The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


The pieces of the jigsaw

Posted on July 27, 2020 by

Late last week, Wings finally received a long-overdue full response to the queries we first made to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) in early April, regarding several matters connected to the failed prosecution of Alex Salmond.

(You’re supposed to get a reply in 20 working days. It’s been nearly four months.)

The unmappable fog-filled labyrinth that COPFS (under the Lord Advocate, W. James Wolffe QC), the Scottish Government and the civil service are attempting to construct around these matters is so tangled that it’s taken us a few days to sit down and make some sense of it, but the truth that’s being coaxed, painfully slowly, into the light is one that paints a truly disturbing picture.

We invite you to examine it for yourself and see if you disagree.

Firstly you should see the letter in its entirety:

23 July 2020

Dear Mr Campbell

Contempt of court: HM Advocate vs Alexander Salmond

I refer to your emails dated 28 May 2020 and 1 June 2020, and to previous correspondence in this regard. May I firstly apologise for the delay in replying to you. This has been a result of pressure of other business but nevertheless I accept that you should have received a response to your emails before now.

In your emails you pose questions regarding proceedings which are currently live before the Court in relation to Craig Murray and Mark Hirst. As those cases are live it would not be appropriate for me to comment on them in detail but there are some general issues which I can respond to.

In your email dated 28 May 2020 you pose a number of questions regarding the involvement of the Lord Advocate in decision making in relation to the criminal proceedings against Alex Salmond and associated proceedings which have arisen during and after the case against Mr Salmond, and who is responsible for those proceedings. As you have anticipated in your email, the Lord Advocate recused himself from involvement in the case against Mr Salmond. As such, he has had no personal involvement in the criminal investigation of, or the criminal proceedings against, Alex Salmond or in the associated investigations and proceedings which have arisen during and after that case. The same applies to the Solicitor General for Scotland.

In any case where the Law Officers are not, for whatever reason, personally involved, Crown Counsel exercise their normal decision-making function. That has been, and is, the position in relation to these cases. However, the Lord Advocate is constitutionally responsible for the systems of prosecution of crime and investigation of deaths in Scotland, and is answerable to the Scottish Parliament for the operation of those systems. That remains the position, regardless of whether or not he has been personally involved in the decision-making in any individual case. We do not name the individual member or members of Crown Counsel involved in decision making as it is the Lord Advocate who is responsible for their decisions.

The final question in your email dated 28 May 2020 asks about the Crown’s position in relation to the individuals who were named by you in your email dated 5 April 2020 to COPFS. As you were advised in our email to you dated 1 June 2020 it is not intended to take action against those individuals. I will address this further in my response to your response to that email, also dated 1 June 2020.

The first issue you raise in your email dated 1 June 2020 is a demand to know the name of the official who had responded top your earlier email. With the greatest of respect, your correspondence is with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. It is not personal correspondence from an individual member of staff who replies on behalf of COPFS. I do not accept your assertion that it is unacceptable that you received an anonymous response. In the event that you wish to escalate matters there is a complaints procedure available on the COPFS website

The second issue which you raise in your said email is to question why it would be inappropriate for COPFS to provide detailed information regarding the reasons for taking no action against the individuals named by you in your email dated 4 June 2020.

As previously advised, each of the publications you referred to were carefully considered and a decision taken not to take action. As with any allegation of contempt of court the Crown requires to consider each case on its own facts and circumstances, having regard to both the content and context of the publication, both to assess whether or not there has in fact been a breach of the legislation and if it is in the public interest to take action. It is not appropriate for COPFS to provide a detailed explanation of the circumstances giving rise to a decision in each case and I shall not do so.

Further, you ask for advice on whether or not you can publish specific materials. I have to advise you that it is not the role of COPFS to provide legal advice to journalists. It is the responsibility of individual journalists and media outlets to seek their own independent legal advice about contempt of court when considering whether or not to publish articles. If they decide to publish prejudicial information in respect of live criminal proceedings in Scotland, or as in the current circumstances in breach of an order of the court, then consideration may be given to petitioning the court for contempt of court proceedings in terms of the 1981 Act.

Finally, notwithstanding the above, having regard to your comment that there are no live proceedings I should remind you that on 10 March 2020 the Court granted an order under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 which prohibits the publication of the names and identity and any information likely to disclose the identity of the complainers in the case of HMA v Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond, and that that order remains in force.

Yours sincerely
LINDSEY MILLER
Deputy Crown Agent Serious Casework

Now let’s unpack it a little.

It’s interesting to have it confirmed that COPFS and the Lord Advocate are answerable to the Scottish Parliament – and therefore primarily to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Humza Yousaf – because as alert readers might recall, in May this year we received a reply from Mr Yousaf to the effect that he and the rest of Parliament in fact held no power over COPFS or the Lord Advocate:

So immediately we have the Lord Advocate saying he’s answerable to Parliament, and the Parliament’s justice secretary saying he isn’t. It’s not the best of starts.

The next interesting part concerns the failure to prosecute the newspaper journalists who for the sake of brevity we’ll call the Garavelli Nine, and there’s one rather revealing line in particular in it:

What’s fascinating about that is that COPFS is very carefully refusing to tell us whether it thinks the Garavelli Nine committed a contempt of court by publishing information that enabled “jigsaw identification” of one of Alex Salmond’s accusers (which they obviously and demonstrably did), but is saying that even if they did it might not be in the public interest to prosecute them for it.

That’s because if it answers the former question it has only two options: (1) if they did commit contempt COPFS has to prosecute them or come up with a very convincing reason why not, or (2) if they didn’t commit contempt then COPFS has to tell us that we’re allowed to reproduce the paragraph from Garavelli’s article, which would reveal unmistakeably that they DID commit such a contempt and take us right back to (1).

That paragraph, pictured below but redacted by us, which is still available for the public to read freely online both in the original Tortoise Media piece and the repeat on the Scotsman website – which the COPFS has elected not to bring a prosecution over OR demand the removal of, but which it repeatedly refuses to tell us we can quote – is at the heart of this entire mess.

COPFS is caught in a cleft stick. For the reasons noted above, it can neither admit the paragraph is contempt, nor say that it isn’t. The only way COPFS can prosecute Craig Murray but not the Garavelli Nine is to keep the paragraph in a state of permanent quantum uncertainty, like Schrodinger’s Cat.

The paragraph must at all times be potentially contemptuous, so that nobody can use it to show how selective, inconsistent and manifestly biased the prosecution of Craig Murray alone is, and so that it can be used to threaten anyone who interjects on his behalf that they might be next in the dock, as Ms Miller is keen to remind us:

Yet at the same time the paragraph must be not contemptuous, so that COPFS doesn’t have to take any action against those it considers its friends and allies. And when you poke at that contradiction, it gets very huffy.

The above passage from Ms Miller’s letter is palpably untrue. The COPFS is not just another legal opinion when it comes to matters of contempt. It is not comparable to a lawyer that a journalist might hire for a view. COPFS is the referee – it’s literally the entity that decides whether contempt has occurred and should be put before a judge.

It absolutely SHOULD advise journalists whether it thinks they would be breaking the law by publishing certain facts, not to protect the journalists but to protect the people whose identity is being concealed by the court’s order.

That’s because the job of the institutions of law is not only to solve crime but wherever possible to prevent it from happening in the first place. If you walk up to a police officer and say “Excuse me, but I’m thinking of smashing that shop window and walking off with that rather lovely new laptop, can you tell me if that would be a crime or not?” it’s their job to tell you and thereby save the poor shop owner from suffering the theft, not advise you to contact a lawyer for an opinion and only start chasing you once there’s broken glass all over the street.

And as it happens, we have some backup for that view. It comes from a letter sent a few days ago to SNP MP and former justice secretary Kenny MacAskill – who has also been making some enquiries relating to these issues – and it comes from no less a figure than.. the Lord Advocate himself.

While repeating Ms Miller’s strange point about seeking intrinsically less authoritative legal advice, Mr Wolffe notes that the duties of COPFS include providing the media with relevant information where appropriate. And in circumstances where information is already freely publicly available, and COPFS is aware of it and has investigated it and taken no action, it’s simply impossible to construct any sort of coherent or credible argument for why it could not simply say “Yes, you can quote that information”.

After a close reading of Chapter 17, we can find nothing anywhere in the COPFS Book Of Regulations that would prohibit the answering of our simple question about whether we can quote the Garavelli Paragraph, which anyone can read for themselves.

But a greater question arises from all of this evasion and buck-passing and denial. Could such determined obfuscation really be, as some suspect, being deployed for something as base as an act of petty revenge against allies of Alex Salmond, serving as unlucky proxies for the state’s failure to successfully prosecute the man himself?

An article written by the aforementioned Kenny MacAskill which was published in the Scotsman last week, when assessed in the wider context alongside other pieces of the puzzle, offered a deeply disturbing possible alternative explanation:

The implication – intended or otherwise – of the piece is that the prosecution of Craig Murray could in true purpose be the deliberate creation of some thick smoke around the Parliamentary inquiry into the actions of the Scottish Government, civil service and justice system around the prosecution of Mr Salmond – actions already found to have been unlawful, unfair and improper and cost the Scottish taxpayer a fortune, yet which have brought down no consequences on anyone.

The convenience of a live case against Mr Murray as an excuse behind which to hide the behaviour of politicians and officials all the way up to the First Minister and her Permanent Secretary, which would otherwise be exposed to full public view, suddenly seems all too apparent.

(And of course, the prosecution for contempt of a number of journalists more sympathetic to the First Minister than her predecessor might well be imagined to damage the prospects of the mainstream Scottish media’s compliance with any such hypothetical cover-up.)

There are further aspects of the case to which this site is privy but is legally unable to reveal to readers at this stage, and which are even more alarming. However, on the evidence above alone, it appears to us that something is very very rotten in the state of Scotland.

Print Friendly

    332 to “The pieces of the jigsaw”

    1. Willie says:

      A rotten Burgh, and rotten utterly.

      Where does anyone go from here Rev in a system like this?

    2. susan says:

      Deeply disturbing, Stu.

    3. Breeks says:

      I’m troubled by the Lord Advocate saying he is answerable to the Scottish Parliament, which conducts it’s affairs as if the Scotland Act and constitution (small ‘c’), of a devolved assembly was the constitutional superior to National Constitution and popular sovereignty of the Scottish people.

      If the Lord Advocate has abdicated the Scottish Constitution and popular sovereignty of the people, then hasn’t he signed the death warrant for the independent phenomenon of Scots Law?

    4. Was just thinking about this,

      time for a pot of tea a couple of sliced sausage and fried egg rolls (lashings of sauce) and settle down to read.

    5. Silent Boab says:

      The contempt charges Murray faces are about publishing prejudicial material.

      Basic stuff.

    6. G H Graham says:

      I’ve been around the block a few times, having testified in front of the US Senate, successfully sued a Fortune 500 company, carried a gun for personal protection while driving to work (in the USA so piss off now, if you’re offended), had a loaded weapon pointed at me by a union rep while at work, rubbed shoulders with the greedy, dangerous, narcissistic best that Wall Street has to offer & so on. Interesting career you might say. I’ve been robbed & left with nothing but the clothes I was standing in, in a foreign country & I also spent 3 years drooling from a wheelchair & had to learn to walk again.

      So you won’t be surprised that it takes something rather special to alarm me these days. So after watching this sad series develop; appointed with spectacular examples of incompetence, hate driven deviousness & willful revenge throughout, I find the behaviour of COPFS & indeed the Scottish Executive deeply offensive that should induce chronic nausea among the most hardened of observers.

      Any half wit can see that there is a clear yet unhealthy relationship between them & I have no doubt that, the one with a face like a wet weekend in Largs (Permanent Secretary Leslie Evans) has her Unionist fingerprints all over this case, sealed with Sturgeon’s Avon grade lipstick.

      I genuinely don’t think Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Humza Yousaf is sophisticated enough to orchestrate this but let’s assume he’s the ever willing tea boy, desperate to ensure he has a lasting legacy before he too is eventually booted out (I know they’re both reading this so do take this criticism personally because you are both a disgrace to the offices that you represent, to the office of Government & to the people of Scotland that you are supposed to serve.).

      There has never been any doubt in my mind that the prosecution of Craig Murray et al, is exactly what is articulated in this article; that it serves two purposes; to seek revenge for the unsuccessful prosecution of Alex Salmond & to create an environment which attempts to close down any further scrutiny.

      For who’s benefit then has the great offices of state, the Cabinet & the Department of Justice colluded? The easy answer would be Sturgeon. But you might consider her behaviour since 2014 which has demonstrated little appetite for independence & ask why that would be so?

      With a comfy political settlement she can continue to play the game with Downing Street just like Starmer does with Johnson every Tuesday because deep down, none of them want to upset or fundamentally alter the system which lavishes them with money, power & influence.

      Alex Salmond, for all his faults was perceived to be a significant threat to all of them personally, the structure of the devolution settlement & indeed the British State. The war of attrition against him & anyone who openly supports him is therefore far from being over.

      Watch your back Stuart Campbell.

    7. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      Stu.,

      79 years ago, Al Capone was eventually undone, nit for some heinous crimes of murder, but by the good old paperwork…

      https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/al-capone

      Might I respectfully suggest you hedge your bets and utilise some lateral thought in securing some justice?

      For example, what might happen if you handed a copy of ALL aspects of this case over to Mr Stephen Boyle, the Auditor General for Scotland?

      Mr Boyle is one of those unusual officials, UNLIKE YOU, he is legally entitled to look behind the curtain of obfustication from COPFS et al.

      Thereafter, if alleged misuse of taxpayer funds, or Heaven forbid, the whiff of malfeasance in public office, then the Auditor General will have had a ringside seat and by the legal powers invested in his duties, shall require him to publish “information about information” that you simply do not have access to.

      Just a thought.

      Al Capone treated infraction of the law as if he were above it.

      How did that turn out 79 years ago,

      Methinks this is an avenue that is worth considering.

    8. Polly says:

      Very well done to Kenny MacAskill and yourself for continuing to pursue this especially when pursuing this is such a labyrinthine process. It seems to me they’re basing some of their behaviour on how to act to specific journalists, or any advice which they’re willing to give, from an ideological perspective of whether they write for ‘real’ newspapers or not. They probably give advice to the newspaper owners which is referenced in the letter he received while they’re shrugging off the enquiries of anyone else they consider a ‘blogger’ though perhaps even John Pilger enquiringly individually as you have done would receive the same response. They’ve done their best to trash his reputation in recent years since he writes what many want hidden. Trashing reputations is the go to for those who wish to discredit someone.

    9. Oneliner says:

      Does a Crown Office which is confused help or hinder the cause of Scottish self-government?

      This feeds into the (alas, anecdotal – but sound) evidence I have about the obfuscation of civil servants ‘with their own agenda’ when it comes to Scotland’s third sector. Apparently a good deal of available European funding is not being claimed.

      ‘Something stinks’.

    10. deerhill says:

      ” It appears to us that something is very very rotten in the state of Scotland.”

      And certain people in power seem to want to drag it out for as long as possible. Can they manage to stretch it past the Holyrood election next year? Seems plausible.( “backlog of courts” “legal big-wigs with ‘flu, covid 20, etc”)

      Is it off topic to mention that a certain Ms. Garavelli was granted an exclusive interview with the FM on her birthday?
      Political “laying on of hands” perhaps?

    11. Iain Hughes says:

      “I do not accept your assertion that it is unacceptable that you received an anonymous response. In the event that you wish to escalate matters there is a complaints procedure available on the COPFS website.”

      After WWII the German troops involved in the genocide atrocities were not allowed to hide behind “just following orders” mantra. That mantra would have made it almost impossible to carry out any prosecutions. Everyone is accountable for their actions and COPFS is beneath contempt in not fronting with a named individual. Is it now the case that anyone can lay charges before the courts in Scotland maliciously and the veracity of those charges cannot be verified because nobody at COPFS will put their name to anything? How do you confirm anything is genuine without a point of contact? If it takes four months to get one answer I rather suggest people should start flooding the courts with false documentation and break the system with the rod of their own making.

    12. Dave says:

      “It’s interesting to have it confirmed that COPFS and the Lord Advocate are answerable to the Scottish Parliament – and therefore primarily to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Humza Yousaf”

      WRONG! This is a DEVOLVED PARLIAMENT we are talking about here not an ACTUAL INDEPENDENT SOVEREIGN Parliament and is therefore subject to “interference” and arbitration from the UK state via the CIVIL SERVICE in Scotland which is run controlled and operated by the SCOTLAND OFFICE.

      Why do I have to keep pointing out the distinction between the Scottish Government and the Scotland Office to you who should know better.
      These judiciary shenanigans are clear examples of these types of “Interference” and “Arbitration”
      If you want to know who the culprits are over the entire Alex Salmond prosecution and the follow up corruptions then look no further than the CIVIL SERVICE and their PAYMASTERS the UK STATE SCOTLAND COLONIAL OFFICE NOT the Scottish Government.

    13. Neil Mackenzie says:

      For most of us, our experience of the phrase “if it is in the public interest” has been from films and TV shows in which villains and heroes alike walk away from killing sprees because someone on high has decided it was not in the public interest to prosecute. Villains, because they do some sort of back-stabbing deal – or naked corruption and heroes, because losing your temper isn’t a crime – or naked corruption. It’s very flexible.

    14. pa_broon74 says:

      I think I might be the only person who doesn’t know what the paragraph is, or who it refers to.

      Hmmm… Obvs I’m not asking. Nope, no, no sireee, not me m’lud…

    15. stuart mctavish says:

      Further aspects which are even more alarming..

      Assuming none of the alphabet sisters were originally inner circle brothers of the type that Ms Black has alluded to previously, was it the Russians or the SNP that contacted the daily record to kick the whole thing off in the first place.

    16. Bob Mack says:

      Rather alarming story Rev. No matter who was involved and why, the only deductions that anyone could take from this are unpleasant to say the least.

      They protect those who they need, whilst prosecuting those who criticised them . All with the same information.

      More alarmingly, they now appear to indicate that all future proceedings will be limited by the prosecutions of Craig and Mark, because they can use the accused privacy as a shield to avoid giving details to any investigation. They will delay both contempt trials as long as required.

      Very cute and very devious. If you cannot see the collusion I suggest you go to specsavers.

      It seems like playing pass the parcel with a live grenade, but I suppose the stakes are very high for everybody involved in this unpalatable charade. Truth will out in the course

    17. Dave says:

      What you’re highlighting is the FACT that the judiciary in Scotland is NOT working on behalf on the best interests of the Scottish Government but in the best interests of the UK STATE.

      You cant convince anybody that any of this is helping the Scottish Government in any way shape or form but is effectively creating DIVISIONS DOUBT and ANIMOSITY towards the BEST chance we have to gain Independence let alone Independence without civil war.

      You’re trying desperately to create a rift between the Yes movement and the SNP Government because you’re upset over their Woke stance. I happen to agree with your position on the woke issue but I am FUCKED if im going to allow it to get between me and my desire for Independence and an escape from REAL fascism.

    18. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “You cant convince anybody that any of this is helping the Scottish Government in any way shape or form but is effectively creating DIVISIONS DOUBT and ANIMOSITY towards the BEST chance we have to gain Independence let alone Independence without civil war.”

      Maybe read it again but this time try to understand the words.

    19. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      GH Graham,

      I like your style sir, and agree with every single word that you write.

      Having also seen the naked narcissism, greed and corruption of Wall Street whilst working in America where the West is still wild and lawless, the most disturbing part of your contribution is the penultimate sentence. I concur. Sometimes the unthinkable reaches a point where it should be written…

      Watch your back Stuart Cambell.

    20. Bill Craig says:

      Excellent work, Stuart, thanks.

      I had noticed the inconsistency about responsibility for COPFS lying with parliament but not with the Justice Secretary.
      That is a critical point, on which much depends. Ultimately, it would seem to be for MSPs to bite this particular bullet.

    21. Lollysmum says:

      Lateral thinking would very probably serve you well in this case Stuart.

      As Alex showed in his dealings in Westminster there is always an alternative route to get to your intended destination. No doesn’t always mean no & often depends on how much & whose buttons you choose to push. Maybe a little more devious than a full on frontal assault. The Ways & Means act can be a wonderful tool at times.

      Where a barrier is being put up against your questions-your question is why. Then it’s how do I pass that barrier? Over, under, go around it are your options apart from the obvious crash head on into it. The barrier is built to withstand that head-on attack as COPFS has shown in their responses to you. There is always another way.

      The Information Commissioner is a good choice.

      I would also suspect that Craig Murray might have a case against COPFS for his being made a scapegoat to stop other journalists from seeking the truth where government wants the truth to remain hidden.

      Keep plugging away-there is a way to get to it, you just haven’t found it yet 🙂

    22. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      It’s interesting you jump to the conclusion that this is an attack on the SNP, when clearly is aimed at the law officers in Scotland and how they are currently operating.

      Perhaps the suspicion is your subconscious thoughts coming forth.

    23. Effijy says:

      This stinks to high heavens!

      The Lord Advocate IS responsible for this and
      We appear to have a government minister for justice
      who doesn’t know the Lord Advocate is answerable to him.

      In turn we have a Scottish Government who appointed someone
      Who doesn’t know what he is doing and who seem content to have
      A Lord Advocate who can prosecute or coverup those he wishes to select.

      He has also failed to meet with the agreed service levels of response, so he
      Should be brought to book for not being up to the job and abusing his powers.

      This really upsets me that they obviously have no interest in the public good or
      a level field and transparent legal system.

      I recently watched a new movie called the Post.
      The US Nixon Administration had leaked documents to show them completely corrupt and
      Knowingly sending thousands of young Americans to their death in Vietnam and a war they
      Knew could not be won.
      The Washington Post published against legal advice and government threats.
      Nixon took them to court demanding prison sentences and lost.

      The Supreme Court pronounced Nixon’s actions to be unconstitutional and
      a disservice to the citizens of the US.

      Nixon barred the Washington post from ever entering the White House.

      Unfortunately rampant corruption means people like Julian Assange taking the
      Same bold action in revealing the truth now leads to his imprisonment.

      Is I’ll

    24. Bill Craig says:

      I like the idea of referring this all to the Auditor General!

    25. Dave says:

      @Rev Stuart How am I supposed to interpret your article as anything other than another direct attack on the Scottish Government?

      You mention the possibility of a smoke screen being created around the “Parliamentary enquiry” by the judiciary and imply its being done to somehow protect the Scottish Government from the enquiry an enquiry sought by instigated by and run by the PRO UNION members of the Scottish Parliament as a deliberate party political smear attempt against the Scottish Government who are desperate LIKE YOU to link the Scottish Government to the prosecution of Alex Salmond and the follow up prosecution against Craig Murray because that would effectively hide any involvement or suspicion of involvement of the UK state via the Civil Service which THEY and THEY ALONE CONTROL and OPERATE even in Scotland.

      So the judiciary on the one hand tried to help the UK state by trying to prosecute Alex Salmond and then went after Craig Murray because of his outspoken views on the case while trying desperately to help the Scottish Government create a cover up against the UK state thats trying to smear it.

      Who’s side in the Scottish judiciary on in your opinion Stu?

    26. Lollysmum says:

      Aargh-apologies for the almost duplicate posts earlier-this laptop is too sensitive when you move the cursor over a button like submit comment.

    27. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack The article alludes to a collusion between the Scottish judiciary and the Scottish Government.

    28. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      Ok consider this. This whole series of event began when Nicola Sturgeon asked Leslie Evans to review and create a policy and code of conduct that would allow the prosecution of former Ministers. Supposedly to eliminate complaints in Westminster and Holyrood.

      That is the origins of where we are today.

      I have no liking for Ms Evans at all, but it was not her idea in the first place. She did as was asked and it was signed of by Ms Sturgeon .

      Make of that what you will.

    29. Astonished says:

      This stinks.

      LINDSEY MILLER signed it and must take responsibility for it, therefore she must go.

      Hopefully this will bring down their house of cards.

    30. F. McRae says:

      To G.H.GRAHAM. I think your remarks are 100% spot on. The amount of wool being pulled over eyes is staggering, and could require a whole flock of sheep….
      I truly fear for our Scottish legal system if the outcome of this whole sorry affair is allowed to fester. Time to burst the boil, let’s have true openness and transparency, as we were promised.

    31. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack

      Wrong. The Civil Service introduced a new policy regarding their code of conduct which extended the scope of the complaints procedure. All Nicola Sturgeon did was NOT oppose it and it wouldnt have mattered if she did. She didnt introduce it write it compile it or recommend it she simply agreed with a procedure that would have been written with or without her approval because the Civil Service doesnt need the Scottish Governments rubber stamp on any procedural changes they are accountable ONLY to the UK STATE.
      The subsequent use of this procedure to go after Alex Salmond was done by the CIVIL SERVICE within the CIVIL SERVICE as the procedure used is irrelevant OUTSIDE of the CIVIL SERVICE.
      This is a clear case of the UK state or more accurately the UK TORY GOVERNMENT using the Civil service to pursue its own agenda while the Labour opposition once again fails to oppose this blatant breach of Parliamentary rules and procedures which is suppose to keep the Civil service NON POLITICAL.

    32. Frank Waring says:

      If, as you say, the investigation and proceedings against Mr Salmond can never be publicly described or discussed without identifying the complainants, and identifying the complainants, even by implication, is going to be illegal for ever, then these will become questions, like the paternity of Prince Harry, to which everybody knows the answers, but nobody can utter them.

    33. Dave says:

      ONLY the UK Government and state can force the Civil Service to act politically nobody else has the authority or leverage to do so. You might want to remember and consider that most of all.

    34. Tinto Chiel says:

      Thanks for the information and analysis, SC.

      Pure Circumlocution Office meets The Twilight Zone stuff in reply. I never imagined an SNP government could become so compromised, vindictive and authoritarian. And to top it off Ms Miller calls you a journalist.

      @G H Graham: strong but excellent medicine.

    35. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      No Dave, you clearly have little knowledge of facts.

      The Civil Service in London were in fact very dubious about the new methods in Scotland. Linda Evans had to approach them to get permission to act. Nicola had to sign them off as First Minister of Scotland. These provisions do not apply in any other part of the UK. Check for yourself. Why would Nicola have to sign off codes of conduct that already existed?

      They were created for a purpose.

      Facts Dave, facts.

    36. winifred mccartney says:

      I have always believed their are plants inside the SG Civil Service, who are not very Civil and are working for UK. AS was seen as the biggest threat to the Union – so it seems reasonable to assume the knives would be out for him. I do think however that NS had little choice if complaints had come forward but to allow an investigation – think what would have happened if she had not allowed it. Leslie Evans is a prime mover in all this and she has history.

      MI5 or others have had plants in every organisation they don’t agree with – think Miners strike, IRA, etc etc and it should come as no surprise that they will have plants inside SG, SG Civil Service and inside party who have been out to destroy while having a smile on their face. Destroy from within – GRA, Hate Speech think Labour and momentum an inside job of destruction.

      As for Ruthie and her ‘put the boot in’ comment that is exactly what WM has been doing and will continue to do until they think the life has been sucked out of Scotland.

    37. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack Nicola Sturgeon doesnt sign off on Internal Civil Service policies she can sign to say she’s been notified and understands them but she hasnt any authority over the Civil Service AT ALL. The Civil Service is RESERVED across the whole of the UK. The Civil Service in Scotland is the responsibility of the SCOTLAND OFFICE and it would be they who would approve or sign off on any new procedures that would apply to the Civil Service in Scotland and only then after getting permission from the UK Government in London.
      Make no mistake this was a UK Government coup from day 1 and I think you know it.

    38. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack

      Who told you the UK Government were dubious about the new procedures? The Express or the Torygraph?

    39. Bob Mack says:

      @Winifred,

      These women could have complained at any time. It seems fair to assume that someone, somehow ,managed to gel their actions and make formal complaints. There were complaints that had been “stored” by the party for future use. Against one particular individual.

      The Civil service in London deal with numerous incidents in the Commons circus. They firefight complaints by the week on behaviour of MPs. I can recall few occasions when such an investigation endured by Alex Sa!mond took place in Westminster.

      No, he was targeted and the ultimate aim was not to have him reprimanded for breaking the Civil Service code, but to garner evidence to put him before a court of law for prosecution.

      Who benefits?

    40. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      No ,My daughters who works for them.

    41. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack

      I understand you feel obligated to believe them.

    42. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      Nicola did sign them off for Scotland only. It’s a matter of record.

    43. Margaret E says:

      Excellent and very disturbing piece of work. I truly commend not only your persistence, but also your ability to describe your findings in as clear and simple language as possible, so that they can be widely shared and understood.
      So Craig Murray is to be used in this truly appalling and cynical way? Do the powers that be simply hope that his health will give way? Is that the intention with Mr Salmond as well?
      Is Breeks right, and has the constitutional issue just been dealt another massive blow?

    44. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack

      Oh good you’ll be able to link to it no bother then.

    45. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave

      Find it yourself.

    46. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack

      Come on Bob thats pitiful as cop outs go why so desperate to implicate the Scottish Government for the sake of an own goal?

    47. mr thms says:

      Regarding it taking nearly four months to respond to Stuart’s letter.

      Sky News today has a long article about First Minister facing new questions on when she knew of complaints about Alex Salmond.

      https://news.sky.com/story/sturgeon-faces-new-questions-over-whether-she-misled-parliament-about-when-she-knew-of-salmond-complaints-12036962

      Is the SNP gearing up to implode?

      The timing coincides with the Scottish Parliament Committee inquiry into how the Scottish Government dealt with the claims about Mr Salmond, and also two potential future leaders of the SNP (and the Opposition?) wanting to stand in Ruth Davidson’s old seat.

      All of which makes me wonder if the FM has plans not to stand for election in the next Scottish Parliamentary Election?

    48. Graeme says:

      This whole affair is making Scotland look like a tin pot banana republic, maybe that’s what this is really all about, if not it’s certainly a fortunate consequence for the unionists

    49. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      I’m not spoon feeding you. Scot gov papers released under freedom of information prior to Salmond Inquiry. Help yourself.

    50. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack you want me to look for something I dont believe exists? Would you go to the North Pole to look for Santa because you were told it would prove he existed?

    51. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      If you never look for the evidence yourself it’s easy to deny what others say. It’s all there for you in black and white unlike Santa.

    52. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack Do you often look for things you believe dont exist?

    53. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi mr thms at 11:28 am.

      You typed,
      “Sky News today has a long article about First Minister facing new questions on when she knew of complaints about Alex Salmond.

      https://news.sky.com/story/sturgeon-faces-new-questions-over-whether-she-misled-parliament-about-when-she-knew-of-salmond-complaints-12036962

      Tom Gordon, in The Herald, had quite an illuminating story regarding the Sturgeon/Salmond meeting. Published 15th January 2019.

      https://web.archive.org/web/20200727103535/https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17358648.alex-salmond-took-lawyer-to-sex-probe-meeting-with-nicola-sturgeon/

    54. schrodingers cat says:

      Bob Mack says:
      @Dave,

      Nicola did sign them off for Scotland only. It’s a matter of record.
      —————-
      considering dave’s previous posts concerning procedure, that’s a pretty lame response.

      what is concerning here is the blatant contradiction in official replies to stu. it no longer seems to be a question of who is doing what but who is responsable for what.

      will this enquiry ever find out what happened or will it descend into an enquiry into the rolls and responsabilities of civil servants?

      on a positive note, if craig murray is only being prosecuted as a screen for the release of info from this enquiry, i doubt they have an ace in the hole to use against him and the probability he will win has surely increased?

      also stu

      “we have the Lord Advocate saying he’s answerable to Parliament”

      is this not just legalese? …..he may be answerable to holyrood but the responsability for bringing forward prosecutions is still his? what does “answerable” actually mean? does Humza’s power allow him to call the Lord Advocate sleekit, but nothing more?

      ergo no contradiction?

    55. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      “We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark, but it’s much harder to forgive a man who is afraid of the light”.

      No more exchanges.

    56. Walter Jones says:

      Sky News this morning:

      Sturgeon faces new questions over whether she misled parliament about when she knew of Salmond complaints

      An unseen account suggests Ms Sturgeon took part in a “discussion about the investigation” before the date she gave to parliament.

      hqttps://news.sky.com/story/sturgeon-faces-new-questions-over-whether-she-misled-parliament-about-when-she-knew-of-salmond-complaints-12036962

    57. Terry says:

      Brilliant article. Hopefully the full truth will emerge despite their frantic efforts to hide it – but they are cunning b@stards, aren’t they?

      Loved Kenny Macaskill’s stray Avon lady comment, BTW.

      On a serious note how the hell could they do this not just to Alex, but to his family and friends? Surely they must have known them well as some of the main players in this have been in the SNP for donkey’s years. Truly awful. Also how could they do this to those of us who have worked hard to fight for independence cos that whole attack on him was also an attempt to nullify the independence movement.

      Well the SNP is supposed to have scottish independence at its heart – not devolution. The above story smacks of a stitch up – Better Together takes on a new twist.

    58. Bob Mack says:

      @SC,

      The records are posted on the SG website. Dave is wearing, but my bad.

    59. schrodingers cat says:

      will this revolution (enquiry) be televised?

    60. GeeH says:

      Could one of Craig Murray’s overseas associates not publish all the truth behind this saga without threat of prosecution?

    61. Bob Mack says:

      @SC,

      I believe not. Suggestion is that it may compromise witnesses.

      Reporting will be restricted as Inquiry are taking evidence under oath.

    62. schrodingers cat says:

      @bob

      my point was that is this an enquiry into rolls and responsibilities of civil servants or into what happened?
      so far, your exchange with dave, (who, to be fair, seems to explain the process quite clearly) is only about rolls and responsibilities.

      daves point is, as such, this thread only encourages folk to claim that nicola ate their hamster

      re
      G H (i carry a gun cos i’ve a small dick)Graham says:

      I’ve been around the block a few times, Leslie Evans has her Unionist fingerprints all over this case, sealed with Sturgeon’s Avon grade lipstick.

    63. Bob Mack says:

      @SC,

      I’m not point scoring. These records were available in the SG website last week. I told people here on Wings I was reading them..I

      Leslie Evans confirmed it was Nicola who wanted the code changed IN SCOTLAND to include former Ministers.

      She (Evans)had to verify with Whitehall this was ok. It does not apply in any other region of the UK. Nicola had to sign off this change for Scotland only.

      I think that’s pretty clear No?

    64. Walter Jones says:

      Sky News:

      STURGEON FACES NEW QUESTIONS OVER WHETHER SHE MISLED PARLIAMENT ABOUT WHEN SHE KNEW OF SALMOND COMPLAINTS
      News Home
      More from SKY NEWS
      Monday, July 27th, 2020 1:11am

      Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon faces new questions over whether she misled parliament about when she knew of sexual misconduct complaints against Alex Salmond.

      Sky News has learned there are conflicting accounts of a meeting she attended at the height of a Scottish government inquiry into her predecessor.

      Ms Sturgeon told parliament she was informed of complaints against Mr Salmond when he told her himself on 2 April 2018. However, a previously unseen account of an earlier meeting contradicts her version of events.

      It indicates she was involved in a “discussion about the investigation” before the date she gave to parliament.

      Political opponents say it raises questions over whether or not the first minister misled the Scottish Parliament and breached the ministerial code.

      The questions arise from events in 2018, when two female civil servants made complaints of historical sexual misconduct against Mr Salmond, which he strenuously denied.

      The Scottish government mounted an inquiry but it was abandoned after Mr Salmond launched a legal challenge and the Court of Session found the handling of the investigation was “tainted by apparent bias”.

      The contradiction surrounding Ms Sturgeon’s version of events centres on what she knew of the Scottish government’s inquiry – and when.

      In a statement to the Scottish Parliament in January 2019, she said she was informed of the inquiry by Mr Salmond himself on 2 April 2018.

      However, it emerged during Mr Salmond’s recent criminal trial – at which he was acquitted of 13 charges of sexual assault – that a meeting took place four days before on 29 March 2018.

      The meeting took place in the first minister’s Holyrood office and was attended by Ms Sturgeon, a government official and Geoff Aberdein, Mr Salmond’s former chief of staff.

      No evidence was heard at the trial about the content of the 29 March meeting, but Sky News has seen an account that indicates the complaints against Mr Salmond were discussed, contradicting what Ms Sturgeon told the Scottish Parliament.

      The account that we have seen states: “The conversation was around the fact of the complaints, without discussing the specifics of them.

      “There was discussion about the investigation, the process of it, the fact it was a civil service investigation being conducted by civil servants.”

      Details of the meeting were recorded during precognition interviews prior to the criminal trial and Mr Aberdein revealed his involvement while giving evidence as a defence witness.

      He told the court he had been contacted by an aide to Ms Sturgeon in the spring of 2018 and it triggered a series of subsequent meetings.

      6 March 2018 – Geoff Aberdein met Nicola Sturgeon’s aide for “a catch up”

      9 March 2018 – During this meeting, Nicola Sturgeon’s aide told Geoff Aberdein of two complaints of alleged misconduct against Alex Salmond

      29 March 2018 – Geoff Aberdein met Nicola Sturgeon in her Holyrood office. A senior Scottish government official was also present. Sky News has been told that the investigation into complaints against Alex Salmond was discussed at this meeting

      2 April 2018 – Nicola Sturgeon met Alex Salmond at her house in Glasgow. She tells the Scottish Parliament that this was when he informed her of the complaints against him. Geoff Aberdein was among others present in the house at the time, including a senior Scottish government official.

      Christine Jardine MP, Liberal Democrat for Edinburgh West, says the sequence of meetings raises serious questions for Scotland’s first minister.

      She told Sky News: “What we have now are concerns about inconsistencies in what we’ve been told, and what we need is to know whether the first minister deliberately, or by mistake, misled parliament.

      “These are all SNP people discussing something that had, and still has, the potential to seriously damage the SNP.

      “What were they talking about? What was the purpose of it? Has the first minister given full disclosure? If not, that’s a serious matter.”

      A Scottish government spokesperson told Sky News that Ms Sturgeon does not dispute that the 29 March meeting took place but refutes the suggestion that it involved discussion of the Scottish government’s Salmond inquiry.

      Sky News asked the Scottish government several questions regarding the meeting on 29 March 2018.

      We asked if the Alex Salmond investigation was indeed discussed. A spokesperson replied: “The first minister stands by her statement to parliament.”

      :: Listen to Sophy Ridge on Sunday on Apple podcasts, Google podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker

      We asked if the first minister misled the Scottish Parliament when she told MSPs that it was Mr Salmond who informed her of the investigation into complaints against him on 2 April 2018.

      A spokesperson replied: “The first minister stands by her statement to parliament.”

      We asked if minutes were kept of the 29 March 2018 meeting and if it was recorded in the diaries of either Ms Sturgeon or the government official present. The Scottish government made no comment.

      When contacted by Sky News, Mr Aberdein declined to comment.

      Questions arising from the new revelations will almost certainly be asked of Ms Sturgeon when she faces a Holyrood committee looking into the Scottish government’s botched 2018 investigation of complaints against Mr Salmond.

      The cross-party committee will start taking oral evidence in the autumn from the first minister and others, who include Mr Salmond, Mr Aberdein and Ms Sturgeon’s husband Peter Murrell, the chief executive of the SNP.

      There are other reviews, too, stemming from the abandoned inquiry. Both have been put on hold as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

      The Scottish government itself is looking into how its harassment procedures were applied.

      Separately, Ms Sturgeon referred herself to an independent panel that will look into whether or not she broke the ministerial code in her dealings with Mr Salmond.

      Her self-referral came after opposition parties questioned why she had been made aware of the inquiry into Mr Salmond when, as first minister, she should not have known about it until its outcome.

      They also queried why three meetings and two phone calls with Mr Salmond in spring-summer 2018 had not been minuted as government business.

      Ms Sturgeon said at the time that it was party business, not government, and insisted she had done nothing to intervene in the inquiry process.

      Sky News

    65. Casper says:

      Stu- watch your back.

    66. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The contempt charges Murray faces are about publishing prejudicial material.
      Basic stuff.”

      Sorry, but that’s bollocks. He faces a whole range of charges in various categories, including charges for doing exactly what the Garavelli Six did, only Craig did it much less so.

    67. schrodingers cat says:

      Bob Mack says:
      I think that’s pretty clear No?

      —————-

      nothing is clear, thats why i avoid making allegations

    68. katherine hamilton says:

      COPFS and the AG are answerable to Humza Yousef, are they. You can see the scenario.
      “COPFS, did you authorise X and Y?”
      “Yes”
      “Please explain your reasoning” ie account for your decisions.
      “Naw, don’t have to.”

      Words are great things aren’t they.
      Answerable is not accountable. Lawyers, eh?

    69. SOG says:

      So in addition to this, with the GRA issues, the lack of focus on Independence, the grouse moors business of illegal killing of raptors and the demand for protection of Mountain Hares, SNP must be shedding members and support at an alarming rate. They are going to need a second party hoovering up List votes.

    70. Bob Mack says:

      @SC,
      Your dogged determination to deflect from the SNP hierarchy does your loyalty credit, but I’m sure all will be revealed in the course.

    71. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack Its clear that your “named” source is Linda Evans not the SG.

    72. Effijy says:

      Sky News- the newest kid on the block to peddle the rich man’s propaganda.

      Why would they find a document?
      How do the authenticate a document.

      Is Christine Jardine more concerned about a possible
      Mix up of dates in the First Minister’s diary than her party cover up
      For Jeremy Thorpe, Cyril Smith, Lord Reynard and David Steel?

      How about we use the Cummings and Gove story about not being able
      To see properly so drove to a meeting where she couldn’t identify who was there?

      Fake news, fake politician in a fake party no one has given a majority to
      In over 100.

      Go ask yourself why Christine!

    73. Craig Murray says:

      Bob Mack

      While I would love it to be true that this was an affair cunningly concocted by Unionists in Whitehall, I can tell you that the opposite is true. Evans consulted Whitehall to get cover for what they were doing. But Whitehall in fact advised that to extend a code retrospectively to include former ministers was not a wise idea. Sturgeon and Evans ignored Whitehall advice to pursue Salmond.

    74. schrodingers cat says:

      katherine hamilton says:
      Words are great things aren’t they.
      Answerable is not accountable. Lawyers, eh?

      ——

      same
      “we have the Lord Advocate saying he’s answerable to Parliament”

      is this not just legalese? …..he may be answerable to holyrood but the responsability for bringing forward prosecutions is still his? what does “answerable” actually mean? does Humza’s power allow him to call the Lord Advocate sleekit, but nothing more?”

    75. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      Schrodingers Cat may find you concise but I have no idea what you are actually talking about.

      Ps. You realise that meetings between the FM and her Chief Civil servants are MINUTED. There’s a clue!!

    76. Famous15 says:

      I forgot to mention one of my many reasons for wishing independence is that the British Security Service has corrupted the Crown Office,much of the Scottish judicial system and the highest reaches of the Civil Service together with the police,BBC and not just the governing party but all political parties operating in Scotland All corrupted.

      They did it throughout their imperial past too. Disillusioned Crown Servants from the former colonies are now confirming it.

    77. Bob Mack says:

      @Craig Murray,

      Thank you Craig. You explained it better than I.

    78. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Craig Murray (12.25) –

      ‘Sturgeon and Evans ignored Whitehall advice to pursue Salmond.’

      Just for clarity – ‘Sturgeon and Evans ignored Whitehall advice in order to pursue Salmond’, yeah?

    79. Gary45% says:

      They went after Alex Salmond and nearly destroyed him, for simply being that good a politician.
      Now they are after Nicola Sturgeon for being the same.
      Both have been head and shoulders in their ability over the pathetic opposition parties.
      Before any numpty starts with the “Sturgeonista” garbage, she is the most popular leader in the UK at the moment.

    80. Dave says:

      @Craig Murray not as cunning as your attempts to pretend you’re Craig Murray which is not in any way shape or form cunning at all.

      We’re supposed to believe that Nicola Sturgeon is the kind of person who would condemn an innocent to prison and the sex offenders register for life for? What? Being a mentor? Helping her become the FM of Scotland? Or for making her transition to the Leader of the party easy peasy?

    81. Walter Jones says:

      Is there no European/International Law Body who could be asked to look into this for you Rev on behalf of Mr Murray?

      Seems a bit “Law of the Jungle” stuff, where no one wants to be held to account.

      Lots of finger pointing and no accountability.

      Is Scots Law really this bad?

    82. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Make no mistake this was a UK Government coup from day 1 and I think you know it.”

      Dave, this is absolute horseshite. However much you’d like this to be a UK government stitch-up, there is no point anywhere along the line where it’s been driven by anyone responsible to the UK government. Every step of the way this has been a Scottish Government fiasco.

      – It was the Scottish Government who stitched up Mark McDonald to provide the excuse for the new regulations.

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-trail-of-breadcrumbs/

      – It was Nicola Sturgeon and Leslie Evans who made sure the new rules could be retrospectively applied to former ministers.

      https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-s-call-for-rule-change-over-sex-inquiries-led-to-trial-of-alex-salmond-gfl9h87xd

      – It was Nicola Sturgeon who failed to sack Leslie Evans after the crooked travesty of an inquiry, when even The Times was calling for her head, and who instead extended Evans’ contract.

      http://archive.is/aWjTy#selection-551.0-555.159

      – It was SNP politicians and staffers who collaborated to put together the dossier of complaints, under the “guidance” of Judith Mackinnon, who has a long track record of dodginess and answers to Nicola Sturgeon.

      https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3772983/civil-service-boss-judith-mackinnon-alex-salmond-snp-sex-pest-probe/

      – It was senior SNP staffers who said they’d “sit on” the allegations of serious crimes rather than take them to the police, and would hold them back as dirt to use against Salmond if he ever looked like making a political return which might threaten Nicola Sturgeon’s authority.

      http://archive.is/VY0Sa

      – It was the office of the Lord Advocate, a Scottish Government agency, who improperly offered Police Scotland the inquiry dossier in connection to the criminal prosecution.

      https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-mp-blasts-role-crown-22136669

      – It was Nicola Sturgeon who lied to Parliament about when she knew about the investigation.

      https://news.sky.com/story/sturgeon-faces-new-questions-over-whether-she-misled-parliament-about-when-she-knew-of-salmond-complaints-12036962

      Etc etc. You can stick your fingers in your ears and shout “LA LA LA LA LA I TRUST IN QUEEN NICOLA LA LA LA LA” all you want, but those are the facts. The UK government has absolutely nothing to do with this. Why do you think the Scottish media establishment is rallying round her and sending the likes of Dani Garavelli to do soft-soap interviews rather than using Salmond’s acquittal to call for her head for the giant shitshow this has been from start to finish? Who is it you think they’re actually scared of? Nicola “I’m putting indy off for the forseeable future” Sturgeon? Sober the fuck up, mate.

    83. Dave says:

      @Ian Brotherhood

      “Just for clarity – ‘Sturgeon and Evans ignored Whitehall advice in order to pursue Salmond’, yeah?”

      I think you’ve just busted the conspiracy wide open. Lolz.

      Whitehall didnt want any legislation in place that could have put Alex Salmond in prison or cause a case to be built that would see him in court. “Apparently”.

    84. Josef Ó Luain says:

      Stop fucking about with the overly complex theorising, folks. Cut-to-the-chase: Ask yourself—Who gets paid to safeguard the perceived interests of the British Establishment? If you don’t believe getting rid of AS was/is a perceived interest of the British Establishment, you’re also likely to believe that Willie McCray took his own life.

    85. schrodingers cat says:

      i would be concerned about commenting on a live case

      careless talk costs lives etc

      what you say craig, maybe true. but i couldnt possibly comment

    86. Bob Mack says:

      Whitehall didn’t want any legislation put in place that would have brought down Westminster .

      They are smarter than you think.

    87. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “not as cunning as your attempts to pretend you’re Craig Murray which is not in any way shape or form cunning at all”

      I can assure you that that is the real Craig Murray.

    88. Dave says:

      @Rev Stu

      Linda Evans is responsible to the UK Government as are ALL of her subordinate staff and any member of the Civil Service who could have made an accusation. The ENTIRE civil Service is RESERVED none of it is DEVOLVED.

      You’re sourcing evidence from sources you yourself have discredited over and over and over. How many years have you spent eviscerating the UK media not only in the manner of their reporting but also the wording and phrasing never mind the content.

      You cant seriously quote UK media articles as evidence after the gubbing you’ve given them.

    89. Effijy says:

      I wonder how Scotland’s corrupt closed doors justice system could proceed
      If a large number of individuals were to post one piece of information that they
      Consider related to the discredited “Victim”.

      A jigsaw of pieces all from unrelated sources and only stating that it is what
      A 3rd party said publicly.

      It would virtually reveal the accuser’s identity and make other jigsaw pieces look
      an enigma within a puzzle.

      Could they prosecute hundreds of individuals for being responsible for one piece
      Of information in a 100 piece jigsaw?

    90. Dave says:

      @Rev Stu I accept your word that Craig Murray actually did post that statement but now Im wondering at motivation. What has happened that would have somebody of Nicola Sturgeons character make her want to send her mentor off to prison destroy his life completely and leave him shattered for life? Do you or Craig know?

    91. James Che. says:

      Keeping it simple, “for the public good” ermm,
      We are the public, being spoken about I presume,
      We want it to be transparent and open, not behind closed doors.
      We should apply pressure for the sake of the public good. If hearings and court cases are hidden behind closed doors, we the public can not ascertain wether there has been injustices carried out, wether information and evidence given and taken is biased to one particular victim or accuser.
      We should oppose hidden, possible kangaroo courts in Scotland. We are the public and we should make it known that we wish for all cases to be held openly, after all we do not wish to find out at a later date there may be some foreign benificary to a certain court case/s result/s.
      As the MSM suggests.

    92. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “You’re sourcing evidence from sources you yourself have discredited over and over and over.”

      No, I’m not. I’m sourcing it from Alex fucking Salmond. But since I can’t publish transcripts of my phone conversations with him, I’m pointing you to newspaper stories that I know he’s confirmed to me directly and personally are true.

      Oh, and read this too:

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/07/sky-news-miss-the-story/

    93. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      I despair. There exists No evidence that could convince you .
      Is there ? Like a mother who insists her son ( Pol Pot), wouldn’t harm a fly.

    94. G H Graham says:

      Does the person behind the anonymous “schrodingers cat” account name call other posters here with puerile, playground comments because it makes him/her feel sophisticated/clever/important?

      I’m not going to justify myself to a keyboard prick who hides behind a picture of a fucking cat but maybe if you too found yourself single highhandedly up against powerful, well funded establishment forces inside a country with a gun culture you too might find it reasonable to carry a gun and check under your car every morning.

      Unless of course you are as cavalier with your life as you are with your schoolboy comments?

      I won’t add value to your cheap announcements on this forum any further. But whatever you do next, don’t overdose on the Wurther’s Originals while wanking furiously over your keyboard in response, ok?

    95. Beaker says:

      @GeeH says:
      27 July, 2020 at 11:51 am
      “Could one of Craig Murray’s overseas associates not publish all the truth behind this saga without threat of prosecution?”

      I think that would cause an absolute fucking uproar, legality issues aside (of which I do not have a clue tbh). No one would come out it smelling of roses.

    96. robbo says:

      I’m going out for an extra case (not bag) of butterkist!

      Someone high is gonna fall in this saga,just hope it’s the right one.Fuck “London or Olympus has fallen”, it’s Scotland I’m worried about.

      Interesting next few months indeed.

    97. These unionists and SNP plants are afraid of Scotland becoming independent because all their crimes will be exposed and most of them will end up in jail aye it’s true yir ain kind are the worst

    98. Kangaroo says:

      A critical piece of the puzzle is just who initiated the change in protocol and who backdated it to cover former MSPs. Once this was done then the process gathers a life of its own like a runaway train it won’t stop until it crashes. Was it like the “Yes Minister” TV show with civil service manipulation of a Minister or was it initiated by the Minister? Will we ever find out?

      Clearly from this article, and other sources, there would appear to be an orchestrated attempt to prosecute/silence prominent independence supporters whilst allowing Unionists an almost unfettered voice.
      As suggested by some btl commenters there must be a way of obtaining the necessary information.

    99. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “A critical piece of the puzzle is just who initiated the change in protocol and who backdated it to cover former MSPs. Once this was done then the process gathers a life of its own like a runaway train it won’t stop until it crashes. Was it like the “Yes Minister” TV show with civil service manipulation of a Minister or was it initiated by the Minister? Will we ever find out?”

      We already know. I’ve linked you to the answer above.

    100. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack You havent produced a single shred of evidence of anything because clearly you have none so spare me the fake hand wringing.

    101. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      I was thinking more about the neck area myself.

    102. Dave says:

      @Rev Stu OK thats actually the first time you’ve mentioned Alex Salmond as a source so thats a new ball game.

      You’re saying that Alex himself is convinced Nicola Sturgeon is his adversary and believes she conspired with the Civil Service to stitch him up with vile accusations that she knew would also risk her Governments status with the electorate her job as FM and the chances of winning any future election in either the Scottish or Westminster parliaments so again I really need to know what could possibly motivate her to this kind of self harming bizarre behaviour at a time when she is at the top of her game and successful at all levels of Government?

      Could it not even be possible that she was duped by Linda Evans and the UK state aparatus?

    103. Confused says:

      If I was an imam I would issue a fatwa against the bullshitters …

      lets see what this pile of crap means

      p1 we made you wait because we can’t be arsed
      p2 we will use the “live case” diversion to avoid answering questions we don’t like
      p3 the Lord Advocate “dindu nuffin”; the Solicitor General, likewise
      p4 Crown Counsel made the decision; we aren’t saying who they are. The LA is the heid bummer, but reports to holyrood.
      p5 the guys you mention aren’t getting prosecuted
      p6 we don’t snitch; complain if you want
      p7 “inappropriate for COPFS to provide detailed information” – fuck you, cunt
      p8 we looked at ALL the other case you mention – HONEST INJUN – and just decided not to; WE DONT NEED TO TELL YOU WHY
      p9 we are not taking your bait; get a lawyer ! – HA! – one hand washes the other …
      – we retain the right to seriously fuck you up if you try this
      p10 the alphabet women will remain anonymous

      Lindsey Miller, deputy, “serious casework” – as opposed to “trivial casework and mild banter”

      I hate lawyers.

    104. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack Self harming does seem to be your thing.

    105. Andrew Morton says:

      If a post contains more than a couple of words in capital letters, I don’t bother reading it.

    106. Mialuci says:

      I learned many years ago that the scottish legal system is pretty good, but the people running the show need a good kick up the arse, you can only get true justice when you are allowed a jury trial, a justice of the peace can sit and pretend all he likes, but he will find you guilty even though he knows you are innocent of any wrong doing, and as for freedom of Information, you are as well writing to the man in the moon for all the good it will do you, you never get true disclosure if they can hide behind that not in the public interest crap
      I have not had any respect for the people running the scottish legal system for years, to me they are a bunch of wasters who have insulted my Intelligence more than once
      It will never change, its all just a big battle of wits, I have seen some great acting in Scotland, but most of my most memorable shows where at the sheriff courts up and down Scotland lol

    107. Republicofscotland says:

      Mr Murray points out in his this blog post, that its more than likely Sturgeon is lying.

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/07/sky-news-miss-the-story/

      Does this site no longer take comments from mobile phones?

    108. Craig Murray says:

      Dave

      I think most of the explanation is here
      https://www.conter.co.uk/blog/2020/7/7/snp-at-the-crossroads

      If you asked me to explain it in one sentence, it would be this following.

      Nicola sees any actual move for Independence as a threat to her career; and she cares about her career much more than she cares about Independence.

    109. Walter Jones says:

      G H Graham 12.53pm

      Well done sir.

      You handed the Cat his ass on a plate.

      Brilliant.

      I have called out the Cat and his other names he uses on her as being working directly for the SNP HQ.

      He is an SNP Trolling plant.

      Here to discredit ANY poster who tries to paint Sturgeon and her cronies as Unionist Devolutionists.

      Which of course Sturgeon and her inner circle are.

      Salmond was a threat to that and had to “disappear”.

      Not to murder him, but to jail him for a very long time.

      But their plans failed spectacularly, and are now coming back to haunt them.

    110. schrodingers cat says:

      G H Graham says:
      maybe if you too found yourself single highhandedly up against powerful, well funded establishment forces inside a country with a gun culture you too might find it reasonable to carry a gun and check under your car every morning.
      —————-

      how do you know i havent?
      perhaps i just dont feel the need to brag about it

    111. Silent Boab says:

      That is true. He did a whole heap of bad court reporting and your post is disingenuous Crap.

    112. Dave says:

      @Craig Murray

      Do you honestly believe that somewhere down the line Nicola Sturgeon suddenly stopped being an idealist gave up on her dream to become the kind of establishment figure that would condemn a “Former”? friend and mentor to prison and the sex offenders register for life? While continuing to support Social Democratic ideals humanitarian politics welfare provision Anti Conservative dogma and inclusive politics?
      And all this on at the very pinnacle of achieving this dream that motivated her into politics to begin with?

      You dont find it all a bit contradictory?

    113. Bob Mack says:

      @Craig Murray,

      Reading that lost you put up Craig, it dawned on me that Perhaps what the SNP are up to is also making itself attractive to the wheelers and dealers of this world ,who can make anything happen.

      Hence the swing to the right wing of politics. Could they actually be “selling” Independence as a welcome mat to big business interests rather than to Joe public. Concessions and tax breaks being the order of the day.

      Some very dodgy individuals seem integral to the party these days.

      Money does after all talk very loudly indeed.

    114. A C Bruce says:

      What I want to know is who the hell do I vote for to help achieve independence before I fall off my perch.

    115. Dave says:

      @Bob Mack

      When did they swing to the right? Which right wing policy dogma are they following?

    116. liz says:

      @winifred stop excusing Nicola S from this. You’re saying if complaints were made, she had no choice….

      Complaints were made and sat on for years by Murrell, McCann etc.
      Are you seriously saying that NS was unaware of these complaints?

      NS pushed the retrospective part of that legislation. She did not need to do it.

    117. mike cassidy says:

      Its better to adhere to the cockup theory of history.

      Whatever the reason(s) for it being done in the first place

      The stitching up of Alex Salmond was never meant to go so pear-shaped.

      Illegal activity in the first courtcase.

      Innocent verdict in the second courtcase.

      Now its tsunami time for those involved.

      And the legal shenanigan exposed here is just one of the ways they are all trying to stay in the boat.

      After all, when Evans had her contract renewed, the message was clear.

      We’ve f**ked up. But let’s stick together.

      Me. I’m hoping for another f**k up!

    118. John Thomson says:

      Stu thankyou it’s one hell of an eye opener probably the best yet and goes deep into the heart. If Scotland does not get to the bottom of this then we would not deserve independence. Truth has to come out and because of yourself, Craig and others it is slowly being dragged to the surface.
      Angus Robertson being put up against Joanna Cherry takes on a new meaning for me, it is possible and likely that Sturgeon will resign and force Hollyrood elections. One can only dream

    119. Dave says:

      So what actually is the plan to force the UK state to acknowledge Scotlands right to self determination without a section 30 agreement leading to a referendum?

      I appreciate that Scotland actually has the right but how do we force the UK state to acknowledge it?

    120. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Could it not even be possible that she was duped by Linda Evans and the UK state aparatus?”

      I doubt that the actress from Dynasty has such skills. But no, absolutely no chance.

    121. Bob Mack says:

      @Dave,

      My hamster is willing to explain it to you,but I’m not.

    122. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “If you asked me to explain it in one sentence, it would be this following.

      Nicola sees any actual move for Independence as a threat to her career; and she cares about her career much more than she cares about Independence.”

      Yup.

    123. Papko says:

      Just to clarify

      As far as I understand the whole Salmond affair was engineered by a cabal inside the SNP to smear their former leader and hopefully remove him from public life (and any influence he may exert on a the leadership of the party).

    124. McHaggis69 says:

      Apologies…

      but if the Garavelli paragraph (which i used to get one name from) is still up and readable, AND the COPFS have told you they reviewed everything and decided to take no action, then why do you think they would puruse you for publishing the same paragraph?

    125. Bill McLean says:

      I’ve read this blog daily since it began. It was educational, illuminating and inspiring, but all along i’ve wondered how long it would take until British state interference took it over. Independence is done now.I’m also pretty sure that some of those who have most loudly proclaimed their support for independence have been “sleepers”, awaiting the right time. Alex may be destoyed politically now and Nicola Sturgeon and her government are the next target. Heartbreaking to realize that some of our own, as ever, have been playing for the other side all along. People have been warning of this for decades. We are England’s greatest assett. They won’t let go.They have now won. You know who you are and shame on you!

    126. Bob Mack says:

      @Bill McLean,

      Quitter,

    127. Joe says:

      Yes, yes, yes. Whatever. Facts n figures etc

      As a freedom loving Scottish patriot all I need now is someone from the SNP to come online and tell me how to think about this and how to vote. Also – am I allowed to any greasy food?

      The only big question is – should I wave a saltire or a lion rampant when we win our referendum next week?

      Big non-threatening fist bumps to my rebel brothers and sisters and our fight to end the oppressive patriarchy in Scotland! Watch out Queen of England we will end your patriarchy next.

      Don’t you just hate Donald Trump?

    128. Republicofscotland says:

      On a side note Joanna Cherry and Sturgeon’s obedient minion Angus Robertson, could soon be fighting it out for the Edinburgh Central seat, if Cherry isn’t deselected for it by the party heirarchy.

      I’d like to think voters in Edinburgh Central will vote for Cherry and not Robertson.

    129. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Bob Mack (1.52) –

      That was uncalled for. We all feel like chucking it sometimes. Even Rev admitted as much after indyref1.

      An apology is in order.

    130. G H Graham says:

      Look folks, Nicola Sturgeon is a politician. She’s not Mother Theresa or the Scottish variety of the dreamy tooth fairy. She’s carved a career for herself from the get-go in politics; an environment in which you can genuinely only thrive by fucking people over & over to get to the top.

      One’s skill at operating inside political circles, especially at higher levels of office, is measured by the subtlety with which your adversaries are back-stabbed, discredited & side lined.

      Unfortunately, her side kick Evans, screwed up her plan of getting rid of Salmond, who was not simply a figurehead threat to the British Establishment but a threat to their very careers because he was obviously frustrated at the lack of progress being made towards achieving independence.

      Instead, their scheme backfired & blew up in their faces twice! Now Sturgeon, Evans & their cronies are desperate to put the entire fiasco behind them but this is being hampered by the impending inquiry demanded by Salmond himself.

      So the two joint collaborators-in-chief have enabled the justice system in their favour to attack pro Salmond agitators & using convoluted, puerile legal arguments to cloak if not eliminate any such inquiry. Humza Yousef is unfortunately just a willing participant, desperate as he is to cling on to high office, a fat pension & stuff his expense claims with as much junk as he can before he too finds his arse out on the street.

      Anyone who imagines that Sturgeon is a sophisticated, backdoor, independence operator who has some sort of secret plan she is keeping close to her chest needs their head examined.

      Murrell is the guy you should also take a good close look at; he’s the one who has built the party political apparatus around her, stuffing it with extremists & loyal careerists who can be called upon to rubbish anyone who questions the miserable lack of progress at Bute House.

      After six years of bullshitting you would think that there was no one left who still believed that Scotland would achieve independence under the leadership of Sturgeon.

      I’m not sure what’s more surprising; that she thinks she can still bullshit her way through another term after all that’s be revealed these last few years or that there are still people who think that Boris Johnson will simply keel over the moment Sturgeon wins yet one more phoney mandate.

    131. mike cassidy says:

      Bill McLean

      On that argument Sturgeon, Evans and the rest were/are were unsuspecting pawns in the Intelligence game.

      And are now about to reap what they unintentionally sewed.

      If they are as dumb as you are implying

      Were they ever going to lead Scotland to independence anyway?

    132. Dave says:

      @Papko

      Possible but Nicola Sturgeon being one of them? Im yet to be convinced she is the kind of person that would condemn anybody to prison on false charges especially vile sex crime charges. It doesnt fit with her lifetime battle against inequality injustice patronage privilege and state corruption unless you think she is suffering from schizophrenia.

    133. Republicofscotland says:

      So how do we removed careerist Sturgeon and her clique, along with £100,00k a year Murrell from the party, and get back on track to independence?

    134. Dave says:

      @GH Graham

      She is also an idealist who has walked the walk of social democracy humanitarianism welfare support inclusive politics anti patronage anti privilege anti racism anti discrimination of all kinds. She doesnt fit the profile of somebody who would be capable of sending an innocent to jail for any reason.

    135. Dave says:

      @Republic of Scotland

      What would constitute “Back on track”?

    136. Bob Mack says:

      @Ian Brotherhood,

      Your right of course. My apologies to you Bill McLean. I was wrong to write that.

      I know you are a long time Indy man. These things make everybody frustrated.

    137. Bill McLean says:

      Don’t be smart with me Bob Mack – i’ve read your stuff too!
      I’ll never give up on a dream for Scottish independence so stick your opinion wherever you like! Mike Cassidy – have you any idea of some of the antics the state have got up to over the years. Both of you smart guys get your heads together and tell us your plan for getting us to independence! Divide and rule again – will you never catch on?

    138. Joe says:

      @Craig Murray and Rev.Stuart Campbell

      While public figures might have to be careful on this, I don’t have to be:

      Its more than just career. She (and probably many of her colleagues) are owned.

      There is a reason the Scottish Government was/is taking the same basic policy stance on unpopular issues as other ‘woke’ governments and political parties – all with ties to the same groups and people.

      Which will soon be exposed.

      I simply don’t have the popcorn needed for it to be honest.

    139. Dave says:

      @joe says

      And there we have it. WOKE. Nicola Sturgeon hasnt given up on Independence for a career some “Idealists” have changed their priorities from Independence to gender ideals and there lies the split.

    140. Joe says:

      Dave says:
      27 July, 2020 at 2:01 pm
      @GH Graham

      ‘She is also an idealist who has walked the walk of social democracy humanitarianism welfare support inclusive politics anti patronage anti privilege anti racism anti discrimination of all kinds. She doesnt fit the profile of somebody who would be capable of sending an innocent to jail for any reason.’

      Funnily enough dave, looking at things from an historical perspective – that’s exactly the kind of person who would send innocent people to jail for ‘no reason’.

    141. Dave says:

      @Joe

      What things?

    142. Bill McLean says:

      Bob Mack – your overbearing and overweening comment defines you! I’ll never give up on independence it’s the windbags like you that get me down! Lots of criticism, lots of conspiracy theories. Like the rest of us you DO NOT know the answers. Mike Cassidy – read some history and see how many brilliant people were taken in and taken down by the British state!

    143. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I’ve read this blog daily since it began. It was educational, illuminating and inspiring, but all along i’ve wondered how long it would take until British state interference took it over.”

      Do shush, Bill. If you’re relying on Nicola Sturgeon to deliver independence you’re the one who’s given up on it, not me.

    144. Bob Mack says:

      @Bill McLean,

      Independence is indeed achievable but not under this leadership. The Rev and Craig Murray have outlined the scenarios repeatedly, but all have been ignored or accused of being agents for MI5.

      Even within the party people like Joanna Cherry want to take the legal route. Again she is sidelined. They tried to force her out for God sake. The top echelons of the party are the ones putting up the road blocks to Indy. Not us.

      Perhaps Murell likes over £100,000 a year as does Nicola.

      You regained your fire in the belly quick enough.

    145. Republicofscotland says:

      “Dave says:
      27 July, 2020 at 2:02 pm
      @Republic of Scotland

      What would constitute “Back on track”?”

      Oh, I don’t know Dave how about pushing for independence, you know the original remit of the party, stop following Westminster in demonising Russia, China, Iran etc. Start settling up and Westminster instead of settling in.

      Sack those guilty in Salmond fiasco, instead of extending their contracts,break the Sturgeon/Murrell control of the party. Allow the members to decide policy instead now bourgeoisie careerist middle and upper management, and that’s just for starters.

    146. Vestas says:

      Republicofscotland says:
      27 July, 2020 at 2:01 pm

      “So how do we removed careerist Sturgeon and her clique, along with £100,00k a year Murrell from the party, and get back on track to independence?”

      Don’t vote SNP on the list next year.

      That might deny them a majority then you can hold her feet to the fire. If the SNP get a majority then wave bye-bye to indyref2 until the 2030s….

    147. Bill McLean says:

      Bob Mack – I will not apologise for my view of you. I read from your subsequent post that you are still proving my point – divide and rule! Rev – The fire has never left my belly as far as freedom for my country is concerned but I have become very suspicious of some of the input here. Unfortunately I can’t claim to be privy to all the facts! It’s getting like the old women in the wash house here. If it’s an opinion make it clear. If it’s a secret – keep it secret! Shush!

    148. Republicofscotland says:

      “Don’t vote SNP on the list next year.

      That might deny them a majority then you can hold her feet to the fire. If the SNP get a majority then wave bye-bye to indyref2 until the 2030s….”

      Vestas.

      I’ve no intentions of wasting my list vote on the SNP ever again. The ISP or indy alliance party will get it from now on, I doubt we’ll get a chance to vote for independence over the next five years with Sturgeon at the head of the party.

    149. Dave says:

      @Republic of Scotland

      So your plan is to post rhetoric? Thats going to get us “Back on track”? You think BoJo will cave in if only we post more “Rhetoric”.

    150. Bob Mack says:

      @Bill McLean,

      No apology sought. I’ll live through it. Promise!

    151. Republicofscotland says:

      “Dave says:
      27 July, 2020 at 2:27 pm
      @Republic of Scotland

      So your plan”

      Jeez oh Dave, lets here your wonderful idea, that can be implemented immediately, if you have one that is.

    152. Dave says:

      Ok the nearest thing Ive heard to seen of a plan to get us “Back on track” is to give our list vote to an unknown party who will hold the Scottish Governments feet to the fire.

      This will do what exactly to convince the UK Government to concede? What can this new party do with the list votes the Scottish Government cant to persuade Bojo to lie down?

      Im genuinely interested in an answer.

    153. Stu hutch says:

      I think that during the investigation next month all roads will lead to mr murrel.who else had the authority and the will to wipe alex from the history of the snp.who would be more likely to want to preserve nicolas legacy. Apart from being nicolas hubby he is a nobody who found himself at the top of the tree through someone else’s efforts who’s whole livelihood depends on her continued success now and in the future.the biggest pointer for me is the.lets keep the rape allegation In the back pocket incase alex gets ideas of a come back.quote by mr macann his enforcer.and i have always been intrigued by the mystery woman who dropped charges on the very day of the court case.but that’s maybe to much conspiracy from me.this will make a great film tho probably not so good end for snp under the murrels.but hopefully cometh the hour.cometh the man. Bit off topic but i remember a few years ago prominent people who wanted anonymity used to use a legal term think it was called a superwrit.that ment they couldnt be named in this country but could in the likes of America.does the alex salmond book fall into this category ? Just so I know where to source my copy.

    154. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Im genuinely interested in an answer.”

      No you’re not. Every “question” you’ve asked here has been answered in considerable detail a dozen times in Wings articles and elsewhere. You’re not under any obligation to BELIEVE those answers and explanations, but pretending you don’t even know what they ARE is trolling. Enough.

    155. Dave says:

      @Rep of Scot.

      I personally dont have a plan. I dont know what its going to take to shift the UK state to concede. I fear it may take affirmative action even Civil war. The UK state has a track record of ignoring the democratic aspirations of its colonies and member states.
      Is this new party thinking along those lines? Or does it think it can get the international community to put enough pressure on the UK state to capitulate?

    156. Joe says:

      @Dave

      I feel it for you. Honestly I do. Its clear this is pissing you off big time and your reaction is quite understandable.

      The most dangerous people in the world are the ones who have big ideas for everyone else.

      Have a look at the laws that have been proposed under her leadership that if enacted will see people legally punished for the subjective infringement of causing offense.

      All in the name of justice, fairness, inclusivity and equity.

      The recent history of the world is a story of lurching from one tragedy of enforced equity to another – always with an assigned group of victims and an assigned group of perpetrators and always to the benefit of a few elites who set the particular victim/perpetrator narrative and the laws.

      That’s not to say that I endorse people being greedy selfish bstds…its just if I was a greedy selfish person who, i dunno, owned a banking empire and wanted to defraud people of their liberties, democracy and property I can’t think of anything more effective than this false equity doctrine.

    157. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “if the Garavelli paragraph (which i used to get one name from) is still up and readable, AND the COPFS have told you they reviewed everything and decided to take no action, then why do you think they would puruse you for publishing the same paragraph?”

      For the reasons it says in the article.

    158. James Che. says:

      If ever a long term plan to split the Scottish voters and diminish the independence movement were to come to light,!
      Well the set up was to move thousands of uk civil servers, sorry servants up to Scotland before all hell breaks loose,
      To feed a narrative that would cause a divide, to make others doubt where to place their vote, for all independence supporters to start accusing each other, to confuse the story, to not believe in MSM reporting and then to quote them also muddies thoughts and facts, look squirrel.
      Meanwhile A long time ago it was spoke about and realised by the people in Scotland that the uk government would try every dirty trick in the book to put the brakes on the yes movement..
      Alex Salmond and Nicola sturgeon were in the past a constant threat to the union and when combined a force to be reckoned with, where one was not so good the other one was and vice versa.
      The whole Alex Salmond saga reminds me of the kavenagh saga in America, with which both witnesses had protecting to the ultimate degree, while the accuseds name is dragged through mud. Does America and uk share intelligence,
      If I was a unionist and I wanted to discredit one or both of the two best Scottish leaders in recent
      history, I think I would go for the “kill two birds with the one stone” method,
      Setting one up against the other, to take them out the picture altogether, thus applying serious brakes to the yes movement before any Scottish election,
      We knew they would do this, we have spoken and commented on precisely this on many Scottish blogs and sites, uoinests will do anything to keep control, even stick the boot in,
      should we fall for it, have we fallen for it,

    159. Robert Graham says:

      The one pressing thing we need in Scotland is

      MORE LAWYERS

      AYE MORE LAWYERS IN THE DEEPEST HOLE WE CAN DIG

      Now thats a good start , bankers and property speculators next get shot of the whole lot of blood sucking parasites that make peoples life difficult and frustrating , Liars every bloody one of them

    160. Bob Mack says:

      @James Che,

      No .We hadn’t fallen for anything, but perhaps the SNP hierarchy has. No Indy voter I know caused this problem.

    161. Bill Dewar says:

      The way through this is to be slow, persistent, and inquisitive. Slowly but surely, the truth will have to emerge. A time for cleansing.

    162. Juteman says:

      @James Che.
      Sorry to say, but i agree with you.

    163. A Person says:

      Why do so many have such blind faith in this one woman, Nicola Sturgeon? Why can they not see what is so plainly in front of them? Why are people who are supposedly so passionate about independence, really only passionate about this poser? Is it because she says all the right things, and her reluctance to do much of substance means that she is a risk-free way of telling oneself one is a good, progressive-minded person? Why are they so willing to excuse her? They are little better than those who excuse Trump his vileness because he “owns the libs”.

      I must have a very cold, detached personality, because while there are politicians I respect, I am incapable of investing this much emotional energy in someone I have never met.

    164. Dan Watt says:

      Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
      27 July, 2020 at 12:42 pm
      “not as cunning as your attempts to pretend you’re Craig Murray which is not in any way shape or form cunning at all”

      I can assure you that that is the real Craig Murray.

      I’m so confused.

    165. K1 says:

      Dave wrote that he wasn’t convinced that Craig was Craig, Rev corrected him by assuring him that it was Craig who commented.

    166. iain mhor says:

      The OP is much as I expected to occur and I was going to give it a miss (apologies) However, the BTL today has been highly illuminating and I’m glad I persevered.
      A most intriguing day.

      Perhaps I’ll dust off the old pince-nez and thumb some indexes after all. I do believe I might even purchase some popcorn. Politics abhors a vacuum and I do so like a good whoosh and a bang…

    167. Juteman says:

      No matter who did what, the result is the same.
      The British State is well practised at divide and rule, and we are witnessing it now.

    168. Doug says:

      My cunning “martyr” plan still applies.

    169. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Rev Stu’s link to the Craig Murray post… (and subsequent mentions of Garavelli…)

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-pieces-of-the-jigsaw/comment-page-1/#comment-2551304

      After reading it, I revisited,

      “Dani Garavelli was in court every day of the Alex Salmond trial. Here she shares her insights on a landmark case that revolved around power and sex. Inside the Alex Salmond trial By Dani Garavelli”.

      http://archive.is/dnNrM

      Check out the two paragraphs that start,
      “The second woman was Nicola Sturgeon.”

      Then, perhaps, read my comment (and link) in answer to mr thms at 11.43 this morning.

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-pieces-of-the-jigsaw/comment-page-1/#comment-2551264

    170. CameronB Brodie says:

      The legal Establishment is simply doing what it does best, protecting their privilege and outlook. I do get the impression that Mr. Yousaf is a bit of useful idiot, who’s be parachuted into a position where he can be used to inflict most damage on Scotland’s judicial system. He is clearly ignorant of how to support the rule-of-law (see genderwoowoo and stuff).

    171. MaggieC says:

      Sky news live on tv still going with the different dates of the meetings between Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond .

    172. Bob Mack says:

      @Juteman,

      Your only problem is that this is not the British State.

      This was done by the SNP hierarchy. Nobody else.

    173. Doug says:

      “I am very sorry, but Scottish politics are about to get very dirty indeed. The degree of penetration and influence by the UK security services behind these events must not be underestimated.”

      Craig Murray

      https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/07/sky-news-miss-the-story/

    174. Juteman says:

      @Bob Mack.

      You think the British State hasn’t infiltrated the SNP?

    175. Robert Louis says:

      Walter Scott had it right, didn’t he?

      “oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to decieve”

      Thanks for pushing on with this REV. It is a pity that not one mainstream so-called ‘journalist’ is even remotely interested in this rank stinking corruption, right at the heart of the Scottish government and prosecution service. This is way more serious than watergate, yet nobody seems interested.

      This goes to the top, the very, very top, in Scotland. As former UK diplomat, Craig Murray succinctly puts it, “The degree of penetration and influence by the UK security services behind these events must not be underestimated”.

      I recall once seeing Nicola Sturgeon interviewed. It was maybe a year or so ago. In it she opined that (and I paraphrase) ‘That many folk do not think her machiavellian enough, to deal with Westminster, but that is just the person she is, and some may not like that’. I think we all now suspect, she is machiavellian aplenty. She isn’t on our side.

      We could have had independence years ago, if that was what she actually wanted.

      I’ve met her many years ago, and thought she was dediacted to independence, but no, she isn’t. You will NEVER get independence, with Nicola Sturgeon as First Minister. Not now, not ever. Hence the endless delay, the provarication, the procrastination, the six utterly wasted years. Another electoral mandate will just give her a longer career, that’s all. And career in all of this, comes first.

      She needs to go, or be removed, and her careerist, wokeist, anti-independence apparatchiks with her. The sooner the better, and hopefully she will take her husband with her.

      Are we seeing, as so often in the past, the Westminster approach of smash and burn in a territory they ilegally occupy? Is that their aim? They can’t have Scotland, so nobody can, so they want to destroy it, as they tried so hard to do in Ireland. And Yes, we really do need to bring that up. All of history tells us that is what Westminster does, smash and burn – or ‘partition’ as they like to call it. Westminster, the spoilt, spiteful brat of international politics.

      When democratic means are wilfully and ilegally thwarted with impunity, what happens next? Are we getting to that point?

    176. Republicofscotland says:

      “I personally dont have a plan. I dont know what its going to take to shift the UK state to concede. I fear it may take affirmative action even Civil war. The UK state has a track record of ignoring the democratic aspirations of its colonies and member states.
      Is this new party thinking along those lines? Or does it think it can get the international community to put enough pressure on the UK state to capitulate?”

      Dave, I don’t know if you’re being deliberately obtuse, or you just haven’t read the article correctly, but this has absolutely nothing to do with the British state.

      No this is about Sturgeon, her clique, and the SNP government, and the effects of them on Craig Murray and their reticence on Scottish independence, and attempted failed fit up of Alex Salmond.

      We wish Salmond and Murray well, but I’m sure the main bulk of interest will be around how this affects the possibility of Scottish independence within Scotland and specifically the SNP government, and Sturgeon’s misgivings on the matter.

      If Stu and Craig are correct, and I have no reason to doubt that they’re not, then Scottish independence via Sturgeon as the head of the SNP and Murrell heading up the propaganda section, independence within the next parliamentary term looks unlikely.

    177. CameronB Brodie says:

      Robert Louis
      I certainly get the feeling that Scotland is being turned into a totalitarian enclave of Greater England.

    178. Gary45% says:

      I like many others want Scottish Independence ASAP.
      Can somebody give me a credible party to vote for in next Scottish Elections please.
      Is it Tory, Labour or Lib Dem ?

    179. callmedave says:

      Caught up on the thread been out since early morning. 🙁

      Quite an article too with the ‘legal reply letter’ to my mind adding to clouding the issues on the contempt of court and stacking the deck against Mr Murray.

      Pretty bleak outlook for the most part but I hope that both Mr Salmond and Mr Murray get a fair crack of the whip in their respective dealings with the SGov enquiry and the contempt of court trial.

      Not looking too good for the SGov or indeed the FM but let the cards fall where they may. The truth will out, I hope, and the independence movement will carry on.

      Like many on here I’ve coughed up a few quid for Mr Salmond and Mr Murray and Wings not forgetting the SNP.

      Have I got my money’s worth….I think I can say I have for the most part. 🙂

      Away for a late gin and tonic!

    180. That piece by Gravellelli has all the looks of a piece of cheese in a mouse trap,

      the slow witted politician, corrupt judiciary,and useless media all sitting round waiting,watching and hoping the trap is sprung by Stu or some other `undesirable` quoting it.

    181. Bob Mack says:

      @Juteman,

      British State can infiltrate anywhere, but I expected that the leader of the SNP above all else would push for Independence regardless of pressure from any source.

      I do not believe Nicola is working for the Bitish State, but I certainly believe neither is she working for Independence, and I believe she did this to finish off Alex permanently.

      My eye alights on her husband though. He interests me greatly, especially his role in this whole affair.we’ll see
      soon enough.

    182. CameronB Brodie says:

      Of course, it’s a bit delusional to hope that Scotland’s judicial system will support the rule of law, as it is subordinate to the legal culture of another nation.

      Access to justice, the common law and human rights
      https://www.lag.org.uk/article/201772/access-to-justice–the-common-law-and-human-rights

    183. James Che. says:

      perhaps some comments reflect very much on the very subject I bought up, a set up between Alex Salmond and Nicola sturgeon and becoming infiltrated into the yes movement and the snp,
      There are those that stay steady and support Alex and those that stay steady supporting Nicola, but there are those that shoot down comments to quickly when we suggest that it might be a set up to divide independence and get rid of our two best yes leaders of our time at the same time,
      I would put a question mark against those commentators, why we would not be allowed to to think along those lines,
      Uk government have worked behind the scenes in many countries to bring about a result they wanted, even selling ammunition to the side they favour,
      When I think of the Sewell convention, the mcCrone report, and the, Scotch- what a verminous race, repeated by Boris jonston, the “not” allowed to have a say in Brexit talks, how evil was announced the very next day by David Cameron,
      No one on here or any other site for that matter, could convince me that the uk government would not set a trap for the independence movement and both the important roll of two Scottish first ministers.
      I would question anyones motive for trying to steer our thoughts away from this possibility.

    184. Dogbiscuit says:

      If your accusers can remain anonymous in a court of law that reminds me of European witchcraft trials where people were sent to their deaths on anonymous evidence in secret court proceedings. Scotland is well down the road to Tyranny.

    185. callmedave says:

      O/T

      Corona:

      Scotland…….today……..00…….Total……2491…SUN
      Wales……….today……..00…….Total……1549…SUN
      N. Ireland…..today……..00…….Total…….556…SUN
      England……..today……..10sun….Total….*41163…WMGov
      =======================================================
      UK………….today……..07…….Total…..45759…WMGov

    186. CameronB Brodie says:

      The Scottish justice system doesn’t even appear the slightest embarrassed that it holds the cause of justice in contempt. That’s British nationalism for you.

      Handbook on European law
      relating to access to justice

      https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Handbook_access_justice_ENG.pdf

    187. Dogbiscuit says:

      Scotland seems to be trailblazing many fascistic policies these days and is becoming Internationally well known for it .We are often described as a social experiment. Social engineering without your freely given consent anyone?

    188. Dogbiscuit says:

      Does Nicola Sturgeon think we are ALL daft?

    189. CameronB Brodie says:

      Of course, it must be remembered that the British legal order is determined to deny Scots our rightful access to human rights, and the Scottish judicial system is being transformed to deny biological women equal access to justice.

      A Framework for Measuring Access to Justice
      Including Specific Challenges Facing Women

      https://rm.coe.int/1680593e83

    190. Dogbiscuit says:

      You all know this First Minister has to go.

    191. Dogbiscuit says:

      She is a crook.

    192. Walter Jones says:

      James Ch 4.38pm

      “…but there are those that shoot down comments to quickly when we suggest that it might be a set up to divide independence and get rid of our two best yes leaders of our time at the same time,

      I would put a question mark against those commentators…”

      James, I have been highlighting these very contributors for the past few threads.

      Cat, Bungo, robbo, to name but a few.

      All diehard SNP Sturgeonistas.

      Sent by SNP HQ to Troll Wings.

      Don’t engage in debate with these Muppets.

    193. ahundredthidiot says:

      I see a movie one day.

      Who will play our Heroes?

      Matt Damon could put on a few pounds on to play AS and Jim Broadbent would be a fantastic CM.

      and the villains……

      This will go down as one of the most troubling episodes in modern Scottish history……so long as the old saying about the Sun the Moon and the Truth prevails.

      And then there’s Justice, of course.

    194. Famous15 says:

      Walter Jones that’s the way to do it.”No debate”

      Where have I heard that before? Woke dei.

      Have a word with dogwhistle as he/ she /it is a propaganda expert!

    195. CameronB Brodie says:

      I don’t want to hurt the SNP, but their legal parochialism poses a very grave threat to the liberty of all those living in Scotland. It also plays directly into the hands of the British legal order, which is ambivalent towards international law and human rights.

      Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2017
      Access to Justice in the United Nations Human Rights Committee

      Abstract
      The possibility of individuals to bring complaints against their countries of nationality to international institutions has been seen as one of the most important developments in international human rights law since World War II. This article uses the United Nations Human Rights Committee as a case study for the success of the of individual communications system in international law.

      The article uses a mixed methods empirical research strategy in order to describe and evaluate the access to justice in the context of the Committee. For the quantitative part of the article (regression analysis), it uses an original dataset of the number of communications filed against different countries throughout the years, and of the different characteristics of those countries.

      For the qualitative part of the article, it uses interviews conducted by the author with individuals who brought communications to the Committee. In evaluating the success of the system, the article uses a goal-based approach, and analyses the success from the perspectives of different stakeholders.

      I find that most of the communications to the Committee come from democratic and socio-economically developed countries. The main problems with the accessibility of the Committee are lack of awareness to its existence, fear from state retribution, budgetary problems within the UN, and lack of implementation by states.

      However, the process is generally perceived as fair, and the Committee is accessible to certain degree even to applicants without legal representation. Finally, the article also discusses what could be done in order to make the system more accessible to people from all over the world.

      Keywords:
      United Nations Human Rights Committee, Access to Justice, International Courts

      https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2999668

    196. Silent Boab says:

      Why don’t you take notes when having your chats with Alex Salmond and publish what he says, like a proper journalist would? You could also put the claims he makes to the people he’s making em about, as a proper journalist would do?

      Otherwise you’re just being used like a puppet with a pulpit.

    197. John Dickson says:

      Pa Broon, you are not alone, the reason however is we are not in the circles of power. If we were I would suggest it is easy to work out. No one is talking so it is a big fix costing a packet of taxpayers money and/or favours to keep every one quiet. Maybe a Twitter poll will bring the rats out into the open.

      Is the Secretary

      1. Woman F
      2. Woman K

    198. Dogbiscuit says:

      Dave blow your trumpet out your arse.

    199. Republicofscotland says:

      “There are those that stay steady and support Alex and those that stay steady supporting Nicola, but there are those that shoot down comments to quickly when we suggest that it might be a set up to divide independence and get rid of our two best yes leaders of our time at the same time,”

      James Che, well James they’re both still here, but there’s a world of difference between them. Salmond has a proven track record on independence referendums having taken us to one in 2014, on the other hand Sturgeon has failed miserably in that department.

      Sturgeon’s approval ratings are at an all time high, not because of her determination to secure independence, but because of her later stage handling of the pandemic,and because Johnson’s handling of the pandemic has been woeful.

      Now that’s all very fine and dandy for Sturgeon and the SNP, however, will she convert that popularity and good poll rating for independence into a independence referendum, or will the referendum remain in the long grass as it has done since Brexit, though it wheeled out like Gordon Brown, by the British nationalists, on occasion to rally the troops when needed, then put right back into its box afterwards.

      Even if we do surmount the Johnson mountain on a S30, Olympus Mons awaits us on the otherside in the form of Sturgeon and her clique.

    200. Dogbiscuit says:

      I bet the First Minister is multi tasking this one eh.

    201. Beaker says:

      @Gary45% says:
      27 July, 2020 at 4:12 pm
      “I like many others want Scottish Independence ASAP.
      Can somebody give me a credible party to vote for in next Scottish Elections please.
      Is it Tory, Labour or Lib Dem ?”

      Monster Raving Loony Party. You get what it says on the tin.

    202. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Why don’t you take notes when having your chats with Alex Salmond and publish what he says, like a proper journalist would?”

      Get ready to be a lot more silent, Boab.

    203. Then I will fly a rebel flag and sing a rebel song and maybe shed my rebel blood to help put right this wrong yes freedom just another word for nothing left to lose so for me no matter what obstacles they put up we will overcome some day

    204. CameronB Brodie says:

      The simplest thing the Scottish government could do to improve access to justice in Scotland, is to step out from under Westminster’s authority, which lacks moral and legal substance. Scotland’s Establishment are pretty much British nationalists to the core though, so I wouldn’t hold out too much hope for the rule-of-law to be supported in Brexitania.

      Promoting Human Rights and Access to Justice for Social Inclusion and Legal Empowerment
      ANNUAL REPORT
      2013

      http://www.undp.org/content/dam/rbec/docs/PHASE%20Project%20-%20Human%20Rights%20%20Justice%20Annual%20Report%202013.pdf

    205. Walter Jones says:

      Famous15

      Another one of the mad mental, fight to the death, Sturgeonistas.

    206. CameronB Brodie says:

      Walter Jones
      That’s certainly not the impression I have of Famous15, who I’m pretty sure is a genuine supporter of democracy and Scottish indy. I’m not so sure about you though.

    207. Robert says:

      I wonder whetherthe COPFS letter and the letter from the cabinet secretary for justice could in fact be consistent?

      “However, the Lord Advocate is constitutionally responsible for the systems of prosecution of crime and investigation of deaths in Scotland, and is answerable to the Scottish Parliament for the operation of those systems.”

      Maybe this means that the Lord Advocate is answerable for rhe systems, but not answerable for individual decisions using those systems?

    208. Walter Jones says:

      Cam B

      You are the official site Loony.

      You stick to what you do best and I will continue to highlight the SNP Trolls, such as Famous15.

    209. J Galt says:

      G. H. Graham @1.57pm

      “Nicola Sturgeon is no Mother Theresa”

      In fact Mother Theresa was no Mother Theresa by many accounts!

      I have no issue with Nicola Sturgeon being ruthless – I just wish she’d be ruthless with the right people for a change.

    210. Breeks says:

      Given all the promises we were given about Scotland not being removed from Europe against it’s will, on a simple point of principle, where were all the mass resignations of Scottish MP’s when when Scotland was?

      Even if the SNP lacked the backbone for a Constitutional battle, they could have walked out of Westminster en masse, preserved a little integrity, and created an awkward constitutional crisis for Westminster to resolve, and forced Scottish elections if MSP’s did the same.

      They walked out when Ian Blackford was reprimanded. Is that a matter of greater weight that the unconstitutional colonial subjugation of the Scottish Nation?

      Where is the anger from the party members when the “management” decide you’re not getting a conference to ask the questions of your illustrious leader?

      We are the fools who are putting up with this. Maybe AUOB needs to set up a vigil on the steps of Bute House until the SNP starts respecting the mandates it’s been given by the sovereign people.

    211. CameronB Brodie says:

      Walter Jones
      OK, so you’re a top class walloper. Thanks for clarifying the point. 😉

    212. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “You stick to what you do best and I will continue to highlight the SNP Trolls, such as Famous15.”

      You can do that if you want to get banned. For the millionth time: if you think someone is trolling, tell me and I’ll take a look and decide. Don’t appoint yourself as a freelance fucking Witchfinder General and start flinging abuse around, because you’ll get some flung back and pretty soon the whole place is a playground and I have to come in and start smacking arses again and I REALLY REALLY REALLY cannot be fucked with it.

    213. CameronB Brodie says:

      To all those who consider me to be the site loony, your hostility to practical, scientific, and legal, advocacy for human rights, suggest you need to develop so self-awareness.

      Leveraging the SDC’s for Inclusive Growth?
      Delivering Access to Justice for All

      https://www.oecd.org/gov/delivering-access-to-justice-for-all.pdf

    214. Morgatron says:

      My oh my. The length they are willing to go to in smokescreening this whole affair is scandalous along with tarnishing any AS supporters reputation along the way is increasingly concerning. It appears the law is above the law in this case. Great work Stu and and a lot of kudos to KMc .

    215. CameronB Brodie says:

      sorry….develop some self-awareness.

      Removing Barriers to Justice
      How a treaty on business and human rights could
      improve access to remedy for victims

      https://www.business-humanrights.org/sites/default/files/documents/Removing%20barriers%20web.pdf

    216. Bob Mack says:

      €Stu,

      Isn’t one of the principles of the Contempt of court act strict liability, which means you are guilty whether you intended to do it or not.

      Garavelli must come under that same strict liability.

    217. dakk says:

      ‘Nicola sees any actual move for Independence as a threat to her career; and she cares about her career much more than she cares about Independence.”

      So how would concocting an outlandish conspiracy which had no real legal chance of success be likely to enhance her career?

      That doesn’t add up.

    218. One_Scot says:

      “if you think someone is trolling, tell me and I’ll take a look and decide.

      Well that is handy to know!

    219. Black Joan says:

      @Breeks 6.03pm. Agreed 100%.

      How many times did we have to listen to Ian Blackford insist in the HoC that Scotland would not be dragged out of the EU against her will?

      What have they done to follow up on that rhetoric? Nothing. Empty words, when many of us hoped and believed they had a plan.

      The Tory Brexitshambles proceeds, unimpeded by the SNP. Well, thanks a lot.

      That, plus an all-too-revealing absence of post-verdict support for Alex Salmond from NS, Humza,the Stirling Daddy-Bear disciples, Angus Robertson etc,etc (in sharp contrast with, and, it seems out and out rivalry for a Holyrood seat with, Joanna Cherry) destroys faith in the sincerity of the current regime.

      Lack of support = the dog that did nothing in the nighttime. By their silence shall ye know them, with or without Garavelli’s assistance.

      What to do? Any ideas, anyone?

    220. Doug says:

      @Breeks 6:03pm

      Well said. The SNP/SG must get radical in its approach to independence. I believe the vast majority of independence supporters know the independence movement is more important, and more resilient, than any one individual politician.

    221. Walter Jones says:

      Sometimes things are said in the heat of the discussion.

      It happens in open forums.

      Cam B

      Keep doing what you do,,, but try and stay out of things that don’t concern you sunshine.

      Now let’s move on a fight the enemies of Scottish Independence.

    222. Asklair says:

      Keep going,nothing has shocked me,just good it’s in written words for others to understand if they want to.

    223. CameronB Brodie says:

      Black Joan
      I’m afraid the SNP leadership doesn’t appear to understand how to support the rule-of-law, so it will take a thorough purge of the party to re-establish its’ purpose. Unfortunately, political power appears to be concentrated in such a way as to prevent effective, inclusive, party management. So it’s up to the members to restore the party’s respect for the law, but I’m not sure the membership are aware of the canker in their party.

      RISK AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN
      RIGHTS: TOWARDS A NEW APPROACH

      http://www.venuereading.com/web/FILES/law/CYEL_Hilson_article_2_June_final.pdf

    224. CameronB Brodie says:

      Walter Jones
      “sunshine”

      In your dreams.

    225. Gary45% says:

      Beaker@5.28
      I don’t think they stand in Scotland;))

    226. Black Joan says:

      Cameron Brodie @ 6.43pm

      Yes. Agreed. Unfortunately a lot of former SNP members have resigned or failed to renew, in protest at the hate-crime/GRA business and the failed promises re the Brexitshambles.

      Without such sound, pro-indy voices, the Daddy Bear faction will be free to promote those they regard as not guilty of thought crime.

    227. O/T,

      noticed Alyn Smith SNP MP has endorsed the new Skotia media,

      hope tae f@ck the misogynist brigade don`t infest this new media site,

      got an uneasy feeling.

    228. Walter Jones says:

      Can B

      I just laugh at you.

    229. schrodingers cat says:

      while you’re here stu, this is just from this thread.
      i thought they had run out of ip adresses?

      Walter Jones says:
      Cam B
      You are the official site Loony.
      You stick to what you do best and I will continue to highlight the SNP Trolls, such as Famous15.

      Walter Jones says:
      27 July, 2020 at 5:48 pm
      Famous15
      Another one of the mad mental, fight to the death, Sturgeonistas.

      Walter Jones says:
      27 July, 2020 at 5:01 pm
      Cat, Bungo, robbo, to name but a few.
      All diehard SNP Sturgeonistas.
      Sent by SNP HQ to Troll Wings.
      Don’t engage in debate with these Muppets.

      Walter Jones says:
      27 July, 2020 at 1:23 pm
      I have called out the Cat and his other names he uses on her as being working directly for the SNP HQ.
      He is an SNP Trolling plant.

      Walter Jones says:
      27 July, 2020 at 6:42 pm
      Keep doing what you do,,, but try and stay out of things that don’t concern you sunshine.

    230. CameronB Brodie says:

      Walter Jones
      Well, of course you free to scoff, but that’s about all the freedom you’ll have in Brexitania.

      PROFESSIONAL TRAINING SERIES No. 9
      HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE
      ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE:
      A Manual on Human Rights
      for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers

      https://www.ibanet.org/Document/Default.aspx?DocumentUid=D7CC7605-4340-4021-A614-2E46916F6D6C

    231. schrodingers cat says:

      Casper says:
      27 July, 2020 at 12:07 pm
      Stu- watch your back.
      ————–

      ditto, me, i’d rename “wings over outer hebrides” and move there.

      we are getting down to the wire now. maybe after a 50%+ vote for indy in 2021, bojo will roll over and say ok. but i wouldnt bet on it.

      he reads same polls as us, if support for indy continues to rise and such a result looks unavoidable, if it were me, id stop the election even taking place. if that happens, you Stu will be first to get yer collar felt.

      seriously stu, take care.

    232. Contrary says:

      Well, what a lively active comments section we have today – it’s honestly good to see, but I’ve nearly forgotten what the article said while trying to reach the bottom here,,,

      Oh yes. Well. I guess that means any written submissions that may pertain to a live case, Craig’s prosecution, might not be published – won’t be published. I’m disappointed. I want real information.

      Nicola Sturgeon: she is a career politician, she seems to be intelligent, she has reached peak leadership (so is ambitious), she is a good politician (excellent communication skills, debating skills, and projecting a public persona). I just don’t see any of those things adding up to her being ‘trustworthy’, and have seen no evidence to say whether she is or isn’t. Well,,, some circumstantial information to say isn’t is the way of it. I am happy to be contradicted, but hearsay won’t convince me.

      This morning I wrote a hypothetical – I think up a bunch of ‘what ifs’ and see how the facts fit – I normally only do it in my own head to test out how my opinion on something might hold up or what new info I might need or if there is any rationale to another’s opinion. This didn’t originally include Alex Salmond – we can assume he was collateral – but the point is, that there doesn’t need to be any conspiracy or unusual behaviour in how it all came about, well, not unusual behaviour for career politicians of an ambitious nature:

      Here is a hypothetical – the SNP have become fully establishment (neoliberal – their economic thinking (growth commission): anti-Russian stance: supporting WM wars, etc) and have recently suggested to Westminster they’d like a stronger and more intrusive MI5 presence to ‘protect us from the Russians’ . Nicola Sturgeon sees herself as progressive and has her own ideas on how society should be changed to become ‘fairer and more equal’ – she has the power now, within devolution, to make these changes that she believes are ‘for our own good’, power that she won’t have within her lifetime if we get independence (other things to do apart from social change) – so, say, she makes a DEAL with the security services, hypothetically – she toes the line on the neoliberal austerity warmongering ideology and maintains devolution in exchange for the security services promising the control of society to make us go along with her social changes (GRA and hate speech – and probably more to come)[insert here:potentially assist in removing AS who would push for independence]. I’m sure this sort of large scale social experiment has a name… Anyway – purely hypothetical – BUT it would explain all the recent few years of decisions, stalling, and manoeuvring AND it would also explain why seemingly opposing views (for and against the SNP) [given in comments] have exactly the SAME effect – to shut down debate and remove ANY reasonable criticism of the SNP. Purely hypothetical – but say you were given the opportunity to realise your dream, you just need to decide how much you are willing to sacrifice to get it. Hypothetically speaking.

    233. Walter Jones says:

      Sturgeon is a lying, self serving Unionist.

      And that’s me being polite

    234. Walter Jones says:

      Cam B

      The only person I can see leading us to a Brexit Scotland, is the wee Unionist Sturgeon.

    235. schrodingers cat says:

      stu

      if you arnt willing to watch yer back, choose a confident,
      change yer hd’s to solid state and give yer confident your backed up data and access passwords

      invest in a coal fire and the ability to eject and destroy all of your files in a hurry

    236. Kenny says:

      I do not understand why a referendum is not held under the following formula:

      “Given that Scotland voted NO to independence in 2014,

      And given that it is not possible to be a member of both the UK and the EU,

      Which of the following unions should Scotland be a member of?

      1. The United Kingdom
      2. The European Union
      3. None of the above”

      If the Remainers really wanted to Remain, they would have urged Sturgeon to pursue this line, as a vote for the EU would then lead to: so how do we go about this?

      1. Via indy
      2. Via dissolving the union and forming a new Scotland-led union with the capital in Edinburgh and allowing the other three nations to join (after Remain parties campaign desperately in England and Wales)

      Alternatively, hold a consultation. Which union do you want to join? Your choice: EU, UK, EFTA, USA, OAS, resurrected USSR [obviously slipped in by those Russian hackers]…

    237. Stoker says:

      Another great article Rev, thank you much!
      __________

      One Nation, but not ours: http://archive.is/3kN7Z

    238. Me Bungo Pony says:

      For what it’s worth (and I realise what a hostage to fortune that phrase is), I cannot for the life of me see what Nicola Sturgeon could ever have gotten out of this. No matter what the process or outcome, it was never going to do her any good. She is not a stupid politician and the claim by Craig Murray (whom I respect) that she would do such an heinous act simply to ensure her career as FM continued is just weak. She has had a stellar career and if this hadn’t happened it would have continued unabated. Salmond was a fan and friend and had shown no inclination to challenge her.

      My thoughts are that her “progressive” politics were used against her by the UK state to (as someone has already mentioned) kill two birds with one stone. That is, both Salmond and Sturgeon. She wanted a code of conduct that was more modern and progressive (Woke even) at the same as a new Head of Civil Service was to be appointed. She was given three choices; two middle aged males or a female with a track record on equal rights. In effect, her bread was buttered for her as she was always going to pick Evans in that scenario.

      The new code subsequently included the ability to investigate former ministers (which of course Westminster didn’t want put in place down there – it would be carnage), not in itself a bad rule as why should former ministers get away with unlawful behaviour? But I believe (just my opinion) that Evans was intent on going after Salmond, whether specifically on the instructions of the UK establishment or for her own career enhancement, not Nicola Sturgeon.

      From that point on, the sh*t hit the fan. I do not believe Sturgeon wanted this at all. As I said, she’s not stupid. She would have known this was not going to be good for her no matter what the outcome. If we could all see that, why would you believe she couldn’t?

    239. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scotland’s political and legal landscapes are somewhat dysfunctional, as a result of British constitutionalism, which is ambivalent to international law and order, and blind to human rights law.

      The Effects of International Human Rights Law (IHRL) on International Law
      A Bibliography

      https://www1.essex.ac.uk/hrc/documents/IHRL_final.pdf

    240. Me Bungo Pony says:

      @Walter Jones

      CBB is not the site loony. He is the site Boffin and, as everyone knows, Boffins are cool 🙂

    241. James Che. says:

      I never mentioned being one side or the other as being right, I am saying what I am noticing on all Scottish sites, that there is a great surge of fighting each other in the dark within the yes independence movement,
      This certainly raises the eyebrow as to who is instigating all this on both sides.
      I happily held back from witch hunting Alex before hearings or court cases, and glad that did, I will give that same curtesy to anyone else as well, including Nicola sturgeon, Let the cards fall where they may. quote” callmedave” is a appropriate saying.
      Be your own person, and remember integrity,
      I will not be judgemental before the day or hour, I will not take up the pitchfork and tar, or shout “off with her head” due to mob leaders,
      Stay calm, hold the head,
      We must not turn on each other, or we will never gain freedom for Scotland and it’s people.

    242. Tony O'Neill says:

      Another example going all the way back to the Al megrahi case,of the corrupt copfs in Scotland.

    243. CameronB Brodie says:

      Me Bungo Pony
      Steady on. 😉

    244. Effijy says:

      So sorry to hear Nicola follow team Boris in the inclusion
      Of the Spanish Island holiday makers having to self isolate
      for 14 days on their return.

      Why when you are 10 times more likely to catch the virus in the
      UK than in Ibiza?

      Why didn’t she point out that some may lose their job due to self isolation
      and with no government support and no monitoring many will simply not
      confirm with it?

      Why not show she does things differently and better than Boris?

    245. Muscleguy says:

      I agree in spades that this stinks to the Sratosphere, if there was enough air to enable a smell without expiration beyond that it would stink to there as well.

      Angels over Scotland enjoying their share of the maturing whisky will have flown for pastures more pleasant & all those fumes will rise unconsumed & do nothing to lessen the stink.

      You are being held in contempt. If it were me and I had the means I would be consulting lawyers at this point to demand that various high law officers in Scotland do their fucking jobs.

      When you add in Section 2 of the impending Hate Crime Bill it will not be possible to say anything critical or controversial in Scotland by private citizens with homes and livelihoods to protect. That privilege will be accorded to the Unionist press who are clearly immune from prosecution.

      If that bill passes I will be shuttering my twitter account since I cannot afford to defend a prosecution. I’m on UC but I own my own home outright which means I don’t qualify for legal aid despite my cash penury. Such would see me having to sell my home. Since I at least morally owe my wife half of it (it’s entirely in my name) I will be unable to buy another. Yet I will likely still have too much to still be eligible for UC so I will have fritter my capital away until I have very little then lean on the state for my accommodation as well in a less than salubrious part of town doubtless.

    246. Mungo says:

      Me Bungo Pony.
      Then why did Sturgeon not get rid of her when she had the chance?

    247. Me Bungo Pony says:

      @muscleguy

      What does Section 2 of the act say exactly?

    248. Me Bungo Pony says:

      @Mungo

      No idea. You’d have to ask her. Perhaps because, in going after Salmond, she had technically just been following the code and it would have looked like petty, political revenge to sack her. Just a guess …. as is virtually everything else on this thread. In any case, it does not prove collusion between Sturgeon and Evans against Salmond.

    249. CameronB Brodie says:

      By allowing English Torydum to remove Scotland from the EU. Westminster is actively undermining the international rule-of-law, and any hope for global susainability.

      World Summit on Sustainable Development
      Opinion
      International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)
      May 2001

      Environment and Human Rights: A New Approach to Sustainable Development
      https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/files/Environment_and_Human_Rights_A_New_Approach_to.htm

    250. CameronB Brodie says:

      I wish my proof reading was better.

      Global Perspectives on Human Rights:
      Oxford Human Rights Hub Blog (2nd edition)

      http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Global-Perspectives-on-Human-Rights-2nd-edition.pdf

    251. Colin Alexander says:

      Breeks

      The SNP even meekly accepted EVEL in the WM Imperial Parliament, so the Imperial Parliament officially became the English Parliament with Scots as second-class MPs.

      Compare this with real independence supporters like Ghandi, for whom beatings and imprisonment would not change his resolve that Indians would no longer be second-class citizens as part of the British Empire.

      He realised ending British rule was the only way of ending British abuses. Nothing less was acceptable.

      Compare with Sturgeon’s SNP: The British Empire’s administrators of Scotland.

      Not colonial administrators like the Tories or Labour: No, the SNP do it better. Outdoing the British parties at British colonialism.

    252. Beaker says:

      @Gary45% says:
      27 July, 2020 at 6:53 pm
      Beaker@5.28
      “I don’t think they stand in Scotland;))”

      If I had the money I would stand! Rutherglen is fertile ground, although I don’t think Clare Haughey would be too impressed…

    253. tartanfever says:

      schrodingers cat says

      ‘we are getting down to the wire now. maybe after a 50%+ vote for indy in 2021, bojo will roll over and say ok. but i wouldnt bet on it.’

      This comment sums up the quandary i find myself in. I think it’s fair to say that many die hard SNP supporters believe this to be the case – that a majority in the 2021 Holyrood elections will bring on a fresh Indyref, and that in effect, the vote next year is one for Independence, especially with polls now placing Yes as a small majority.

      Unfortunately this is plain wrong, and dangerous.

      The vote next year is for who governs us for the next few years, not independence. Maybe the SNP feel they can get through their agenda driven policies because ‘Yes’ people will fall into line and swallow a bitter pill of ill thought out policies.

      But I can’t vote for them on their proposals. I gave them my vote last December in the General Election, swallowing that bitter pill and they have done nothing with it, except push their own agenda more extremely while ignoring independence. Last December’s GE was always going to lead to a Tory win, it made little difference who I voted.

      Holyrood 2021 is a very different proposal.

      I have voted SNP for many elections now but I’m not a member.I have no allegiance to any party now, the SNP have wasted my vote. I will vote Yes in an Independence Ref, but if the SNP are relying on my vote to help them get there, it’s not going to happen.

      Their policies stand contrary to my core beliefs. (as do the Greens)

      The best that the Yes movement can hope from me is that a new party of Independence stands in my region that I can vote for.

    254. “Why do you think the Scottish media establishment is rallying round her and sending the likes of Dani Garavelli to do soft-soap interviews”

      Was it not for Tortoise, an English media outlet, paid for by the Tories?

      The UK independent press regulator were having none of my complaints about having my tweet edited in her article to appear to mean something much, much different to what it did mean, she’s an out and out bullshitter. The other tweet doesn’t appear likely to have ever even existed either. The tone she then uses throughout about such tweets and feelings is fabrication max, they weren’t the only ones constantly refreshing. An odd choice for the Scottish media establishment to rely upon, and an odd award winner to have an article have to apologise for being misleading in.

    255. schrodingers cat says:

      @tartanfever

      i think you miss the point. the next holyrood will be a defacto independence plebiscite. polls show 54% and rising.

      if the snp get eg 57% on a manifesto for indy, what would be the point in holding a referendum. think about that for a minute. seriously

      if this senario plays out and bojo says no, it isnt the snp who are finished. its the democratic road to indy

      your concerns about the snp will be eclipsed, you can vote for whoever you want, a new indy list party etc. it makes no odds.

      if bojo can ignore the majority of the sovereign people of scotland standing behind the snp, do you really think bojo will listen to some other indy party? this is the end game

      vote snp in the constituency vote.

      if and when we win and bojo shuts us down

      i’ll see you on the other side of this curtain tartan fever

    256. schrodingers cat says:

      @tartanfever

      seriously mon ami

      you doubt bojo will give in, as do I, but tell me, if this senario plays out, (the polls are saying this is very very possible) what will you do? what can you do? what can any of us do?

      dont say we’ll blame the snp and vote for somebody else, cos that wont really cut the mustard, will it?

    257. CameronB Brodie says:

      If Westminster is prepared to allow English Torydum to turn British constitutionalism into a racially informed populist despotism, I suggest folk don’t hold out too much hope for Westminster to recognise Scotland’s political will. Democratic rights don’t apply to Scotland, apparently (see Brexit).

      Accessing and Implementing Human Rights and Justice
      https://www.routledge.com/Accessing-and-Implementing-Human-Rights-and-Justice/Mills-Labonte/p/book/9781138036697

    258. Graham says:

      The only sense I get of how seriously this is being taken by Joe Bloggs, is the extent and (some) thoughtful and careful analysis from the comments on here today.
      It’s nice to know I’m not alone in feeling incandescent with hyperbole in the way certain citizens of this country are being treated by the State.
      Anyway…By George, I think I know who it is…:)

    259. Gary45% says:

      Waldo Jones mibees Oscar??

    260. robertknight says:

      One of my favourite lines from Braveheart comes to mind…

      “The Almighty tells me he can get me out of this mess, but he’s pretty sure, you’re f***ed”.

      Accurately sums up the situation between myself (considering leaving these shores for foreign pastures new) and my homeland.

    261. Helen Yates says:

      Excellent though disturbing article Stu, Scotland owes much to you and Craig Murray although sadly many don’t or won’t see this, it puzzles me no end that there are still so many who think Queen Nicola is as pure as the driven snow, they’ve obviously never heard the phrase ‘power corrupts’ and I have no doubt this applies to sturgeon, I’ve often thought back to a BBC protest at Pacific Quay that both myself and sister attended, we were early and only a few people were there so we wandered around killing time when we stopped beside a man sitting on a bench, he asked if we were there for the protest and we said yes, he then said I assume you’re SNP supporters to which we said yes we are, he then went on to tell us about the roll he played in the SNP and the work he had done for Sturgeon, he came across as a very educated and astute man however from stories he was telling us we both thought he was someone who had a grievance with the party and only wanting to stir up trouble, he showed us his membership and had great admiration for Alex Salmond who was the FM at that time, when we went to walk off he said and these were his exact words, keep your eye on the Queen in waiting, she is not what you believe her to be, I wish I could remember his name, he was a blogger at the time, of course we didn’t think anything of it but looking back now as we have done lately it made us realise this man was indeed very clever.

    262. CameronB Brodie says:

      Without leadership that understands how to support the rule-of-law and human rights, Scotland does not have much of a future as a nation. Scotland appears to be lacking such leadership. This will undermine access to justice and the quality of life for all those living in Scotland. Yoons included, though most of them as anti-democratic knuckle-dragers who value nationalist tradition over equality in law.

      Human Rights: A New Standard of Civilization
      https://www.academia.edu/4314875/Human_Rights_A_New_Standard_of_Civilization

    263. Andy Ellis says:

      @SC

      That’s a slightly odd take I reckon. Let’s assume things play out as we suspect: the SNP win an outright majority in Holyrood 2021. BoJo refuses S30 Order. The courts rule Holyrood has no power to hold referendums.

      What do you think people like me, who are disillusioned with the SNP, will do with our votes? Why waste them on a party with no real appetite, or indeed chance, of doing anything much before the Holyrood election after 2021, or the next Westminster election?

      It’s glaringly obvious the SNP isn’t for turning. The membership and activist base have achieved nothing in the past 5 years. Many of us may be prepared to lend the SNP our votes tactically where it’s sensible, but it’s more and more evident we might as well look elsewhere. I can see myself voting for Joanna Cherry for example, but Robertson….? Nope. Not going to happen. Same goes for many other individuals in the party who are aligned with the woke Stasi.

      It’s all very well to assert alternatives don’t cut the mustard, but it’s not as if we can depend on the SNP to deliver independence this decade.

    264. Papko says:

      @ Heisenbergs Conundrum
      “i think you miss the point. the next Holyrood will be a defacto independence plebiscite. polls show 54% and rising.”

      No it won’t, it will be an election for the Scottish Parliament.

      If its anything like the last 14 years or so the SNP will get a million votes and there may be a curt reference to Scotland’s destiny in their manifesto.

      And life will get back to normal.

    265. CameronB Brodie says:

      Still unwilling to believe Scotland’s judicial system is actively being destroyed from within?

      The Rights of Women
      Helping Women Through the Law

      Evidence for Joint Committee on Human Rights Inquiry into:
      Human Rights: attitudes to enforcement

      https://rightsofwomen.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Evidence-for-Joint-Committee-on-Human-Rights-Inquiry-into-Human-Rights-enforcement.pdf

    266. defo says:

      I thought the letter well crafted.

      An arrogant, we’ll decide ‘fuck off’, with a lovely little helping of ‘whatcha gonnae dae?’ condescension.

      You could still taste the fear seeping out though.
      🙂

      Well done Stu, but I’d steer clear of popularity contests…

    267. schrodingers cat says:

      Andy Ellis says:
      That’s a slightly odd take I reckon. Let’s assume things play out as we suspect: the SNP win an outright majority in Holyrood 2021. BoJo refuses S30 Order. The courts rule Holyrood has no power to hold referendums.

      ————————-
      whats the point andy, really?. think about what your saying?

      i beg you.

      if we win 50%+ in the next holyrood election, all talk of indyref2 or a section 30 becomes as redundant as talk of a peoples vote (euref2 etc)

    268. Craig Murray says:

      Dakk,

      Alex was already showing impatience with Nicola’s stalling on Independence. If you are Nicola, and you are determined to quietly ditch Independence as any more than a vague aspiration while enjoying being First Minister, Alex is very obviously going to be a threat to you. It is obvious.

      Which is why there is a 100% correlation between those who are in denial that Nicola has quietly had dropped the idea of making any actual move for Independence, and those who are in denial that she tried to have Alex Salmond put away for the rest of his life.

    269. schrodingers cat says:

      @papko

      no, it wont, maybe it will be business as usual for you, but we have never had 50%+ support for yes or the snp. you might fuck off back into the shadows but their are many many folk who believe in the sovereignty of the people of scotland, who wont

      for them, and me, the democratic road to indy will end. you can wank over whatever political party you want. but many of my compatriots will have moved on

    270. schrodingers cat says:

      Craig Murray says:
      Which is why there is a 100% correlation between those who are in denial that Nicola has quietly had dropped the idea
      ———-
      to be fair craig

      we dont all have a hotline to alex. we still have to filter msm

      i dont doubt your take. but i am still allowed to view the evidence and make up my own mind

      no matter how much i value your insight, in 2 weeks time, i hope to be able to make up my own mind.

      truthfully
      i believe in an independent scotland.
      alex, nicola, you, me etc are only bit parts in this drama.

      i, you and aex and nicola… are expendable in the grand scheme of things

    271. schrodingers cat says:

      Andy Ellis says:
      27 July, 2020 at 9:55 pm
      @SC
      That’s a slightly odd take I reckon. Let’s assume things play out as we suspect: the SNP win an outright majority in Holyrood 2021. BoJo refuses S30 Order. The courts rule Holyrood has no power to hold referendums.

      What do you think people like me, who are disillusioned with the SNP, will do with our votes? Why waste them on a party………………
      —————-

      why bother voting andy ?

      think about what you are saying

    272. ElGordo says:

      @ Helen Yates says:
      “when we went to walk off he said and these were his exact words, keep your eye on the Queen in waiting, she is not what you believe her to be, I wish I could remember his name, he was a blogger at the time, of course we didn’t think anything of it but looking back now as we have done lately it made us realise this man was indeed very clever”

      And later that night when i was lying in my bed , there was a knock, knock, knock at the window, scared but curious I crept over to check, again, but louder, Knock, Knock, Knock, I managed to overcome my fear and hold the curtain in my trembling hand and slowly pull it back…

    273. ElGordo says:

      @Andy Ellis says:

      What do you think people like me, who are disillusioned with the SNP, will do with our votes? Why waste them on a party

      https://people.howstuffworks.com/voter-suppression2.htm

    274. Colin Alexander says:

      There would be no splitting of the indy vote, if Holyrood is used as a plebiscite election: 50%+1 of the votes are for indy is what would count, not how those votes are shared between pro-indy parties.

      It is the people that are sovereign, not the politicians or the colonial parliament.

      True independence parties should want Scotland to obtain her freedom.

      The SNP will run on a colonial devolution manifesto. The Greens will probably do the same.

      Political parties are nothing without your support, without your votes.

      You have the power to shape Scotland’s future. If you vote for colonial devolution that’s what you will get.

      If you want independence: don’t accept anything less.

    275. ElGordo says:

      @Colin Alexander or Nicola and Alex ER

      Divide & Conquer, or retain in this case

    276. robbo says:

      @Andy Ellis says:

      What do you think people like me, who are disillusioned with the SNP, will do with our votes? Why waste them on a party

      —————-

      You do what your democratic voice in your head says Andy Ellis.

      Just remember murder Fraser, Annie wells, Liam Kerr, Halcron whatever , and the one that auld git that wanted to know when he could be back playing “crochet” during a fucking pandemic would love you to bin your vote-or give it to them.

    277. ElGordo says:

      I’m sure the UK Govs recent brexit power play on Spanish tourism will be remembered by the Spanish Gov, who along with all other EU27 have a veto on any future trade agreement.

      Immediate decision, with no notification, knock on impact beyond the 30% of UK tourists for a limited season, they had just invested in ramping up for.

      Since when did the UK Gov put the health of their subjects over economic or political benefits.

    278. ElGordo says:

      Nobody really talks about Gibraltar anymore do they, used to be a big deal..

    279. Me Bungo Pony says:

      Wow! Nicola Sturgeon must truly be the most evil monster that ever walked the Earth. Probably eats puppies and indulges in kitten juggling. No doubt she’s sent evil spirits to possess the minds of her supporters. Why can people not see this? Yaddah, yaddah, yaddah.

      Honestly, with the supposedly pro-indy folk on this site ….. it’s not “Auld Nic” or the unionists who are going to ensure independence never happens.

    280. Walter Jones says:

      There are five Parties at Holyrood who prefer Devolution over Independence.

      We need a strong Indy leader who is not afraid to shout about Independence at every opportunity.

      Not a leader who is frightened of her own shadow.

      Are you listening Sturgeon, move on to your next project and leave Independence to those who are up for a fight.

    281. Davie Oga says:

      Colin

      You touched on it there. All these noble notions of a plebiscite election next year, or ideally before,
      are pointless without a wholesale shift in policy and personnel.

      Reality. As it stands, the election will be fought on a mandate to request a referendum from our imperial overlords. Since 2015 SNP electoral success has been built on soft unionist and devolutionist votes. You can vote SNP without voting for the big enchilada. Will they gamble their jobs and power on a hard independence manifesto? Unlikely.

      The only hope is if Sturgeon and Murrell can be removed before Christmas.

    282. Me Bungo Pony says:

      “We need a strong Indy leader who is not afraid to shout about Independence at every opportunity”.

      And therefore piss off the electorate and ensure independence never happens. Just like you want eh!!

    283. Papko says:

      Elgordioe

      “Nobody really talks about Gibraltar anymore do they, used to be a big deal..”#

      Its only 30k people, how much can 65 million people talk about Gibraltar ?

      Does someone in Bathgate say “Barbers are open after the lock down, so I will get a hair cut, what about Gibraltar eh”

    284. Me Bungo Pony says:

      “The only hope is if Sturgeon and Murrell can be removed before Christmas”.

      And therefore put support for independence into a nose dive. Just like you want eh!

      This is no longer a pro-indy site.

    285. Davie Oga says:

      MGP

      I’d say conspiring to put an innocent man in prison for the rest of his life is pretty good indicator of evilness.

    286. Jimmy Jo says:

      El Gordo

      You are correct, the BritNat media have gone very quite on Gibraltar.

      A couple of years ago it was never off our screens and neither was their head guy, he was never away from London.

      Now, not a peep.

      Strange indeed.

    287. Me Bungo Pony says:

      Because that what happened isn t it Davie One? You know this for a fact do you? May as well not waste our time on an enquiry then. Just send a lynch mob to Bute House because the Wingers have spoken and their word is the alpha and the omega of truth.

    288. Jimmy Jo says:

      Me Bungo Pony

      You say this is no longer a pro Indy site.

      I think you are mixing this site up with the official SNP website.

      Now that definitely is NOT a Pro Indy site

    289. Papko says:

      @Pythagoras’s pseudonym

      “you might fuck off back into the shadows,,,, you can wank over whatever political party you want. but many of my compatriots will have moved on ”

      Vintage analysis.

      Take the soft noes and the remainers away with the Murrells and Indy goes back down to those “retired musicians” -who get their rent paid by the DLA- those ultra radicals.

      Yes good bye to your 54%.

      bit like Catch-22.

    290. Jimmy Jo says:

      I would be up for a Mass Rally through the streets of Edinburgh, finishing outside the front door of Bute House.

      Get Sturgeon to address the Rally and commit to fighting for indyRef2.

      If she refuses to come out, then we know she must be removed from her position as leader of the Independence Movenent in Scotland.

    291. Davie Oga says:

      Me Bungo Pony says:
      28 July, 2020 at 12:25 am
      “The only hope is if Sturgeon and Murrell can be removed before Christmas”.

      And therefore put support for independence into a nose dive. Just like you want eh!

      This is no longer a pro-indy site.

      If she did the right thing, by her own standards, she would resign and move on with some dignity intact. By clinging on, she will profoundly damage the independence project. Do the inquiry is just going to go away? Or that our opponents won’t drag it out as close to the election as they can? Do you think the free pass she’s getting from the unionist media will last if she makes a serious push for independence? She is compromised and has to go.

    292. crazycat says:

      @ David Whannel at 9.17

      “Why do you think the Scottish media establishment is rallying round her and sending the likes of Dani Garavelli to do soft-soap interviews”

      Was it not for Tortoise, an English media outlet, paid for by the Tories?

      The soft soap interview being referred to is the one last week for her 50th birthday, I think. Scotsman or similar.

      The Tortoise piece was at the time of Alex’s acquittal.

    293. Al-Stuart says:

      .

      AC Bruce,

      It’s taken 2 hours to read the main article and also BTL. Scrolling past shat-cats 20% average thread pollution shaves a good 25 minutes off of that. But from all of the interesting contributions, and there were many, this one stood out due to its simplicity and vital importance…

      A C Bruce says at 27 July, 2020 at 1:35 pm
      What I want to know is who the hell do I vote for to help achieve independence before I fall off my perch?

      In May 2021, I would respectfully suggest you consider voting…

      1). Constituency: SNP (hold your nose).
      2). List: The Alex Salmond IndyRef2 Guaranteed List Party.

      I am none to keen voting for the Wee Dreghorn Backstabber (she is so addicted to Machiavellian episodes of the Borgen TV drama she begged the production company to meet the fictitious Dannish Prime Minister actress who played Birgitte Nyborg)…

      https://archive.is/wip/uWr9Z

      But it is highly likely if Alex Salmond leads a LIST party GUARANTEEING IndyRef2 we will end up with a MAJORITY PRO-INDY HOLYROOD.

      For example…

      61 SNP MSPs and…
      22 Alex Salmond LIST MSPs.

      An historic 83 pro-Indy MSPs.

      Then to use one of Alex Salmond’s favourite phrases, he will hold John Swinney’s feet to the fire.

      Why Swinney?

      Someone in the SNP will have to trigger the constitutional removal process to get Nicola Sturgeon to retire immediately. Likely to spend more time with Peter Murrell who will have had his jotters.

      This is Nicola leaving Bute House with her karmic dignity intact…

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oYLvsbDbNOE

      Then with Dr Alex Salmond MSP., PC, MA, HNC, D.Univ., back in Holyrood, and Nicola’s sins sticking to her as the Scottish version of Tony Blair and the aroma of excrement that universal contempt for both Blair and Sturgeon will be forever contemptuously held in, we can start again, just where we left off in 2014. The mass of voting public will see why the wee careerist backstabber had to go.

      Then in 2022, after several months of work, Scotland, with Joanna Cherry and Alex Salmond rotating the Scottish First Ministership in a similar way to last week’s announcement the Taoiseach in Eire we WILL have our IndyRef2.

      AC Bruce, I hope this helps give you guidance and hope on how we have some way to get to Scottish Independence.

      P.S. Stu., your rejoinder to Silent Boab was hilarious and quite elegantly makes the point I have tried to do here.

    294. Stuart MacKay says:

      A lot of people are confounding supporting for Nicola Sturgeon with support for independence. I’ll bet a poll with the question “Would you still vote Yes if Nicola Sturgeon was not the leader of the SNP?” would turn up some interesting numbers.

    295. Andy Ellis says:

      @SC

      “whats the point andy, really?. think about what your saying?

      i beg you.

      if we win 50%+ in the next holyrood election, all talk of indyref2 or a section 30 becomes as redundant as talk of a peoples vote (euref2 etc)”

      —————–

      I HAVE thought about it. I’d love to be able to support the SNP. I’d love to be able to rejoin the party, to help Joanna Cherry become my MSP and seen them deliver independence, but I just can’t do it. They aren’t the party I thought they were.

      Winning > 50% at Holyrood 2021, or 55% or 60% will signify nothing if there isn’t a Plan B. We’ll be no further forward, because of the gradualist acceptance that we need Westminster’s permission for self determination. I’ll vote for a WoS party or ISP or Alliance on the list, but I won’t vote SNP until I’m convinced they’ve changed.

    296. ahundredthidiot says:

      CM @ 22:46

      ‘Which is why there is a 100% correlation between those who are in denial that Nicola has quietly had dropped the idea of making any actual move for Independence, and those who are in denial that she tried to have Alex Salmond put away for the rest of his life.’

      Without doubt, one of the most depressing paragraphs I think I have ever read.

      And if it doesn’t put fire in yer belly, I don’t know what will.

    297. ahundredthidiot says:

      I am hearing NS has a pet name for her Husband.

      Like most children she couldn’t quite make up her mind, so, it is somewhere between ‘My Little Pony’ and her favourite character from ‘Rainbow’

      ….and he loves it!

    298. ahundredthidiot says:

      Ian B @ 6:46

      Thanks for that!

      Last line from the ‘professor’ is that it could return ‘no majority for a single vision of independence’

      My crystal ball tells me this line is premeditated and a sign of things to come. Brits just love a punchline they can repeat, and repeat, and repeat.

      My response would be simple: The single vision IS Independence!

    299. Jimmy Jo says:

      Ian Brotherhood 6.46am

      Regarding the “Gaming the System”, I’ll bet you the Yoons would just love to be in a position to fill Hollyrood with pro Unionist parties.

      And you wouldn’t hear a peep from Curtice and Co.

      I thought in a democracy you were allowed to vote for whoever you wanted to.

    300. Effijy says:

      TV news is covering the cancer treatments in England stopping with
      The Corona Virus treatments taking priority.

      A Father talking about his young daughter being told her treatment Might lead
      To her catching Covid and dying but the situation meant that she Would die with
      Cancer.

      We would all take on the possibility of death before the certainty.

      This is of course due to the Tory cuts to the NHS and by scaring of foreign medical staff and a stop
      to training bursaries.

      A Professor from the NHS has stated that a return to the established levels of cancer treatments has
      Not been prioritised and funded by the government.
      Her colleagues assess that there will be 35,000 needless cancer deaths in the UK due to the cancellations and the backlog.

      Between the 45,000 Covid deaths declared, the 20,000 excess deaths not being counted and the
      35,000 cancer deaths team Boris will dispatch 100,000 citizens with the worst mismanagement of the virus on the planet!

    301. The Isolator says:

      Fantastic article Stu,goodness knows where this will lead us but in the context of the arbitration ruling against HMFC and PTFC yesterday these lyrics from Junior Murvins Police and Thieves certainly ring true.

      “All the lawmakers turned war officers”. Access to the law for everyone is a human basic right.The Scottish justice system just slammed the door shut on that and the Scottish government is complicit.It’s sickening but it only ramps up my resolve to help purge the party and rid it of these fuckers.

    302. Contrary says:

      Richard Murphy has produced a long article (also in PDF format) on Scotland’s debt – what we would owe on independence:

      https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2020/07/28/scotland-debt/

      He’s is doing this for us, he has no need to and has no skin in the game except his strong sense of social justice, so please read, ask questions and understand what it means.

      I believe the economical arguments are the strongest thing we have in favour of independence – it turns it from a ‘nice to have’ to something not only preferable but worthwhile. It you understand why it is, you can convince others of the same.

      Forget the SNP, for now, the politics will play out, it is us, WE are the strength behind independence, we don’t need to lean on anyone: everyone that can, understand what the economic arguments mean – it will give a solid base as we move forward to new things, and ensure our representatives are not leading us a merry dance.

    303. Ian Brotherhood says:

      ‘These are opinion polls that show shifts in opinion.’

      Michael Gove, on GMS, two minutes ago.

      The boy will go far!

      😉

    304. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      O/T

      UK suspended Julian Assange extradition hearing yesterday after the US failed to prepare a new indictment.

    305. Jimmy Jo says:

      O/T

      Re BBC.

      For the last couple of days the BBC seem to have dropped the:

      “…and now for the news, travel and weather where you are…”.

      Why have they done this?

      The BBC never do anything without some sneaky meaning at the back of it.

      Are they trying to say that we are not made up of different Nations and that we are just one big happy BBC Nation?

      I don’t know why, but it has been done deliberately.

      Never trust anything the BBC do or say.

      And no, I don’t pay the illegal licence fee, but I thought I would inform the world of their latest propaganda tactic.

      The hated media arm of the english establishment will sink to any depths to save their corrupt Union.

    306. stuart mctavish says:

      Papko @12:34

      On subject of catch 22’s, an interesting one for indy minded remainers is that, thanks largely to Boris, they now have a little over 5 months to redeem themselves/ demonstrate their conviction 🙂

    307. Jimmy Jo says:

      Unionists don’t do Democracy.

      They do things their way.

      If that is illegal and unfair, then tough.

      This attitude feeds right down to your average, deranged, knuckle dragging Blue Nose.

    308. Polly says:

      Glad you’re getting coverage in the papers and upsetting Wishart. It’s not so good though that eventually tv news broadcasting to everyone about that earlier meeting between FM and certain individuals, focus on Sturgeon being there of course not the others who are more interesting. Inevitable as it may have been, and as much as I knew it would happen, it’s still a bit of a jolt to know it’s almost upon us and all the rest of brexit, power grab etc. still to happen. What worries me is that since these trial women are protected by law from being named and with the trial, the judicial review and these private meetings in March all being connected, that the inquiry into the wrong doing will be hampered if certain names are not allowed to be spoken as being connected. That could affect Geoff Aberdein and his testimony especially. If the inquiry is only allowed to state their positions in government and party and leave them unnamed or how they’re connected to both review and trial then it could end in a whitewash.

      Even though I realised since she allowed Joan McAlpine to be abuse by her trans pets that she wasn’t even half the person I thought her as far as integrity goes I still had a shred of hope, which I see some here still hold, that Sturgeon had been somehow tricked into giving the ok to a process which would trap Salmond. It’s easy to fool yourself with BUT it’s the Westminster civil service (it is), or BUT she couldn’t do this (think now she could). Even if you think she has been played, that’s not to her credit to be so very stupid. When I heard she had private emails/correspondence against the rules I first thought it must mean she doesn’t trust some of those working with her. But she kept working with them when she didn’t have to and there could be another reason for keeping things unofficial. And given her normal standard of ‘people need to step down temporarily from politics if they are under suspicion of breaking rules or likely to bring disrepute on party or government – why isn’t she doing it herself now since she has a deputy – other folk were made to do it for far less and less high profile reasons.

      She is obviously clinging on until Robertson can get in and take over, or trying to. Him and his grubby little wife pushing his candidacy and fundraiser with the selection process still to happen. I also saw he was posting photos making claims disputed by folk in the photos. It’s unseemly, grubby and disheartening to think I used to admire him too. I wonder whether Sturgeon would have taken the ‘honourable’ route and stepped back had MacKay still been there. Whatever happens some folk like me who were happy to want independence but were happy to sit back and let the party and its activists do the work, thinking with the numbers rising independence would happen eventually for us, will no longer be so inactive in future when we see the only real independence party brought down from within, attacked from without and dirty tricks deployed. The party has also been encouraged to become too closely aligned to her. Whatever independence parties fight in future I know we’ll all still want independence and it won’t be allowed to die.

    309. Jimmy Jo says:

      If Jimmy Reid was alive today he would have said:

      “I didn’t leave Nicola Sturgeon, Nicola Sturgeon left me”.

    310. Polly says:

      @Contrary

      ‘Forget the SNP, for now, the politics will play out, it is us, WE are the strength behind independence, we don’t need to lean on anyone: everyone that can, understand what the economic arguments mean – it will give a solid base as we move forward to new things, and ensure our representatives are not leading us a merry dance.’

      Well said, from now on whatever happens with politics and the law and politicians involved has to reach its inevitable conclusion, whatever that ends up being. We should think of regrouping and preparing what we can do for the future. Ordinary people are the strength of Yes and we’re not going anywhere.

    311. Breastplate says:

      People will vote Yes in an independence referendum whether they think Nicola Sturgeon is their best friend or the Devil incarnate.
      The argument is will she call for an independence referendum anytime soon or not.
      Many believe yes she will and many believe no she won’t.

      I would say though, people tend not to be more patient while waiting for something.

    312. callmedave says:

      The king of the forked tongue ophidians slithers out his lies and deceptions for the unaware there on GMS.

      Whatever the message Gove presents, think the opposite Scotland.
      🙁

    313. Gary45% says:

      Gove, he who said,” poorer people eat fatty food because it gives them, comfort, solace and pleasure”.
      I suppose with Johnson,you know what stupidity to expect, Gove on the other hand is simply a waste of organs and skin.

    314. The Isolator says:

      @ Jimmy No

      “This attitude feeds right down to your average, deranged, knuckle dragging Blue Nose.” agreed and the same with your average Sellick fan methinks.

    315. mike cassidy says:

      The Isolator 9.22

      Magnum was rubbish

      But I thought Tom Sellick was great in the Jessie Stone films.

    316. mike cassidy says:

      Child hospitalizations from Covid-19 surge 23% in Florida as schools statewide must reopen

      http://archive.is/w4Zjx

    317. James F. McIntosh says:

      Maybe the ISP or Alliance parties should stand against the SNP in the main election unless we get legal assurance from SNP to hold ref. immediately after election if they win.

    318. Robert Millar says:

      Excellent post. But just in case it has not been mentioned in any of the other comments it is a fact that the COPFS is answerable to the Scottish Parliament – not the Scottish Government. The SG – which somewhat confusingly includes the Law Officers in their role as the SG’s legal advisers – is of course also answerable to the SP. The structure is designed to preserve the independence of the COPFS. Humza – or more accurately one of his officials – was on this rare occasion correct.

    319. Graf Midgehunter says:

      Difficult to figure out why England hangs on to Scotland like a junckie on the needle.

      It can’t be because of all that worthless oil n’gas, water, wind energy, tidal power, whisky, seed spuds and agricultural products galore…can it?

      Maybe this could help find a way to get us on to our feet:

      https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/28/how-much-is-a-life-worth-northern-irish-community-split-over-gold-mining-plans

      See how small what NI has compared to Scotland..! (Map)

      The Broch fishermen will be out panning fur gold on the Mormond Hill.. 😉

    320. Kenneth G Coutts says:

      Superb Stuart, I get it.
      Keep on keeping on.
      I was never impressed with Humza even more so with our local
      SNP MP.
      Something not quite honest with her.
      Just saying.
      ??

    321. CameronB Brodie says:

      Gove isn’t only a waste of organs and skin. he’s a dangerous right-winger who punted Brexit through a populist narrative. As such, he poses a serious threat to democracy.

    322. James Che. says:

      And the blue nose Tory wins the Scottish election because Indy yes got confused and lost its way.
      Maggie thatcher said if the majority of people want Scottish independence .
      Everyone knows it is not a party, it is not parliament north or south that sovereignty lies, it is not a queen or a king. It is the Scottish people, it us and us alone that holds a voice for independence. In 2018 it went through Hansard that it is the people of Scotland that have the right to chose, not a parliament or a party,
      And that fact has stood the test of time, it is just that the ordinary people in Scotland do not know how to put it into practice.

    323. Mike d says:

      The Scottish legal system are Westminster’s bitch.

    324. CJ Robertson says:

      To me, there’s nothing as off-putting in works of fiction (literature, TV/movies, etc) when characters are motivated to do something that defies their internal logic. It’s usually a solution of poor writing and understanding of the character within their environment.

      For those who are commenting on this article: what motivates Nicola Sturgeon to –

      (1) abandon the quest for Scottish political independence?
      (2) orchestrate a high-level conspiracy that would ruin the lives of at least 2 colleagues?

      I’m genuinely interested to know the thoughts of folk who accuse her of doing these things.

    325. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi CJ Robertson at 4:47 pm

      You typed,
      “To me, there’s nothing as off-putting in works of fiction (literature, TV/movies, etc) when characters are motivated to do something that defies their internal logic. It’s usually a solution of poor writing and understanding of the character within their environment.”

      In pub blethers, I have recounted this…

      I used to watch Brookside and Eastenders. I gave up on Brookside when Graeme Souness (Terry?) pushed his wife and bairn off the roof. There was no logic to it.

      I gave up on Eastenders when Martin Kemp hit Saskia with an ashtray when she attacked him in the nightclub office. It was self defence so why did the young guy, who was an onlooker, have to take the blame for it? Once again, ‘illogical, captain’.

    326. McDuff says:

      MBP
      What exactly has NS done in the past six years to further independence apart from react to events. Where is the passion, the plan. We are talking about someone who we were led to believe was devout in her mission to set this country free, not to run it for Westminster.
      NS has created this frustration and anger with her sheer indifference towards independence and its supporters. She simply is not interested, and when people like you finally see the light it will be too late,

    327. Polly says:

      @ CJ Robertson

      I agree with anyone who dislikes literature which is internally inconsistent, and yes it shows a quality of poor writing or understanding of character by the author. Real life of course is not self contained or written by one author in the same way and we haven’t yet reached the final denouement. Also in many novels you get an internal view of the character from first person/stream of consciousness etc., again lacking in real life. Not all villains conspire with the audiences sotto voce like Richard III.

      Whether she is guilty of either of the things asked in the two questions, or whether if guilty it can be proved, to me makes no difference. The inconsistencies Sturgeon has shown, which are provable, is more than enough to be suspicious of the rest of her behaviour. What can’t be denied is that she was always shown to be someone who ‘went high’ like Obama’s wife, not engaging in abuse, calling it out, making scapegoats of anyone on our side who did, dropping people who were even questionable, and showing great leadership in that. Why then did she allow the abuse of Joan McAlpine? Not only allow it without speaking out, but allow it continue without doing anything about it behind the scenes, and still promoting the faction who were behind that abuse.

      What was consistent about that after all her previous behaviour? If anyone can answer then I might consider I could be wrong in having serious suspicions about her.

    328. Contrary says:

      CJ Robertson

      She’s a career politician.

      What other motivation or personality type is needed? I don’t see any contradictions. In saying that, I won’t judge until things are more than hearsay, on the gossipy stuff.

      It is usually our own expectations that make it difficult to accept unwelcome news.

    329. Me Bungo Pony says:

      @McDuff 10:03 pm

      NS has taken support for indy parties to nearly 60% and, consequently, support for indy to sustained record levels. They are now, for the first time, at levels that would make YES favourites to win a referendum (with or without Westminster’s endorsement).

      As I’ve said elsewhere, the SNP have always stated they would only go for another referendum when they could reasonably guarantee winning it. There’s no point going all gung-no for a referendum when YES is behind in the polls and the electorate is focused on something else entirely

      What else could they do That they haven’t already done? The “malcontents” are big on saying the SNP should be “doing more to get us independence”, but when asked about what they think they should have done …. there is either silence or some fanciful piece of nonsense that has no basis in reality.

      The fate of those who go to early and ignore careful planning; https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mLyOj_QD4a4

    330. Balaaargh says:

      Kinda disagree on the interpretation of a couple of points here:

      The Lord Advocate is responsible for the operation of the legal system not the decisions made within it. Parliament’s power is to ensure COPFS is operating as per its defined processes which won’t always give the answer you want to hear.

      And I don’t think it is the job of the COPFS to give an opinion on whether something is dodgy. Opinions are dangerous things for lawyers because it implies culpability whether it’s right or wrong. Even when it is so blindingly obvious to the man in the street what right is.

      Ultimately, this is obfuscation on their part. The original point about the Garavelli six still stands and will forever be dismissed as “not being in the public interest” which is a completely subjective excuse to get out of doing the work.



    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