and Governance Division) has noted the following considerations which he took into account in drafting this part of the Procedure:1.It is standing practice in the SG’s disciplinary procedures that investigating officers should have had no involvement in the complaint to be investigated. Thisstanding practicewas therefore adopted and incorporated into the Procedure. 2.This approach is intended to ensure that no person who was an actor in, or witness to, the incident(s) atthe time they occurred, or in their subsequent aftermath, should be appointed as the Investigating Officer. 3.By way of illustration, applying this approach would in practice mean that an IO would not be drawn from those who, for example:•Had some direct involvement in the matter being investigated around the time the matter is said to have occurred; •Could be called as a witness to provide evidence as part of the investigation;•Became involved in the matter under complaint as a consequence of having a direct line management responsibility around the time of the incident for either the complainant or the person subject of the complaint;•Was an immediate colleague of either the complainant or the person subject of the complaint and who may therefore have had, or could reasonably be assumed to have had, some involvement in the matter;•Had a relationship with either of the parties at the time of the incident, or before or subsequently, which would call into question their ability to be impartial.The intention of this approach is clearly to avoid giving rise to any actual or perceived conflict of interest on the part of the IO. The operation of this part ofthe Procedure is not meant to preclude an IO being appointed who had some foreknowledge of the circumstances of the complaint as long as that foreknowledge would not compromise the IO’s ability to be an impartial collector of facts, and as long as the IO had no direct involvement in the matter around the time it occurred.”

    279. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @cynicalHighlander –

      Now that’s magic!

      😉

    280. cynicalHighlander says:

      The impossible will take a little longer. Nay probs IanB

    281. MaggieC says:

      Ian Brotherhood @ 8.37 pm ,

      Here it is , I’ve broken it down a bit into paragraphs to make it easier to read ,

      Annex: Note from James Hynd of 2 November 2018 “Interpretation of para 10 of Procedure

      Paragraph 10 of the Procedure relating to the appointment of an Investigating Officer (IO) provides that: ‘that person will have had no prior involvement with any aspect of the matter being raised’. James Hynd (Deputy Director, Cabinet, Parliament and Governance Division) has noted the following considerations which he took into account in drafting this part of the Procedure:

      1. It is standing practice in the SG’s disciplinary procedures that investigating officers should have had no involvement in the complaint to be investigated. This standing practice was therefore adopted and incorporated into the Procedure.

      2. This approach is intended to ensure that no person who was an actor in, or witness to, the incident(s) at the time they occurred, or in their subsequent aftermath, should be appointed as the Investigating Officer.

      3. By way of illustration, applying this approach would in practice mean that an IO would not be drawn from those who, for example:
      • Had some direct involvement in the matter being investigated around the time the matter is said to have occurred;
      • Could be called as a witness to provide evidence as part of the investigation;

      • Became involved in the matter under complaint as a consequence of having a direct line management responsibility around the time of the incident for either the complainant or the person subject of the complaint;
      • Was an immediate colleague of either the complainant or the person subject of the complaint and who may therefore have had, or could reasonably be assumed to have had, some involvement in the matter;

      • Had a relationship with either of the parties at the time of the incident, or before or subsequently, which would call into question their ability to be impartial.

      The intention of this approach is clearly to avoid giving rise to any actual or perceived conflict of interest on the part of the IO. The operation of this part of the Procedure is not meant to preclude an IO being appointed who had some foreknowledge of the circumstances of the complaint as long as that foreknowledge would not compromise the IO’s ability to be an impartial collector of facts, and as long as the IO had no direct involvement in the matter around the time it occurred.”

    282. MaggieC says:

      Ian Brotherhood ,
      Cynical Highlander,

      I see that you’ve now got 2 copies of the page ,

      What’s that slogan “ Buy one get one free “ LOL .

    283. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @cynicalHighlander & MaggieC –

      Thanks both.

      Still don’t understand why it wouldn’t let me just Control C & V but doesn’t matter – ye’s got it!

      Hoots aplenty.

      😉

    284. cynicalHighlander says:

      @MaggieC

      Your presentation is far better, bows.

    285. Dan says:

      Barrhead Boy podcast tomorrow morning at 9am with Iain Lawson and Jason Michael.

      https://twitter.com/Scotpol1314/status/1321493071352258560

    286. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Thanks @Tinto Chiel says at 7:13 pm, I will continue to update as more comes to light.

      If I remember rightly some of the SNPs “weird woo-woo wokelings” were caught bonny with proper anti-Jewish abusive posts on twitter and fuck all was done, I think it was some of ‘Daddy Bears’ Bearded Lady Twittler Youth Battalion.

    287. boris says:

      Nicola and her supporters were warned that their proposals were toxic and the debate over legal changes would be protracted, divisive and perhaps unsuccessful, but they decided to press on with the change.

      As projected the proposals polarized opinion within the Party, many believing a change to “self-declaration” would eliminate women’s sex-protected rights and undermine data which is dependent on knowing if a person is a man or a woman. A number of women’s groups added their voices to the protests.

      https://caltonjock.com/2020/10/29/where-angels-fear-to-tread-queering-the-pitch-of-snp-woke-subversives/

    288. CameronB Brodie says:

      I see the moral competence of the Lord Advocate’s legal practice is under scrutiny. So here’s a look at “Post-positivism and the notion of practice”. This is why I’m quite certain he’s as hostile towards due legal process and international human rights law, as any English Tory determined to empower their anti-social ideology.

      https://dfddip.ua.es/es/documentos/vega-postpositivism-and-practice.pdf

    289. Alf Baird says:

      Effijy @ 8.38

      Interesting and rather confirms the ‘ScotGov’ is still a department and hence part of the UKGov, and SNP ‘Ministers’ are either impotent or complicit, maybe both. In other words, the SNP elite aspire to ‘run’ only a colonial administration and their desire for a referendum is not serious – more especially now they have no money left to campaign with.

      Which also suggests the Holyrood enquiry really needs to focus on those persons who ultimately direct and control the actions of ‘senior’ ScotGov civil servants, i.e. line managers higher up in UKGov. Nobody seriously thought ‘Scottish’ branch office civil servants did this all of their own bat, did they?

    290. Ian Brotherhood says:

      This is from the 26th Oct letter from John Swinney to Linda Fabiani, where he’s answering specific questions from the committee:

      Update on the search to establish whether Barbara Alison received a specific text from the Permanent Secretary.

      The Committee sought an update on the efforts Barbara Allison has made to establish whether she had received a text from the Permanent Secretary. I understand that Ms Allison has written today to the Committee to clarify this matter following searches conducted by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.’

      So, wait a wee minute…

      She has written ‘today’?

      That’s the 26th October i.e. Monday.

      She appeared at the committee on Tuesday and delivered the spiel about not remembering sending anything to Leslie Evans which could’ve resulted in the infamous ‘Lost battle/win war’ text.

      But she had already written to the committee the previous day ‘following searches by CO and PFS’?

      Huh??

      What did those searches find that she was required to clarify in a letter on Monday which she couldn’t remember the next morning?

      Here’s the Swinney letter:

      https://www.parliament.scot/HarassmentComplaintsCommittee/20201026DFMtoConvener_(JR_and_also_corr).pdf

    291. Hatuey says:

      Of course, the most important part of the Hynd note is the date at the top; “2 November 2018”.

    292. LeggyPeggy says:

      Another update ,

      Still no email from Colin Beattie .

    293. Hatuey says:

      Ian Brotherhood, we knew on Tuesday that she had changed her tune on the ‘conspiratorial’ text and admitted that she was indeed a recipient. It was also covered in Newspapers on Tuesday morning. https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/alex-salmond-inquiry-civil-servant-admits-she-received-conspiratorial-text-message-3016066

      She was asked if she had prompted that text from Evans – with a text of her own – and it all got a bit murky. At that point she conceded that she had deleted some texts but not all relating to these matters.

      JM also admitted on Tuesday to deleting texts that may or may not have been of interest and relevance to the Inquiry. As I said at the time, it’s odd behavior.

    294. Sylvia says:

      Jeremy Corbyn being destroyed – Alex Salmond being destroyed – anyone noticing?

    295. Hatuey says:

      From the Scotsman article linked above:

      “The text from Leslie Evans reads: “Thanks Barbara – battle maybe lost, but not the war. Hope you are having lovely & well deserved break. L”

      Ms Allison then replies: “Thanks Leslie. It is lovely here. My mind and thoughts are with you all there tho. Best wishes. Bx”

      The tendency to drop the “Thanks Barbara” part in reporting of this is interesting. We can only guess what was said by Allison to prompt Evans to say “battle maybe lost, but not the war…”

      Nice timing on the holiday. I wonder if she was somewhere hot and sunny as Salmond was fighting for his life in the Edinburgh courts.

    296. MaggieC says:

      Ian Brotherhood @ 10.25 pm

      Barbara Allison’s letter dated 26th October is the very last one from her on the written evidence page , It’s the one that’s (216 KB)

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/115516.aspx

      I’ve just posted the link to the written evidence page again as some of the links are not opening again because of the way the pdf shows up at the end of them ,

    297. Sylvia says:

      Hatuey @ 10;54 Ms Allison was on holiday in the Maldives

    298. Grey Gull says:

      Hague’s @10.54
      Aye, what was it Leslie Evans was saying thanks to? Craig Murray suggests a couple of ideas. I know which one I think is more likely https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/10/the-circle-of-amnesiacs/

    299. Grey Gull says:

      Sorry – Hatuey

    300. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Hatuey, Maggie, Grey Gull –

      What I’m struggling with is why she was prompted to write to the committee following ‘searches’ by the CO and the PFS – what did their searches reveal that she didn’t already know? And what were they searching for?

      Did they manage to find her original text? In which case, why did she maintain the line that she ‘couldn’t remember’ the text and had deleted it as a matter of course when she’d been writing a letter about it the previous day??

      In any event – wasn’t CO/PFS involvement worthy of mention on Tuesday, by her or the committee?

    301. A Person says:

      -Sylvia-

      Yes and no. Corbyn was electoral poison for his party and couldn’t even beat the useless May. What’s been done to him is a bit contrived but probably necessary from Labour’s point of view. Salmond while disliked strongly by some was popular and effective. No reason not to have him onside- unless you were a power-hungry egomaniac…

      Unless you’re saying that this is the British government getting rid of its enemies- in which case I agree with you. Corbyn got slater 24/7 to the point of there being a coup of hatchet-job books, riddled with lies, written about him. In which case why isn’t NS being attacked like this… hmmm ?

    302. MaggieC says:

      Ian Brotherhood and others ,

      Here’s the link to the full written report from Tuesday’s meeting again , I’m still working my way through reading it all , I read part of it and cannot believe what they have said and have to keep going back and re-reading the same paragraph over and over again just to make sense of it all .

      I just cannot believe the way that the civil servants have been allowed to give their evidence to the committee and then have to submit further written evidence that they conveniently forgot in the first place .

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=12898&mode=pdf

      I did post it yesterday at 6.31 pm on this post but with so many btl comments it may have been missed .

    303. Hatuey says:

      Hi Ian, it’s a good question. Here’s what I think happened.

      Evidence was gathered as part of the criminal trial and subject to ‘equality of arms’ rules it had to be shared with all sides. As a consequence of that, I believe it was known to Salmond’s lawyers that these texts existed.

      There’s a lot of overlap, as you’d expect, with the Government case against Salmond, the CoS proceedings, the criminal trial, and now the Inquiry.

      We can only speculate as to why Allison seemed to forget about the existence of texts, why she deleted some of them, and why she initially misled the Inquiry.

      This is what “we” are up against.

    304. kapelmeister says:

      Grey Gull @11:01 pm

      Yeah. Amnesiacs indeed. Civil servants with minds like sieves.

      The senior sievel servants of Scotland.

    305. Effijy says:

      Corbyn is a sacrifice on the alter of right wing extremism.

      The rich Tories control the UK media and as such nothing left of centre
      Is allowed the oxygen necessary to exist.

      Stammer is another faint photocopy of the Tory party
      Just like Blair and Brown were.

      I don’t want to remember much of what Thatcher said but I recall her
      Saying that her greatest achievement in politics was the formation of
      New Labour.

      It made all of the 3 main UK parties right of centre.

      Corbyn May be at fault for not having his finger on the pulse and may not
      have seen the inadequacy of Labour’s process for dealing with claims of
      Anti-Semitism, but I don’t believe he could spend a lifetime in politics for
      his character to be revealed only now.

    306. cirsium says:

      @sylvia, 10.43
      Jeremy Corbyn being destroyed – Alex Salmond being destroyed – anyone noticing?

      Yes. Add “Julian Assange being destroyed” to that list and then read this lecture from Jonathan Sumption “This is how freedom dies” https://archive.is/XBdtw

    307. Grey gull says:

      Kapelmeister@11.23

      Senior sievel servants. Like it!

      Ian B, Maggie and Hatuey
      Smoke and mirrors. I know it’s not very insightful but it’s how it comes across. These texts and WhatsApp messages exist and it would appear are known about by quite a few folk. Just wish they could be made public.

    308. Michael Laing says:

      @ Cirsium, 11.38pm: To your list I would add Tommy Sheridan, who the powers-that-be put through the wringer until they got the result they wanted. ‘If at first not found guilty, try, try again’, to paraphrase a famous Scottish quotation. Tommy Sheridan was of course a massive thorn in the side of the system and a powerful fighter for ordinary people. As with Alex Salmond, I have always strongly doubted that he was guilty of any crime.

    309. holymacmoses says:

      My guess, given the date and the attitudes being shown by these women is that the ‘Thanks’ bit of the message is simply good wishes for the New Year – it being likely that they hadn’t contacted each other since before Christmas.
      They all seem to be remarkably relaxed in the treachery they undertook in trying to *frame* Mr Salmond

    310. MaggieC says:

      Ian B , Grey Gull , Hatuey , Kapellmeister and others , I had to go back and look for this from Craig Murray on 8th January 2019 ,

      “ The Salmond Stitch-Up – the Incredible Facts, and why Mackinnon and Evans Must Be Sacked

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/01/the-salmond-stitch-up-the-incredible-facts-and-why-mackinnon-and-evans-must-be-sacked/#click=https://t.co/KULqtYU6TI

    311. Hatuey says:

      Cirsium, Salmond hasn’t been “destroyed”. His stock is high and expected to rise. And those who conspired to destroy him are being forced to lie and hide the truth of what they done.

    312. Joe says:

      ‘Salmond while disliked strongly by some was popular and effective. No reason not to have him onside- unless you were a power-hungry egomaniac…’

      If I had plans for Scotland that involved using apparently nationalist politicians to harness the momentum of the independence movement to achieve goals that were against the interests of independence and Scots themselves my first task would be to eliminate the 1 man who could literally rally the bulk of the independence cause back on course, and behind him, with not much more than a couple of words.

      The way I would get rid of him would be through total character assassination, preferably finished off with criminal convictions.

      I would never breathe easily while he was free to speak and/or act.

    313. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’m not suggesting the pandemic has been handled well, or that our rights are not under threat. But that is the natural state of legal vulnerability of Scots, as English Torydum considers us sub-human, apparently. Well, they clearly do not think Scots have a legally defensible cultural or national identity, guaranteed under Treaty law.

      https://www.fph.org.uk/public-health-ethics-and-law/covid-19-explaining-the-legal-and-ethical-dimensions-and-providing-professional-public-guidance/

    314. MaggieC says:

      Ian B and others ,

      This article was in Wednesday’s National after the committee meeting

      “ Flawed harassment policy used against Alex Salmond still exists, official admits “

      https://archive.vn/j3bhH

      And the interesting comment about it was this from Craig Murray on his twitter page ,

      “ This article and the committee both spectacularly miss the point. Of course the Scottish government has not changed the unlawful policy. It was only ever a one shot weapon designed to “get” Alex Salmond. It will never be used again, so why correct it? “ .

      https://twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1321157250740793346?s=20

    315. Lizg says:

      OT..
      I’m hearing that Hairmyers Hospital is on fire ?
      Any body any news of it ?

    316. Stan Broadwood says:

      Joe 12.03am.

      Spot on Joe, right on the money.

      Sturgeon and her merry band of crooks are starting to get sloppy.

      They are starting to trip themselves up over their own lies.

      Note in question, the latest evidence given at the hearing, it’s just one lie after another.

    317. Stan Broadwood says:

      Brilliant detective work by Wings Inc…

      Keep up the brilliant forensic digging Wingers, you are doing us all proud.

    318. Stan Broadwood says:

      We now have two aims in life,,,

      1. Win Scottish Independence.

      2. See the Sturgeon Gang put behind bars for a very long time.

    319. crazycat says:

      @ holymacmoses at 11.49

      If the missing tweet was an innocuous new year greeting, why delete that and leave the incriminating follow-up?

      The other way round would make sense, as would deleting them all.

    320. Stan Broadwood says:

      Go Wingers Go!!!

      Go right for the jugular.

      No mercy!!!

    321. MaggieC says:

      Lizg @ 12.07 am ,

      I’ve only seen this so far about the fire at Hairmyres Hospital , hopefully all staff and fire brigade in attendance are safe and well ,

      https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/6217901/fire-hairmyres-hospital-east-kilbride-police/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    322. Famous15 says:

      Stan Broadband your glee at the distress in the YES camp is pure revealing pish.

      Get back under your rock ,ya bam.

    323. Stan Broadwood says:

      More evidence in question regarding the Sturgeon Gang getting sloppy is their attempt at trying to justify the money disappearing from the “ring fenced” indyRef2 money.

      Very sloppy.

    324. Famous15 says:

      Sorry,I should have been more polite.

      Desist.

    325. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous15 breaks cover.

      She just can’t stand her Nicola being exposed as a CROOK.

      Take a hike Famous.

    326. Famous15 says:

      Stan has no interest in independence. I suspect he plays in a flute band in drag.

    327. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous 15

      Have a look around,,, it’s only you and a couple of others who are left supporting the wee CROOK Sturgeon

    328. Famous15 says:

      I only support independence. Doubt you do.

    329. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous15

      I think you better aim that last post at Sturgeon.

      I think you will find it is HER who has no Interest in SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE.

      Dry your eyes Famous.

      You keep stumbling on to the wrong website.

      This is a pro Indy site,,, NOT a pro Nicola site.

      Now move along,,, you are holding us back from trying to win Independence and get the Sturgeon Gang put away for trying to con the people of Scotland.

    330. Famous15 says:

      Stan’s shift must have ended.

    331. Famous15 says:

      Stan is an OO.Bully boy.

    332. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous15

      Like your wee sidekick Pig Sty, you just can’t handle Sturgeon being called a little lying bastard.

      Go, prove us all wrong, start sticking the boot into Sturgeon.

      She is a fraudster.

      You are a pain in the arse.

    333. Famous15 says:

      Stan,up to your knees in bullshit.

      Lay out your plans for independence.say just one positive sentance.

    334. Famous15 says:

      Sorry…sundance.

    335. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous

      You’re late with the 77th accusations.

      They usually come after your second post.

      And by the way, is this going to be your only contribution to today’s debate???

      What a fuckin roaster.

    336. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous15

      I think you’ll find any members of the orange order, or any other Unionist organisation will be fully supportive of the Sturgeon Adminstration, because they also want to remain in the Union,,, Just like that little lying bastard Sturgeon.

    337. Famous15 says:

      Stan ,just one little sentence in support of independence.

      You do not need to be too philosophical but one little idea you have which supports independence.

      Well,just say why YOU support independence.

      Waiting.

    338. A Person says:

      -Joe-

      As usual I have expressed myself poorly. If I was Starmer, trying to make Labour more electable, I’d have plenty of reasons to expel Corbyn- swing voters can’t stand him. If I was Sturgeon, trying to increase support for Indy, I’d have no reason to get rid of Salmond as he’s a great campaigner popular with the grassroots and many apolitical voters. So the only reasons Sturgeon could have to go after Salmond is due to malicious factors.

      The British state, however, has plenty of reasons to “neutralise” both, and I’m saying that as someone who really isn’t a Corbyn fan.

      Also note that Corbyn has been suspended from Labour- he could be re-admitted, and he’d probably get re-elected in his constituency anyway- whereas Alex nearly got sent to prison, a rather different level of problem.

    339. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous 15

      Independence is normal.

      Even arseholes like you know that Famous.

    340. CameronB Brodie says:

      Independence is normal. Trolling indy sites is also natural, if you’re hostile towards diversity and natural rights. So here’s a look at “My body and other objects: The internal limits of self?ownership”, which is a perspective that English Torydum is hostile towards. As is the SNP’s NEC and ‘our’ Lord Advocate, apparently. 🙁

      https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ejop.12439

    341. twathater says:

      Don’t know if this has been posted upthread here’s a link to Martin Keatings latest fight on our behalf, does this look like the actions of a govt who want indy

      http://r.mail.crowdjustice.co.uk/mk/mr/cSwmWiIWD85LUeagA7B_L85TMIcpdpROzytjQmeqKSnIp4uiipRnJjQs1tdz0rytJfb1QTBQjeuFXSF5pI9tHyP0K-N-biM4M6uVTWODlnAeHxAIPKQXYA

    342. Stan Broadwood says:

      It’s the same wee clique that try to call me out.

      Famous15
      Pig Sty
      robbo
      Liz g

      Every one of them will not have a bad word said about their Nicola Sturgeon.

      For some reason they only seem to call me out, never Stu or any one of the vast majority of Wingers.

      Strange.

      Maybe one day soon, they will have their very own “lightbulb moment”.

      Just mibees they will come over from the dark side into the light

      Or mibees naw.

    343. CameronB Brodie says:

      “Every one of them will not have a bad word said about their Nicola Sturgeon.”

      This is simply untrue, so it is only natural that folks tell Stan to get tae. As he appears to be quite skilled at niggling folks, then misrepresenting their politics. Which is classical colonial practice. So “Do we need unicorns when we have Law?”.

      https://pure.qub.ac.uk/ws/files/1560143/Positivism_and_Human_Rights_ssrn.pdf

      “Theoretical justifications of human rights have been troubled by many criticisms and objections. It has been objected that the source of human rights is unclear as is the meaning attached to human rights. Yet today many human rights have been adopted in positive law. Law students today need to learn about this positive law of human rights and may consider that those debates in human rights theory are pointless.

      This article examines the extent to which the positive law of human rights answers these questions satisfactorily. It concludes that positive law offers several important answers to these criticisms, but suggests they cannot replace the need for a normative justification. The article concludes that approaches which integrate theory and positive law are fruitful avenues of inquiry.”

    344. Stan Broadwood says:

      Famous15

      You came on here tonight to stop the constant critisisum of Sturgeon.

      Fellow Wingers, don’t let her or her little clique succeed.

      They will try to talk about anything other than “Sturgeon Bad”.

      Don’t let then change the flow of the thread.

      We see their ” Oh look, a Squirrel” moves.

      Just talk right over the top of them and ignore.

    345. Stan Broadwood says:

      CamB

      I’m surprised you got involved.

      I thought you had enough enemies on here, without going out looking for more.

      If that’s the way you want to play it fair enough…

      I’m surprised you took the side of the deluded Sturgeonistas

    346. Hatuey says:

      You guys pipe down with the arguing. It’s all junk.

      Why do comments with youtube links not work? I had a video to share.

    347. CameronB Brodie says:

      Surprise? I’m a post-colonialist and ethical rationalist. Which means I have some training in “Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method”. So I’ve got a pretty good grasp of how to identify the authenticity of debate, or otherwise. Though I’m obviously not infallible. Ken fit ah mean?

      https://methods.sagepub.com/book/discourse-analysis-as-theory-and-method

    348. CameronB Brodie says:

      Hatuey
      You need to delete the https:// from the link, before posting. Otherwise it ends up in the bin.

    349. Stan Broadwood says:

      Hatuey

      I hope your comment was aimed solely at Famous15.

      She is on here to stop critisisum of Sturgeon and the SNP.

      That was here prime function tonight.

      Infact, that is her prime function every time she appears on Wings.

    350. CameronB Brodie says:

      Stan would have us believe that long-term contributors to WOS, who have not left out of misguided resentment, are here simply to support the First Minister. I find that kind of hard to believe.

      http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/A%20Note%20on%20Epistemics%20and%20Discourse%20Analysis.pdf

      “Discursive Psychology has the great merit of having introduced discourse analysis (DA) to social psychology and to have contributed to DA itself by its study of the expression of ‘psychological’ notions in text and talk. Within this perspective, this paper presents some elements of a proposal to study the expression of knowledge in discourse.

      Beginning with a brief summary of our multidisciplinary approach to knowledge, followed by a summary of discourse structures that express knowledge, the main argument of the paper is that we not only need to take discourse seriously in the study of knowledge, but cannot ignore their cognitive underlying structures if we want to describe and explain many properties of discourse, such as all implicit or presupposed knowledge, as well as the interactional and contextual management of old and new knowledge in text and talk.”

    351. Stan Broadwood says:

      Cam B

      So you find it hard to believe there are still loyal Sturgeon supporters who frequent Wings???

      You’re dafter than people say you are.

    352. Stan Broadwood says:

      Cam B

      You are as bright as a 3 Watt bulb.

    353. Stan Broadwood says:

      Cam B

      If brains was dynamite, you wouldn’t have enough tae blaw yer bunnet aff!!!

    354. Stan Broadwood says:

      Cam B

      The auld yins urr the best.

    355. Hatuey says:

      Thanks CameronB.

      Stan, listen… there’s two people in here worth talking to; me and CameronB. Stop distracting yourself and everybody else from the wonderful ideas we bring to share.

      So, anyway, I thought everybody would want to hear (and see) Pete Wishart explain how the SNP intends to pressure the UK government into coming across with a Section 30.

      Wings and others have been highly critical, you will know, urging them to do more than simply ask and to put something along the lines of a Plan B in place. Well, here it is;

      Skip to about 30 minutes on the clock: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Wn5zQY90M&feature=emb_logo

      So, there you have it. If they continue to ignore and refuse us, the SNP intend to offer to meet them for a chat in Windsor Castle.

      There was no suggestion that he intends to take an army with him and leave a trail of plunder and destruction – I think he really intends to chat with them.

      There’s yer Plan B, ya shower of ungrateful Wings-loving bastards…

    356. CameronB Brodie says:

      I think I might have hit a nerve, and I don’t think Stan’s noticed I’ve reached peak flow, or there abouts. So here’s a look at “Drawing on Bakhtin and Goffman: Toward an Epistemology that Makes Lived Experience Visible”. 🙂

      https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Drawing-on-Bakhtin-and-Goffman%3A-Toward-an-that-Cresswell-Hawn/0d71b7c6fb574855d5e515cdfa599344308cba17

    357. Tartanpigsy says:

      Apart from all this SNP pish
      Talk to strangers
      Say hello
      Ask folk how they’re doing
      Be a community
      Put a note through your neighbours door saying hi!
      Everyone needs it. Fuck the paranoia

    358. Donna Babington says:

      Okay I have been intentionally staying out the political loop and maintaining some sanity within nature. I have nothing constructive or clever to say, just curious as to what that Grant Mitchell chap from EastEnders has to do with this latest commotion caused by that vile yin from Bath, in England?! My emergency pink badge never leaves my person.

    359. Willie says:

      Can’t help but think that it is around 1.00 am in the morning that the standard of comment drops, and drops quite dramatically as the suspected bevy head trolls start to clatter the keyboards. But by around 2.30:am they’re usually gone, off to sleep the sleep of the intoxicated one would presume.

      No early risers these boys, one suspects they live useful fulfilling lives, sleeping by day, trolling by night.

    360. Abalha says:

      From the Times in June, excellent Kieran Andrews,braw Angus (whaur a’the true Scots hail fae) laddie, fae Kirrie, on SNP and cash to branches.

      ”SNP headquarters faces a further rift with grassroots members after withholding tens of thousands of pounds from local activists.

      ”The party’s central operation in Edinburgh ruled that it required the money to plug a funding gap it says has been created by the coronavirus crisis.

      ”Colin Beattie, the MSP and national treasurer of the party, wrote to party branches on April 30 telling them that a dividend of funding would be withheld for three months.

      ”It is understood that the decision was not made through the SNP’s ruling national executive committee. The NEC held its first meeting in three months last week, with the session failing to cover all items on its agenda despite running for more than three hours”

      https://archive.is/qJM9g

    361. Breeks says:

      Sylvia says:
      29 October, 2020 at 10:43 pm
      Jeremy Corbyn being destroyed – Alex Salmond being destroyed – anyone noticing?

      I don’t believe Alex Salmond has been destroyed. He has retained his dignity throughout, while this appalling conspiracy to smear him, destroy the man and his reputation has shaken itself to the brink of it’s own destruction.

      I’m not saying that as a Salmond supporter, (which I do freely admit to being), but even those who are neutral or critical of Alex Salmond can recognise the extent to which this whole affair has been a conspiracy which set out to stitch him up.

      Personally, I choose to stand by Alex Salmond. I would much rather Scotland’s affairs were back in the hands of a ‘disliked and unpopular’ Alex Salmond than a ‘much loved and highly popular’ Nicola Sturgeon.

      Alex Salmond is an international statesman who came close to bringing this rotten Union to it’s conclusion. Sturgeon was anointed to take over, and handed the keys to the huge YES and Indy Juggernaut, with it’s engine roaring, and a huge fuel tank of momentum which Alex Salmond had filled. It hardly took Sturgeon a couple of years to squander the lot, fritter away one great opportunity after another, and single handedly dismantle the strength and integrity of Scotland’s sovereign Constitution.

      Her command of strategic thinking is laughable. I repeat the example of Brexit; where Sturgeons opening gambit was to emphatically declare that she’d do nothing until she knew the final details of Brexit, thus inadvertently telegraphing her punches (or no punches as it turned out) to Theresa May, that from the beginning to the end of Brexit Negotiations with Europe, Scotland would not engaging with the process, nor indeed fighting it or holding any Independence Referendums or lodging any Constitutional challenges at the UN. Instead, Scotland would be sulking in the corner, in the huff, until Theresa May and Michel Barnier were finished their negotiations.

      Consequently, Ireland and Northern Ireland secured the Irish Backstop, and successfully defended their European interests.

      But no Constitutional Backstop for Scotland, sulking like a teenager. Indeed, no ‘anything’ for Scotland. Even the DUP got more out of Brexit than Scotland. Instead while Theresa May was plotting the UK’s course out of Europe, Sturgeon was busy dismantling and overruling Scotland’s Constitution and popular sovereignty of the people.

      Scotland was subjugated to the will of the UK Parliament over Brexit, but that subjugation began with Nicola Sturgeon’s cowardly and inept capitulation, having first blunted and forfeited Scotland’s constitutional strength by overruling the Scottish mandate to fight Brexit. Fking idiot.

      “Waiting to see the final details” isn’t the only manifestation of Sturgeon’s terrible weakness in strategic thinking and lack of constitutional acumen, but it’s perhaps been the most singularly damning for Scotland’s National interests. Sturgeon’s ‘strategy’ must have been the toast of Theresa May’s Cabinet, and indeed the whole Tory Government. – Scotland neutered by it’s own First Minister without Westminster lifting a finger.

      Sturgeon has been a disgrace as First Minister for her craven failure to defend the sovereignty of Scotland’s people and Nation, and that’s before we open the Pandora’s Box of all-women shortlists and GRA men in frocks, the “Get Salmond” Conspiracy, the cabal of useless and ineffective dullards and incompetents she has promoted to office, and the despicable way she has let down and betrayed the trust of the entire YES Movement. Rather begs the question what this ‘leader’ is actually leader of.

      I don’t know whether the answer is to resurrect Alex Salmond. I could live with that in a heartbeat, but many people have polarised views (as I do too, and freely admit), and maybe we need to compromise around a third alternative… I hope we might benefit from Alex Salmond’s strategic mastery, but I feel certain it is vital we stop this Sturgeon regime before yet more irreparable damage is done to Scotland’s interests, and Scottish Independence is undone completely.

    362. David F says:

      Time to update that timeline Daisy!

      I don’t go to Gordon Dangerfield’s blog often enough. So I only just picked up on his piece from 25 Oct. Basically, last Friday’s evidence from the “Salmond” (Sturgeon) Enquiry showed that:

      1. Leslie Evans indisputably was aware of specific allegations against Alex Salmond by 29th November 2017
      2. Leslie Evans indisputably met with Nicola Sturgeon on 29th November 2017
      3. At that date – because the new procedure was not yet in place – Sturgeon as FM had both a right and a duty to know about these allegations

      So either:

      4. Leslie Evans deliberately and consciously withheld from the FM allegations that she knew the FM had a right and a duty to know about, in a situation where she was working with the FM to create a specific procedure that would deal with such allegations, or:
      5. Leslie Evans and the FM discussed the allegations.

      If 4, then Leslie Evans is guilty of a grotesque level of misconduct. But 4 is not credible.

      If 5, then the FM has lied not once, but twice, about her knowledge of events – the first time when she claimed she first heard of the allegations from Alex Salmond on 2 April 2018, and the second time when she remembered that she had forgotten that she actually heard about them from Geoff Aberdein on 29 March 2018. In fact, it now appears that she knew about them, at the latest, a full five months earlier.

    363. Abalha says:

      Interesting 2009 Angus Macleod, fine Lewisman, dead now, Times article on Osama Seed Bhutta, standing in the now notorious Cunninghame North selection btw anyone have any update on that?

      ”The Quilliam Foundation, a think-tank set up by two former activists to foster better relations between Islam and the West, is urging Alex Salmond to drop Osama Saeed, formally adopted last week as the SNP’s general election candidate in Glasgow Central, unless he changes his views.

      ”The foundation claims that Mr Saeed, a former spokesman for the Muslim Association of Britain and who has set up the Scottish Islamic Foundation (SIF), has written in support of a global Caliphate that would see the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims united in a superpower under one leader – a position, says the foundation, that is also espoused by al-Qaeda”

      https://archive.is/jY5gV

    364. ScottieDog says:

      Jeremy Corbyn being destroyed – Alex Salmond being destroyed – anyone noticing?

      Yep and the potential unraveling of the SNP.

      Never ever underestimate the deep state

    365. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      @Breeks,

      Just getting ready for work and read your elegant and eloquent contribution at 06.06 this fine morning.

      Breeks, that is one of your best yet. Thankyou for helping make sense of the world.

      I agree with every single word you have written there.

      Now am off to work.

      Hi hi, hi ho, it’s off to work I go,
      Alex Salmond’s a prince,
      Stitcher Sturgeon’s a crow,
      Hi hi, hi ho, hi ho, hi ho.

      Banker Beattie’s quite rich,
      As a councillor he muddled,
      But it wasn’t a fiddle,
      And now he’s pig in the middle,
      Having woven away, half a million I’d say,
      Hi ho, hi ho, hi ho, hi ho.

      Now we’re stuck with the Murrells,
      Their accounts are all bent,
      With a kinky cabinet, anent,
      Queen Nick’s great intent,
      Is to ditch IndyRef, MI5’s Heaven sent,
      But her big great mistake will be her political wake
      For we vile cybernats, can smell the aroma of fake.

      The end is quite near,
      Of Queen Niks crap career,
      As her numbers unfold,
      And the figures are told,
      Up and down this great land,
      As a botched slight of hand,
      Brings a final demand.

      Hi hi, hi ho, it’s off to the pokey
      They go.

      ————————–

      Sorry guys, its only 06.59am and that’s the best I can do. Need more tea.

    366. Willie says:

      Abalha@6.22am

      Do you know why Osama Saeed as he was then known changed his name to Osama Bhutta, the name he now using to stand against majority sitting MSP Kenny Gibson in Cunninghame North.

      And do we know if Osama Bhutta ever gave any public explanation for the £200k of government grant money that could not be accounted for after the collapse of the Scottish Islamic Foundation, of which he was CEO, collapsed.

      That he is Humza Yousaf’s cousin and appears to have commenced his selection campaign very early doors back in the summer, is maybe coincidental, but the first two questions demand an answer.

    367. ScottieDog says:

      “ So, there you have it. If they continue to ignore and refuse us, the SNP intend to offer to meet them for a chat in Windsor Castle.”

      I agree with Pete Wishart’- up to a point.

      He mentions that if/when the U.K. refuses a referendum, the EU have to get get behind us and help with a referendum. That is fantasy stuff. The EU are not going to get involved in what will still be domestic matters. He talks about ‘legal and constitutional’. The U.K. can easy legislate against indyref2. How does he negotiate his way round that.

      It seems he wants a risk free strategy when there isn’t one. The EU will only recognise our independence (or not) after a referendum or similar.

    368. Will says:

      Ah well Friday today, one week since commencement of candidate selection voting – and you know what – members still waiting to get their votes despite having chased their entitlement.

      Appreciate that some members might have fallen through the cracks but is there a deeper thread to this. A statement from the National Secretary would be appropriate.

      Voting, the entitlement to vote, is at the absolute heart of a party. Dr Angus MacLeod must speak.

    369. Abalha says:

      In reply to Willie at 0650

      You ask ‘Do you know why Osama Saeed as he was then known changed his name to Osama Bhutta, the name he now using to stand against majority sitting MSP Kenny Gibson in Cunninghame North’

      My hunch because his Guardian articles when he was at MAB are in the name of Osama Saeed, example below.

      You ask;’And do we know if Osama Bhutta ever gave any public explanation for the £200k of government grant money that could not be accounted for after the collapse of the Scottish Islamic Foundation, of which he was CEO, collapsed’

      NO, he did not, he buggered off to Qatar to take up a post with Aljazeera despite speaking no Arabic and little or no Comms experience, the man in charge then, very much an Islamist.

      You say;’That he is Humza Yousaf’s cousin and appears to have commenced his selection campaign very early doors back in the summer, is maybe coincidental, but the first two questions demand an answer’

      Absolutely NO coincidence after all he gave up his Amnesty job, now come on why would yoy if you weren’t certain of selection? (of course perhaps he was let go by Amnesty, I’ve no clue)

      ”The Scottish Islamic Foundation (SIF), which was launched by Alex Salmond and includes an SNP minister among its former directors, is in “pre-dissolution” and six months late in filing its annual accounts at Companies House”

      https://archive.is/FO51r

      Eh, really???? Such an insult to people’s bloody intelligence, I am very well aware, as an atheist, what is exactly meant by ‘sharia’ and ‘caliphate’.

      ”Terms such as “sharia” and “caliphate” have important meanings to Muslims quite different from the distorted connotations they often carry in the west”

      https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/01/religion.world

    370. Craig Murray says:

      As I have stated before, my view of Osama Saeed and his politics is positive. The Quilliam Foundation on the other hand is a deeply dodgy operation with American funding and staff seconded from MI6. You are heading down completely the wrong path.

    371. Abalha says:

      In reply to Craig Murray and as I said the last time you questioned my analysis I would assert that I have a lot more in depth knowledge about Osama Saeed, his family, his time at Aljazeera and time as spokesperson for MAB.

    372. Monsieur le Roi Grenouilleverteetprofonde says:

      breeks at 6.06am says
      Sturgeon was anointed to take over, and handed the keys to the huge YES and Indy Juggernaut, with it’s engine roaring, and a huge fuel tank of momentum which Alex Salmond had filled. It hardly took Sturgeon a couple of years to squander the lot, fritter away one great opportunity after another, and single handedly dismantle the strength and integrity of Scotland’s sovereign Constitution.
      Thats not what I remember. I remember a great sense of disappointment and the thought ” what do we do now? Agitating for another referendum was clearly impossible.There was a period of licking wounds, then people started to wake up to the brexit vote and the implications of a brexit started to filter into people’s consciousness. I, like most people were shocked by the result.I remember thinking ‘how the hell did that happen’?
      It seemed pretty mad to all but the strong xenophobic sub fascist little englander mentality ‘dann saff’. it was a thing of nightmares and was such a huge change that it put the indy ref back on the table(or at least somewhere near the table.Prior to this the 2015 election saw Milliband fail, and the SNP taking up the status of a third force in UK politics. Since the eu referendum the performance of the SNP went flaccid. I think the brief flirtation with power represented by 56 seats completely transformed the mentality and we saw the drift into the recent position where a ruling party mentality developed and the more comfortable finances
      created by short money and large donations engendered the Scotish political bourgeoisie we now see fixedly trying to be a ‘serious’ political influence trying to flex social engineering muscle . whether we like it or not the U?S and its politics is a hugely determining influence here and the growing woke liberation movements must have seemed ‘cutting edge’ for the rather small minds of a lot of the SNP who would have thought ‘we can now make a difference to big structural issues such as the liberalisation of sexual politics.They were thinking they could be front runners in a large, culturally complex, global scale matters with some sriously powerful playerslike China and the US and Europe. So off trots Nicola in an olympic marathon cultural event but is simply (with others who had followed her lead making a rather feeble attempt to control proceedings, but the inevitable happened -NS ran out of intellectual puff- she didn’t have the muscle for the role she had taken on , she was clawed back into the pack and has now shown her real ability- bringing up the rear with the odds and sods from the mighty powers like Andorra , Monaco and the Faroe islands.In effect she knows she has failed in this game and it has spurred her on th make a show of the Covid crisis, but it is just not convincing.It is a displacement activity I think N?s has come to the end of her natural political life.She has no ideas and has squandered the few high cards she undoubtedly had for a while. The focus hereshould really be on her political failure.The AS affair is an abject political failure in her project to bring about lasting change in the structural
      gender and sexual inequities.In time I suspect she will be shown to have set her own project back. There is no need for the invective and fury we sometimes see in some of the comments here. It is probably for her to draw a line under her career-she-herself,Bow out now while you still have a shred of dignity and take your podgy greedy self-important mediocrity of a hubby with you.

    373. Contrary says:

      Ho ho, Martin Keatings has put in a FOI request about the draft referendum Bill – he certainly has got himself up to speed on legalese and provisions of the scotland act – no response yet, of course

      https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/competency_of_referendum_bill

    374. Effijy says:

      Covid observations-

      China, where it all started, has a population close to 1.5 Billion but has
      Suffered very few Covid deaths over recent months and only 10-30 new
      cases daily. Their death talky is one tenth of England’s.

      North Korea has a population of over 50 million, just like England,
      But with only 460 Covid deaths it makes the English 100 times more
      Likely to die from Covid.

      Germany had its first Covid case within 24 hours of England’s and despite
      Having a population 25 million greater than England’s they only have a fifth
      of the Covid Death rate.
      The German economy can also support a financed second lockdown.

      I’m sick of hearing claims of how well our UK politicians, medical advisors and
      Scientists are doing and how we must adhere to their rulings.
      It’s quite obvious by comparison that the UK group are inadequate, incompetent,
      and incapable of managing this situation.

      They are trying to reinvent the wheel while being unsure of what shape it might be
      they watching the learned roll by them at speed.

    375. Contrary says:

      Oh FFS, I thought I’d better check what restrictions there now – what those levels mean – and I thought, stupidly, ‘at least it should be simplified, just check the restrictions on that level’ – but no! Reams and reams of endless different categories that you have to check separately – I didn’t read the rest of the government doc (I’m really short of time, and assume it’s drivel – can someone let me know if it isn’t?) –

      https://www.gov.scot/publications/covid-19-scotlands-strategic-framework/pages/9/

      Does anyone have a source that has a clear and concise list of instructions at each level, in plain English preferably?

    376. Monsieur le Roi Grenouilleverteetprofonde says:

      breeks at 6.06am says
      Sturgeon was anointed to take over, and handed the keys to the huge YES and Indy Juggernaut, with it’s engine roaring, and a huge fuel tank of momentum which Alex Salmond had filled. It hardly took Sturgeon a couple of years to squander the lot, fritter away one great opportunity after another, and single handedly dismantle the strength and integrity of Scotland’s sovereign Constitution.
      Thats not what I remember. I remember a great sense of disappointment and the thought ” what do we do now? Agitating for another referendum was clearly impossible.There was a period of licking wounds, then people started to wake up to the brexit vote and the implications of a brexit started to filter into people’s consciousness. I, like most people were shocked by the result.I remember thinking ‘how the hell did that happen’?
      It seemed pretty mad to all but the strongly xenophobic sub fascist little englander mentality ‘dann saff’. it was a thing of nightmares and was such a huge change that it put the indy ref back on the table(or at least somewhere near the table.Prior to this the 2015 election saw Milliband fail, and the SNP taking up the status of a third force in UK politics. Since the EU referendum the performance of the SNP went flaccid. I think the brief flirtation with power represented by 56 seats completely transformed the mentality and we saw the drift into the recent position where a ruling party mentality has developed and the more comfortable finances created by short money and large donations engendered the ineffectual Scottish political bourgeoisie we now see fixedly trying to be a ‘serious’ political influence, trying to flex social engineering muscle . Whether we like it or not the US and its politics is a hugely determining influence here and the growing woke liberation movements must have seemed ‘cutting edge’ for the rather easily excied small minds of a lot of the SNP who would have thought “we can now make a difference to big structural issues such as the liberalisation of sexual politics”.They were thinking they could be front runners in large, culturally complex, global scale matters with some seriously powerful players like China , US and Europe. So off trots Nicola in an olympic marathon cultural event but is simply (with others who had followed her lead, in making a rather feeble attempt to control proceedings from the front). But the inevitable happened -NS ran out of intellectual puff- she didn’t have the muscle for the role she had taken on, she was clawed back into the pack and has now shown her real ability- bringing up the rear with the odds and sods from the mighty powers like Andorra , Monaco and the Faroe islands.
      In effect she knows she has failed in this game and it has spurred her on to make a show of the Covid crisis, but it is just not convincing. It is a displacement activity I think NS has come to the end of her natural political life.She has no ideas and has squandered the few high cards she undoubtedly had for a while. The focus here should really be on her political failure.The AS affair is an abject political failure in her project to bring about lasting change in the structural gender and sexual inequities. It must be a huge humiliation for her. In time I suspect she will be shown to have set her own gender/sexual power project back by her ineptitude. Hubris and Nemesis spring to mind.
      There is no need for the invective and fury we sometimes see in some of the comments here. It is probably for her to draw a line under her career-she-herself.Bow out now, while you still have a shred of dignity and take your self-important mediocrity of a hubby with you.

    377. Kenny says:

      It might be good to follow the Georgian experience in gaining independence. Some of them stressed the importance of “freedom, then independence”.

      In our terms, this is the work that the SNP *should* be doing at the moment if serious about indy. So devolving broadcasting above all. Tightening the electoral register to avoid violations by English second-home owners, English students. Not allowing Ruthie to read postal votes. No foreign interference, contacting foreign observers. Planning exit polls.

      Why is this not being done? Why are resources being wasted on woowoo gender nonsense, hate crime bills, why this attempt to run before we can even crawl, let alone walk?

      I think NS was only ever serious about indy as a way to introduce weird nonsense. When politicians have an obsession with sexual matters (usually because they do not have a healthy sex life themselves), it cannot be rooted out of them.

    378. Oneliner says:

      @ScottieDog 6:36

      The world is full of coincidences. I’m sure it’s all coincidental.

      Two of the highest profile opponents of the Iraq war were both found dead while out walking – just a coincidence.

    379. David F says:

      @ Craig Murray
      30 October, 2020 at 7:55 am

      Craig you don’t actually have to take up the cudgels on behalf of every Moslem who finds himself a target of criticism.

      Some of them richly deserve it,and it seems to me that one who gobbled up £200,000 of taxpayers money and fucked off leaving nothing but a hole in the ground might just be one such.

    380. Craig Murray says:

      Caesar!ha,

      But with respect I do not know you and I do not know your motivations. The Quilliam Foundation is (see posts on my blog over years) an MI6 and CIA front organisation. It promotes Islamophobia. Douglas Murray is a big fan.
      If you are promoting the views of the Quilliam Foundation and hostile to the Muslim Association of Britain and to Al Jazeera, frankly I am likely to object to your politics a great deal more than I am to object to Osama Saeed’s.
      I don’t see what his being a cousin has to do with it. I have some well dodgy cousins.

    381. Craig Murray says:

      DavidF

      If people start promoting the views of the Quilliam Foundation on this blog without being challenged it is going to turn into something very unpleasant.

    382. ahundredthidiot says:

      oneliner re coincidences.

      Kary Mullis died in August 2019.
      He was quite vocal about how his invention could be used.

      Funny that it was around the same time the NHS was bracing itself for ‘Aussie Flu’ heading to our way for winter.

      Now…..let’s burn this Guy Fawkes fella….

    383. Joe says:

      Craig Murray is correct. The Quilliam foundation is extremely dodgy and is definitely linked with intelligence agencies.

      One thing the former leader of the BNP did say that is extremely interesting ‘We were offered significant funding from the US. The one stipulation being that we had to focus on Muslims. We were to mention nothing about Israel or the banking system.’

      Tommy Robinson falls into the same category to the point where you can practically see the Mossad strings.

      That, however, does not mean that our secular and democratic nations can cope with much of an influx of people who hold to a dark age religion. Nor should we be expected to.

      Craig Murray might not have lived in areas that are culturally enriched. I have. Its no fun when your wife is afraid to leave the house herself because the barbarians the sheltered political and financial class have mass imported have been brainwashed into treating women like whores who do not wear muslim attire.

      Whether you agree with these sentiments or not Mr Murray is besides the point. The ordinary working class of Europe are living with the consequences of the policies and ideas of the perpetually sheltered and being told that they are horrible racist people if they should raise a voice of complaint.

      Personally ive had enough of it and so have many others.

    384. kapelmeister says:

      Abalha @6:22 am

      I think it has to be said in all fairness, that the notion of a modern Caliphate that Osaama Bhutta was talking of then was of a European Union style bloc of Islamic countries.

    385. Breeks says:


      Monsieur le Roi Grenouilleverteetprofonde says:
      30 October, 2020 at 8:26 am

      breeks at 6.06am says

      …Thats not what I remember. I remember a great sense of disappointment and the thought ” what do we do now?

      I remember thinking that momentum was with us, and even a couple more weeks we would have won in 2014. The defeat was a kick in the teeth yes, but within hours, the notorious vow was already beginning to crumble. They’d cheated to win.

      Perhaps Independence was on the back burner, at first, but their victory was a cheat, and a cheated referendum did not settle the question. There was also a pregnant opportunity begging; the Vow’s declaration to deliver ‘more powers’, but no explicit detail of what actual powers that meant.

      I was agitating for a snap plebiscite hot on the heels of the YES referendum to have the sovereign Scottish Electorate make that decision, hold a plebiscite to choose those powers returning to Scotland in a manner that made it impossible for Westminster to refuse, and make sure that Broadcasting was top of the list.

      I don’t believe YES momentum did falter in 2014, but kept going, and on the back of the 2014 Momentum, the proven perfidious nature of the Vow revealed, that very momentum swept the SNP to 56 out of 59 seats at Westminster.

      In 2015, YES and the SNP was running rampant, the SNP were turning maps yellow, and then, like manna from Heaven, the UK decides to have a Brexit Referendum, and once again, Scotland delivers… handing the SNP a Constituional Breach of the UK Union; one Sovereign Nation in the UK voting at odds with the other Sovereign Nation, delivering the watershed constitutional ultimatum; Brexit but no UK Union, or a salvaged UK Union with No Brexit.

      We had EVERYTHING needed to secure Scottish Independence AND stay in Europe. Democratic victory at Holyrood, Westminster’s Scottish seats, and an emphatic Scottish democratic mandate to dispute and defeat Brexit, backed by a National Constitution which made that Scottish mandate sovereign.

      We had it all. We were there! The Union was in it’s death throes…. But Scotland no longer had General Salmond in command, but Corporal Sturgeon instead, darling of the SNP who wouldn’t hear a bad word against her…

      All Sturgeon had to do was trip over her shoelace and she would fall down with a Scottish Backstop, just like the Irish Backstop, a Treaty between Nations which had to be respected, and which defended Scotland’s Constitutionally sovereign Remain Vote.

      But no. Corporal Nicola had her own fkg agenda and Pretorian Guard of SNP Disciples laying on thick about Nicola’s secret masterplan that was so spiffingly clever it couldn’t be discussed.

      Nearly 6 years later, and look where the fk we are.

    386. kapelmeister says:

      Breeks

      You’re on fine form the day!

    387. maureen says:

      Scottish independence: ‘Plan B’ rejected for SNP conference vote
      A MOTION on a “Plan B” route to independence will be not be on the agenda at the SNP’s conference next month after it was rejected by a key party committee.

      The move will mean there will be no vote on what an alternative strategy should be if Boris Johnson continues to reject a request for powers to be transferred to Holyrood to hold a referendum agreed by the UK and Scottish governments.

      Instead, delegates at the online event will be invited to take part in a discussion session on the subject of independence and the party will hold a National Assembly on the subject next year.

      The two chief Plan B proponents Angus MacNeil MP and Councillor Chris McEleny said they are disappointed by the conference committee’s decision.

      READ MORE: Scottish independence support has 12-point lead in latest Politico poll

      They had been hopeful their motion would be selected after figures close to the leadership backed having a full debate on the topic at conference, despite them not agreeing that the party should stray from its current policy of getting a new Section 30 order required for the transfer of referendum powers.

      MacNeil and McEleny had previously believed they had been given a positive signal when drafting their resolution which backed requesting a Section 30 order as the preferred route, but then went on to argue that if this was rejected then Scottish ministers should seek a legal challenge to establish if Holyrood could stage a referendum without the UK Government’s agreement.

      Should this second step prove unsuccessful, their proposed motion argued that the May 2021 elections should be a de facto referendum on independence.

      MacNeil and McEleny claimed the decision to block their resolution would not be popular among grassroots activists who have seen support for independence grow to a record level of 58% but feel their goal has been frustrated and a No-Deal Brexit looms in just two months.

      READ MORE: Scottish independence: Four things we learned from the 56% poll

      “Scotland should now be in a situation to free itself from this kamikaze cliff jump by the Tories, or more correctly the Scottish Government should be,” said MacNeil.

      “However, the cold hard fact, which some of us may not want to admit to, is that we have no escape. The Scottish Government is unarmed to fight or even ameliorate the choices that Tories have foisted on us.

      “We have ended up here at the mercy of the Tories by our own hand. Unless we change our Plan-A-only policy, it doesn’t matter how much those who have the microphone boldly proclaim that Plan A has ‘momentum’ or that Boris Johnson’s position is “unsustainable”.

      “It has been almost four-and-a-half years since the Brexit vote and face facts, the cupboard is bare.”

      McEleny stated: “Scotland stands at the cliff edge of a No Deal Brexit, the economic decisions that will define Scotland for a generation are about to be made by a Westminster Government we didn’t vote for. Now is not the time for a talking shop, now is the time for action.

      “Public opinion is now consistently measuring that a majority of Scots want independence. In advance of last year’s general election it was said that we didn’t need a Plan B because Boris Johnson’s opposition to a referendum would be blown away by an SNP victory. We won a landslide at the general election and he still said no.

      “If the SNP win a majority next year, and polls are showing even greater support for independence, are Westminster suddenly going to agree to a referendum when it’s even more likely that they will lose it? The more it looks like Scots will vote for independence the more the forces at Whitehall will act to block our right to self determination.

      “Plan B puts political pressure on the UK Government to agree to a referendum and it makes it clear that the SNP will ensure the democratic voice of Scotland is heard.

      “Boris Johnson doesn’t want us to determine our own future and I’m bitterly disappointed that SNP members won’t be allowed to debate a plan designed to allow us take Scotland’s future into our own hands at next years Holyrood elections – whether the UK Government like it or not.”

      Last weekend Kevin Pringle, the SNP’s former head of communications, backed a proper discussion on Plan B at the conference.

      “While I’m not persuaded of the case for a non-referendum “plan B” route to negotiating Scottish statehood, I suspect that the process of discussing the issue properly at next month’s online SNP conference would help ease at least some of the current tensions,” he wrote in a newspaper column.

      In June Andrew Wilson, the author of the SNP’s blueprint on the economic case for independence, backed the conference having a full Plan B debate when he responded to a post by MacNeil on social media.

      “I welcome wise idea of SNP virtual conference to let us thrash out pros and cons of independence approaches and fall back plans. #ScotRef,” wrote MacNeil on Twitter.

      Wilson responded: “Agree with this. Time to unite the party behind the best route to unite the country behind progress. At a pace that respects reality and will win and win big.”

      Internal party critics of Plan B though argue that the SNP’s current strategy of holding out for a Section 30 order is working with support for independence climbing to record levels.

      They point to the UK Government being “in panic mode” over Scotland with ideas for pro-Union strategies, such as seeking help from the EU to say it would block Scotland’s future membership, looking desperate.

      They also contend that if Johnson is not going to grant a Section 30 order he is unlikely to enter negotiations on Scotland becoming independent.

      Critics further note comments made to The National in August by top pollster Sir John Curtice who cautioned the SNP against putting a Plan B route to independence in its Holyrood manifesto.

      READ MORE: John Curtice: SNP could use 2024 General Election as defacto indyref2

      Curtice warned such a move could weaken the SNP’s negotiating position with Johnson to get a section 30 order.

      He said the party would need to present a clear position to voters before the Holyrood election about what it sought from the Prime Minister. An inclusion of an alternative process to independence could risk such clarity, he said at the time.

      “You have to make the proposition, put it to the public in an unambiguous way. We want a repeat of the process of 2014. Fullstop. It’s not to say the SNP shouldn’t have a Plan B, but it’s for their consumption, not for public consumption.”

      The SNP have been approached for a comment.

      The SNP’s online conference will take place from November 28 to 30.

    388. Craig Murray says:

      Joe

      Being married to a Muslim, having Muslim children and having lived in Muslim countries, I expect I know more than you. Please keep your racist anti-immigrant drivel to yourself.

    389. Willie says:

      Reading the comments from Craig Murray I can only reiterate that I find his opinions are inevitably preferred on the utmost good faith. He is for me a purveyor of truths in support of a better, fairer world.

      If he says he believes the Quilliam Foundation to be a CIA, MI6 supported facade then I would place great stead on what he has said.

      However, as for Osama Saeed, or Bhutta, there are questions about him and folks should continue to ask them until they get answers. Craig himself would expect no less.

      But let us not conflate Scottish Independence politics with Islamaphobia. Muslims are in truth a small minority of our Scottish people. larger in number in Jewish people who are also a small number. Both these communities are adherents to religious faiths, just like Catholic or Protestant Christians. That should not be a division between us. However, all adherents to a religion, whatever that religion may be, or of people with no religion, should be very aware of the potential difficulties that adherences and or alignments against their fellow citizens can cause.

      Osama Bhutta currently has a current website describing him as the “ Pride of Pakistan “ and that most certainly marks him out as an individual who has an ultra high opinion of himself to award himself that title. Caveat emptor!

    390. Abalha says:

      In response to Craig Murray.
      You say;
      But with respect I do not know you and I do not know your motivations. The Quilliam Foundation is (see posts on my blog over years) an MI6 and CIA front organisation. It promotes Islamophobia. Douglas Murray is a big fan.
      If you are promoting the views of the Quilliam Foundation and hostile to the Muslim Association of Britain and to Al Jazeera, frankly I am likely to object to your politics a great deal more than I am to object to Osama Saeed’s.
      I don’t see what his being a cousin has to do with it. I have some well dodgy cousins.

      I am Alison Balharry, late 50’s, hail from Dundee.

      To suggest my only motivartion is the promotion of Quilliam is I’d say a distortion of my full post.
      I worked at Aljazeera from 12/03 until 04/05 on a career break from the BBC Radio 4 WATO/PM stable of programmes, having had the misfortune to be sent as THE R4 Editor for 6 weeks every day ahead of the illegal invasion of Iraq to the Qatar based US Central Command Media Centre in a desert warehouse.

      I worked for Aljazeera when it was the original Pan Arab supporting Aljazeera not the islamist leaning org it became bit by bit after Qatari Mohammed Jassem was replaced by Wadah Khanfar and grew into the monster it is now.

      My motivation is to raise legitimate questions someone I believe, and am told by my contacts INSIDE the Scottish Muslim community,is not as he presents himself.

    391. Hatuey says:

      The resistance to Plan B and those supplying it, will soon disappear – like snow off a dyke, as they say – when Sturgeon steps down. And it’s inconceivable that Sturgeon can stay in her job given what has come to light in the Inquiry.

      As Craig Murray points out, it should be referred to as The Sturgeon Inquiry. Investigating her part in the plot is, after all, central to its remit.

      Based on the above, it’s difficult to take anything anyone says about Plan B very seriously at the moment.

      Looking at the past rather than the future, Sturgeon’s leadership has been completely incoherent, amateurish, nasty, and deeply dishonest. Whoever replaces her will do better than that.

      Her seemingly positive showing in the polls is a predictable consequence of concerns about Brexit and Boris’s “herd” strategy. Surprise, surprise, people don’t like poverty and death.

    392. Craig Murray says:

      Alison Balharry,

      I accept that you know more than I of Osama’s personal conduct.

      I can only speak to his politics, he used to be one of the most frequent regular commenters on my blog and I always found him entirely sound.

      You however quote the far right Quilliam Foundation with approval and describe the former head of Al Jazeera as an “Islamist”. I know the senior staff at Al Jazeera pretty well – I was the guest speaker at their annual Gala in July – and their politics are broadly anti-Imperialist and anti-US. I would not call any of them “Islamists”. I may not know the individual you speak of.

      But broadly, your attack on Osama promote war on terror type diatribe against politically active Muslims.

    393. Hatuey says:

      Abalha: “ I worked for Aljazeera when it was the original Pan Arab supporting Aljazeera not the islamist leaning org it became…”

      Not one facet of the above bolsters any argument you may ever engage in.

      I have a few objections but my biggest is the implied paternal (western) overlordship and judgement you exhibit, possibly without even knowing it yourself, and the assumption that we have any right to even comment on such things, given the apocalyptic carnage we have made in the Middle East.

      I’m sure you’ll be thinking your employment at aljazeera gives you some right or obligation to comment. That’s the opposite of the truth and is in fact a symptom of the relationship we have with people there and elsewhere in the world.

      I’ve noticed you mention your previous jobs a few times. Craig Murray does that too but with Craig there’s a sense that he has some regrets and he’s definitely under no illusions today about the dark nature and priorities of his previous employers.

      For you, though, working for the BBC seems to be something that you are unambiguously proud of. Certainly you don’t seem ashamed.

      The role of the BBC in the world in terms of its News service is anything but ambiguous. It never has been ambiguous; I think you could argue that it’s one of the most sinister and effective propaganda machines in the history of humankind. It has played and continues to play a pivotal role in providing cover for foreign policy exploits and crimes abroad on behalf of successive UK and US administrations.

      Deep down inside you will agree with everything I’ve typed here – I know that. The only question is “how deep?”

    394. CameronB Brodie says:

      “That, however, does not mean that our secular and democratic nations can cope with much of an influx of people who hold to a dark age religion.”

      Is this not just a tad bigoted and racist?

      “Its no fun when your wife is afraid to leave the house herself because the barbarians the sheltered political and financial class have mass imported have been brainwashed into treating women like whores who do not wear muslim attire.”

      I think this may be even more overtly bigoted and rascsit.

      “The ordinary working class of Europe are living with the consequences of the policies and ideas of the perpetually sheltered and being told that they are horrible racist people if they should raise a voice of complaint.”

      And there’s the voice of the radical right, so your man Joe is more than a little dodgy.

    395. Abalha says:

      In reply to Hatuey, believe what you want about me BUT you are correct I do not regret the time I spent at WATO/PM but as I have previously said after what I witnessed at US Central Command in Qatar I witnessed a less than savoury side to, in particular, TV media. And so I left the BBC, not long after my return to London in 2005 after my career break at Aljazeera.Indeed I couldn’t stomach a return to WATO/PM so went to BBCWS but realised it was no longer for me.

      Have you seen ‘Control Room’, I have a 2 frame appearance as the director told me when we bumped into each other at a conference she included me as ‘the only white person NOT cheering and laughing’ as Sky News interviewed the first British soldiers in Baghdad.

    396. Abalha says:

      In reply to Craig Murray.

      Wadah Khanfar I mentioned expressly tried to get me booted out on the basis I was ‘anti Muslim’ after a 2 person delegation from two British journalists who not only loathed me but most of the Arabs on the team and most certainly the Hindus. Anyway it backfired when all the other Muslims on the team variously from Sudan/Iraq/Lebanon/South Africa/Morrocco/Jordan/Palestine/Qatar/Egypt unbeknowns to me all signed a letter saying I wasn’t the problem they were.

      I remained they left.

    397. Hatuey says:

      CameronB: “ your man Joe is more than a little dodgy.”

      He’s a culturalist, cam, make some allowances.

    398. Hatuey says:

      Abalha, apologies, if I’d known you didn’t laugh and cheer at the massacre of millions of Iraqis, I would have steered well clear of any ethical considerations.

      I haven’t seen “Control Room”, whatever it is. I realised many years ago that the more of that sort of stuff one watches, the less one truly knows.

      I guess that means that I’d rather be uninformed than misinformed but my ignorance would be a lot more blissful if people like you didn’t work for the BBC.

      No offence though. You support independence and that’s the important thing.

      So it goes.

    399. CameronB Brodie says:

      Hatuey
      I hear you, but according to critical rationalism, the best way to loose your democracy is to tolerate intolerance.

      http://www.openculture.com/2019/03/does-democracy-demand-the-tolerance-of-the-intolerant-karl-poppers-paradox.html

      “In the past few years, when far-right nationalists are banned from social media, violent extremists face boycotts, or institutions refuse to give a platform to racists, a faux-outraged moan has gone up: “So much for the tolerant left!” “So much for liberal tolerance!” The complaint became so hackneyed it turned into an already-hackneyed meme.

      It’s a wonder anyone thinks this line has any rhetorical force. The equation of tolerance with acquiescence, passivity, or a total lack of boundaries is a reductio ad absurdum that denudes the word of meaning. One can only laugh at unserious characterizations that do such violence to reason.

      The concept of toleration has a long and complicated history in moral and political philosophy precisely because of the many problems that arise when the word is used without critical context. In some absurd, 21st century usages, tolerance is even conflated with acceptance, approval, and love.

      But it has historically meant the opposite—noninterference with something one dislikes or despises. Such noninterference must have limits. As Goethe wrote in 1829, “tolerance should be a temporary attitude only; it must lead to recognition. To tolerate means to insult.” Tolerance by nature exists in a state of social tension.

      According to virtually every conception of liberal democracy, a free and open society requires tense debate and verbal conflict. Society, the argument goes, is only strengthened by the oft-contentious interplay of differing, even intolerant, points of view. So, when do such views approach the limits of toleration? One of the most well-known paradoxes of tolerance was outlined by Austrian philosopher Karl Popper in his 1945 book The Open Society and Its Enemies“….

    400. Abalha says:

      In reply to Hatuey.

      Fyi ‘Control Room’ is a documentary made about the media coverage of Iraq invasion, filmed between Aljazeera HQ and CentCom.

      And I was merely making the point that journalists’in built bias is rarely challenged, but hey if you want to believe I’m some sort of patronising arse who doesn’t respect others and goes in for virtue signalling, fine.

      You of course have the benefit of knowing who you’re addressing I have absolutely no clue who you are.

    401. Hatuey says:

      CameronB, I’m as tolerant a fellow as you will ever find.

      Abalha, I’m just a guy.

      Regardless of who you are, your status, background, qualifications, etc., I’ll stick to addressing what you actually say, playing the ball and not the man. I think that’s fair enough.

      FYI not one single negative thought about you exists now or has ever existed in my mind.

    402. CameronB Brodie says:

      Hatuey
      I wasn’t questioning your tolerance, simply pointing to the threat faced by Scotland’s democracy. Both Westminster and Holyrood are now openly hostile towards international human rights law. In fact, both parliaments now support exclusionary legal practice that is consistent with EUGENICS. So here’s a look at “PLURALISTIC AND MULTICULTURAL REEXAMINATIONS OF TOLERANCE/TOLERATION”.

      https://www.cpp.edu/~jet/www/Documents/JET/Jet13/ding1-12.pdf

      “Tolerance, inter-cultural dialogue and respect for diversity are more essential than ever in a world where people are becoming more and more closely interconnected.”
      – Kofi Annan, Former Secretary – General of the United Nation”

    403. Hatuey says:

      I disagree with all that, cam. The social sciences are full of these paradigms. It’s like the pop charts. And I really don’t think anybody in Westminster or Holyrood is motivated by eugenics.

      In terms of what we call culture, I don’t think our society has ever been so diverse and tolerant. I know it’s not fashionable to say it, but I think there’s a lot that’s good and right in the mix right now.

      Attempts to curtail freedom of speech and expression are certain to fail and I don’t think ordinary people have ever had it so good in terms of being able to exchange ideas, challenge power, form alliances, organise, talk, etc.

      I think technology has changed everything and I’m optimistic about its potential. I’m a technologist before anything else.

      I feel like apologising for being positive but if you want a miserable assessment of where we are right now I’m sure it won’t be long before some unthinking socialist comes along and goes through the latest list of gripes.

    404. CameronB Brodie says:

      Hatuey
      Again, I hear you, but I’m afraid I can’t agree. Brexit articulates constitutional legal practice that is empty of consideration for the Natural law or socio-economics. So it articulates intensely positivist legal dogma and excessive legal instrumentalism. So Westminster is empowering the Tories to conduct an act of legal violence on Scotland, that imposes authoritarian English Torydum on us, and denies us our cultural identity. Which is the very essence of eugenics.

      http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/3520/1/HLA_Harts_rule_of_law_(LSERO).pdf

    405. Hatuey says:

      Since they were doing all that and more before the Brexit vote, I think we can rule out brexit as a trigger.

      You put too much emphasis on a definition of culture that makes no sense to me. Actually I don’t think it makes sense to you either and here’s why.

      Central to everything you say is a belief that there is such a thing as Scottish culture. If you believe that to be true then you must believe there are cultural traits that are both common and exclusive to all Scottish people, or a very high proportion of them. So far, so simple. What are these traits?

      If you can’t answer that, and you can’t, then there is no such thing as Scottish culture.

      I don’t need cultural traits to explain Scottishness. And I don’t need Scottishness to explain Scottish sovereignty. History has bestowed upon us a gift (Scotland the country); why should we turn our Scottish noses up at it?

    406. Joe says:

      @Craig Murray

      Ahh…so there really IS no problems with the views of muslim males towards women, especially non-muslim women then.

      Im so glad you cleared that up for me.

      Its all just a big conspiracy.

      You are an embarrassment sir.

    407. Joe says:

      @Craig Murray

      Another thin: Islam is a religion.

      Criticism of it and the religion-inspired views of its followers is NOT racism.

      Besides which RACE would that be? East Asian? Central Asian? African? Russian?

      Get real.

    408. CameronB Brodie says:

      Hatuey
      I’m not sure if I’ve argued my case well, as my argument is a law and order one, not a cultural one. You can’t support democracy by breaking international law, which Brexit does. It does so in a manner than denies Scots our legal identity. Which is pretty much an example of government through force, a.k.a. eugenics.

    409. Graeme says:

      Bit late for replying to this – don’t blame me, blame the electoral commission,

      I sent them this:

      “To: PEF Inbox
      Subject: Scottish National Party: Published Accounts

      Hi there

      Would you be able to comment on the ongoing controversy concerning the latest published accounts of the Scottish National Party, as laid out by the Independence Supporter, the Reverend Stuart Campbell at https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-limits-of-accountability/ ?

      The SNP’s Chief Executive, Mr Peter Murrell, and National Treasurer, Mr Colin Beattie, both say that despite a deficit of over £320,000, their “ring-fenced” Independence Fighting Fund is still safe, having been “woven through the overall income”; Surely, thisbshould be investigated by yourselves?”

      and received the following:

      “Thank you for your email.

      Parties’ finances are regulated under the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA).

      PPERA 2000 sets certain responsibilities on parties’ treasurers so that they can ensure that the parties comply with its rules, including:

      a) Making sure that any loans and donations that a party receives are checked for permissibility, recorded and reported where appropriate.

      b) Taking all reasonable steps to make sure that these donations and loans can be accepted by ensuring that the donors are permissible.

      c) Reporting certain donations and loans to us, the Electoral Commission.

      d) Keeping clear and accurate records of the accounts to show the true financial position of the party or accounting unit.

      e) Submitting annual accounts to us.

      As the Electoral Commission we regulate that parties are compliant with their submission responsibilities, and that all the necessary steps for accepting donations or loans have been taken. However, we do not regulate on what is the appropriate use of the stated funds or the trustworthiness of the parties regarding the actual use of fighting funds. Therefore, we cannot make a comment regarding a party’s actions with respect to the use of their funds.

      I hope that this helps but please let me know if you require any further information.”

      So, in other words, they won’t do anything…



    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