The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


To The Committee

Posted on February 08, 2021 by

Committee on the Scottish Govt Handling of Harassment Complaints

Dear Ms Fabiani and Committee Members,

We have now had the opportunity to consult on Friday evening and over the weekend with our client on your clerk’s latest emails of Friday afternoon. Those followed the convener’s letter informing us that you do not intend to publish our client’s submission on the Ministerial Code, a submission which was sent to you on December 31st and which was carefully considered by this firm, and by Counsel, prior to submission.

Your latest communications and the decision not to publish exemplify the confusion and legal difficulties created by the Committee and which now plainly undermine the capacity of the Committee to fulfil the remit set by Parliament.

It must be clear to you that our client cannot accept a position where his evidence submitted in good faith to your Committee (and in greater part still publicly available) is not to be published and therefore form part of the evidence leading to conclusions in your report. The submission was not simply for James Hamilton’s Inquiry. It was also specifically to address Part 4 of your Inquiry on the Ministerial Code and was framed entirely to assist you in fulfilling the remit given to you by Parliament. The latest emails seeking to clarify the position do not assist. Our client is still in the dark about the parameters of his evidence and what assurances and protections you can provide to him to enable him help you to fulfil your remit, while being truthful and transparent.

Asking a witness to accept the constraints of speaking only to evidence selected by you on the undisclosed advice and direction of unidentified others is not acceptable in any forum and is, in our client’s view, particularly offensive when the remit he seeks to address has been set for you by Parliament and addresses the unlawful actions of an elected Government and the needless squandering of hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money.

You advise that there are ‘elements’ of the submission which can be spoken to in oral evidence or in the opening statement. Which elements? You offer one example (the leak to the Daily Record). Which other elements are deemed acceptable?

Simultaneously, you appear to have identified specific elements which are problematic. Please set those out in writing, together with the legal basis for that stance. In the absence of such clarity, we are no further forward in advising our client. Not only does clarity require to be given in relation to oral evidence, but it also necessarily informs the content of his written submission. It is at present entirely unclear to us what he is able to submit and what you view as unacceptable.

Even your suggestion of a ‘detailed opening statement’ is immediately subject to the caveat of complying with the Committee’s approach to evidence. That is meaningless until we understand what interpretation of the Section 11 order (the key barrier as we understand it) you are taking.

Similarly, why would a ‘supplementary submission’ made after a hearing have any more chance of being published by you, and relied upon by the committee in its deliberations, than the initial submission you have already refused to publish?

Beyond that, there is the obvious question of what legal advice could possibly justify the absurd position of our client being told he can essentially read out or repeat ‘elements’ of a submission but that the same elements (freely available to all online at ‘The Spectator’) cannot be published.

You advise that legal advice cannot be published or shared to support the stance the Committee has taken on this matter of overwhelming public interest. I am sure the irony of that will not have escaped you. Regardless, what is required is an understanding of your legal advice so that we can assess that, respond to it and advise in light of it.

Given the importance of this, a telephone call is not sufficient. Your position needs to be set out in writing to ensure clarity.

There are other matters which require a definitive and urgent response.

We have written on numerous occasions on this matter without substantive reply.

We require to advise our client ahead of his proposed evidence session. In order to do so, we need fully to understand all restrictions placed on his evidence and the legal bases therefor. Accordingly, we need you to set out the totality of the restrictions upon him. For example, which chapters of evidence are restricted or excluded, what reference can be made to the existence and content of documents which are known to exist but which the Committee has not recovered, which individuals or meetings is our client prevented from referencing? Which other prohibitions are in place?

The committee, on its own unpublished legal advice has attached a series of restrictions on evidence without offering either a comprehensive list of such restrictions or any legal advice which supports them. The effect is that we, as legal advisers, are left in the dark and are severely hampered in any advice that we can give. No body taking evidence can seriously expect a witness in the position of our client to do so blind to the full range of prohibitions, restrictions and penalties of even an inadvertent breach.

We note, for example, that the evidence of Geoff Aberdein has been withdrawn in its entirety and will form no part of the Committee’s deliberations. We do not know why or which parts of that evidence have led to that decision. We do not understand why the entirety of that submission had to be withdrawn. We understand the same will apply to at least one and probably more of the submissions made by our client. Further, we understand that limited or possibly no evidence is to be allowed in relation to specific meetings in March and April 2018, many of which are in the public domain and have been since January 2019. Moreover, the evidence given by the First Minister will similarly be restricted, a remarkable position which fundamentally undermines the value of the committee investigation.

In addition it is now claimed in today’s Sunday Mail that evidence sessions from “senior officials” are no longer to take place because of legal restrictions being placed on your Committee. What are these legal restrictions, which senior officials are involved, and how does the exclusion or absence of such evidence affect our client’s evidence and indeed the Committee’s own remit to “consider and report on the actions of the First Minister, Scottish Government officials and special advisers”?

These are only examples and we do not understand either the extent of these restrictions or the legal advice on which the Committee is proceeding which underpins them. In order to advise our client properly, we require clarity on the totality of the restrictions. We require very specific direction on this. A generic reference to a court order is not sufficient. We have advised you on many occasions that our client is fully aware of that Order (he was in court when it was made and indeed did not oppose it) and has been fully compliant with it. We are perplexed by the Committee’s interpretation of that order in relation to much of the evidence, hence the need for clarity.

We have been seeking this clarity for months and time is now extremely short.

We must advise our client of the potential legal implications of giving evidence. Allowing our client to proceed without clear direction from you as convener is to place him in legal jeopardy. We cannot responsibly do that. We have told you on many occasions about correspondence from the crown office about the consequences of breaching s. 162 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010, which creates a criminal offence. Despite raising those concerns we have had no meaningful response which allows us to give our client any assurance that he can fulfil his oath.

Our client remains willing to give evidence to the committee at any point up to the final date for evidence (currently fixed for 16th February). However, he cannot take his oath to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth unless and until you properly address in writing the legitimate concerns set out in this and our numerous previous letters.

Yours sincerely,

David McKie
Levy & McRae

Print Friendly

    313 to “To The Committee”

    1. BuggerLePanda says:

      Kangaroo Court?

    2. Intractable Potsherd says:

      This seems to be setting the stage for an application for (another) judicial review. Who has got their hands up the committee puppets’ arses?

    3. Dickie Tea says:

      Cue tumbleweed!

    4. ian foulds says:

      brilliant -that’s all

    5. Bob Mack says:

      I was always told that Justic was blind.

      It was only recently I learned that in Scotland he was gagged as well.

      To think our legal system once earned world praise.

    6. ScotsRenewables says:

      FFS

      Unbelievable

      What now?

    7. Muscleguy says:

      Salmond sill being persecuted in order to protect saint Nicola of thd fals diary entries.

    8. Captain Yossarian says:

      Good for David McKie. Holyrood don’t reply to anything complex and they find everything complex.

      When a Junta is formed at the very heart of government, that needs to be exposed to the light. That’s what’s happening now.

      There are still a handfull of honest lawyers in Scotland and so there is still hope.

    9. Mia says:

      Fabiani should be ashamed of herself. What an embarrassment. She is leaving the committee looking like complete idiots and totally undermining the parliamentary inquiry. What a way of ending you career in politics.

      Frankly, if this is the level of scrutiny these puppets were prepared to offer, I don’t know why the hell they even bothered. This has now passed the boundaries of whitewash. It has become a total farce where the committee and Fabiani in particular are acting like puppets.

      Where can I find emails from the civil servants involved in all this for the week of the 5th November 2017? Why haven’t those being submitted? I have looked in the information from the judicial review that is included in the section of the harassment complaints procedure for this committee and the date of the emails in November included in it has been redacted!!! What the hell? Since when a fckng date helps to jigsaw identification?

      This inquiry is the pits.

    10. Giesabrek (the original) says:

      The only positive to come out of this is that Alex’s lawyers appear very competent and on top of this fiasco.

    11. Alexander Wallace says:

      They don’t miss the dart board with that statement.

    12. Sharny Dubs says:

      Toothless tiger

    13. Frank Gillougley says:

      wonderful

    14. Pete says:

      O/T
      Camell laird in Liverpool has won the contract to service the Calmac ferries.

    15. Ron Maclean says:

      Whit ye askin me fur? A wis on leave an it’s no ma writin.

    16. misteralz says:

      Mr. Salmond, you are a house painter?

    17. Meg merrilees says:

      I promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing!?????
      WTF?

    18. Rebecca Hislop says:

      What an absolute farce!

    19. William McCarron says:

      Franz Kafka’s ‘The Trial’ seems normal compared to this absolute shit-show.

    20. Steve The Pirate says:

      Some of these government people are better pirates than me

    21. Captain Yossarian says:

      John Swinney will be asking all lawyers who are on the payroll of Holyrood (there are hundreds of them): ‘How does old-Linda answer this?’

      The brightest lawyer stands up and says: ‘Issue a holding response’. That always works……doesn’t it?

    22. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      I do not recall ever witnessing such outrageous nonsense in my life.

      A proper judge led enquiry to consider EVERY piece of evidence is now urgently needed.

      Following that people need to be detained and questioned.

      We will not see this occur as the folk in change don’t want detained.

    23. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      Folk in charge that should be

    24. Grendel says:

      “I promise to tell the truth, the whole trusth and nothing but the truth”.*

      *Terms and conditions apply. Only the truth as authorised will be recognised as being the truth. Other truths containing unauthorised facts will be deemed inadmissable. Telling certain legally protected truths may incur a custodial sentence or significant fine, but more likely the former.

    25. Lorna Campbell says:

      Talk about obstructionist. Set up to find out nothing, like most of these things. Usurping the right of parliament to find out precisely what went on, as if we didn’t already know. This SNPG is out of control on so many levels. Illegality on stilts and a level of stupidity and cupidity that is almost, but no quite, unbelievable. Judging by The National, though, all is fine in the state of Denmark, and the ultra faithful continue the mantra of “wheesht for indy” even though indy is not even on the horizon and never will be at this rate.

    26. SilverDarling says:

      This is set up to trip him up if he gives evidence because he can’t not refer to certain participants in meetings.You see people on social media saying what does he have to hide because that is the way it is being spun.

      Most of us know who is causing this.

    27. mountain shadow says:

      I can see this ending up in Court and Alex winning a multi pound settlement against The Scottish Government and Lord Advocate.

    28. Bob Mack says:

      Murrell admits that evidence he gave under oath to the Inquiry last time was “speculation”

      Thats where we are folks. Imagine trying that line in a court of law.

    29. Mac says:

      (Apologies, posted this in previous article by mistake.)

      Missed Murrell.

      I take it he was savaged relentlessly by one dead sheep after another and generally given a good gumming by the toothless ‘non-Inquiry’.

      The Fabiani Farce is going to be remembered as very much a part of the ongoing scandal and cover-up. It is aiding and abetting the crimes and cover-up, not attempting to uncover them. It is now complicit in what was done to Salmond.

      Well done Linda. You have really honoured yourself.

    30. SilverDarling says:

      *He can’t not refer to the meetings if he is to give a full account.

    31. This is why the statues of ` Lady Justice ` are blindfolded, so she can`t see the dishonesty and deception done in her name,

      it was ` The Law` that put the blindfold on her.

    32. Neil Mackenzie says:

      If only Richard Nixon had had Nicola Sturgeon’s entourage…

    33. Frank Waring says:

      Please, sir, what is a Section 11 order? Forgive my ignorance, or if I’ve overlooked something……

    34. katherine hamilton says:

      The submission seems very complicated, detailed and indeed specific. I’ve watched bits of this enquiry and the interrogation and understanding of the issues involved seems lightweight. I hae ma doots that the distinguished members of the committee, in particular the chairperson, have the wit and wisdom to assimilate all of this.
      I know it sounds a bit snobby, but I really don’t think they are up to it.

    35. ClanDonald says:

      Nicola Sturgeon is going to get away with this. She has successfully prevented the meeting on 28th March from being discussed at the enquiry, therefore it won’t form part of the findings. There will be no conclusion that she misled parliament.

      And even if she does face a vote of no confidence she’ll win it thanks to the support of the green party. In exchange she’s promised them gender reform via the criminalisation of women for objecting to men in women’s spaces.

      The only way to stop her now is to vote for another party in May and that would mean no indyref. Shes got you all over a barrel.

    36. TNS2019 says:

      My sister is a lawyer working for the parliamentary auditor in a major commonwealth country.
      Her words to me in May 2018 as we were sensing the corruption that was about to engulf the school was, “They can’t do that. They just can’t do that”. (She was present in Scotland at the time).
      Since then she has been following the Whitehouse v Lord Advocate case, the Swinney debacle and, of course, our own sorry story.
      She and her colleagues are gobsmacked at what is happening in Scotland.
      What on earth is all of this doing to our international reputation and our credibility as an future independent country??
      https://www.tns2019.org/new-blog-1/2021/2/8/careful-what-you-say

    37. John Martini says:

      Acta exteriora iudicant interiora secreta

      Argumentum ab impossibilii plurimum valet in lege

    38. Captain Yossarian says:

      @ClanDonald – I would wait until we hear from old-Alex.

    39. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      Frank Waring says:
      8 February, 2021 at 11:15 am
      Please, sir, what is a Section 11 order? Forgive my ignorance, or if I’ve overlooked something……

      https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/current-business/court-notices/contempt-of-court-orders

    40. Cath says:

      So, to sum up the evidence so far, as I understand it: Peter Murrell wasn’t at home during the meeting and didn’t talk to Nicola about it because it was government business, but Alex had just popped in and it wasn’t really a meeting at all, and Nicola had no idea what he wanted to talk about, except that maybe he was on the verge of quitting the party but she had no idea why. Then Peter did come home and found some unexpected people in his house (as you do) but had no idea Alex was there so just ambled off upstairs to get changed and nothing more was ever spoken of it. [Strokes imaginary beard]

    41. Alf Baird says:

      According to the MI5 website:

      “Our officers work closely with members of law enforcement agencies.”

      and:

      “Judges have allowed our staff to give evidence in criminal trials anonymously, including appearing behind screens.”

    42. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      Bravo Cath, in a nutshell.

    43. PhilM says:

      Garbage in, garbage out.
      Set up to fail, now failing.
      What a shocker!

    44. Mac says:

      I reminded of that horror movie a while back where a group of teens accidentally kill someone and then ‘successfully’ cover it up. Or so they think…

      However the next summer when they return to the scene of their crime they are slowly picked off one by one in grislily revenge for their crime.

      Nicola, we know what you did last autumn. It’s comeuppance time.

    45. Marie Clark says:

      Oh dear, what an absolute burach. This committee is too far out of its depth or they would never have allowed themselves to be hamstrung like this.

      It was set up as a whitewash and that’s how it will probably turn out, unless some of them have some backbone to say we are unable to form a conclusive opinion beacuse, from the very beginning, we have been hampered by non co-operation of SG. Make that clear and very public and resign from said committee and walk away.

      It will be interesting to see what Alex will do now. He won’t just walk away you can be sure of that.

      What a shower ministers, civil servants eh. They should be jailed for what they have done.

    46. Liz says:

      Nicola Sturgeon runs the SNP like it’s her own wee gang.
      She’s the leader, she makes the rules, and changes them when she feels like it.
      She sets the attack dogs on those outside her wee gang.

      When she goes, and it needs to be soon, we will rise again and we will not be so gullible.
      Checks and balances are required.

    47. Career: Politician says:

      As said by others, this is now beyond a whitewash, and the inquiry appears to have become one of the weapons of the “Sc’ddish Govurnment”. (I wince every time Nasty Nicola says those words).

    48. Betsy says:

      @Cath

      “…Nicola about it because it was government business, but Alex had just popped in and it wasn’t really a meeting at all, and Nicola had no idea what he wanted to talk about, except that maybe he was on the verge of quitting the party but she had no idea why.”

      Of course the chief executive of the SNP would have no interest in a longstanding member and former leader being on the verge of quitting because that is somehow government business.

      Honestly he’d have been better opening the window and letting the magpie in to give evidence on his behalf.

    49. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      @Liz, exactly.
      I refer to it as the Sturrell Medieval Court, bloody
      disgrace and was evident to me in 2014 as it has been for
      many members/politicians.

      I’ve never been in the party but saw it close up in 2014, very, very ugly then.

      But few people were/are willing to speak out.

      Wasn’t through my lack of trying I hasten to add.

    50. Livionian says:

      I fear this will be followed by the sound of chirping crickets

    51. David Caledonia says:

      Legal proceedings have to be taken against Fabiani, what she is allowing to happen must be illegal in scottish law
      Serve a writ on her, all she is doing is trying to keep her job until she gets her nice little pension
      Well its time to stop her getting that pension, she is corrupt and she needs to be brought to account for her actions in this whole whitewash which she is part of

    52. Blind Squirrel says:

      This fankle has been:

      – deliberately concocted by unionism to take out our top players
      – been alarmingly effective at taking out our best media
      – effective at detracting all sides from the gift that was Brexit
      – delayed independence

    53. Strathy says:

      Nicola Sturgeon on 7 February 2021 – ‘839,226 have now had first dose’ and ‘On track to hit all targets.’

      This is true, now that the Crown Office has declared all evidence of Jeane Freeman’s target of 1 million by 31 January 2021 to be inadmissible in any discussion about vaccination targets.

      The fact that evidence of the target set by Ms Freeman is available on the internet has no bearing on the above.

    54. Captain Yossarian says:

      @TNS2019 – Yet another ‘Mallicious Prosecution’ – we’ve turned into a semi-authoritarian junta overnight.

      Don’t tell me….you’ve suffred from years of ‘no response’ or ‘holding responses’ from our Scottish Parliament?

      Years of effort by parents and honest professionals at your school amount to nothing.

      Like your sister, I’ve worked all over the world and I’ve never seen corruption like this anywhere.

      If only we had a Laura Kuenssberg or a Robert Perton, eh?

    55. Meg merrilees says:

      The saddest thing in all this farce is the stress that is continuously being brought to bear on one innocent man.

      A man who almost brought Scotland to Independence, who has spent his life fighting for Scotland, and is still fighting for the soul of Scotland against the very people who are supposed to be the Guardians and Protectors of our Land.

      I hope his mental and physical state can cope because this is a disgrace. A lesser person would have crumpled by now and even though he has truth on his side, the efforts of coping with all this will have an adverse effect on him and his wife.

      We’ve got your back Alex. This will soon be over and we will all be the better for it.

    56. And spouse says:

      The letter was translated from Stanley Baxter’s Parliament Glasgow. His original interpretation-
      Witthefekruchancersplainat.

    57. BaronessSamedi says:

      What are we going to do now?

    58. Indy says:

      They’re clearly enjoying wasting Salmonds on time. More fool them… Murrell is slowly eating away at his own reputation.

    59. And spouse says:

      Parliamo Glasgow. Ooops

    60. Stéphane Séchaud says:

      We need to make all inquiries judicial ones from now on, ban the other types like this one. It’s clear that this inquiry is not fit for purpose, and is being led in bad faith. Whoever thought that politicians could be relied upon to investigate their own must have been another one of the corrupt power mongers that we need rid of.

    61. ALANM says:

      How did we get from a legal system, much admired as a model to be emulated by the rest of the world to having one that’s a complete joke?

      A system which now protects the rich and the powerful at the expense of everyone else, where men can be presumed guilty until proved innocent, where lies under oath have no consequences, where journalists can’t do their job for fear of going to jail and where thinking the wrong thoughts will soon become a criminal offence?

      To answer my own question, constant tinkering by politicians who think they know best and are willing to discard centuries of accumulated knowledge and experience without a second thought is what’s brought us to this point. Now there’s no way back.

    62. kapelmeister says:

      Fabiani, soon to be drawing a nice parliamentary pension at our expense, capping an undistinguished career by presiding over this whitewash. FFS, it’s not even a skillful whitewash. Insults the intelligence of the public.

    63. Mac says:

      It was an acid test for me seeing how many spineless SNP MPs & MSPs would finally stand up and be counted when the truth of what was done to Alex Salmond was revealed.

      Well we reached the point where it was more than clear what happened a good while ago now (if you bothered to look) but especially so in recent months. So to not know at this point is willful ignorance. But I suspect for many of them it is far worse than that and they are actually happy to go along with what was done and is being done to Salmond.

      So if there was any question about ‘are these current SNP MPs etc worth saving’ the answer is a resounding no.

      It is clear that the vast majority of them have to be replaced. They are impediments to independence, selected as candidates by a fully corrupted NEC.

      If we had a credible alternative constituency party ready we would simply vote for that and smash the SNP. We don’t though and it is too late before May.

      The only thing we can do at this election is ‘deselect’ as many of them as we can at the ballot box. We then either repopulate the SNP with candidates who are not Sturgeon drones / nutcases or we simply form a new party and let the SNP go the way of Labour and the Conservatives in Scotland. Not fit for purpose anymore.

      There is no quick way out of what Team Nicola have systematically done over the last six years. If we are ruthless we can reverse it all in four years max. But we have to be ruthless.

      If you promised me that in four years we’d be back on track with the buzz back in the movement I’d snap your hand off.

    64. SilverDarling says:

      Peter Murrell – ‘Nice to see Alex again, what is he up to?’

      Nicola Sturgeon – ‘He might be leaving the SNP because of…stuff.’

      Peter Murrell – ‘Oh, OKay. Nothing to do with me. Do you want anything when I am at the shops?

    65. Willie says:

      A country without a functioning rule of law in a failed state is but a jungle.

      And Scotland is that jungle.

      And this letter explains precisely why. All we need now to complete the picture is the death squads so beloved of similar regimes in other parts of the world. The judges, like the prosecutors and the police, tainted right through.

    66. Jack Murphy says:

      Just in case anyone missed it, here is the Scottish Parliament’s TV Archive of today’s

      COMMITTEE ON THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT HANDLING OF HARASSMENT COMPLAINTS

      Just under an hour:
      tinyurl.com/vvuda48k

    67. Beaker says:

      @Mac says:
      8 February, 2021 at 12:09 pm

      Looking at Fabiani’s likely replacement, and a few of the other candidates, I heartily agree with you.

    68. Kenny says:

      Well, as seen by the entire sensible world, the Civil Servants Inquiry is as shambolic as it is underhanded as it is corrupted as it is Sturgeon.

      Stuart, been meaning to ask for some time now; not being entirely clear on the law, and being increasingly impatient by references to mystery persons in comments (many of us know who shared the meeting with Geoff Aberdein and Sturgeon) would it be imprudent of me to reference, or point to, through any subsequent comments on your site, an English news article that mentions – by name – the identity of that person in that meeting? Where do we stand on that?

    69. James Carroll says:

      Peter Murrell was called out for lying under oath and was let off the hook by the convener. What is the point of this if this is how its being conducted!?

      Justice must be done….

    70. Stoker says:

      I’ll now refer to it as The Fabiani Farce. Reading that makes the corruption even more obvious. It also delays further as May fast approaches. Even if Sturgeon was somehow ousted by this farce she would have delayed things long enough for her Wokey Pokey Folk to still be in power. No referendum and a further 5 years of jiggery wokery. A very vindictive cheerybye fae the bitter dethroned self-appointed Queen of all Scotland.

    71. Jack Murphy says:

      A better link for my 12:14pm Post:

      https://tinyurl.com/vvuda48k

      Fingers and toes crossed.

    72. SaorsaCat says:

      Cath @11.27

      Perfectly put! You slashed away al the bluster and conflation.

    73. Fiona McRae says:

      I’ve just watched the inquiry replay from this morning, with Mr Murrell…. he used the term ‘false allegation’over and over and over, then the word ‘confused’ again and again…. in fact at one point Ms Fabiani said ” I think Mr Murrell has said he’s a bit confused – so I think it’s fair to allow the witness to look at this and I’ll ask Mr Murrell to reply in writing!” WTAF???? NO!! he should have been made to answer, what’s the point of this being filmed and reported if he gets away to research his answer carefully and prep the written reply?
      During the questioning from the committee, he kept playing on the issue of how he felt there were mix ups of false allegations drifting into the messages between him and members of staff. “there was no conspiracy, you need to be careful..” he said at one time. “we need to be careful about the privacy of the complainers” All of this, while Alex Salmond is being constantly referred to, sexual harrassment being mentioned over and over – YET HE WAS FOUND INNOCENT. This inquiry is supposed to be about the handling of the complaints towards the former FM by scottish governent, yet it still feels as if Alex is on trial. I DO NOT KNOW THIS SNP ANY MORE. Mr Murrell also seems to blush a lot and gets quite agitated… at one point I thought his head would explode or his flailing arms would be fast enough for him to take off and join the magpie which was obviously distracting him just off camera…. You know, if someone is telling the truth, they don’t need to think, to ponder on a question, or backtrack, or refer to notes. the truth is the truth.

    74. Betsy says:

      @Mac
      Agree with every word of this. Scotland seems to have moved from being a country that would elect a monkey if you stuck a red rosette on it to one who would do so if you stuck a yellow one to it.

      We are a movement not a job creation scheme for people who would struggle to sustain a career as a manager in a minor cal centre. We need to realise that sometimes it’s better to lose a seat than have a waste of space representing the independence movement in parliament.

      Something Now Scotland could usefully do is arrange hustings for pro-indy candidates of any party or standing independently. If candidates aspire to represent the movement then they need to tell us what not only what their party will do but what they intend to do to ensure we progress towards independence.

    75. Cath says:

      From the previous thread

      The unionists on this committee are bowling for a strike – take out salmond AND Sturgeon.

      I suspect this is absolutely the plan. The media narrative, whatever else a handful of people know, will remain that Salmond is guilty and wholly against him. And that Nicola was complicit in a conspiracy to cover it up. That’s where all the “what did she know when?” will go with the unionist media, and that will be the narrative. I’m not sure if there is any way to counter that.

    76. Fiona McRae says:

      SilverDarling says:
      8 February, 2021 at 12:12 pm
      Peter Murrell – ‘Nice to see Alex again, what is he up to?’

      Nicola Sturgeon – ‘He might be leaving the SNP because of…stuff.’

      Peter Murrell – ‘Oh, OKay. Nothing to do with me. Do you want anything when I am at the shops?

      This ^^^^ is spot on.

    77. kapelmeister says:

      If Scotland was a shoe then Peter Murrell would be the dog shit stuck to the sole.

    78. Willie says:

      Many have written about the establishment being at the side of Sturgeon and the gang. Yes the SNP have been infiltrated.

      And yes the Crown agent was an MI5 man. And yes, Sir Muir Russel ex of Glasgow University and other high profile slots is suspected by many as being the same. But from these slots he moved on to the Judiciary Appointment Board.

      And of Police Scotland

    79. Beaker says:

      First question at daily briefing is about the Salmond enquiry. Ouch.

    80. Josef Ó Luain says:

      If they’re ever to be taken seriously in their future careers, this committee will have to resign, immediately.

      Individually and collectively, the members of this committee are in no competent state to respond meaningfully to the perfectly legitimate requests of Salmond’s legal advisers.

      At best, the committee re: its remit, is worse than useless, at worse: wholly complicit in the farrago.

    81. Colin Alexander says:

      Holyrood is a pile of keech. It always was. It was created to be a Westminster branch office. A colonial administration parliament to buy off Scotland’s political class with lifetime careers administering the UK State in Scotland. Salmond recognised this and denounced it as a “parish council”.

      Then Salmond’s SNP talked it up. Even lied that the Parliament of Scotland is hereby reconvened.

      Salmond’s SNP Govt’s were never held to account properly when in power. It suited Salmond’s SNP that Holyrood was ineffective and that public authorities, including the Scot Govt were never held to account properly.

      Under Salmond power was concentrated at the top of the SNP. It became a party of the Leader, not the sovereign people. The SNP became the party of indyref, not plebiscite election.

      And the party faithful lapped it up.

      You reap what you sow. It’s been a long time coming but the chickens are coming home to roost for 21 years of SNP and the independence movement’s collusion with British colonial administration.

    82. Robert graham says:

      Always a bit suspicious about anything that begins
      Once upon a time
      Watching Murrell ” I will tell the truth and nothing but the truth ”
      The laughter can be heard in Ireland
      The disbelief can be detected all over Scotland
      Oh what a bloody Pantomime that shames the whole Scottish Government

    83. Kiwilassie says:

      Just watched the last committee SG pod cast with Evans. What a farce.
      The only politician on that committee that put her feet to the fire was Baillie,
      “I think Ballie missed her calling.” she was good here.

      Love this site, being in NZ it’s difficult to get the truth on FB Independent sites. Too much emotion, very little logic.
      I prefer WOS, Craig Murrays site & Gordon Dangerfield for info.

      I can’t believe what they are putting Alex through. He’s a big cuddly teddy bear, a Scottish hero. He has given his life to Scotland & the quest for Independence

      I am disgusted with Nicola. Alex treated her like a daughter & she is now FM only because of him. What a nasty person she turned out to be.
      Thanks Stuart, for all your hard work, keeping us informed, both in Scotland & overseas. You are a jewel in Scotland’s crown.

    84. Bob Mack says:

      The fact remains that even if you believe Nicola Sturgeon and her talevif events, she STILL broke the Ministerial Code.

      She would have allowed Civil Servants and lawyers and SNP party officials to alter and change the Civil Service Code of Conduct unsupervised.That is a clear breach of the code.

      It falls ultimately at her door for failing in leadership whether Alex was a friend or not.

    85. Willie says:

      Many have written about the establishment being at the side of Sturgeon and the gang. Yes the SNP have been infiltrated.

      And yes the Crown agent was an MI5 man. And yes, Sir Muir Russel ex of Glasgow University and other high profile slots is suspected by many as being the same. But from these slots he moved on to the Judiciary Appointment Board.

      And of Police Scotland, it is interesting to review the complexion of the senior executive team which comprises of many who have a background in the military, including military intelligence, and UK bodies like the National Crime Agency. Moreover, with many one of the team a 27 year man with the RUC and others from the Met, one does wonder how this complexion of skill sits with the traditions of Scottish policing.

      Here is a link to the Police Scotland web site section detailing the executive team.

      https://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/police-scotland/executive-team/

      Of itself the complexion of the names and faces mean nothing. But in the light of the Police’s enthusiasm to pursue Alex Salmond, Craig Murray, Mark Hirst, Manni Singh, Michelle Thompson, Margaret Ferrier and others, you do question the absolute bias now so apparent .

      https://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/police-scotland/executive-team/

    86. Garavelli Princip says:

      An Enquiry designed to fail; circumscribed and delineated such that any matter of importance or consequence CANNOT and WILL NOT be addressed.

      Plus – an open invitation to Mr Salmond to enter a field of elephant traps, any one of which could see him arraigned by the corrupt, MI5 controlled Crown Office, and put before a corrupt judge sitting without a jury, ready to jail him – and remove his deeply embarrassing presence from the Court of Queen Nicola.

      What kind of country does that sound like?

    87. Mac says:

      The evidence clearly points to NS knowing before she said she was told by AS. [Redacted] purposely got GA involved to set him up so he would tell AS and AS would tell NS. NS couldn’t have been seen to find out any other way, otherwise that points to foul play.

      The fact that no one told the FM about this is very unlikely, and as Gordon Dangerfield points out, their procedure specifically said the the FM should have be notified.

      It would be great to have a timeline of how everything slots together, and maybe we can piece together what triggered this sorry set of events.

    88. Astonished says:

      Is there a new movie coming out starring Curly, Larry, Moe and fabiani ?

      I think what will finally get the murrells is the ring-fenced money ( or rather the lack of ). How very, very gangster-like.

    89. Sheepshagger says:

      Why would the EU want Scotland as a member? Irish memories are not that short so as to forget the many UK cover ups and whitewashing of state murder and collusion with terrorists.
      This is like Hungary.

    90. aulbea1 says:

      OT – sort of – As formations go it seems to me that the proposed h te bill & g nd r acti are designed/engineered to protect nQs should she continue past may. I think the intention is to hold Scotland hostage in this union – those of us who know she’s a tractor will be joined by others as the scales fall from their eyes – but by law we will not be able talk about her trea hory or name her as such.

    91. Hugh Jarse says:

      Fabdabbydozy!

    92. LaingB French says:

      Excellent letter! that should in all fairness nip it in the bud, unless of course they can come up with some more new shit to cover up the old shit and each time they do that, it gets closer and closer to the cliff EDGE of INCOMPETENT EXCUSES. There backs must be tight up against the cliff edge by now. HAPPY LANDING! NOT!

    93. Dumb Unicorn says:

      I know it’s been said before but the thing I just can’t get my head around, is that the Committee has been set up to find out if there has been any wrong doing by the govt/civil servants, yet Alex Salmond who is technically just a witness to (and most likely a victim of) any wrongdoing is the most in danger of ending up in prison over it! It is truly Kafaesque.

    94. avocado devil says:

      And spouse says:
      8 February, 2021 at 12:07 pm
      The letter was translated from Stanley Baxter’s Parliament Glasgow. His original interpretation-
      Witthefekruchancersplainat.

      worraborrabitapassha with that?

    95. Effijy says:

      Alex – I put my hand on this bible, the one used by
      everyone who has been proven to have lied on oath
      against me and you hope I swear on it now that it
      Is without virtue or credibility?

      I will tell the part Truth, that those plotting against an innocent
      man have selected and not make mention of the truth that exposes
      corruption throughout the government, civil service, Lord Advocate
      and the police, so help me God, if he too has not been restricted in his actions.

      The case of Farce and Corruption Vs Salmond and Independence!

    96. Stuart MacKay says:

      SilverDarling’s right. This looks more like entrapment rather than incompetence.

      Now I understand why so many of the “old guard” are retiring in May. The smell must be unbearable.

    97. Mac says:

      I would happily accept having (almost) no SNP MPs & MSPs for four years if it meant that at the end of those four years we had, non-woke candidates, selected on the basis of merit, who saw independence as their primary goal, all ready to go.

      That could be in a de-woked, repaired SNP or in a brand new party. It is not important.

      First we have to demolish the current SNP shit-pile built on gender nonsense and political quicksand this last 6 years and then rebuild.

      It will be rejuvenating for the independence movement which has been methodically suffocated by the Sturgeon regime.

    98. Cath says:

      the Committee has been set up to find out if there has been any wrong doing by the govt/civil servants,

      Nah, that’s the pretence. It was set up to make sure the smear campaign against Alex continued in the press for months more after the media trial, the jury trial, the post jury media trail etc. That was its only intention.

    99. Ian Mac says:

      FFS, to summarise : despite everything that has happened, including the court case where Alex Salmond was found not guilty on all charges, and evidence indicated that at least one claimant was lying, you continue to operate this so-called enquiry on the basis that he is guilty and are attempting to use the enquiry to ensnare him in more legal quagmires, which will ensure your desired result of tarring him with the sex crime brush while exonerating the SNP of their campaign to jail him.
      Further evidence of your strategy was contained in a Guardian article about this farce when a Nicola Sturgeon ‘source’ (ie spokesperson) claimed that she was ‘looking forward’ to giving her side of the story which will be about ‘allowing the victims’ to come forward and have nothing to do with the original terms of the enquiry around the perversion of justice by Scottish officials under her remit.
      A kangaroo court doesn’t come close to describing the manipulation of this enquiry with its Kafka-esque rules designed to make sure the truth cannot come out, but the alleged guilt of Salmond is maintained. A farce, a shambles a deeply shaming insult to Scottish people and their ability to trust in their institutions, which now look like something out of the Stasi playbook.

    100. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      If you haven’t already read the full list the transcripts of Derek Mckays messages to the 16 year old lad. That he is STILL not been reported on, shocking.Like the Salmond inquiry they are just letting the clock rund down so he can piss off quietly and not face the media barrage others have had to.

      Why members of the SNP are not shouting from the rooftops utterly beyond me. Does the party have processes or not?

      To think how they treated Mark McDonald in comparison.

      https://archive.is/vEKtS

    101. Bob Mack says:

      well,well,well. Sue Riddich issues a statement as SNP Chief Operating Officer about how her private communications are not supposed to be revealed. Timing good eh?. She also reveals she had complained to the police about an assault by Alex.

      Next revelation. That is now 3 women involved with the Alex Salmond business who have benefitted financially.

      Chris McEleny reveals that as well as Liz Lloyd and Leslie Evans. Sue Riddich had received a large pay rise which had not been approved by the NEC.

      Follow the money folks.Follow the money

    102. Frazerio says:

      This letter looks to me like the foundation of Salmonds future court victory & multi-million pound payout for malcious hounding (Im not fully conversant with legal terms). It could hardly make clearer his attempts to be honest and forthcoming in the face of either utter incompetence or malicious conspiracy (clue, the latter).

    103. Kiwilassie says:

      Meg merrilees says:
      8 February, 2021 at 12:05 pm
      The saddest thing in all this farce is the stress that is continuously being brought to bear on one innocent man.

      A man who almost brought Scotland to Independence, who has spent his life fighting for Scotland, and is still fighting for the soul of Scotland against the very people who are supposed to be the Guardians and Protectors of our Land.

      I agree Meg What is happening to Alex is scandalous.
      My thoughts also are for the ordinary man on the streets. Good honest caring men. They are being put down with this way of thinking.
      I’m a believer that we women & men are equal. I don’t consider myself a feminist as I see males equal to me & have nothing to prove to anyone, to be myself.
      I’m in my 70s & I can honestly say that all my male friends have been truly supportive & upstanding.
      Having a failed marriage doesn’t equate to men being bad.
      This male bashing in society needs to stop.

    104. Anonymoose says:

      Does anyone know when James Hamilton is due to deliver his report into breaches of minesterial code?

      Because at the moment that is the only thing that will bring any sort of conclusion out of this enquiry that is not a complete disaster.

    105. Robert graham says:

      Watching Murrell ,
      a smug fkr with the air of you can’t touch me if ever I saw one,when Questioned about his comments on social media ,Remember this is the social media he doesn’t eh use , this line of questioning from a Tory MSP Margaret Mitchell the deputy convener she was shut down by Ms Fabiani when it starts to get uncomfortable and Murrell has the usual memory loss , Murdo is reminding Murrell about the consequences of telling lies to the committee ,not a hint of a blush at that point.
      I agree with previous comments this committee are not up to the task ,they are not nailing down the ones at the centre of this balls up and they don’t ask the right questions in a way that gets to the truth Murrell has this way of avoiding through a selective use of verbal gymnastics to answer but not answer a question , he’s a slippery fkr and a particular way of questioning him so he can’t wriggle out of answering a direct question that takes skill and that’s what the committee lacks

    106. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      Now this from bloody Ruddick

      https://archive.is/kibGM

    107. Mike Fenwick says:

      Will Levy & McRae receive a comprehensive response from the Committee to each and every point raised in that letter, and in the earlier letters rasing many of the same issues – and achieve that by the 16th?

      Rhetorical!!!

    108. cirsium says:

      @Mac, 12.09

      good comment but it is not just the SNP MSPs who have been found wanting. This is a committee of the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Government is refusing to release evidence and putting limitations on the testimony of witnesses. What is the Scottish Parliament going to do about the abuse of process by the Scottish Government?

    109. wee monkey says:

      Quote.

      MSP Murdo Fraser tweets, “Giving a false statement under oath is a criminal offence under s.44(1) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation)(Scotland)Act 1995.

      It is clear from his evidence today that Peter Murrell is guilty of this offence.”
      ———–.————

      So. We were right all along; the “Salmond inquiry” is in fact nothing of the sort, just a wee game to keep the plebs amused as the train rolls on…

      Kudos to those members, whose hands are tied by the terms of reference of the inquiry, kudos to those who have the courage to speak out.

    110. Hatuey says:

      I’m still quite disappointed with Murrell… some Machiavellian wizard of Oz he turned out to be. We followed the yellow brick road for miles to find this, “you know”, little baldy, “you know”, prick behind the, “you know”… curtain.

      My God, though. He knew what they were going to ask him about. He knew what they regarded as inconsistencies in his previous testimony. It’s been all over the media and everywhere. And all he could come up with was, “you know”, fuck all…

      Forget his ability to tell the truth – that horse bolted long ago. He can’t even deliver coherent lies. Why am I wasting my time on this sub-prime pish?

      If this is life, I want my money back.

    111. wull says:

      There are what seem to be some extraordinary statements on the enquiry made by Sue Ruddick this morning, now published as the main headline on the National’s webpage.

      I won’t comment – it seems best just to let the statements speak for themselves. Other than to say it made me wonder at how fast this right to self-identify seems to be catching on. Although maybe I am misinterpreting what is happening there.

      With regard to Police Scotland, I always thought it was a mistake to combine the old Scottish police forces into one. This seems to have been done on April 1st 2013. So, given such a date, the question arises: who was fooling who?

      When there were several police forces in Scotland, and no small amount of rivalry / competition between them, they could at least keep a beady eye on each other (as well as the rest of us, or whoever they wanted to ‘investigate’ next).

      How do you investigate suspicion of corruption in a country’s Police Force if that country only has one Police Force?

      One of the most interesting points made by the late lamented ‘Screaming Lord Sutch’ was the question he used to pose in the manifesto of his Loony Party: ‘Why is there only one Monopolies Commission?’

      You could re-tool that question, and apply it to the Police. Why should Police Scotland have a monopoly of investigating instances of suspected corruption?

      And if no one else but Police Scotland has the power and authority to investigate accusations of such corruption, who investigates Police Scotland if, or when, such accusations are made against them?

      If there is only one Police Force in Scotland it hardly seems fitting, and is unlikely to prove effective, if it has to investigate itself. Or is this also a procedure that seems to be catching on?

      As was remarked btl in response to another article on here recently, why is it that those who are being investigated in the current Parliamentary Enquiry are the very ones who seem to be deciding which bits of evidence can or cannot be given to those doing the enquiring, and which bits of it can be unilaterally withheld, altered or redacted?

      It all seems very arbitrary, and convenient. At least, for some – especially those who wish to avoid scrutiny. I suppose it’s a new form of logic. What shall we call it? The Logic of Non-Accountability? Or, for instance, the ‘Long Ball Logic’, in the sense of keep kicking it out of sight, as far away as possible … over the goalposts, and out of the stadium altogether.

      And what was that someone said about the highlights of Scotland’s victory at Twickenham being shown only in the long-past-midnight, early hours of some unearthly morning? (Don’t they read this blog, and see that some Wingers are always up at that time anyway?)

    112. Ian Mac says:

      So, they are getting what they want. The enquiry is a whitewash which will continue to reheat allegations against Salmond, while giving a platform to Sturgeon and her acolytes to lecture us about the ‘victims’ blah blah.
      Should AS give evidence of the plot against him, he will be subjected to further ruinous legal actions and more smearing of his motives and character. Having made it impossible for him to testify, they can tell everybody how he refused to state his case, so it can’t be that convincing.
      It’s a win-win. Everything stays the same, no actual investigation will be carried out, and the perpetuators of blackmail, intimidation and the perversion of justice get away with it, having stitched up the enquiry by refusing it any way of carrying out its remit.

    113. Mac says:

      Anyone of us can copy and paste Salmond’s submission to the Hamilton Inquiry (published almost in full in the Spectator).

      Yet the Fabiani ‘inquiry’ into the botched Salmond stich-up refuses to accept Salmond’s own submission into evidence (and again, which is already in the public domain).

      Kafka would probably have said, ‘naw this is taking it too far, you’ve got to make it at least semi-believable’.

      It is a farce, a sick one. I mean what other word is there for it at this point.

      Team Nicola have weaponized the SNP as party, weaponized the civil service, the COPFS and Police Scotland all against Alex Salmond. It has been consistent from start to finish, wall-to-wall abuse of power.

      So we really should not be surprised that the Fabiani led inquiry is exactly the same. They are not interested in uncovering the truth at all it seems. Quite the opposite in fact. And if they can smear Salmond somehow again they will try to do that as well.

      Cover-up the conspirators attempting to pervert the course of justice and smear the victim. That is the Fabiani inquiry.

    114. Hugh Jarse says:

      Alison
      If it looks like stalking…
      DM should be in hiding!

    115. Alf Baird says:

      Willie @ 12:38

      Scotland’s governance is looking more colonial each day; oppression for the colonized, immunity for the colonialist.

    116. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      @HughJarse, quite.

    117. Neil Wilkinson says:

      100%Yes says:
      8 February, 2021 at 1:23 pm
      Take a look at the article in The National.

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/19073215.salmond-inquiry-msps-accused-bullying-intimidating-complainers/

      Yet again its ” The Salmond Inquiry ” Its not, its maybe the Fabiani Inquiry, such as it is

    118. Big Jock says:

      I think it may end up back in court. I think Salmond’s lawyers will be deciding if the matter should be referred to criminal court. I believe a crime is currently under way.

    119. JB says:

      If they wanted private communications, they should have used a platform and application where that is an inherent property.

      So in some respects, we should be glad that they were incompetent enough to use Whatsapp rather than something like Signal. That said, I seem to recall a report of Westminster MPs now switching to Signal from Whatsapp, however not for security/privacy per-se (support for larger sized groups).

      In future we may not get to see such messages unless one of the participants phones are seised, and they’re compelled to provide access to it. Even then, the mechanisms it offers would possibly have ensured the old messages are destroyed in a timely manner.

    120. Eileen Carson says:

      Big Jock says:
      8 February, 2021 at 1:48 pm
      I think it may end up back in court. I think Salmond’s lawyers will be deciding if the matter should be referred to criminal court. I believe a crime is currently under way.
      ………………………

      I agree, the matters have been investigated, someone charged, put on JURY trial AND FOUND INNOCENT by a jury of his peers. The so called complainers need to remember that.

    121. Robert Louis says:

      What an absolute charade the committee has become. As Mr Salmond’s lawyers clearly state, they could not possibly advise their client correctly, in the absence of total WRITTEN clarity, as regards his evidence submitted, and what is allowable, and within the law.

      What a joke of a committee, what an absolute, total cover-up. Linda Fabiani should hang her head in shame.

      As for the Murrells, they don’t just need to go, they also need booted out of the SNP, and be investigated for possible perjury.

      Mr. salmond is correct to refuse to assist this investigation into the behaviour of the government and civil service. It is a sham.

      I hope he sues the lot of them, over and over and over again. What they did to him is truly evil, wicked beyond compare. Yet not one of them has expressed rgeret, or even offered any kind of support to him. They deserve what is coming to them.

      This Scottish government is a sick and twisted, conniving cabal, hell bent on destroying an innocent man.

      What a mess NS has made of things. What an utter, utter mess. Proof, if ever it were needed, that certainly in the hands of weak people, power corrupts.

    122. JB says:

      Was Sue Ruddick actually named in the order for messages?

      She seems to indicate she was not covered by the requested criteria, and I seem to recall some others (was it Craig Murray) mentioning that she should have been.

      So why would she be complaining about her messages being included?

    123. John H. says:

      I hope that old saying “It’s always darkest before the dawn” is true. Because it’s looking very dark for Scotland from where I am.

    124. SilverDarling says:

      It is turning into quite the free for all.

      Ruddick makes claims in the Dirt Rag based on messages she sent to Murrell. As no one else can see them she decides what the context is.

      Alex Salmond makes claims backed up by documented evidence and no one is allowed to refer to it. That is fair isn’t?

    125. Ian Brotherhood says:

      Sue Riddick’s Twitter home page has a very nice selfie of her and Murrell.

      How often do you see pictures of his coupon anywhere?

      Dornan, Hunter, the Wokies are all now bolstering the agreed line, as sketched in her tweet i.e. that this is all about the ‘complainers’ still enduring torment beyond description and it’s all Alex Salmond’s fault etc etc…

    126. SilverDarling says:

      *Isn’t it?

    127. Frank Gillougley says:

      Forgive this stating the obvious as many have done before me, but, this simple point has to be worth re-stating which is that if your party IS the government, how on earth can you separate at all what is party business and what is government business?

      We’re in the surreal realms of Bertrand Russells library conundrum here.

    128. Tom says:

      The ref. in the Levy & McRae letter to a ‘Section 11 order’ is interesting.

      A quick Google search explains that a Section 11 order is something to do with the supervision of children.

      We’ve already heard there was trawling by officials in Fife looking for evidence from children to support the prosecution of Salmond, but that apparently none was found.

      So what do we conclude from this, that they were hoping to prove AS a paedophile?

      It’s too ridiculous, isn’t it? I’ve just added two and two together and got twenty three. Haven’t I?

      There must be another kind of Section 11 order, nothing to do with children, which my Google search didn’t reveal.

      Surely ..

    129. JB says:

      On another point, I get sick of politicians stating ‘I refute’ when they mean ‘I deny’.

      If they were refuting something, they prove it to be false.

      Sadly none of the journalists then ask them for the evidence which provides the refutation – possibly they also don’t know what ‘refute’ means!

    130. Alwi says:

      Don’t know if been said already, but it he can’t appear. It’s a set up. The lord advocate will be there and on his nod Salmond will be dragged out to jail as soon as he says anything ‘inadmissible’. Which, as we now know is almost everything relevant.

    131. 100%Yes says:

      Wings and everyone involved with Wings a big thank you for bring this to the attention of the general public.

    132. Colin says:

      Tom it’s Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981.

    133. Republicofscotland says:

      It must be terribly frustrating for Alex Salmond to not be able to openly and freely tell the truth to the committee, a committee, that is hamstrung in part, by the Scottish government.

      The Lord Advocate, a member of Sturgeon’s cabinet and the lawyers employed by Sturgeon at the taxpayers expense, are doing everything they can to prevent the truth from coming out, this is why Sturgeon can say on her Covid briefing today that she welcomes the questions from the inquiry, and that she’ll answer all of them, giving off the impression she can’t wait to appear in front of the committee.

      As for the committee itself I feel certain members have had a somewhat lack lustre approach, and are quite willing to be led rather than do the leading, again this type of attitude has lead to Alex Salmond having to instruct his lawyers, to write to the committee because there’s no clarity from the committee as to where he stands, on telling the truth, its a disgraceful state of affairs.

    134. Socrates MacSporran says:

      What is in it for all these SNP members who are rushing to the defence of their embattled Leader?

      I mean, if they were Unionists, the likes of the soon-to-retire FAbiani could be promised a nice little £300 per day earner in another place. Other lesser beings could be being lined up for MBEs, OBEs etc. The civil servants going the extra mile to cover-up wrong-doing, they could be bought by orders of St Michael and St George, or the Bath, or whatever.

      But, the SNP doesn’t play these London games – we don’t have a separate Scottish honours system. There is nothing in it for them, other than the possible realisation, that, when the truth comes out – and come out it will – that they were part of a scheme to stitch-up one man, boy will they be sorry.

      Three hundred years plus on, we are still dealing with a parcel o’ rogues in a nation.

    135. Tom says:

      Thanks Colin at 2.08pm.

      I’m away to hide in embarrassment ..

    136. Jamsie says:

      Wouldn’t be surprised if the committee/Scottish Govt. want Alex Salmond on the stand in the hope that they ask him leading questions and he then commits contempt of court in answering. They couldn’t fit him up on sex charges so they’re trying another ruse. Pathetic,

    137. Robert graham says:

      Personally I wouldn’t trust this slippery fkr Murrell to tell me the time , his whole presentation is that of obstruction and evasion , his insistence on referring to the remit of the committee is embarrassing ,and only being saved from further total embarrassment by the convener .
      His whole performance was disgusting and totally unacceptable.

    138. Republicofscotland says:

      According to radio news, the SNP’s Susan Ruddick has written to the inquiry chair, asking the inquiry not to ask for anymore text messages from certain individuals, because its upsetting certain women.

      Going by the Chair of the Inquiries (Linda Fabiani) performance today, with regard to the questioning of Peter Murrell, I doubt the upset women will have anything more to worry about.

    139. SOG says:

      @ wull

      Down here in England an investigation into a County Police Force was, in the past, carried out by a nearby Force.

      ISTR Loamshire investigating Stoneshire, while simultaneously Stoneshire investigated Loamshire. I think that has changed with an independant investigation outfit.

    140. SOG says:

      Someone please ask Sue Ruddick why they were sending personal messages on the company’s IT system.

    141. Eileen Carson says:

      Oh this is excellent! First Ruddick, now Sturgeon is jumping on-stage to attack “ridiculous suggestions” made by committee.

      Alex Salmond >
      If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you, >snip<
      Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
      And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!
      Rudyard Kipling

    142. Daisy Walker says:

      There was a ‘salmond is coming’ video yesterday, which warned of the dangers of failing to hang up the phone when leaving a message on the answering machine.

      It talked about DM. To me it sounded like a person, rather than say Direct Message. And I wondered who it was.

      I wonder if it might be Dereck Mackay? Which would bring him into the conspiracy and perhaps explain why his inappropriate conduct has not yet got him the sack.

    143. susanXX says:

      Why do people talk about Hungary as a failed state? Can’t see it myself

    144. Daisy Walker says:

      SilverDarling says:
      8 February, 2021 at 1:58 pm

      It is turning into quite the free for all.

      Ruddick makes claims in the Dirt Rag based on messages she sent to Murrell. As no one else can see them she decides what the context is.

      Alex Salmond makes claims backed up by documented evidence and no one is allowed to refer to it. That is fair isn’t?’

      And would any of these private messages, and the upset women who sent them, care to explain why the head of Rape Crisis Scotland is able to say in an openly published letter, ‘I’ve seen the contents of these messages and there is nothing there for the inquiry’.

      In other wise they are happy to disclose the contents of the messages to those they deem sympathetic, but not to a ‘lawful’ official body set up to make ‘proper’ enquiry.

      Dear Alex, this cannot go dragging on and on. The only real opportunity we now have of clearing out these bams is to vote them out in May. And for that the truth needs airing, all in one go, and you need to get re-elected and use parliamentary privilage.

      People are asking who can investigate when the corruption involves Police and Crown Office – they forget it happened while we were still within the EU.

      Stay safe and brave and thank you.

    145. Eileen Carson says:

      In view of the amount of intrigue, time wasting and chit-chat on social media by employees of either SNP or ScotGov I’m of the opinion that a) few would last 5 minutes in a REAL working environment, b) they’re all overpaid c) there are far too many on a cushy number d) they’ve all read to much John Le Carre books and their egos are bigger than their brains! Sack the lot!

    146. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      Re queries about Section 11

      ”HMA v Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond (under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981), High Court of Justiciary, Edinburgh, 10 March 2020”

      Quite a list

      https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/current-business/court-notices/contempt-of-court-orders

    147. graeme_from_IT says:

      RepublicOfScotland

      Sue Ruddick :
      “The messages the Committee saw last week confirm I reported to Police Scotland an act of physical aggression by Mr Salmond.”

      So is she claiming it was against HER, (and therefore outing herself as one of the Alphabet Women), or that she allegedly saw him being aggressive towards ANOTHER woman?

    148. Sylvia says:

      The National – SUE Ruddick, the SNP’s chief operating officer, has accused the committee of “bullying and intimidating” the women who complained about Alex Salmond.

      https://archive.is/2oHeg

      Followed by this from Mhairi Hunter.

      https://twitter.com/MhairiHunter/status/1358749079178776576

    149. Daisy Walker says:

      Anyone saying its all over for the Murrells is being premature.

      Anyone saying the press are gearing up for a big exposure? Really, they’ve had all the ammunition for some time now. What I see is them periodically rattling their sabres at key moments, in order to ‘remind’ Nicla of her script and keep her online.

      Anyone thinking the Committee Inquiry is a Failure, has not understood what it was designed to do. Waste time, come to no conclusions and Keep Nicla in power up to and past May if possible.

      Anyone thinking Big Bailley is playing a blinder – well she is, but as always only for herself. She’s twisting the tail of both sides, and there will be a nice big bonus waiting for her when they sit her down and ask her, what’s it going to take for you to pull your punches. (My bet is a lovely coat of Ermine).

      Anyone thinking a Judicial review will sort it. No, it will be far too late by then.

      Always, what they seek to do, is keep Credible, electable people from offering up Indy away from the ballot box.

      This shambles and scorched earth policy from the SNP and the Crown Agency – makes the cash for ash scandal in NI look tiny.

      They are going to shut Holyrood.

    150. Frazerio says:

      What follows are 3 current headlines to articles in ‘pro-independence’, The National.

      Alex Salmond inquiry: Peter Murrell denies he gave ‘false statement’

      Nicola Sturgeon hits out at ‘ridiculous suggestions’ made to Salmond inquiry

      SNP chief accuses Alex Salmond inquiry MSPs of ‘bullying’ accusers

      Remind me again, where is this Alec Salmond Inquiry? Who is chairing it?? Who sits on it???

      But, no worries as Sturgeon will clear everything up presently, she says “And let me be very clear, I am willing to answer all and any questions put to me by that committee including on the topic that you have just asked me.

      “And in addition to answering all and any questions I perhaps will also get the opportunity to take head on some of the ridiculous suggestions that have been made about this whole situation”.

      So, we’ll all rwalise just how silly and untrusting we’ve been very soon.

    151. John says:

      Surely it’s time for the good people of Scotland to give some back? Every time official Scotland asks a question:

      “Sorry, cannot answer that based on my legal advice”

      What’s that?

      “Sorry. I can’t tell you.”

      Or gives an instruction:

      “Sorry, cannot do that based on legal advice”

      What is that advice, and who is it from?

      “Sorry. I can’t tell you, based on legal advice”

    152. Contrary says:

      Dear Levy & McRae,

      We are all perplexed. Totally and utterly baffled. It would, however, have saved you a lot of time and effort just to write:

      “Dear Committee,

      Are you lot as thick as mince, or what? Pull yourselves together, or we advise our client to tell you to take a hike.

      Cheers, L&M”

      I won’t charge for this advice.

      Thanks, Contrary.

    153. robertknight says:

      Dear Ms Fabiani and Committee Members,

      Further to my lockdown ‘to-do-list’, I am now at the stage where I can turn my attention to the exterior maintenance of my house. (The interior having been fully redecorated during intermittent periods of furlough – much to my wife’s relief).

      With that in mind, and in anticipation of your committee’s findings, (which I am sure are already determined, if not yet published), I write to enquire whether you would be able to assist me in the acquisition of 500 litres of whitewash?

      I am informed by an acquaintance, having professional experience of such things, that this quantity should provide two coats to be applied to the exterior of my property.

      Perhaps having already prepared several thousand litres in advance of your committee’s impending ‘winding-up’, you may feel that you can spare a relatively small amount to assist a tax-payer who, like millions of others, has funded the circus which you have presided over these past few months.

      I very much hope that you have enjoyed the experience and look forward to hearing form you in due course.

      Yours sincerely,

      Robert Knight
      Elector, Taxpayer (The people you all serve – in case you forgot!)

    154. Skip_NC says:

      Contrary, several decades ago, I wanted to start a letter to the Inland Revenue (as it then was) like that. My manager rewrote it. Probably a wise thing to do, but I daresay you have expressed what a few people at Levy & McRae are thinking.

    155. Contrary says:

      Skip_NC,

      Yes, I need adult supervision too when sending out official letters 🙂

      Having read a lot of L&M letters now, I suspect what I wrote really IS what they are saying – they just had to pad it out a bit, to get the cash in, as lawyers do.

    156. Pete Roberts says:

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/19073215.salmond-inquiry-msps-accused-bullying-intimidating-complainers/

      https://www.thenational.scot/news/19072734.alex-salmond-will-not-appear-holyrood-inquiry-row-evidence/

      Comments are disabled on these 2 articles by Andrew Learmonth. So the National is now following in the footsteps of the Guardian in disabling comments on articles where they are afraid of what the comments may reveal.

      One of the reasons that I subscribe to the National is for the comments, many of which are very informative. But if they carry on down this path I will cancel my subscription to the National and go to their new role model, yeah they are corrupt as hell but at least I won’t have to pay for their bullsh!t.

    157. Daisy Walker says:

      From Oh What a Lovely War…

      whiter than the whitewash on the wall
      whiter than the whitewash on the wall

      Oh wash us in the water
      that you washed yir dirty daughter in
      and we’ll be whiter than the whitewash on the wall

      On the wall
      On the wall
      whiter than the whitewash on the wall
      On the wall

      Oh wash us in the water
      that you washed yir dirty daughter in
      and we’ll be whiter than the whitewash on the wall

    158. Skip_NC says:

      Contrary, Levy & McRae’s letters to the Fabiani Inquiry are historical documents that should be read by historians in the decades to come.

    159. Big Jock says:

      Murrel is terrified of perjury.

      Murdo ” Peter you said you weren’t at home when Salmond came”…. ” Now you say you weren’t at the meeting”.Murdo ” Were you at home?” Murrell” I wasn’t at the meeting”.

      He has changed from not at home, to not at the meeting. The inference not stated is that he was at home, but won’t say it because his lawyer said it would be perjury.

      Deary me this is amateur stuff. Fabiani is corrupted!

    160. Lulu Bells says:

      So Alex Salmond wants to tell the whole truth etc. but the Crown Office says no…do that and you are done for sonny. But it doesn’t actually matter anyway because the inquiry doesn’t want the whole truth they just want the evidence they want, not all the evidence, selective evidence. How can they know something is evidence or not until they hear it and test it. Once they have heard it they may discount it if they wish but hearing everything is the only way to decide. Alex is right not to attend, they are treating him as if he is part of the problem, when in fact he is the solution.

    161. Career: Politician says:

      Murrel can’t possibly stay in his job after this hearing today…..

      Can he?

    162. James Che. says:

      Up to a point this has been the best laid trap to ensnare and ensure that the two largest independence leaders are of this century are turned against each other and that the independence support base is split and divided by secret agents unknown.
      We are aware that details are being manipulated, we are aware that information on phones is not inaccessible or beyond the capabilities of agents like m15 if they were to be involved in creating a set up that looked believable. we are aware that there were buildings with false purposes in Scotland that appeared to be more than a little connected to political people down in London, I won’t mention empty mills or goves name in connection with them, we are aware that there seems to be a link between leaks from the Scottish goverment to a news paper that may been linked to ex Westminster parliament,
      We are aware that a certain lord advocate seems to be in on the act, we are aware that other high quality snp members are being targeted, bullied and bought down or sacked,
      While at the same time we had a stupid brass necked health minister that travelled to her holiday home to check things that led to off with her head in all the papers and she must be sacked,
      We are aware that Prince Charles travelled all the way to Aberdeenshire to get a check up while not feeling to good with suspicion of covid, how Prince William and Katy travelled to Edinburgh recently during covid travel restrictions when they could have done zoom message. How bj and mrs went on a strange camping holiday during covid or how he was seven miles away from his home during covid travel restrictions on his bike, or his other recent traverses up to Scotland, then there are the others that are targeted like Alex Salmond, Murray, keating, Hirst, cherry, etc,
      By now we must realise that there is a definite push from unionist to save their empire of Great Britain especially now Brexit has been done, how stupid would they look to leave Europe and then have Britain fall apart beneath their feet,
      We are aware that not so long ago thousands of civil servants were sent up to Scotland.
      We are aware that in Westminster they are aided by ("Tractor" - Ed)ious Scots whom have the same characteristics as certain Scots in 1706/ 1707, with the same purposes in mind to gain wealth and prestige and willing go against there own kith and kin.
      We are aware that Scotland is a perfect place to play practice war games or park wmd. On the other hand we are also aware of the experiment to rewind Scotland to the dark ages with rewild Scotland project whereby we wake up bears wolfs and other such predators on our doorstep.
      We are aware we still have oil reserves if we wished to use them, that England does not. We are aware that we have great access to wind and water power, taxes, land,
      When all these subjects along with many many others can be seen under a large magnifying glass you begin to have a sense of how important Scotland is to England’s version of Great empire, and how depleted Westminster would feel without Scotland, they do not care for the natives on the soil, just the soil and sea,
      Yep, they desperately need to break up and bring down Scottish leaders and thereby destroy the grassroots of independence,

    163. Toby says:

      Googled ‘ Sue Riddick’. Stu was right ,very little information on her, not even her picture on her twitter banner. May have been recently removed.
      But counted 80 google entries posting the headline “ Salmon Complainers’ messages must stay private – SNP chief operating officer.”
      All apparently posted within the last 3 hours.
      Seems the exact same press release has been posted out to every press outlet from Isle of Wight to Wick. That is some coverage considering the lack of press interest displayed over the months the Parliamentary enquiry has been on going.

    164. Hatuey says:

      Pete, The National is doing worse with those articles than disabling comments.

      It’s better to be uninformed than misinformed, and I should know… I’m the most uninformed person that comes here. You ever heard me complaining?

    165. Hatuey says:

      James Che, that’s pish.

      You can’t pin the Salmond scandal on WM.

    166. TNS2019 says:

      Much is being made of the reputational damage that AS has suffered through this whole affair and as a fellow victim of state-sponsored defamation I can appreciate just what it means to have an unblemished career destroyed by those in power.
      I wonder however just what impact the malicious prosecution has had on Mr Salmond’s health and wellbeing? He sounds like a strong, pugnacious sort of guy but having been so successful as a politican, I can imagine that he has had to endure some pretty tortuous times.
      Those who engage in unprovoked assaults on innocent individuals such as AS, David Whitehouse, Murray, Hirst etc, should not get away wit what are effectively psychological assaults that can lead to very poor outcomes for their victims and even suicide.
      That alone is reason enough for AS to dig-in and fight back.
      I put that before any aspiration I have for him cleaning-up the SNP to make it worthy of the office it holds.

      Psychological abuse

      Psychological abuse, often called emotional abuse, is a form of abuse, characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another person to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder.[1][2][3] It is often associated with situations of power imbalance in abusive relationships, and may include bullying, gaslighting, and abuse in the workplace.[2][3] It also may be perpetrated by persons conducting torture, other violence, acute or prolonged human rights abuse, particularly without legal redress such as detention without trial, false accusations, false convictions and extreme defamation such as where perpetrated by state and media.

      https://www.tns2019.org/new-blog-1/2020/9/9/wx0osnugm0r9se9o88mohy5tgq0mor

    167. James Barr Gardner says:

      In regard to Peter Murrell reminded me of this poem….

      The Henpecked Husband (Poem by Robert Burns, 1788)

      Curs’d be the man, the poorest wretch in life,
      The crouching vassal to a tyrant wife!
      Who has no will but by her high permission,
      Who has not sixpence but in her possession;
      Who must to he, his dear friend’s secrets tell,
      Who dreads a curtain lecture worse than hell.
      Were such the wife had fallen to my part,
      I’d break her spirit or I’d break her heart;
      I’d charm her with the magic of a switch,
      I’d kiss her maids, and kick the perverse bitch.

    168. JB says:

      That ‘National’ article contains this text:

      ‘”The messages the committee saw last week confirm I reported to Police Scotland an act of physical aggression by Mr Salmond.’

      Which would appear to be a quote from Sue Ruddick.

      If so, and if accurate, what inferences are we justified in drawing from it?

    169. Contrary says:

      Mia said, somewhere miles up-thread,

      “Where can I find emails from the civil servants involved in all this for the week of the 5th November 2017? Why haven’t those being submitted? I have looked in the information from the judicial review that is included in the section of the harassment complaints procedure for this committee and the date of the emails in November included in it has been redacted!!! What the hell? Since when a fckng date helps to jigsaw identification?”

      I got side tracked myself earlier – the origins of the procedure is still wrapped in mystery & I get re-irritated by it on occasion. The SG says the first iteration of the procedure was produced, created, invented, on 7th Nov 2017 – but I can’t find this first version, and their emails of the 7th imply they were discussing it the day before, and their discussions on the 7th were very advanced about considering former ministers – so a lot was happening between the 3rd and 7th of Nov, but barely an email do we have. Missing Footnotes relating to that approx time are FN17, FN18 and FN22 – so I’m guessing the info we seek is in there, not published. The redactions are a mess – very inconsistent, and I estimate 60 – 70% of SG submissions are just repeated material (that is, aye, they’ve submitted hundreds of pages, but only 30 out of a hundred is unique or unredacted). Farce.

    170. Mia says:

      How much taxpayers’ money has Fabiani wasted us all with this farce?

    171. INDEPENDENT says:

      What were the odds of Sky reporter James Mathews getting called for the first question today after him being on Sky news all morning.
      Pre determined set up question to allow faux outrage and full unchallenged rebuttal and prepared statement as to how she will respond to all questions next week when given the chance.
      Soon as next question is asked Sky cut back to main studio.

      So if James isn’t called first Sky can’t use it in the allocated slot.

      All pre-planned.
      Our wonderful MSM.

      Then BBC Scotlands one o’clock report leads with the headline
      Police breaking up illegal partys. 3 mins.
      Commitee piece gets one minute.
      Move along nothing important to see here!

    172. James Che. says:

      Up to a point this has been the best laid trap to ensnare and ensure that the two largest independence leaders are of this century are turned against each other and that the independence support base is split and divided by secret agents unknown.
      We are aware that details are being manipulated, we are aware that information on phones is not inaccessible or beyond the capabilities of agents like m15 if they were to be involved in creating a set up that looked believable. we are aware that there were buildings with false purposes in Scotland that appeared to be more than a little connected to political people down in London, I won’t mention empty mills or goves name in connection with them, we are aware that there seems to be a link between leaks from the Scottish goverment to a news paper that may been linked to ex Westminster parliament,
      We are aware that a certain lord advocate seems to be in on the act, we are aware that other high quality snp members are being targeted, bullied and bought down or sacked,
      While at the same time we had a stupid brass necked health minister that travelled to her holiday home to check things that led to public newspaper claims, off with her head and she must be sacked, while a different set of laws apply to Prince Charles whom travelled all the way to Aberdeenshire to get a check up while not feeling to good with suspicion of covid, how Prince William and Katy travelled to Edinburgh recently during covid travel restrictions when they could have done zoom message. How bj and mrs went on a strange camping holiday during covid or how he was seven miles away from his home during covid travel restrictions on his bike, or his other recent traverses up to Scotland,
      As we speak we are aware that other big hitters like Alex Salmond, Murray, keating, Hirst, cherry, etc, are being targeted.
      By now we must realise that there is a definite push from unionist to save their empire of Great Britain especially now Brexit has been done, how stupid would they look to leave Europe and then have Britain fall apart beneath their feet,
      We are aware that not so long ago thousands of civil servants were sent up to Scotland. But not for what purpose.
      We are aware that in Westminster they are aided by ("Tractor" - Ed)ious Scots whom have the same characteristics as certain Scots in 1706/ 1707, with the same purposes in mind to gain wealth and prestige and willing go against there own kith and kin.
      We are aware that Scotland is a perfect place to play practice war games or park wmd. On the other hand we are also aware of the experiment to rewind Scotland to the dark ages with rewild Scotland project whereby we wake to up bears wolfs and other such predators on our doorstep.
      We are aware we still have oil reserves if we wished to use them, that England does not. We are aware that we have great access to wind and water power, taxes, and important land.
      When all these subjects along with many many others can be seen under a large magnifying glass you begin to have a sense of how important Scotland is to England’s version of Great empire, and how depleted Westminster would feel without Scotland, they do not care for the natives on the soil, just the soil and sea,
      Yep, they desperately need to break up and bring down Scottish leaders and thereby destroy the grassroots of independence,

    173. kapelmeister says:

      The Notional displaying its Sturgeonite colours once again.

    174. JB says:

      Oh dear – one of the later purported quotes in that National article lead me to an inescapable conclusion.

      Unless of course the party supposedly quoted actually mis-spoke.

    175. Hamish Kirk says:

      When The Lockerbie business started I was sure that there was something very wrong in the Scottish Judicial System. Now it is clear for all to see. Will they arrest me for that ?

      Just in case, I am preparing my safe house in Pyongyang.

    176. Jack says:

      So the evidence which should be considered is not to be discussed ? What utter lunacy. The next meeting of this clown show should see those attending, turn up in their big clown shoes and clown make up . They should all be driven there in their clown cars. Clownworld. Scotland’s embarrassment.

    177. cirsium says:

      @Lulu Bells, 3.16

      Yes, “selective evidence” to produce the predetermined conclusions for the Committee and Ms Sturgeon will answer all “selective questions” based on the “selective evidence”. One of the key conclusions, if not the only conclusion, will be that “lessons will be learned”.

    178. James Che. says:

      Hatuey that’s an interesting comment in its self.

    179. Robert Graham says:

      The only reason for the panic about the tweets or email messages not being made public is because they prove what Alex has said there was a plot to frame him , not by the british state but by his protege and the management of his own party.
      These conspirators believe everyone are as stupid as them ,most intelligent people know what happened and the antics of those attempting to cover their arses is only making it worse ,they have long since passed the point of no return , whats the saying “when in a hole stop fkn digging “.
      A message to Alex ,dont appear its a trap .

    180. kapelmeister says:

      Don’t try to be Sturgeon’s friend, philosopher and guide. Your reward will not be a nice one.

    181. ian murray says:

      Alex should request one of their lawyers to sit at his table to advise whether he can answer the posed questions or not
      Then he could tell the committee “On the advice of your own government lawyers I cannot answer as I may be breaking the law”
      Next question

      Can it get any dafter ?

    182. kapelmeister says:

      “There’s a magpie” says Murrell.

      A thieving magpie? Come to pay homage to the master.

    183. Cath says:

      I’m still processing that evidence session from this morning. So let me get this straight…

      Nicola was having a meeting deemed “Scottish Government business” in her house. It was a meeting at which Alex Salmond’s lawyer and ex chief of staff were present. By sheer luck, Alex just happened to “pop by” at the exact same time the meeting was taking place. Which was bloody lucky as none of them had any idea what the meeting was about until that point.

    184. Breeks says:


      Sylvia says:
      8 February, 2021 at 2:48 pm
      The National – SUE Ruddick, the SNP’s chief operating officer, has accused the committee of “bullying and intimidating” the women who complained about Alex Salmond…

      That’s the same tactic they used to target Mark Hirst. It’s pure deflection, but it works on gullible people.

    185. Breeks says:

      … and wait until those women are being interviewed under caution by the Police investigating their criminal conspiracy…

    186. JGedd says:

      @James Barr Gardner @ 3.22pm

      What a charming poem. You should read that at the next Burns Supper, James, as a Toast to the Lassies.

      So much for ‘Ae Fond Kiss’…Let’s have none of that sentimental nonsense, eh?

    187. Hugh Jarse says:

      It could be our new National slogan, ala ‘best wee country ‘ guff.

      ‘SCOTLAND.Tainted by apparent bias’

    188. Sylvia says:

      Hamish Kirk @3:36 I truly believe many compromised themselves at Lockerbie, consequently, they’re now controlled by an element of corrupt UK/US Intelligence.

    189. Republicofscotland says:

      “Up to a point this has been the best laid trap to ensnare and ensure that the two largest independence leaders are of this century are turned against each other”

      James che @3.18pm.

      There is only one independence leader and that is Alex Salmond, he’s got form he took us to an indyref, by comparison Sturgeon isn’t interested in independence, and has been promising an indyref for years, but it will never come.

    190. Career: Politician says:

      Could people please stop throwing ‘Mi5 Conspiracy’ about as an explaination for everything?

      I think what we have here is a bad case of politicians doing politician things – Stu summed it up well by pointing out that the root cause of most of the problems with the SNP is Sturgeon’s weak leadership / paranoia (two sides of the same coin).

    191. Republicofscotland says:

      “Hatuey says:
      8 February, 2021 at 3:21 pm
      James Che, that’s pish.

      You can’t pin the Salmond scandal on WM.”

      Hautey, no you can’t, however, Holyrood and and its MSP’s and Civil service is hoaching with British state actors and plants, who probably helped it along a bit.

    192. Big Jock says:

      The Sturgeon cult who shall be known as “Wheesht for Indy”. Think that moving on from the trial and making Salmond look like he refused to turn up, while Sturgeon spouts her squinty eyed fabrications.

      Need to remember that the Brits will have a plan for maximum damage. They want to Sturgeon to look like she has walked away from this. So they will wait until April before bringing her down and the SNP vote will collapse.

      What we need is to get rid of her now. Get a new leader in and clear out the cabal. That way people like me will vote SNP with a clear conscience and the Brits won’t be able to collapse the SNP vote.

      We are in this mess because of Sturgeon, we can only come out of it if she gets sacked.

    193. kapelmeister says:

      Career:Politician @4:23

      You think that spooks wouldn’t ever or couldn’t ever exploit the paranoia of a politician?

    194. WhoRattledYourCage says:

      Here are some England-centric drivel-musings on independence from an English rag to amuse you.

      https://uk.yahoo.com/news/why-brexit-made-scottish-independence-113437428.html

    195. Republicofscotland says:

      “Career: Politician says:
      8 February, 2021 at 4:23 pm
      Could people please stop throwing ‘Mi5 Conspiracy’ about as an explaination for everything?”

      I’m wondering why you would say that when its a given that Holyrood has its fair share of them, though in this case they haven’t taken point.

    196. kapelmeister says:

      A Ploy Named Sue.

    197. Career: Politician says:

      ….Maybe I would say that because I’m a secret Mi5 agent….. or maybe you’re slightly paranoid. Who are these Mi5 agents within Holyrood, which it’s a given are there, as you say?

      My problem with this ‘let’s invoke the Mi5 conspiracy theory to answer everything’, is that it seems quite lazy, a little immature, and just sounds a little bonkers to be honest.

    198. Hugh Jarse says:

      When the shouting starts for May, i don’t think it’s going to be all about the conspiracy.
      GRA and the Hate crime folly will give the yoons plenty ammo, and with the reek of corruption polluting the atmosphere, the list vote is more important than ever.

      We have to make it known, that it’s the only way of making our voice clearly heard.

    199. Eileen Carson says:

      kapelmeister says:
      8 February, 2021 at 4:03 pm
      “There’s a magpie” says Murrell.
      …………………..
      Sounds better than “Oh look there’s a squirrel”

    200. Hatuey says:

      RepublicofScotland, the Inquiry isn’t into the role of spooks. As for helping it along, do you think they needed help? It looks to me like those involved were perfectly able and motivated to help it along by themselves.

      “These are not the droids you’re looking for…”

    201. Nosey says:

      What David Caledonia said, Fabiani must be prosecuted for attempt of court. Serve her papers she can’t get away with this. She’s retiring so thinks she can say and do as she pleases. She should be ashamed of herself. Salmond should sort something out with his solicitors, make sure she doesn’t get her big pension. She’s a dirty auld lying scumbag. Sitting there covering up for that wee fat baldy lying creep Murrell. He’s only married to Nicola by name. Get the auld b@stard done (Fabiani) I mean well Murrell too, and half the NEC we must be the laughing stock of the world. Get the Murrell’s out and serve papers on Fabiani sorted

    202. Hugh Jarse says:

      This disappearing isn’t a surprise.

      https://twitter.com/bridgesforindy/status/1358514540116381697

      Can a Twitterer please have a looksy?

    203. Jack says:

      The revolution always eats itself. Bonappetit.

    204. Robert graham says:

      The only thing everyone can do is to still vote SNP in the next Holyrood election.

      This on the one hand stops any security services involvement if they are actually behind what has happened.

      Once the SNP have a majority if that’s possible , torture your SNP MP make them work for our money constantly pushing them for what they should be doing don’t give them a moments peace

      It’s the only way I see out of this conundrum anyone with a better idea ?

    205. Anonymoose says:

      Hugh Jarse

      re: Can a Twitterer please have a looksy?

      See this tweet – https://twitter.com/Scottish_1/status/1358819793474879489

    206. Jacqueline McMillan says:

      I’m banned but looks as if what ever it was has been taken down

    207. Hugh Jarse says:

      Ta Anonymoose.

      Is there such a thing as an Unofficial Secret?
      🙂

    208. Alexander Wallace says:

      Please let me know if i am wrong,

      P Murrell stated that the meeting in his house was just finishing when he arrived home. He stuck his head round the door, Nichola and Alex where having a private discussion in another room.

      Alex Salmond statement to Hamilton enquiry.

      In attendance at the meeting on 2nd April 2018 were Mr Aberdein, Mr Hamilton, Ms Lloyd and myself. The First Minister and I met privately and then there was a general discussion with all five of us.

    209. Captain Yossarian says:

      ‘That was speculation on my part’ – Henceforth to be known in Scots Law as ‘The Murrell Defence’.

      James Wolffe is Emailing all Scottish lawyers with this instruction, as I speak.

    210. MaggieC says:

      Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

      That’s the written report from today’s session published ,

      https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=13108&mode=pdf

    211. Jack says:

      From the STV report
      An SNP spokesman said: “Peter agreed – for a second time despite some committee members having prejudged his evidence already – to appear at committee and he answered questions honestly while maintaining anonymity of the women.

      “It is nothing short of disgraceful that some members of the committee are so willing to sideline the experiences of the women to try and score pathetic political points.

      “Murdo Fraser’s trolling tweets which mock the women’s efforts to support one another are a disgrace. He should apologise and delete them.”

      Right for starters the ‘spokesman’ should be identified. Who is saying this? If it proves to be a member of staff reading a script, who wrote the script? Enough of this anonymity. Who said this?

    212. robertknight says:

      Career Politician @4:41

      On a previous thread, it was suggested that the Crown Agent of the COPFS was also a former Secret Agent or, as was described, “ex-MI5”.

      No idea whether that is indeed the case, or whether someone is simply adding 2 + 2 and getting 5.

      It did make me laugh however, as I suspect the only people who would describe themselves as “ex-MI5” are those drawing their pension from their time spent at the “Circus”, as Mr Cornwell would refer to it.

      To make my point, I’ll simply quote De Nero’s character Sam, from the excellent film Ronin,… “I never left, don’t you see?”

    213. Ottomanboi says:

      And bang goes national independence and sovereignty.
      https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/tesla-buys-15b-bitcoin-accept-payment-75753079
      The corporate/fascist coup d’état…by stealth.
      Time to wake up.

    214. Garavelli Princip says:

      Career: Politician says:
      8 February, 2021 at 4:41 pm
      ….Maybe I would say that because I’m a secret Mi5 agent….. or maybe you’re slightly paranoid. Who are these Mi5 agents within Holyrood, which it’s a given are there, as you say?

      Well, we now know for a fact that the Crown Agent in the Crown Office David Harvie was/is an MI5 agent.

      https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/02/04/dark-forces/

      Such a situation does not explain all of what is going on, but it may very well account for the numerous political prosecutions we have seen: Salmond, Hirst, Murray – to name but three, whereas many Unionists including my namesake and Kirsty Wark, who DID provide jigsaw information on a vast scale – go on about their business un questioned.

      And that is just what is now visible; What else are they up to? Who else is an agent/asset/compromised?

    215. Sylvia says:

      SNP urged to suspend Nicola Sturgeon’s husband Peter Murrell for bringing party ‘into disrepute’

      https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19074521.snp-urged-suspend-nicola-sturgeons-husband-peter-murrell-bringing-party-into-disrepute/

    216. Jm says:

      “What makes you so sure Major Major is a Communist?”
      “You never heard him denying it until we began accusing him, did you? And you don’t see him signing any of our loyalty oaths.”
      “You aren’t letting him sign any.”
      “Of course not . . . that would defeat the whole purpose of our crusade..”

      Joseph Heller- Catch 22

    217. Neil Wilkinson says:

      Jm says:
      8 February, 2021 at 5:37 pm
      “What makes you so sure Major Major is a Communist?”
      “You never heard him denying it until we began accusing him, did you? And you don’t see him signing any of our loyalty oaths.”
      “You aren’t letting him sign any.”
      “Of course not . . . that would defeat the whole purpose of our crusade..”

      Joseph Heller- Catch 22

      **********************************************

      Essential reading along with Animal Farm and 1083

    218. James Che. says:

      It is very interesting that although I favour Alex Salmond above Nicola Sturgeon as the best person for Scotland as a political leader, it is fascinating to find there are protectors of Westminster here first and foremost before Alex Salmond,
      The m15 comment is more to imply there are secret actors acting against Scotland and its leaders best interests, ( without putting my foot in it) which in turn effectively stonewalls independence for the people of Scotland, An element of the unknown jokers card/s within the Scottish devolved government,
      Some of the related persons I mentioned that may be involved were actually people, buildings and subjects that were discussed here first a year or two ago, you will probably find them archived.
      The implication that (the snp and Scottish people are left to our own devices) by Westminster within the Scottish devolved government is pish and naive.
      Indeed it is actually stupid.
      It is stupid to believe that knowing the existence of these people, services and servants that they would not be bought into use to save the status quo of the uk.

    219. Neil Wilkinson says:

      Duh, 1984 , not 1083 . Must put the lights on sooner

    220. Veritas says:

      I am touched and surprised by the confidence many correspondents place in the Scottish judiciary.
      I note many calls to resolve this via some sort of judicial enquiry.
      As someone who has some knowledge & experience in this area my view is that taking that course of action is unlikely to uncover the “ truth “ of the matter and the whole process will definitely be very slow and very expensive.
      The hollowing out and placement of “ yes” men and women in the pillars of civic society has been going on for years – it is only when it impacts upon one of the SNP’s own that it becomes apparent to those who support Independence.
      If we had for instance a proper functioning Civil Service it is very likely that this whole debacle of retrospective disciplinary action against Salmond would ever have got off the ground.
      If we had a proper functioning Parliament then the present Committee would not be lead by Fabiani & loaded with the nodding donkeys who pass themselves off as the “ people’s representatives “
      I suspect that the view from within the legal profession is that the Judiciary- at all levels – is being stuffed full of “yes “ men & women whose main qualification for the post is support for the SNP.
      Look no further than Carloway and his efforts to bring the FM’s and Rape Crisis ‘s view of what the law should be into our system.
      Does everyone not accept that the only thing that scuppered the conspiracy was the Edinburgh jury?
      Does anyone believe that a Scottish judge sitting alone would have had the guts to bring back a not guilty verdict?
      I wonder how the host of this site found his experience of the famed Scottish legal system?
      The cost of bringing any action & I mean any action in Scotland is ridiculously expensive.
      I rather suspect Miss Sturgeon & Mr Murrell would welcome Judicial Enquiry- they will pick their judge & kick backin the safe knowledge that in the unlikely event that their place person finds against them it won’t be for at least 3 years- probably longer & by that time it is likely that Miss Sturgeon will be out of Bute house & in Aberfeldy(I pick Aberfeldy for no other reason than it’s small & out of the way)
      So if there is to be a Judicial enquiry it should be a non Scottish judge.
      This is Scotland’s own stink – let’s stop the ridiculous idea that this is some Westminster or Unionist conspiracy.
      The SNP has fed the idea of Scottish exceptionalism like Kool Aid- stop drinking it & open your eyes to the fact that politicians belong to their own class – it’s a global profession.
      Lastly my cap is doffed to Mr Campbell – I am not an Indy man,neither am I a Unionist- but your investigation & commitment to the truth is utterly commendable.

    221. Hugh Jarse says:

      For a fishing expedition, someone in the team decided on ‘Operation Diem’, when Carpe is the natural fit!

      Does CC Livingston have a fun side?
      Moonlighting as ‘Ironic Ian’!

    222. Eileen Carson says:

      MaggieC 8 February, 2021 at 5:21 pm
      Re Harassment and Complaints Committee ,

      That’s the written report from today’s session published,

      It’s actually partially wrong unless he affirmed, he did not complete the oath with “so help me god” I noted that at the time, struck me as odd, must look at video again.

    223. Effijy says:

      Today Currency is worthless in reality.

      The “I promise to pay the bearer” once meant that there was
      Bullion in a vault somewhere equal to the value of notes issued.

      There is next to nothing in the vault by comparison these days.

      In the U.K. Gordon Brown sold the Gold Reserves and not too long after
      it’s price tripled.

      Today Currency is worthless in reality.

      The “I promise to pay the bearer” once meant that there was
      Bullion in a vault somewhere equal to the value of notes issued.

      There is next to nothing in the vault by comparison these days.

      In the U.K. Gordon Brown sold the Gold Reserves and not too long after
      it’s price tripled.
      Today Currency is worthless in reality.

      The “I promise to pay the bearer” once meant that there was
      Bullion in a vault somewhere equal to the value of notes issued.

      There is next to nothing in the vault by comparison these days.

      Have a look at the U.K. Debt Clock on line.

      It doesn’t know about all the Covid debt yet but it’s chasing £2.5 Trillion.

      Who do we owe it too?
      Why is there no limit on the amount of debt?
      Why is there no timescale for when it must be paid?

      This Bitcoin thing seems to me to be another token name that has nothing
      behind it to pay out if you want to return to paper money.

      And Westminster says an independent Scotland that hadn’t borrowed in 300 years would
      rack up debts? lol.

      You have to hand it to them for well polished brass necks.

    224. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      kapelmeister says at 4:40 pm wins WoS today with

      “A Ploy Named Sue.”

      Absolute class!

      🙂

    225. stonefree says:

      @ Hamish Kirk at 3:36 pm

      The Lockerbie business? The whole thing raises questions , an American Air Force Base in the Netherland ,Scottish Jurisdiction, Mandela’s offer of neutral country rejected the delay in actually starting the trial, and Gadafi
      A guy I knew very well,he was in charge for his company from the borders,to at least Aberdeen said after the crash the his company donated serious money to the area,but it was pocket change to what the Americans were throwing at the area , that was in about 89 to 92

    226. Hugh Jarse says:

      ‘In a statement earlier today, Ms Ruddick confirmed she had communicated with Mr Murrell “for support” around the time Mr Salmond was charged with sexual assault. ”
      Self ID

      From the Herald piece Sylvia linked.

    227. stonefree says:

      Eileen Carson at 5:48 pm

      he did not complete the oath with “so help me god”

      He would have made an “affirmation”
      which is non-religious
      What he was saying you need to take my word (as an officer and gentleman and connoisseur of cheap wine)

      Aye Right

    228. JGedd says:

      Haven’t time to check through all recent comments above but has anyone mentioned Gordon Dangerfield’s latest contribution on his blog? If not, you should read ‘A Very Scottish Coup (Part One)’.

      Demolishes Nicola Sturgeon’s argument that she was not involved in devising the policy to trap AS, specifically. (Sorry if I’m behind the curve if others have already drawn attention to it.)

      I can’t wait for Part Two.

    229. Jm says:

      Such was the shambolic bizarre performance by Murrell can we be absolutely certain he even remembers his own name?

      Dodgy beyond words.

    230. No more corruption says:

      @ Cath, you nailed it ?

      Cath says:

      So, to sum up the evidence so far, as I understand it: Peter Murrell wasn’t at home during the meeting and didn’t talk to Nicola about it because it was government business, but Alex had just popped in and it wasn’t really a meeting at all, and Nicola had no idea what he wanted to talk about, except that maybe he was on the verge of quitting the party but she had no idea why. Then Peter did come home and found some unexpected people in his house (as you do) but had no idea Alex was there so just ambled off upstairs to get changed and nothing more was ever spoken of it. [Strokes imaginary beard]

    231. twathater says:

      I am so disgusted and incandescent that this FARCE as everyone knows it is, is continually referred to as the Alex Salmond inquiry , WE know why they do it DIVERSION , to take away the REAL REASON for the inquiry , Sturgeon’s and her cohorts DELIBERATE but FAILED attempts to denigrate and demean an innocent STALWART in the fight for Scotland’s independence

      WHAT rankles and infuriates Sturgeon is the FACT that AS is superior to Sturgeon in integrity , honesty and character and no matter what she does she will NEVER attain his principles

      She has surrounded herself by a clique of weak unobtrusive sycophants who are unwilling or frightened to challenge her vision of herself as a great leader , she has chosen these useless fawning wastes of oxygen because she knows they don’t have the self respect of NORMAL people to stand up against bullies and repugnant sycopaths

      For ME to vote for these craven worthless COWARDS would make me complicit in THEIR RANK CORRUPTION AND DEVIANCE and I would NOT debase myself

    232. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Looks like today’s protestations have provided me with my third alphabet woman.

      No idea which letter though.

    233. shug says:

      If she is still in power at the election there must immediately be a leadership challenge.
      I do wonder why Westminster is protecting her, could it be they would rather deal with her than AS. He is so much more astute where she may be more pragmatic.
      Any thoughts

      In any case I will only be voting SNP if there is a cast iron promise of indyref2, and if it does not happen this year then I will vote tory before I vote SNP again.

    234. Mia says:

      “Up to a point this has been the best laid trap to ensnare and ensure that the two largest independence leaders are of this century are turned against each other”

      I see that from a completely different perspective. For me it has been clear for a while that there were never “two” independence leaders in all this, only one and that one is and always has been Mr Salmond. The other one is in my view just a fraud that has been for 6 years tasked with regressing autonomy for Scotland, holding the yes movement on a leash and handing over our powers and assets to Westminster. I would not be surprised if she was tasked to hand the keys to Holyrood to the England MPs too and she has decided to do it by making us think our parliament and government are useless.

      Sturgeon may have pretended to be a pro independence leader for the last 6 years, but sure as hell she has not behaved like one. She has behaved exactly as the opposite of a pro independence leader. She has behaved like a Blairite.

      The evidence points to a deliberate attempt to bring Mr Salmond down from day one and the trigger was not the nonsense of “me too” as they expect us to believe it was. That was the convenient excuse to review CURRENT complaints procedures. What we should have therefore seen as the result of this was a reviewed complaints procedure, not an entirely new, designed and made to measure unlawful one, which is exactly what we got.

      What you perceive from that evidence is that these people embarked on was looked like a race against the clock to design and implement a brand new procedure that had no precedent neither in the UK nor elsewhere. Not even the civil service itself had anything remotely similar to apply to former civil servants. From the emails I have read, there is something very obvious: these people were on a hurry to complete this. Why?

      The trigger for this former ministers bogus complaints procedure was most likely, in my opinion, the announcement that Mr Salmond wanted to return to politics and was about to take over the Scotsman. I am sure the spooks by then had also found out he was about to start a programme in RT. Mr Salmond does not strike me as the kind of mark MI5 would simply have ditched the day he “lost” the referendum or the day he “lost” the seat (the inverted commas are because I do not think he lost either of them. I am of the opinion somebody arranged for him to lose both).

      My own interpretation is that the newspaper and broadcasting platforms were about to give Mr Salmond a much larger share of the audience the British state could ever be comfortable with.

      From those platforms he could start increasing very significantly his profile reaching many voters north and south of the border but more importantly, he could totally undermine the British state’s script of unionism, bogeyman Russia and of course the “we are not campaigning for independence and we now see Russia as the bogeyman” script that Sturgeon and her bandwagon of pretend feminists, gradualists and pretend pro-indy politicians were so eager to follow.

      I have always been convinced Mr Salmond’s stitch up was the baby of the British state since 2014. Sturgeon, Murrell and the others pawns within the SNP and the SGov have just been chess pieces within the strategy, that no doubt has been overseen by crown agents and MI5 plants within the SNP and the Scottish government. There is no way Fabiani would have been allowed to insult everybody’s intelligence with such mockery of the inquiry, that Swinney and the Lord Advocate would have been able to stop the evidence if the British state had not wanted them to and the MSM were happy to oblige by looking the other way.

      If something has become clear in all this hubris is that it is and it always has been the British state who is the main beneficiary of having a neutered SNP, that has abandoned its desire for independence and has become compliant under a fake pro independence leader like Sturgeon.

      The fact all those Uk civil servants jumped at the prospect of sinking the man is a tell-tale, as it is still fresh in our minds from 2014 those prizes and recognitions given to civil servants in the treasure for “helping to save the union” sailing too close if not crossing entirely the borders of what is acceptable and what is not under their civil service code. This is no different. Moving Salmond out of politics and the public eye would help to slow down, if not derail independence and “save the union” one more time. I wonder what was the prize these UK civil servants were expecting to get. Same of them got nice price rises.

      But the suggestion that Sturgeon is a victim here, I am sorry but that is not credible. Sturgeon is either a British State tool (to me, the way she fits far too much with New labour) or she had a personal grudge against Salmond that the British state has exploited with her full consent. But in any case, she chose to go along with all of it.

      Let’s be clear: Sturgeon could have taken control of this procedure from day 1 and this is what, as head of government and in line with the ministerial code, she should always have done. She has that power and always has. The idea that an unelected civil servant had more power than her at any time is utterly ridiculous.

      If she “did not have power” on that procedure is only because she choose to delegate that power to somebody else so she could distance herself with it. But she delegated it to people that were not equipped to either design that procedure nor implement it and even less delivering it. So at the very least, Sturgeon is guilty of negligence and dereliction of duty, to the complainants, to Mr Salmond and to the people she delegated the work to when they when they were not equipped to do so.

      If she was really a pro indy leader who had found out that crown agents and MI5 plants were distorting against her will the activities of the Scottish government and the SNP to stall independence, it was her duty to speak up and speak up loudly – She could have done so by asking to be interviewed in Mr Salmond’s RT programme and spill all the fckng beans for the whole world to watch. But she didn’t. Instead she took part directly or indirectly in the biggest and most disgusting and expensive political cover up of Scotland’s political history to cover her arse, that of crown agents, MI5 agents and plants and their pawns that in their quest to derail independence were prepared to unlawfully pervert the course of justice by sending an innocent man to jail. I wouldn’t be surprised the aim of all this disgraceful spectacle is to render Holyrood useless and easily hand out its keys to England MPs. What this woman has done to Scotland is unforgivable.

      Sturgeon is no seagull manager. The way she has taken over from the Health Minister in the matters covid proves she is a micromanager instead. This means that she deliberately handed control for this procedure and she did that as part of a plan. One that stinks at premeditation.

      To me the crux of the matter and that has already been airbrushed completely is when Sturgeon knew about the complaints or that the complaints were about to come. Not the official ones, but the ones that led to the complaints procedure. The ones that were used “to test” the procedure and that ended up as official complaints afterwards.

      This woman is the head of the government and the head of the SNP and we are expected to believe she was not notified neither by the SNP nor the Sgov that complaints through BOTH had been received and pretty much at the same time?

      This sht does not fly.

      I could not see this committee, or rather those controlling the strings of this committee, having any interest pressing the SGov and the SNP hard enough on the events taking place during the last week of October and the first 2 of November and I wonder why.

      According to the information released to the press from the criminal case, one of the accusers contacted the SNP with a complaint on the 5th November 2017. From some of the submissions to the enquiry by Nicola Richards, the timeline in those submissions has an entry for 5 November 2017 that reads: “Meet Ms A, NR/JMac”.

      It is interesting that only 2 days later, the first draft of the complaints procedure against former ministers is completed. Is the complainer who contacted the SNP on the 5 November the same Ms A met by NR/JMac according to that timeline submitted to the inquiry?

      On the 5 November 2017 there is also an attempt by Nicola Sturgeon to contact Mr Salmond. An awful lot appears to be happening on the 5th November, however everybody seems to want to distract us by focusing our attention on March and April 2018. There seems to be a big effort to dismiss the first two weeks of November, when this is precisely when this complaints procedure really took off.

      I want to know what happened in the first 2 weeks of November. Have emails from all the interested parties for that time been requested? If not, why not? Doesn’t it stand to the obvious that in order to establish if this was a deliberate conspiracy to bring down Mr Salmond the first thing that needs to be established is how on earth an innocuous review of an existent and perfectly valid complaints procedure approved on the 31st October 2017 suddenly a week later morphed into the first draft of a totally brand new, bespoke complaints procedure directed neither to current civil servants, current ministers or former civil servants, but actually former ministers?

      this question has been eating at me since the first day I read Nicola Richards submissions:

      Why was it so important to write a complaints procedure against former ministers “to close a gap” but it was never even contemplated by any of those people to write the equivalent complaints procedure against former civil servants and SPADS to close their gap too?

      Why was so urgent for this procedure against former ministers to be completed but there was no urgency in even contemplating a similar procedure for former civil servants?

      It is not that they had not been made aware of it. I mean, in the email from the Uk cabinet office (November 2017), one of the questions asked something down these lines: “does this procedure depart much from your current complaints procedure against former civil servants”?

      We have not been shown the response issued to the Uk cabinet office but certainly the exchange of information between the civil servants in the SGov was that they didn’t even know if such a procedure to complain against former civil servants actually existed.

      That should set alarm bells ringing because it points to the possibility that this was never about being fair to women, about closing every “gap” in the complaints procedure as it has been dished as an excuse. This was an opportunistic attempt to ride the metoo wave to stitch Mr Salmond under the guise of “updating” an already existent complaints procedure.

      So how does Fabiani purport to establish if this has been a conspiracy when she is not looking or allowing the committee to look at the crucial evidence required to establish that fact?

      This inquiry is a complete farce and in my opinion has always been designed to fall as an inquiry. This “inquiry” has morphed instead into another propaganda mouthpiece from where to continue smearing Mr Salmond after the British state and its minions in STurgeon’s government and SNP failed to do so with a botched, unlawful and biased complaints procedure, an unlawful leak to a newspaper simply because the man was about take the rug from under their feet by gaging them with an interdict, after a ridiculous criminal court case standing on a foundation of lies, after the accusers were using their anonymity to continue the campaign of throwing dirt at Mr Salmond through mouthpieces paid by subsides from the SGov.

      It is amazing how much the British state fears Scotland’s independence and how much they fear Alex Salmond. It is amazing how much contempt they have for STurgeon, though. They do not seem to give a sht if she is portrayed as the most corrupt politician of the UK, but clearly neither does she. But the lengths they have gone to stop the independence and to move Mr Salmond away from politics speak for themselves.

      We should remind them every time one of the stooges of the British state comes here to tell us that we survive thanks to subsides from England. Yeah, right. That surely is the reason why the SNP, the COPD and the civil service up here are bursting at the seems with British state spooks and plants.

    235. Andybhoy says:

      I think the Inquiry seems to be throwing the alphabet women under the bus by having their names redacted from reports that many of us have already read.

    236. Andybhoy says:

      Given the amount of shite that has hit the fan today, one wonders at what pint the rats stop trying to protect the whole and start trying to protect themselves, even if that means fingering one of the other dodgy characters in this conspiracy.

    237. Republicofscotland says:

      Hautey @4.49pm.

      What about LE, seconded to Holyrood by the British Civil service, has she played her part in this? You’re not going to tell me she’s pro Scottish independence. There’s a few others just off the top of my head that serve two masters at Holyrood.

    238. Republicofscotland says:

      “or maybe you’re slightly paranoid. ”

      Aye tell that to Willie MacRae,

    239. Andybhoy says:

      Sorry if I missed it, but what was the time line between James Matthews asking the FM that question during the Covid briefing and Ruddick coming out and
      stating harassment of the complainers has to stop?

    240. ALISON BALHARRY says:

      @Mia eh those of us on the Yes Scotland HQ Hope St media desk worked out in July 2014 that the Sturrells cared more about power than independence.

      And aye I flagged to the many now MPs and MSPs who got their appointments on the back of the referendum, many of whom I fisrt got on broadacast media.

      Did they listen? Did they give a fuck? Nah.

      That is your current SNP.

    241. Pixywine says:

      Little Nicky spawn of the Devil of Dreghorn. Oh no.

    242. Republicofscotland says:

      Well said Chris, Murrells’ a lying b*stard.

      “Alex Salmond lives a 3.5 hours drive away from Nicola Sturgeon, no credible witness can claim he just popped in on an Easter Bank Monday and after travelling that distance the SNP CEO was conveniently sent out for milk”

      https://twitter.com/ChrisMcEleny/status/1358713753940951040

    243. robertknight says:

      Andybhoy @ 6:22

      “I think the Inquiry seems to be throwing the alphabet women under the bus by having their names redacted from reports that many of us have already read.”

      They know that we know the names, and we know that they know that we know the names.

      But don’t go offering up your own or the Rev’s scalp – they’ll also close this place down in the blink of an eye if they get the chance.

    244. Tannadice Boy says:

      The last chance for the Inquiry to restore any confidence in the Parliamentary Committee system was lost today. Reap the harvest you have sown. Reminiscent of an Alan Ayckbourn farce and that’s being kind. I couldn’t think of a Scottish equivalent because it is normally not how we do things.

    245. Sylvia says:

      Republicofscotland @6.24

      Evans joined the Scottish Government in September 2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Evans#Career She is married to Derek McVey who was an SNP activist for Edinburgh central.

    246. Cath says:

      Aye tell that to Willie MacRae,

      Was so happy to find out from this site his old law firm is the one working with Alex now – Levy and MacRae.

    247. Republicofscotland says:

      “The implication that (the snp and Scottish people are left to our own devices) by Westminster within the Scottish devolved government is pish and naive.
      Indeed it is actually stupid.
      It is stupid to believe that knowing the existence of these people, services and servants that they would not be bought into use to save the status quo of the uk.”

      James Che.

      Exactly, I recall Craig Murray saying on his own blog years ago, that there was at least 50,000 people doing Thames House bidding in the UK.

    248. A Person says:

      Right, so, where are we?

      -The inquiry is hopeless; just a cosmetic exercise
      -The Crown Office isn’t going to do anything about this
      -The media is largely following a policy of omertà, although this is changing
      -Ninety-nine out of a hundred SNP elected officials are happy/sufficiently scared of being attacked by Daddy Bear’s mob that they will keep shtum.
      -About half of all SNP activists and supporters blindly believe that chanting “Nicola has it in the bag” will solve all problems.
      -We are having to depend on our avowed enemies like Murdo Fraser and Cole bloody Hamilton and Galloway for crying out loud.

      Not looking great, so there needs to be a game changer. What is that going to be?

    249. Andybhoy says:

      robertknight

      Absolutely no change, I have noticed in the last few days a change in the tactics of the SNP sycophants. In that they are now asking you for proof, name the women who made these allegations against ALex Salmond.

      Clearly coming from the same clown who thought up

      wheest for indy

      they might get the gullible sheep to attack people on social media with ease, but I can handle being called a tractor, a yoon, a MI5 soy etc, but under no circumstances am I getting banged up for breaking a court order.

      But I do get the impression that people are getting desperate and they know that the noose is tightening.

    250. Republicofscotland says:

      “Evans joined the Scottish Government in September 2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Evans#Career She is married to Derek McVey who was an SNP activist for Edinburgh central.”

      Slyvia.

      And? She’s the numero uno Civil servant in Scotland she liaise’s regularly with London, her duplicity has been established in the Only Game in Town.

    251. ian murray says:

      These alphabet women should be answerable for their actions.
      Some of them have made it even harder for women to be treated fairly in cases of sexual assault.
      Can we just remember that one of them claimed to be at a dinner party at Bute house when she was assaulted, and when, according to other people at the event “she was not actually there”
      It was not held in a school cafeteria ffs
      Who invited her ? who did she sit beside?
      who did she talk to ?

    252. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Think about this…

      There have been umpteen “Hope Over Fear” rallies and mega-umpteen “AOUB” marches/rallies since the first “Hope Over Fear” rally in George Square, October 2014.

      I’ve been at most of the above, along with either my son and Pete, or Ronnie Anderson.

      The only rally that I recall NS appearing on stage, was the rally in George Square in November 2019, organised by The National.

      So, she blanked every ‘grassroots’ initiative – but attended a rally that had been supported by a proportion of the £3 Million, gifted to the MSM by the Scottish (SNP) government.

      Why did she deign to appear at the ONE organised by The National, immediately prior to the December 2019 GE, but NOT support the ‘grassroots’ initiatives?

    253. Pixywine says:

      It seems to me that the Inquiry is being hammered into a tool with which to continue the Witch hunt against Alec Salmond. What does it mean ” legal restrictions being placed on your committee”? Perhaps a D Notice?
      It is only my opinion but there appears a great deal of collusion between the First Ministers office Fabianis Inquiry team and the Procurator Fiscals office.
      Surprised?

    254. Baxter says:

      INDEPENDANT @3-30pm
      My first thought when hearing Matthews question to Sturgeon this afternoon was that it was a set-up for her to get a dig in at Salmond. Hardly had to take time to think about her reply and it sounded to me as well rehearsed.

    255. North chiel says:

      I am rather surprised that some posters are naive enough to think that the British security services are in some way “ remote , mythical and principally M25 based” . Certainly many EX military “ officer” personnel when they leave the service and are subsequently employed in all walks of life in the UK ( including Scotland) , retain links with GCHQ and undoubtedly some will also retain previous links to MI5 & MI6 . They are embedded in all walks of life in Scotland and areas of Scotland where there are major military bases such as Moray , Fife etc . These areas would have a higher proportion of ex military personnel employed in all walks of life. You would be surprised indeed to learn that your work colleague or neighbour could well have longstanding links to “ previous employers” . I would add that some indeed but not all , over time could well be sympathetic to Scottish Independence .

    256. ScottieDog says:

      Hope those willing to airbrush this episode out realise that their voices will be ignored when it come to shaping a new Scotland. The SNP have already cemented their partnership with Charlotte st partners, benny Higgins and the big real-estate companies. They’ve basically ignored conference amendments on currency as Andrew Wilson likes to remind us. She’s forging a mini-Britain (that’s if we ever get another vote on independence)

    257. Mia says:

      “There appears a great deal of collusion between the First Ministers office Fabianis Inquiry team and the Procurator Fiscals office”

      Don’t forget the SNP executive: “We’ll sit on that and hope we never need to deploy it”

      Well, it was conveniently deployed, wasn’t it?

    258. Republicofscotland says:

      Cath @6.37pm.

      It wasn’t that long ago that Our Man in (Havana) Holyrood “Justice” secretary Humza Yousaf, rejected the proposal for a full inquiry into Willie’s death.

    259. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      I meant the first post-indyref “Hope Over Fear” rally in George Square, October 2014.

    260. Robert Hughes says:

      Mia @ 6.20

      Absolutely brilliant post .

      Effort is required to withstand the cognitive dissonance unable to concede the scale of corruption that’s -painfully , coming to light , but the scenario you describe is both compelling and persuasive . Excellent .

    261. Mia says:

      “My first thought when hearing Matthews question to Sturgeon this afternoon was that it was a set-up for her to get a dig in at Salmond”

      Did you notice how on his second question she very quickly removed the page she had in front of her to expose the one below before answering?

    262. Republicofscotland says:

      North Chiel @6.56pm

      Well said, the British state via its actors interferes constantly where it can, from Kenyan elections to the more recent Ugandan elections, hell they even have the power to instruct those further up the chain of command to remove democratically elected PM’s, such as Gough Whitlam.

      Oh and there’s this as well, giving state actors a free hand to do as they please.

      https://www.rt.com/op-ed/502727-uk-bill-security-services/

      https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-01-20-britain-whitewashes-ugandas-stolen-election/

    263. Tannadice Boy says:

      @Brian doonthetoon 6:52pm
      Simples the SNP is her party not yours or mine or any of the grassroots. How dare you have the temerity to think you can have any influence over party policy. I fear ‘we’ have to bring the house down before her and hope to recover. Hope alone is all ‘we’ are left with. A puckle of snow in our area. I have had the snow shovel out today but pensioners are still needing help along the street. Guess what I will be doing tomorrow. Hope over fear.

    264. robertknight says:

      Sheriff J W Pepper comes to mind…

      “A Secret Agent? On whose side?”

    265. Cath says:

      Kenny McKaskill being interviewed on Channel 4 news right now.

    266. Baxter says:

      Mia@7.08pm

      I was listening on the radio as I was driving but my initial reaction was it was a set-up, I will try and see if I can watch it.

    267. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “So is she claiming it was against HER, (and therefore outing herself as one of the Alphabet Women)”

      It was against her, but it was not one of the charges in the trial (the police took no action on it, for reasons you can read in our latest post), so no, she isn’t.

    268. Carol Neill says:

      Ma heids birlin

    269. Anonymoose says:

      Brian Doonthetoon at 6:52pm

      Instead of going to the indy supporting rallies of AUOB and the likes, she was either at rallies supporting the woke or reading books.
      You just need to look at her twitter feed whenever there was AUOB or any other Indy marches on she was everywhere but there and all over twitter doing everything but supporting independence.

      Except that one event in George Square, which for all intents and purposes was a defacto SNP event organised under The National banner.

    270. Bob Mack says:

      @Briandoonthetoon,

      Booommm!!!

    271. Saffron Robe says:

      This is what happens when you try to circumscribe the truth. In layman’s terms it’s called nobbling.

    272. Aroma says:

      Mia @ 6.30pm

      I think you need to lie down for a bit in a dark room or go for a good walk. My own experience of cross border working is that Scotland is more than capable of creating the current farcical situation without any help from London.

    273. Hatuey says:

      Republicofscotland says:
      8 February, 2021 at 6:24 pm
      Hautey @4.49pm.

      “What about LE, seconded to Holyrood by the British Civil service, has she played her part in this? You’re not going to tell me she’s pro Scottish independence.”

      No, and by the same token I won’t tell you that Mao Zedong was pro-independence either.

      The obvious filter in terms of attributing and apportioning responsibility for this, or anything, requires that you ask a basic question – would it still have happened without that person?

      The evidence suggests that in the case of LE it could have happened without her. Indeed, as I understand it, she was quite right when she said she was just following orders.

      If you go through the various players asking that question, you will soon find someone that it could not have happened without.

      And this is very basic stuff, btw. If it disappoints you, it’s because you are biased. Nevertheless, what happened here could very easily have happened without anyone from MI5 taking part.

    274. tricia young says:

      Watching Peter Murrell in action today I had an overwhelming urge to smack the supercilious smirk off his face. And I am a pacifist. Wish the magpie(s) had turned on him.

    275. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Looks like I’ve had a comment removed.

      It was the one that started with,

      From an email I’ve just received…

      So, I’ll offer this:-

      https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/02/08/following-a-statement-by-sue-riddick-to-the-media-the-plot-continues-and-flops-again/

    276. tricia young says:

      In 2014 when independence first raised curiosity in me, I didn’t know what to think. Like a lot of people I was not that interested in politics and was just getting on with my life. I attended a few meetings out of curiosity and one in particular (in Arbroath) took me aback. There on a wee stage in a wee church sat Alex, Nicla, and many others. Alex Salmond laid out his ideas and plan for a free and independent Scotland. I have never been so fired up in my life. He was electrifying and utterly believable. Nicla was just a shadow saying nothing then. I went leafleting, marching (all bar one of them) and converting. He gave me real hope for a better Scotland. She has given me nothing. She has never turned up on AUOB marches, ignored women leaving the party, supported ANYTHING rather than independence. She lost me a long time ago. Alex Salmond said at that meeting that he would resign if he didn’t get the indy vote. And unlike other politicians here was a man that kept his word. He handed everything to her and she has p@@ it up a rope. I know this is a bit of a personal post but that is how I feel. Alex Salmond, for me, is a hero and always will be. His fight is my fight.

    277. cirsium says:

      @BDTT, 6.52

      Why did she deign to appear at the ONE organised by The National, immediately prior to the December 2019 GE, but NOT support the ‘grassroots’ initiatives?

      It was just before the GE and her appearance was a vote harvesting exercise. Vote for SNP, give the SNP a ( yet another) mandate and there will definitely be an Indyref in 2020 and look what happened on 31 January 2020.

      Another vote harvesting exercise is starting up in preparation for the Holyrood vote.

    278. cirsium says:

      @Baxter, @Mia

      It was a set-up to establish Ms Sturgeon’s honesty and truthfulness (or should that be truthiness) in preparation for her attendance at next week’s meeting of the Committee. She is going to answer ALL the questions. Given the redactions, restrictions and omissions connected with the evidence, the scope of these questions is going to be narrow. Ms Sturgeon is an experienced public performer so she will not require Ms Fabiani to act as a prompt. As Sir Humphrey said in “Yes Minister”, an inquiry is a train and a train can only run on the rails which have been established.

    279. Mia says:

      “she was quite right when she said she was just following orders”

      Sure, but whose orders?

      The procedure she ended up producing was unlawful and costed us over 500,000 pounds that could be put to better use. This woman is the most senior civil servant in Scotalnd, for goodness sake.
      If the average person in the street can already see that involving complainers in the design and redaction of the procedure, how couldn’t she? And how producing and implementing a knowingly unlawful procedure does that not break the civil service code at every possible level?

      This was a bespoke procedure that had no precedent anywhere in the Uk and I dare say abroad. She did not even have similar procedure to handle complaints directed to former civil servants. So what was the real motivation behind the urgency to bring this procedure to light? It could only be political. The Permanent Secretary is a UK civil servant that must abide by the civil service code – political impartiality is the basis of the code. How didn’t she break that part?

      What about breaching her own procedure? The procedure indicated the “victims” had to be requested consent before the complaints could be passed to the police. Did she asked her consent or she passed them to the COPFs? How is that not a breach of trust and confidence of the victims?

      Who leaked the information to the newspaper just hours after she received a letter from Mr Salmond’s lawyers telling her about the interdict? Who did she speak to? How many people did she contact to? Either the woman is hopeless or she didn’t make any effort at all trying to figure out who leaked the info, and more importantly, who authorised it.

      “what happened here could very easily have happened without anyone from MI5 taking part”

      I don’t see how. If MI5 and its plants were not controlling this from top to bottom, an illegal and unlawful complaints procedure that would never bear its own weight in court would have never seen the light of day and if it did they would use it to completely destroy the SNP. Instead, we see them circling wagons around Murrell, the SNP executive, the civil servants from hell and STurgeon.

      If MI5 and its plants had not their fingers all over this, a criminal court case could have not emerged out of thin air and based in ridiculously flimsy accusations against the most investigated man in Scotland’s history.

      If MI5 and its plants were not infesting the SNP and the SGov, individuals would not be so ready to perjure themselves in a criminal court or parliamentary inquiry. The only way this is conceivable is if they have been offered protection- permanent anonymity and evidence stalled from the inquiry.

      If spooks were not all over this, there is no way the COPFS would have been able to corrupt its structures in such a blatant way stopping the evidence reaching the public.

      If spooks were not all over this, there would have never been a collusion of structures of government, COPFS, police, opposition parties, and parliament desperately trying to put a lid on this to avoid the names of assets coming to light. If it was just SNP people and the SNP was not infiltrated top to bottom, the British state would not hesitate to throw them to the wolves. Instead, we have every structure above applying their heavy weight to the lid that is stopping those fckng whatsapp messages coming to light. Why? How many spooks and plants are currently in the SNP executive?

      It spooks were not all over this, there would not be this urgency for Sturgeon to survive politically until May 2021. She would have been out in 2018.

      In 2017 their goal was to eject Mr Salmond from the SNP so they could take over and destroy it as a party of independence. Today their urgency is even more: they are desperately trying to stop 2021 HE to become a plebiscitary election. And time is of the essence.

      So no, I do not see how any of this could have ever happened if MI5 and its plants were not infesting the SNP, COPFS, the police, the SGov and parliament.

    280. James Che. says:

      Mia, that was an excellent post and detailed understanding of the picture within the Scottish goverment and actors that took part, with all the ramifications thereof.
      Without doubt a preplanned event with the collusion of more than one department within Governments to try falsify and imprison the one man that may politically threaten the stability of the status quo of the uk.

    281. Derek says:

      @Hugh Jarse says:
      8 February, 2021 at 4:42 pm
      When the shouting starts for May, i don’t think it’s going to be all about the conspiracy.

      Oh shite, is she here too?

    282. McDuff says:

      James Che 3.18
      AS didn’t turn on Sturgeon it was her who turned on him so that’s a very odd thing to say.
      Mi5 might be involved but it has nothing to do with AS.

    283. Hatuey says:

      Mia, I only read the first paragraph of what you typed. I had no incentive to read the rest.

      You seem unable to imbibe the basic fact; that LE was acting under the instruction of the Cabinet. You seem to be arguing that she did so carelessly or clumsily, badly, or, whatever.

      I have no interest in her performance levels when it comes to carrying out tasks that were – for a variety of reasons – wrong.

      I don’t know how she could do something that’s inherently wrong well, but that’s something for you to grapple with, not me.

      Good luck.

    284. Saffron Robe says:

      As regards only following orders. I thought the Nuremberg trials established that this couldn’t be used as a valid defence to escape punishment?

    285. John says:

      Hatuey,
      Then it is your loss.
      “The Cabinet” is the Privvy Council, Is it not?
      That’s “Her most gracious lady the Queen”, is it not?
      So to whom do you believe is Mistress to Walsingham?

      Mia,
      Well put. I take it your point is the exact opposite to what Hatuey would have us believe?
      That Evans cannot possibly have done this on her own iniative.

    286. Saffron Robe says:

      John says:

      “So to whom do you believe is Mistress to Walsingham?”

      Excellent John, what a good way of putting it.

    287. Jack says:

      I wonder how many other ‘under oath’ testimonies are allowed reprieve when ‘confused’ to leave the stand and ‘circle back’ on another date with a written answer?

    288. Hatuey says:

      John: ““The Cabinet” is the Privvy Council, Is it not?”

      Actually I was referring to the Scottish Government’s Cabinet, not Westminster. The Cabinet isn’t the Privy Council, though, and I don’t know where you got that idea.

      The Right Honourable Nicola Sturgeon is a member of the Privy Council, as it happens.

      But carry on regardless… whatever.

    289. Jack says:

      SNP = Redacted.

    290. Saffron Robe says:

      Could it be that the paralysis in justice is being caused by the discrepancy between an oath to the (English) Crown and an oath to tell the truth?

    291. Hatuey says:

      L.U.T.B., I concur.

      Whether you believe it was a conspiracy or not, none of this nonsense would have been set in motion were it not for the enabling role played by the FM.

      It’s a matter of fact and not opinion that only the FM could have initiated this, with changes to “the procedure”, etc. And it follows logically that none of this would have taken place without her playing that part – regardless of MI5 or anyone else.

      It’s the Internet and people want to be dramatic or something.

    292. John says:

      Saffron,
      Thank you. And you could just be right in your analysis.

      Hatuey,
      It’s no big secret. Anybody can look it up. The executive committee of the privvy council is called The Cabinet.

    293. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      I can no longer vote SNP CONSTITUENCY.

      The reason I left the Labour Party is because Blair is a serial liar and Gordon Brown a nasty dinosaur.

      The current SNP leadership, and sadly a LOT of the SNP branch members arrogantly assume the SNP now “weigh” their votes in Scotland. THE FEELING OF ENTITLEMENT AMONGST MEMBERS OF STURGEON’S SNP IS BASED ON QUICKSAND.

      Labour’s stronghold on Scotland was killed off in 2007 when sufficient Labour voters said “fuck that, I will lend my vote to Alex Salmond and the SNP.”

      I was very happy with Alex as First Minister. He kept his word. He improved the econonomy. He helped our company create a LOT of jobs. He also kept his promise and held IndyRef1 in 2014.

      Distressingly, afte reading that letter which shows the Sturgeonite McWokists for the twisted scheming legal gerrymanderers that they are, there is…

      NO WAY ON EARTH I WILL VOTE SNP “CONSTITUENCY”.

      AND…

      NO WAY ON EARTH I WILL VOTE SNP “LIST”.

      I am aware that not voting SNP CONSTITUENCY will harm the chances of INDY LIST parties, but enough is enough.

      Humza Yousef’s rancid ORWELLIAN SNP/TRANS-SPEAK law is beyond the pale. Fuck off Humza and your abuse of a once decent Scottish legal system.

      As for the liar Sturgeon and creepy beard of a man who lied through his teeth with the feeble excuse: “I saw nothing of Nick’s meeting with Alex as I just got home with the messages”. Aye right.

      Enough.

      The SNP have been infiltrated. This is a brilliant activation by the secret squirrel Brigade of all their assets to implode the SNP.

      With deep regret, I am unlikely to vote unless Alex Salmond and/or Johanna Cherry/Kenny MacAskill lead a new Constituency and List Party.

      Regret because so many people gave their lives to enable us to vote.

      Anyone who says: “Just hold your nose one more time and at least VOTE SNP1 and ISP-LIST2, worth but Sturgeon and her cabal of deviants, turncoats, liars and thieves have wrecked the SNP.

      Four weeks before Holyrood’s election in May, the mainstream media will launch an all out assault on the MCWOKE-SNP and it will go from MINORITY government to OPPOSITION.

      Every SNP seat in Scotland is a marginal.

      The media publicising and purging the pustulent boil that is t r a i t o r Sturgeon and her lick-spitle lapdogs, Humza, Blackford and Narcolepsy inducing Swinney will turn sufficient voters off of the McWoke SNP.

      We were alradtpy lied to like this, so we abandoned Labour to rot in 2007 and whether it is this May’s election or the next, the SNP will be finished in a similar manner.

      I believe this is all a masterstroke…

      The British State will not make the same mistake the did in 2014.

      Game over.

      Unless Alex has a plan.

      Sorry guys, I and MANY others LENT our vote to the SNP.

      Many of us have been treated with disrespect, even when joining and paying dues to the SNP and attending constituency branch meetings where we were fleeced for this fundraiser and that.

      NO MORE.

      SNP troops: please sort out your leadership, of sufficient floating voters will walk when they read the disgusting corruption of the legal system that Alex Salmond’s lawyers are trying to fight and remedy.

    294. Graham says:

      @ David McKie What’s with all the typos and grammatical errors? Made me think it was a hoax.

      @LUTB
      “If the Deep State were running the show would they have let Cameron risk the 2014 referndum”

      If they were, then why would there be any risk?

    295. Graham says:

      If your reaction to MI5 involvement is incredulity, ask yourself what MI5 is “for” and what role they “didn’t” play in suppressing Irish independence.

    296. Graham says:

      @Al Stuart “Anyone who says: “Just hold your nose one more time and at least VOTE SNP1 and ISP-LIST2, worth but Sturgeon and her cabal of deviants, turncoats, liars and thieves have wrecked the SNP.

      I don’t really understand that paragraph but I do say that, because whether it’s an actual plebiscite or not it will be interpreted as one, and the best chance for THE MOVEMENT is to have the biggest possible independence representation in Holyrood AND sort out the SNP or replace them over the next year. That can’t be achieved by May.

      The alternative is have a weaker Pro independence representation, and that’s the only difference. Not voting SNP won’t change anything, and they’ll still win anyway, as I’ve been told several times including by RevStu.

      I wish there was another pro independence choice but not this time. Not voting SNP this time is a vote for the union.

    297. Al-Stuart says:

      .
      Hi Graham,

      Sorry my paragraph above didn’t make sense. Been working long hours and the autocorrect gremlins have been at it!

      I genuinely understand the point you are making, but there is a poison pill in returning the SNP to power at Holyrood with Sturgeon and Humza still in place after May. To the point where we would all be safer with an non-SNP government for 4 years to regroup and rebuild.

      Even if Sturgeon is turfed out as collateral, the SNP winning shall have one thing GUARANTEED…

      They WILL bring in Humza’s Hate Law. Humza will likely be the first BAME First Minister.

      Once his 1984 Orwellian Hate Law receives the Royal Assent,I guarantee you the Wings Over Scotland website will get closed down. Someone at Cheltenham has a wickedly ironic sense of humour inflicting 1984 on the country where it was written.

      Stuart Campbell will be the NEXT person in the INDY movement to be arrested AGAIN…

      https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-41009988

      Graham, when the stakes are high the State’s playbook is to often give someone a warning.

      The next step is to put the Sword of Damocles above the necks those that don’t play by the UKOK rules or if they threaten the status quo of the vestiges of the British Empire, things are made very unpleasant for them…

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52412137

      The ultimate sanction is for the State to make it abundantly clear to the solicitors representing those that rock the boat that they may be imprisoned for life, and to emphasise their strength the they gerrymander the actual law of the land.

      To prove this I refer you to the terrifying letter at the top of this page. I use the word terrifying advisedly, as when the State had confiscated all of Stuart’s computer systems, the WILL have a rich database including ALL the email addresses of you, me and thousands of others. These will yield a filing cabinet full of detailed IT driven and multi source harvested surveillance of everyone who has ever posted on Wings up to the point of Stuart’s first arrest. Stuart is smart enough to have removed MOST of the sophisticated spyware on his systems when it was eventually released to him.

      But be in no doubt the playbook is already written for when Nicola and Humza get back in. Scotland is a plaything to the real power brokers in London. Exhibit A, the Poll Tax. Tried it out in Scotland first.

      Now the playbook after IndyRef1 would have REQUIRED the destruction of the SNP for a generation. David Cameron fucked up. That ain’t ever going to happen again so easily. This is a small time game of chess to the 6,000 clever minds working 12 moves ahead of anyone here. Surely we have seen that with the Clannish internecine wars on this website as those experienced in statecraft saw vast swathes of pro-Sturgeon pit against anti-Sturgeon people?

      Meanwhile all the main players have been nobbled.

      Some of us have finite/limited lifespans left, so we tend to push things in a way that younger people do not. Those that are blissfully oblivious their lives seldom last more than 99 years tend to be more cautious. The ambitious, the craven, the corrupt and covetous of high political office. They do as they are told by the powers that be.

      There are few men and women of integrity fit to secure Scottish Independence.

      By virtue of the fact that Craig Murray has turned down several honours and put himself in harm’s way for just causes, marks him as a human being of incredible honour. Yes, the irony of declining a U.K. honour is a strange way of assessing an honourable person, but when they gave that murdering ba5tard Ian Duncan Smith a knighthood after he killled all those disabled people: http://www.calumslist.org and especially after they gave pedo creep Sir Jimmy Saville an honour, I rank it a badge of respect to demur the colored ribbon over which Napoleon boasted he could make his soldiers die.

      Johanna Cherry and Kenny MacAskill are two other talented people who put principle before self.

      A saving grace is that the Scottish electorate ain’t daft. IndyRef1 showed we have a lot of sophisticated people out there. When Alex Salmond releases his evidence, and he will manage to one way or another, I predict a groundswell of support for him. Why?

      Because Scots are thrawn. Look what we did after IndyRef1 was lost… we sent 56 out of our 59 MPs down to Westminster wearing SNP rosettes as a giant GIRFUY tae Westminster.

      Little did we realise half of “our” SNP MPs were sleepers for the British State, or had peccadillos that the chief whips usually use to “motivate” deviant MPs to do things they at which they would otherwise baulk.

      Graham, sadly we are near an end-game. Either Alex Salmond will put himself in harm’s way AGAIN and get us out of this shite hole.

      Or we will likely lose Independence for a generation: 20 to 40 years.

      Alex has devoted his life to Scottish Independence. He even risked his liberty and gave three years to the stress of fake-rape allegations and the vilest of smears.

      How do you think Nicola KNEW Alex was coming back to frontline politics and need stopping? She was told by those up by the Old Mill watching Alex 24/7.

      For the rest of us using legal means to watch Alex Salmond… on his RT show, he seems very happy and deservedly so. There is no shame if Alex says he is calling it a day. He was right y’know. We are all just 90 minute patriots!

      Though what really worries me is what happened in Ireland. When the Black & Tans treated justice and the Irish in such a disgusting way, that set off decades of death and riots. Ironic in a way as my City of YES is Dundee and my MP for Dundee exactly 100 years ago was Winston Churchill.

      I think Shirley puts it best…

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0WAgPs9To-8

    298. Kiwilassie says:

      This is an old news clipping. It states that Aberdein said he had a meeting on March 29th 2018.
      Liz lloyd was the one to make first contact with G Aberdein to meet in Nicolas office where he was told about the accusations against Alex & for him to organise a meeting to discuss the situation. That meeting held at Bute House on the 2nd April.
      Their were 4 people there if I remember correctly NS, LL, AS & GA.
      It states one of the people at the meeting on the 29th March was between himself, a complainer at the trial & Nicola Sturgeon. Hmmm!
      https://www.magzter.com/stories/Newspaper/Daily-Record/Former-Aide-I-Arranged-Meet-With-Sturgeon-After-Sex-Complaints-Emerged

    299. Republicofscotland says:

      Hautey @7.59pm.

      Hautey.

      I didn’t say MI5 did it, I’m saying that they are present within Holyrood, and would have easily went along with it knowing the consequences to Scotland and the indy movement overall.

    300. James Che. says:

      Macduff, Having re read and re read again what I wrote, i can find no such statement by myself suggesting that AS attacked NS , but what was said went like this.
      [ I ]commented at 3.18 pm.
      [ Hatuey ] responded to my comment at 3. 18 pm.
      [ my response ] back was at 3.45 pm.
      [ my further comment and response ] was at 5. 40pm.
      Pleases go back and read.
      Unlike the Murrells I can put my comments in context for all to see that I did not ever even suggest AS attacked NS mentally or physically,
      However I did and still do find it interesting that Hatuey was very very quick with his response in a quick put down of my comments while he himself defends Westminster.

    301. Kiwilassie says:

      Brian Doonthetoon
      Hi Brian I’m a Scot living in NZ. Have done for over 50 years. If I can help here I will. I’m a pensioner in my 70s & have no fear of being nobbled for any information I give out, that’s not allowed by my kinsmen within Scotland.
      One thing I would like to say, regarding the complainant, was NS wasn’t the complainant in the room.

      If I overstep the line, I expect Stuart to let me know in the way he’s accustomed to.

    302. StuartM says:

      @ Republic of Scotland

      “they even have the power to instruct those further up the chain of command to remove democratically elected PM’s, such as Gough Whitlam.”

      That’s a pile of bull’s excrement. Gough Whitlam was brought down by his own arrogance and incompetence. On 2nd December 1972 the Australian Labor Party won a Federal election for the first time in 23 years. Neither Whitlam nor any of his front bench had ministerial experience, indeed most like Whitlam himself had never run anything at all. During the 23-year non-Labor federal dominance, Labor had held office at State level (eg NSW) but none of those experienced Labor ministers had crossed over into Federal Parliament.

      Whitlam was an eloquent QC with a good line in repartee. As an Opposition Leader he was highly effective, as a Prime Minister he was a disaster. Immediately after being sworn in as PM Whitlam announced that he intended to make the Federal Civil Service “the pacesetter for wages growth”. That is the first time, and hopefully the last, that a PM will proclaim that it is government policy to create hyperinflation. The hyperinflation duly occurred, helped on by massive budget deficits. The crunch came when Whitlam tried to bypass the Constitution in 1975 by “temporarily borrowing” billions of $ through a shady middleman to buy up mining companies on the stock exchange. The Opposition-controlled Senate reacted to this unlawful behaviour by refusing to pass a Supply bill authorising government expenditure. The Parliamentary convention is that if it can’t get it’s legislation passed a government has to call a general election. However Whitlam knew he was so unpopular with the voters he would lose, so instead he called on the Governor-General to order the Opposition to pass his Supply bill. The G-G was Whitlam’s own nominee for the role Sir John Kerr, formerly a Chief Justice of NSW and a long-time Labor supporter.

      Kerr knew he had no legal authority to order the Senate to pass Supply. The current Supply bill was due to expire on 30 November yet Whitlam refused several compromise offers which would have required him to agree to an election and instead proposed bizarre and illegal ways of continuing without Supply. With time running out for the government to continue running, Kerr decided that if Whitlam would not call the election he would appoint a PM who would. Accordingly on November 11 Kerr dismissed Whitlam and appointed the Leader of the Opposition Malcolm Fraser as caretaker PM to hold the election on December 13. The Liberal-Country Party Coalition won the election in a landslide, a fact that apologists for Whitlam conveniently ignore.

      A point that people in the Northern Hemisphere may not appreciate is that time was running out to hold an election. The school year ends on the Friday before Christmas and the 4-week summer holidays begin. Private and Catholic schools often finish a week earlier. Many manufacturing businesses send their employees on vacation and other businesses and government offices operate on skeleton staffs. It would have been impractical to hold an election with most of the electorate (not to mention Electoral Commission staff) away from home. December 13 was the last practical date for an election and 4 weeks the absolute minimum to allow for candidates to nominate, ballots to be printed, polling places hired and election staff trained. Whitlam’s intransigence and arrogance had brought it down to the wire and left Kerr no choice but to act to prevent chaos. Whitlam brought himself down, no assistance from Whitehall, MI5 or the CIA required.

    303. Graham says:

      @ Al Stuart,

      Thanks Al for taking the time to explain your view. To be honest I find it a little difficult to read, but I think I understand some of it. Each time I’ve made my point, I’ve asked for a credible alternative that advances the cause of independence, and as far as I know didn’t get one. Your view is that there’s no alternative, but SNP hegemony is actually counter productive as they are (wittingly or not) proxies of the British establishment, and pose an existential threat to members of our movement by making laws that will be used to persecute genuine pro independence actors. Is that it?

      Do you think that Nicola is an MI5 asset?



    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