An Ambassador is evidently not as important as a Scottish First Minister, but there is one interesting similarity. You get to live in a palatial Residence at public expense, and you host numerous social events there, from intimate lunches to grand dinners to receptions for many hundred people. Indeed as a diplomat you do this throughout your career – as an Ambassador, Deputy High Commissioner, First Secretary and even Second Secretary I hosted many scores of such events in my home, and in every case was supported by office and domestic staff who worked under me, both British and local.
The strange thing is that, despite the fact I generally had extremely friendly relationships with those I managed, out of the dozens of women, many young, who assisted me over the years on such occasions, I am absolutely certain that every single one of them would have point blank refused had I asked them upstairs to my bedroom after the event. Some would have refused humorously, some would have told me to F*** Off, some might have suggested I was drunk. But not one would have conceivably said yes. Not office staff, not domestic staff. Not from any of the very different cultures concerned – British, Nigerian, Polish, Ghanaian, Uzbek. And if I had “instructed” any of them to lie down on the bed, the reaction of all of them would certainly have switched from humour to “F… Off”.
Which is as it should be.
The position of a senior British diplomat to a Ghanaian member of their domestic staff is possibly one of even greater power and authority compared to that of a Scottish First Minister to any Scottish government sector employee. Simple authority cannot compel compliance with such obviously unorthodox instruction.
I do however recall an occasion when I invited a young woman, not working for me in any sense, to my hotel bedroom after an event in Lodz, Poland. We both understood what an invitation to a bedroom that late at night meant, and as soon as we closed the door behind us I kissed her, passionately, which she welcomed. I did not ask her permission beforehand, indeed there was no prior verbal exchange at all about the possibility of a physical relationship developing. That is not in the least unusual in human relationships, and I despise the drive to make such matters coldly transactional. In that particular instance, for example, we remain friends 25 years on.
Not one of us would be able effectively to clear our names against allegations made years after the event, of an incident which allegedly occurred with no independent witnesses. As outsiders, we can only refer to our own experience to judge the likelihood of the tale which is told. For reasons explained in the first paragraph, I happen to have experience of the peculiar circumstance of hosting large public events in my own home with the assistance of public sector staff who worked for me. Few of you reading this will have analogous experience, as it is an unusual position to be in.
And I smell horseshit.
Maybe they sourced said ordure from the Household Cavalry.
As far as ‘the Establishment’ is concerned, there are no red lines.
All’s fair, in the name of self preservation.
Let’s suppose that the case against Mr Salmond is false. I don’t remember him being particularly noisy recently. For what purpose would there be a desire to discredit and disgrace him now? What’s he doing now that merits such action? Thanks.
That’s the head scratcher. You’d have thought they’d have sprung this on him in 2014 when he really was a serious problem.
Remember Smiley’s dictum, ‘Topicality is always suspect’ 🙂
He hosts a programme on RT. You know, the evil Russians who poison UK citizens on a mere whim. That’s enough to set the hounds on him.
There’s a real possibility of another referendum for Scottish independence being called really soon… This is a way to create divisions at the top of the SNP and also and attempt to take AS out of the game…. A game which he knows how to play really well, especially as he went through the gut wrenching experience, which was the tirade of twisted misinformation by westminster last time around… He’ll have learned an awful lot from that and he’ll have been working on his gameplan for the next round of the game.
because he’s an agent ot Russia Today… remember the Scripals, Alan Turing and Snow White – all poisoned
The Skripals were “poisoned” ??? Do you have evidence for that assertion. Turing poisoned himself as I recall. Hermann Goering did too
Not that I know anything about this subject, but I thought the general idea is that “they” see no-deal Brexit coming, with its very likely corollary of Scotland leaving England to its fate, and hopping off. Salmond was a main stimulator of the Indie movement. Discredit him, and it may be possible to discredit Indieref2.
For what purpose would there be a desire to discredit and disgrace [Alex Salmond] now?
A strong but tame SNP suits the Conservatives very well. They’ll never pick up many votes north of the border so better the SNP has them than Labour – just as long as it doesn’t result in Scottish Independence.
Momentum towards actual independence is dwindling under Sturgeon despite the unquenched popularity of the SNP. If Salmond resumed the reins of the SNP and its army of grassroots activists, it would truly be a force to be reckoned with. Perhaps the attack on Salmond is to protect Sturgeon.
That’s an elaborate theory. Perhaps he’s just been a perv.
Do you come up with these elaborate conspiracy theories every time a Tory is accused of being a perv?
That’s an elaborate theory.
Not to most people – just a couple of simple, plausible concepts. Perhaps you’ll find it easier if you point at the words with your finger while you read them.
Alex Salmond intervened a couple of weeks ago when the BBC asked YouTube to block Wings over Scotland. Normally, as a law unto themselves, the BBC would have ignored any and all complaints about their actions. However, when Alex Salmond as a high-profile public figure wrote to them (and published his letter) asking them to explain their reaction, they were forced to climb down with some embarrassment.
Of course, clipping the wings of a high profile independence supporter weeks before the potential announcement of a second independence referendum in October might be an equally valid reason to try to discredit him if, as you say, the case is false. (Personally I’ll wait for the outcome of the investigation to decide that).
Oh, I also understand that the rules for the Scottish Government/Civil Service complaints procedure that is being used were only recently (December-17?) changed to include First Ministers, wo wouldn’t have been applicable in 2014.
And up pop the complainants in January!
If First Ministers were exempt until December 2017 that is absolutely disgraceful in my opinion. Why should they have been?
If I were a conspiracy theorist – which I am not – I would probably say something like “the previous rules deliberately exempted first ministers because Mr Salmond was first minister at that time”
You’re being silly again Charles. Salmond wasn’t the first FM. There were three before him.
Jo1
I didn’t say Mr Salmond was the first First Minister. I said he was First Minister at the time the original rules were drafted.
Apologies for not using capitals, it would have been clearer.
To write “If I were a conspiracy theorist – which I am not –”, and then write “I would probably say something like “the previous rules deliberately exempted first ministers because Mr Salmond was first minister at that time” kind of seems to prove that you are a conspiracy theorist. Or something like the.
” a second independence referendum in October”
Really? Are you a clairvoyant or just an optimist?
We will know in October the shape of Brexit (current bookies favourite = no-deal). Whatever that is, its unlikely to meet the expectations of the Scottish Government on retaining access to the Single Market or a Customs Union. In those circumstances, they have a mandate to announce a second indyref, so, yes, I (and most others) expect to see an announcement on that in October.
Note: I’m not saying I expect to see the referendum in October, only an announcement of the date, most likely in my view to be Mar-19.
Purpose? In my humble opinion an imminent GE by which he could come back to front line politics. I think should he compete with the current tory that is holding his former seat, the tory would be evicted in a heartbeat and Salmond would be back in the HoC. It is quite clear to me that the British establishment does not want Mr Salmond any near Westminster particularly at this moment in time. I wonder what it is exactly what they fear.
I’ve never worked for anyone in an “important” position. I have had a boss who made what would now be seen as “inappropriate” remarks which I used to dismiss with humour. (I was always of the opinion that if I had said “come on then big boy” he would have run a mile). When I read the reports of the alleged misdemeanour my thought was the same as yours. Who in their right mind would have agreed to go into the bedroom in the first place and what adult woman wouldn’t have told said boss to f**k right off had he told her to lie on the bed, following up with a threat to tell his wife if he ever tried the same shit again. It doesn’t ring true to me and it wouldn’t ring true whoever the accused was.
Possibility of Indyref being announced and Mr Salmond set to be a big player. That would be enough.
@ JDS
I share your puzzlement, You will of course have seen the theory that he’s being got at because he broadcasts for RT. Such notions are, to my mind, horseshit (to use Craig’s expression).
Sniff, sniff – not necessarily horse-shit, certainly a very bad smell indeed I agree.
I’ve always found horseshit to have a rather pleasing aroma. Unlike, say, dogshit or human shit. They both smell like Tories to me. Or, worse still, Scots supporters of British Unionism.
Nicola Sturgeon: ‘No legal basis’ to suspend Alex Salmond
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-45315001
This post resonated with me. I’m a nobody, but I have seen how these dynamics can play out and how they can be used.
lol, but you have his name in the title! i haven’t been following it.. i live in canada and it seems a bit removed from where i am at present.. but i gather you are following salmonds situation closely and smell horseshit.. thanks for the update..
A few years ago I suggested that it would be only a matter of time before pictures of AS in the act of drowning puppies are found.
Now it’s happening. They must be scared down in Brexit land.
Agreed. I’ve wondered what they would try to pin on him. It seems that if you want to ruin a reputation in this country you use sex. It’s OK for WM ministers to be involved in killing benefit recipients or bombing kids abroad for profit but don’t dare do what comes naturally. “No sex please, we’re British”.
Yes, scared. Scared out of their skins.
Why do you generally use your personal experience to separate your self from us, like I’ve never had a co-ed breathlessly arrive at my door at mid-day when my wife was away to offer anything she could do to improve her grade? We never even kissed.
For what it’s worth, I don’t find someone’s use of relevant personal experience alienating in the least. Or perhaps I should say that such disclosure is not off-putting, in my personal experience.
For instance, I think it’s fascinating that you revealed that “we never even kissed”. I understand completely! Such straitened circumstances are not conducive to the luxury of foreplay.
From what I understand of such practices, hookers don’t kiss their clients either, as a rule. They just get down to business, but no hugging or kissing (either before, during or afterwards). But doubtless others on this blog would have personal experience that they can bring to bear on this matter, so I bow to their superior knowledge here.
How do you know that, glenn_amsterdam ?
Actually, I heard it mentioned on HIGNFY in regard to your mate Jeffery Archer’s association with prostitutes. But you did spring to mind as a person who could speak with authority on the veracity of the claim – do “pros” seriously frown on the notion of kissing a “John” ? Would the “high class escorts” or some-such that you were waxing on about just earlier today be more inclined to kiss, or are they dead against the practice too?
I smell horseshit too, Craig.
Indulge me in a supposition or two.
Isn’t it more than likely that Salmond, who has a lot of influence within the SNP, has been at odds with Sturgeon’s ‘gently gently’ approach to politics over the last 15 months?
If we were to be honest, we would admit that there’s probably a real fault line in the SNP over Brexit and how it has been handled by the leadership. Most of the SNP and independence supporters I know, and I’d say that it’s about 90%, are really dismayed with Sturgeon’s strategy and handling of Brexit.
When will she activate indyref2? She has the authority, it couldn’t be clearer, triple locked. Why do we need to wait until the bus gets to its destination before deciding to get off? Why not get off now and go elsewhere?
Getting back to this Salmond stuff, it isn’t a stretch to assume that it might be convenient for some within the party to neutralise him and his supporters. I won’t be surprised to hear that to some extent he has been hung out to dry.
As the bus gets nearer to its ‘no deal’ destiniation, pressure is going to mount on Sturgeon. If Salmond is neutralised that pressure is reduced, regardless of the veracity of the allegations against him, who instigated the investigation, and who could have done more to help him.
Indeed.
Compare how the media treated Salmond when he was SNP leader with how they treat Sturgeon .
Compare how they treat Corbyn with how they treat Sturgeon.
Then ask which one the Establishment perceives to be the least threat.
Thank you Hatuey. Precisely what I am seeing, too.
Going to law is an astute move, better a moving target than a sitting duck.
Squeeth
I agree. Excellent move which shows his intention to fight.
He also has more ammunition.
The senior civil servant leading the investigation personally told the press that he had tried to “gag” her. In fact he had, legally, sought to be given more time and access to the information he required in order to defend himself, something the investigation lead had refused to give him. Salmond’s attempt to get more time was perfectly legitimate, yet the lead in the investigation informed the press it was an attempt by him to “gag” her. Her choice of language was a clear attempt by her to prejudice the case. I hope Salmond’s legal team raise this serious misjudgment on her part with the court.
Salmond’s team can also prove that details of a confidential investigation are being fed to the media.
Salmond HAS already been hung out to dry (by the political establishment, Sturgeon and SNP). He has to somehow achieve total vindication real soon (that’s not going to happen), or the public will have to completely refuse to buy-in to the allegations (possible).
On a personal basis, Salmond has only two choices, go the Parnell way (being fundamentally psychologically affected) or go the Corbyn way (not really being that bothered about it). By choices, I don’t mean that this is something that he can opt for, the choice he makes is already hardwired into his DNA. Is Salmond passionate, committed, continually striving, always trying hard to win and do better? If so, then he will be affected in a Parnell kind of way. If he is more relaxed, water off a ducks back kind of person; then maybe he’ll be ok.
Tactically, he should (publicly) point the figure at those who have done this to him. He won’t do this because it will damage the SNP and the cause of Scottish independence.
Salmond was the outstanding parliamentarian/politician of our age. They are poor lot that remain
Well seeing as Campbell’s Portland Comms are making such a hash of smearing JC I don’t think Alex has anything to fear really, providing it’s not true, just ignore it Corbyn style. The public have absolutely had enough of centrist MPs in coming quite with these ridiculous statements that actually sound like they came from a Campbell email.
Sturgeon is one of them – If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck then in this case – it’s a expenses fiddle Estsblishment and/or Blairite stooge.
Shatnersrug
I honestly don’t think any man can just shrug something like this off and ignore it. I’m glad he’s fighting it. I think he must. Allegations like this are used precisely because they cannot be ignored. They damage and destroy careers and reputations.
Interesting Hatuey but I can’t see NS having anything to do with such a scheme although I do accept she’s under pressure on a few things.
Her haste to condemn Russian interference here in the events at Salisbury infuriated many, including Craig.
The whole Indyref2 business is creating division. NS brought this about by herself by firstly saying, “Once in a generation.” and only with 60% support for it and then putting it out there as a real possibility post the Brexit vote. From there she has teetered backwards and forwards and infuriated everybody. Protests are predicted at the Autumn Conference.
Salmond has never said he was finished in politics. Someone clearly wants to change that. I think this whole thing has been manufactured outwith the SNP.
I, too, sense something not quite kosher here, but I doubt that Nicola Sturgeon has anything to do with it. The damage being done to the SNP and the SG will do her no favours. I don’t know, any more than anyone else what happened, but I do feel a pricking of my thumbs. It is the timing and the nature of the 5-year-old allegations that don’t quite gel, but we could all be wrong – or we could all be right. Time will tell.
What is a dead cert is that someone close to the leadership of the SNP, and who has been in place for a very long time, will be a plant/sleeper awaiting an opportunity to discredit the party and undermine it. He or she will be playing a double game and will not be recognizable as a plant at all but will be far more dangerous than any Mundell or Leonard or Davidson. That is how Whitehall and the Thames Embankment lot operate. The Unionist sheep up here serve their purpose well.
There are three possibilities as to why this has happened now: a) Mr Salmond has hinted that he might return to front-line politics; b) he is a thorn in the UK’s side because of his RT show and his refusal to back down and drop his show which is subtley pushing the case for independence and paying no heed to the current anti-Russian agenda of the establishment; c) the ruling elite knows that Brexit is going to be a disaster of epic proportions and Scottish independence is the very last thing they need now. Whether Mr Salmond was daft enough to do what is alleged or if he did no such thing, that may be the way they have decided to neutralize him and halt Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP because, without them, the political leaders, the YES movement will find it very difficult to go it alone. There are other routes to independence and I have tried to show that in other posts and threads, but I have said that I have put that case and will no longer harp on about it, so I won’t.
That leak came from somewhere. Nicola Sturgeon needs to find the source of that leak; if she does, she will flush out the double (albeit there may be more than one) and assuming it isn’t the civil service which has leaked (they never leak anything that might be useful to the SNP only to try and damage them, so they have to be in the picture for that one) or one of her own anti-Salmond brigade. If she does, there will be no need to go public or even to acknowledge the fact because that double will be useful to channel duff information through. He or she is there. This isn’t paranoia. It’s how they operate. They did it in Ireland; they did it in NI; they did it in every country that embarked on independence or did not slavishly follow the establishment line. I hope it was the establishment lackies because they will lose in the end, and that it was not Mr Salmond who brought this hubris upon us all, including himself and his wife and family.
“that may be the way they have decided to neutralize him and halt Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP because, without them, the political leaders, the YES movement will find it very difficult to go it alone.”
Stop Nicola and the SNP doing what exactly?
Before the 2017 General Election the SNP was telling supporters not to go to Independence demo’s. The leadership decided in its wisdom not to mention independence during the campaign. They lost about 40% of their Westminster seats in that election. Well done.
Since 2014, the strategy of the SNP towards achieving independence has revolved around Nicola; the idea was to show people what a safe and capable pair of hands she was and, through her, win them over to the indy vision. The polls since then have more or less consistently showed no gains with support for independence stagnant around the 45% level, and often lower. We should call this phase the “I’m With Nicola” years, the slogan on her brochures etc., since 2015.
And now we have Brexit. It was almost as if the Gods intervened and decided to send the independence movement the greatest gift they could imagine. The SNP leadership’s response? Let’s jump off the cliff with the rest of the UK before deciding if we want to fall. It never, ever, made sense and as we fall towards the hardest of hard Brexits, that strategy is going to look increasingly dumb and dumberer with every wasted second that passes.
None of this was necessary. But here’s the question that really puzzles me. I beg an SNP/Nicola loyalist to address and answer this question; what might the SNP possibly have lost if they pursued a more aggressive strategy towards indyref2 and independence? Because I know this, a more aggressive strategy would have absolutely galvanised the Yes support, guaranteeing 45% in every election. Who knows, with Brexit looming, it might just have jolted others to stop and think too and created momentum.
A more aggressive approach to Indy would absolutely would have rattled May and those cruel Tory bastards in London too — my guess is they would have bent over backwards to shut us up so as to let them get on with negotiating their Euro-deal in peace. Looking at it like that, it’s almost as if the SNP’s strategy was drawn up by Downing Street itself — it’s achieved nothing.
What did we have to lose?
As for this tittle tattle and Alex Salmond, it’s a complete irrelevance. Anyone that tells you this sort of mud slinging matters after the stunts we have seen them pull with Assange, Sheridan, and countless others, is at it. Independence is an idea, not a person or a party. Support the idea.
I’m not with Nicola or anyone. I’m with Independence.
Hi Hatuey: I agree with you on most of your reply, but I still do not believe that Nicola Sturgeon had anything to do with this, and I think she was very genuinely distressed, like the rest of us, by the whole thing. I, too, think that the approach to the independence question is far, far too conciliatory and meek. That NO vote should have been torn apart in 2014/15, analyzed upside down and a rationale drawn from it. I put the fact that it was not done adequately down to depression and defeat. I agree absolutely that not making independence a corner stone of the 2017 GE was a monumental error, as I believe another indyref would be. We have simply reacted to every move made by the UKG and that was always the biggest mistake. No other country in the world has approached independence in that way.
None of that, however, makes any difference to why Mr Salmond is being accused now. I think it is because he is a continuing thorn in the side of the establishment, and the accuracy or otherwise of the complaints against him is neither here nor there because they want him ruined, and, with him, the party because only the SNP can lead us, politically, out of the UK. You, no more than I, or anyone else, knows the truth or otherwise of the allegations, but we can all see how these accusations are likely to destroy him whatever happens now, and with him, the SNP, the SG and the wider YES movement are all affected. In the longer term, that would not have mattered, but we do not have much time before we Brexit. I will be called a nutjob for suggesting that there is someone – at least one someone – high up in the SNP who is working for MI5 and that Nicola Sturgeon should pay attention to who is whispering negatively in her ear.
Mark Smith, in The Herald, has already stated that conspiracy theorists are mad and wrong, but what would he or any other journalist today know, since none of them ever do much more than hit soft targets. Placing someone in the SNP years ago, even in Mr Salmond’s time, is not a conspiracy theory, but pretty much a likely fact because that is what they do on the Thames Embankment where there is a threat to the establishment’s hegemony. Journalists know perfectly well – or they should – that the security services act in this way and always have. The arrogant stupidity of some of them, and their puppy-dog willingness to do exactly as the UKG tells them, is so deep-seated, you have to wonder how they manage to do up their shoe laces.
The real problem for Nicola Sturgeon has been that she must represent the views of all in Scotland, not just her party’s or the wider movement’s, and that is all good and well, but the time for pussy-footing is over. Scotland – every man, woman and child – is in danger now of being dragged into that post-Brexit Tory One Nation State. She has a duty to protect us from that fate. We either go very soon or we stay, Mr Salmond and his troubles notwithstanding.
Quite a mixed bag but I’ll stay on point.
We know that Sturgeon and Salmond are to some extent at odds with one another over the RT show. The inner party leaders have actually banned SNP politicians from taking part in his show, as I understand it. This isn’t speculation.
Knowledge of Salmond the man and taking into account some of the things he has hinted at recently, suggests that he — like you, me, and many others — is, to say the least, disappointed with the passive approach taken by Sturgeon in regards to indyref2 and Brexit. Had Salmond been at the helm, I’m certain we’d be making plans for indyref2 right now.
We also know that Sturgeon and her inner party are very tight and disciplined and that they keep a lot of the decision making to themselves. This comes up all the time and isn’t speculation. For example, I heard that debate about the timing of indyref2 is not up for discussion at conference, etc.
I don’t have a problem with any of that per se. The problem is it isn’t working and it isn’t effective. Brexit, I repeat, ought to have been a gift from the gods to the Indy movement.
My god, EU membership was central to the No campaign in 2014. Now we are to be ripped out regardless of what was promised in 2014 (EU membership), regardless of how we voted in the EU referendum, regardless of the clear and unequivocal mandate provided by two elections, regardless of the parliament passing legislation for indyref2.
Sturgeon is hoping that Brexit is postponed so that she doesn’t need to press for another indyref. That’s obvious to me. Her strategy on independence hasn’t so much failed since 2014, the polls show support falling if anything, but it basically doesn’t exist. No senior party officials had basically even discussed independence up until the Brexit vote.
If Sturgeon loses her job she’s basically finished. It’s not like she has a career in radio or TV waiting for her or likely to make much doing lecture tours — I’ve had more engaging conversations with people who operate elevators for a living.
If you don’t think all of the above creates an incentive for Sturgeon to neutralise Salmond, her biggest threat as leader, if push ever came to shove, then I’d say we were basically on two different planets. You might be happy about that in itself but if there’s one thing that I’ve learned in my analysis of politics and history it’s that the most cynical explanation is usually the most accurate. My planet is reality.
Hi Hatuey, I agree with much of that, too, but I do not believe you have taken the slightest account of a female leader being very different from a male leader, especially one like Mr Salmond, who takes risks and political gambles – and which often pay off, I have to say. I think Ms Sturgeon saw what happened in indyref1, how every aspect of SNP policy and intention was swamped and destroyed by lies and subterfuge, and keeps her powder dry: the less Whitehall thinks she is doing to upset the status quo, the better, and she will strike when they least expect it. I have always been of the opinion that someone high up in the SNP has been passing info to Whitehall/Thames Embankment, because of things that have happened. I’m not suggesting that Ms Sturgeon also believes that, although I wonder, just that she acts like a woman, not like a man. You do not see it because, I’m assuming, you are a man. Where I do part company with Ms Sturgeon is in that we no longer have any choice but to go if we are to survive as a nation, and we must go soon. In fact, I’m not at all sure that she doesn’t see that herself.
She is aware, as we all should be – but patently are not – that the numbers simply do not show that we can win. My solution is that we find a new route to independence and do it very soon because another failed indyref will be the end. Not just an end, but the end. It might tip off Whitehall, but we have come to a crossroads and we need to choose. Women do tend to be – not dithering – but very cautious, and for very good reasons, but when they decide on something they stick with it to the bitter end, and I think this is what she will do when she believes the time is right.
I am quite sure that Ms Sturgeon would make a second career, or third, for herself, if she had to, but I watched her body language as she spoke of the allegations against Mr Salmond, and I believe she was genuinely distressed and worried by the implications for the party, and the Yes movement, as a whole.
Mr Salmond will not be the first politician to find himself in a sexual allegations media fest. Parnell springs to mind, and we know exactly how the Irish Question was settled eventually, despite the mess. The Irish independence people did not, of course, have to deal with a crumbling UK and its fantasies of exceptionalism or with Brexit. These lend our own independence bid great urgency. I do not believe that Nicola Sturgeon has anything to do with these allegations against Mr Salmond, but neither do I believe that she can ask her own party members to wait again in October and expect them to do just that. If anything, these allegations and Mr Salmond’s predicament prove that.
Lorna
Interesting post.
Regarding the leaking of investigation details, I’m pretty certain no one from the SNP will have had access to that information. As NS said herself, it isn’t a Party matter but one dealt with by the civil service. (Of course, if the accusers are themselves part of a scheme to bring Salmond down, along with another or others in the SNP, then they would all know those details.)
I’ve mentioned Leslie Evans, the senior civil servant who announced news of the allegations to the media, in other posts. Her decision to add her own personal attack on Salmond by claiming he’d tried to gag her was, in my view, a grave mistake. It revealed her hostility towards him. For she was deliberately prejudicing his case by publicly misrepresenting the legitimate reasons why he had tried to get her announcement delayed. That’s why I’m leaning more towards this being an establishment job. Ms Evans’ behaviour was appalling.
Salmond did say in May that he’d be ready to campaign as soon as NS decided on Indyref2. When he lost his own seat he didn’t say he was finished. He’s still only 63. So, very much still someone maybe out of politics but just as political.
I’m glad he is fighting this but what worries me is that it’s all very well to look to the highest court in the land, but when that court is part of the very establishment which seeks to destroy you , it’s difficult to believe he’ll get justice. I hope I’m wrong.
Hi Jo1, It was a civil servant who leaked about Nicola Sturgeon’s and the French Ambassador’s supposed conversation that led to the Carmichael case. Most leaks come courtesy of the civil service, except if they, in any way, help the SNP: neither McCrone nor the associated theft of our territorial waters were leaked until it was too late, despite that Guardian? piece, and McCrone was hidden under the 30-year rule. It was, apparently, the civil service in the form of a latter-day Sir Humphrey, that came up with the wheeze about the territrorial waters.
Mr Mundell’s office has had an increased budget and many more personnel to operate the Disinformation, Propaganda and Leaks Office in Scotland. This is not a game. The UK is fighting for its life here. The SNP is a threat to the established order, ergo, it will be seen as the enemy.
I cannot say any more than anyone else what happened between Mr Salmond and those two women, but, if they are telling the truth, and I say that as a supporter of Mr Salmond, he made a massive mistake and his reputation will never be the same again. He will have handed the establishment a coup. Nicola Sturgeon has had an extremely difficult job to do since 2014, but I think independence will come very soon or not at all, and we’d best all try to understand just what we are up against.
In the National today, there is a letter about Catalan independence and how Scotland has not suffered a dictatorship as the Catalns have. That is true, but I doubt that anyone from another country can even begin to comprehend the underhand and malevolent grip in which the UK state holds its people because, on the surface, it appears as if it is a democratic and law-abiding state, that the first indyref was a model to follow, but they cannot even begin to appreciate the subtle ways in which the UK state works, but which are just as destructive as Spain’s or anyone else’s.
Thanks Lorna.
So, who is the Permanent Secretary’s (Leslie Evans) boss? I have said in another post how odd it is that her office has not announced a full investigation into the leaks. Given the lengths gone to to stress the limited access permitted to her own investigation, Ms Evans would, I would have thought, want to dismiss any suggestion that anyone in her office was implicated.
Hi Jo1, Ms Evans will be subject to Whitehall, as all civil servants are. However, that does not make her guilty, and it is a fact that high heid yin civil servants before her have ‘turned native’. I just hope that cybernats do not target her because I do not believe she did it. I think, and this is just my opinion, that the leak came from Mr Mundell’s Office for Disinformation, Propaganda and Leaks, more lowly civil servants perhaps passing interesting gossip on to colleagues. That is precisely what happened in the Carmichael case, with an SG civil servant passing on (wrongly, as it turned out) info about Ms Sturgeon’s and the French Ambassador’s conversation to the Scottish Office, under Carmichael. That person was tracked down and had links to the Labour party in Scotland, I believe. I could, of course, be very wrong. It is all speculation, isn’t it?
Craig Murray,
Great post. I don’t have your experience, well only for a short while, when in between girlfriends. It didn’t last very long, because I fell in love again, and I have been faithful ever since, as I was before.
However, internet communications, are now so powerful, that it is very easy, if you want to, to connect to your ancient history, and I have once, and it was so wonderful to see her again after 35 years.
My view is that if you fall in love, to such an extent that you live together, then that love lasts forever.
In between there may have been a very few, one night stands, and it is entirely possible, but somewhat unlikely that a 40+ year old bloke or girl, could come knocking on my door (who I have absolutely no knowledge of) and say
Hi Dad – my Mum has traced you…..and if it happened it may be true.
What am I supposed to do then?
I am not knocking God, nor Jesus. I know Jesus meant well…but look at the state of America.
Glad I live here in England. My wife is so much fun, particularly with our Grandson.
We both independently (we didn’t meet till nearly 10 years later) gave up religion when we were 15. We had been brought up with strong Christian moral values, which we have naturally always done our best to portray, without thinking about it, by what we do.
“Hate Gets It Done: Why America is Now Far Scarier Than Trump”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/50117.htm
Tony
The security services obviously consider that Scotland leaving the RUK after Brexit is a serious possibility so they’ve thrown this spanner in the works to damage the credibility of the SNP. People will look at two senior figures (Salmond and Sturgeon) slugging it out in a court and just find them laughable.
I’m with Craig, I smell horseshit too, as most people who follow this blog will but the problem is, we’re a minority. The wider populace will see it differently and that’s the real threat to Scottish Independence.
As an aside, my personal belief is that this will suit Nicola Sturgeon down to the ground since I’ve had my doubts that she really wants an independent Scotland for a long, long time. Consequently, my belief is that this situation will benefit her.
It says alot when someone like Salmond is condemned by the press, politicians but not John Mccain.
Its breathtaking reading the hailing of this despicable warcriminal from leftists to right wing hawks! What the hell is going on?
Completely agree. McCain was evil, incompetent, dim and downright dangerous. At one time he was just a useful contrarian but changed into a salacious warmongering neocon for hire by the military industrial complex. I can’t help feeling he may have had the cancer eating his brains for a long time.
Lol
most of the “leftists” are right wing hawks.
OAH
Indeed, differently put as someone put it on twitter, never have cancer saved so many lives.
pretzelhawk
Thats probably true, I am shocked to see leftists, heck even Human Rights Watch works support this criminal bastard:
John McCain: In Memoriam | Human Rights Watch
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/26/john-mccain-memoriam
I’m still not exactly used to it, Jack, but HRW’s smarmy eulogy is not as surprising as it would’ve been a few months ago. It’s a symptom of the “world turn’d upside-down”– or, to use Trollope’s title, “The Way We Live Now”.
The “soft” progressive-liberal bloc, individuals and organizations alike, have become so pathologically consumed with the conviction that Donald Trump is the Great Orange Satan who must be removed from office forthwith, and by any means necessary, that they hysterically embrace any public figure who opposes (opposed) Trump.
I frequent prog-lib sites in the US, where I live, principally to read and post in the comments threads. The prog-lib moderates are not really of the “left”, a term which has become a semantic placeholder for anyone or anything that doesn’t explicitly identify as right-wing or politically conservative.
But before they were traumatized by, in their view, the abominable Trump usurping the imperial Oval Office Throne, they used to be reliably antiwar, anti-imperialist, anti-military, anti-police state, etc.
Now, the Democratic Party establishment and fellow-traveling organizations have realigned– flipped their lids– to a point in which they reflexively support everything that purports to oppose and undermine Trump. They even regard the nefarious state-security apparatchiks in the FBI and CIA, and the “brutal fixers” in the Department of “Justice” who have been assiduously working to construct a frame-up job, or crucifix, upon which to hang Trump as heroes.
It’s appalling.
Ort
Good summary, yes HRW have no credbility to begin with, I should have written that.
Sharp Ears
Yes I saw that too and I am not really surprised to see Bernie write that and it shows what kind of morals and views he on wars. He’s not anti-war/anti-imperialist thats for sure.
Agree with you. It ‘s sickening to hear the presenters parroting the same script.
I see Bernie Sanders also claimed him as his true friend.
Yes. He’s being shafted.
Salmond tells RT he’s headed to ‘highest court in the land’ over govt’s handling of harassment case
https://www.rt.com/uk/436802-salmond-highest-court-case/
25 August 2018
‘However, he went on to state that “somewhere from within the bowels of the Scottish government” a tabloid was briefed on the case. “So, the story got out and therefore we revealed about our legal action and events have taken their course.”
Salmond explained that confidentiality is entirely necessary in order for the process to be properly conducted, noting that, although the system should be designed so that everyone has a fair shot, “the Scottish government process doesn’t do that.”‘
Any investigation under the code of conduct is inherently partisan, and deliberately so, because its normally your political opponents who bring the charges and decide whether you are guilty and even if due to a political realignment you are found not guilty, its comes with a standard “best standards must be maintained”, implying a certain guilt.
The code should be a guide and everyone reminded to abide by the code, but if any serious complaint is made it should be a separate civil legal matter and the complainant invited to contact the police, which they are unlikely to do because whereas you can waste civil servants time with a complaint, you can be charged with wasting police time if its groundless.
We all knew that Alec Salmond would be targeted in a smear campaign at some point. Why now? Because there is going to be chaos in a couple of months when BREXIT blows up. A second Independence referendum is inevitable.
Salmond is a formidable speaker and would be free to campaign without ministerial constraint. This tye of smear is desgned to drag on for months with probably no charges brought so that the smear fest can be extended to cover the entire BREXIT break up shambles.
There is a second advantage. The YES camp can be divided into Salmond v Sturgeon supporters and set against each other. Divide and rule is ever the tactic of the British State. The best thing we can do is refuse to be drawn into such a self defeating argument.
I expect Alec Salmond to defend himself in court and, if he prevails, to sue those newspapers and the Permanent Secretary for defamation. I do hope he campaigns as publicly as usual.
And who briefed the tabloid?
Sturgeon’s response when the story “unexpectedly” broke was very slick, I’ll give her that.
I wish she was as slick and confident towards May and the question of when those who voted for her manifesto 2 years ago are going to get what they voted for, a referendum on U.K. membership.
The SNP position on independence seems to hinge on a hope that Brexit is cancelled so that they don’t need to pursue it.
Hatuey
I really think you’re jumping the gun here by focusing on Sturgeon.
I do not believe her capable of being involved in this. I felt she looked genuinely distressed when she spoke about it.
Jo, it’s party politics, not personal. Most political parties are very factional. it’s the factions in a way that hold them together and create dynamism. The SNP is no different.
Salmond basically built the SNP we see today and still has a lot of power and influence therein. It’s very easy to imagine this annoying other factions, especially if he and his supporters/faction is critical of others.
Hatuey
On Salmond, I agree. Without him I do not believe we would have seen the SNP in government and, in its second term, with an outright majority in Holyrood..something we were told was impossible.
He is a very gifted man. I don’t know your age but I well recall the debate in Edinburgh between Salmond and George Robertson, chaired by Lesley Riddoch. Robertson was a shambles and Salmond wiped the floor with him.
I think it is important not to jump to conclusions about this coming about as a result of Party infighting. That said, I found Lorna Campbell’s post on this thread interesting.
Jo, who was it appointed Leslie Evans to the highest paying civil servant job in the land in 2015? This is a job that pays around £165,000 p.a. (that’s more than the Prime Minster earns).
Call me old fashioned but if someone awarded me a job that paid so much I’d be eternally grateful.
And who leaked the story to the Daily Record? Apparently they even got to read witness statements, something that Salmond himself hasn’t been allowed to do.
The regulations that form the basis of this case and enquiry in terms of procedure and process were put in place by Evans herself very recently. It’s possible the allegations are at the very flimsy end of the spectrum — i.e. he made a lewd suggestion or something. We don’t know.
We do know that his reputation is getting dragged through the mud though and that someone leaked very sensitive information to a tabloid newspaper.
Also, in Sturgeon’s statement, I didn’t hear anything supportive of Salmond whatsoever. You might think it would be inappropriate for her to say anything directly supportive but she could have hinted at it without crossing a line.
We will find out, wait and see.
Hatuey
“… the highest paying[ sic ] civil servant job in the land in 2015? This is a job that pays around £165,000 p.a. (that’s more than the Prime Minster earns”
And…? Whitehall Permanent Secretaries get paid more than the Prime Minister. Nothing new there.
Hatuey
“Call me old fashioned but if someone awarded me a job that paid so much I’d be eternally grateful.”
That opinion shows that you really don’t have a clue about how the civil administration of a liberal democracy works.
It is as if you were saying that Craig Murray should be eternally grateful to whoever was the Foreign Secretary and the PUS at the FCO at the time when he was appointed Ambassador.
Perhaps Craig could comment on whether that was (and should be) the case.
Charles, it was unlikely appointment being that it was the first time a woman had held the job. Not routine, as you suggest.
By giving her that highly paid job, do you think Sturgeon enhanced the chances of being on good terms with Evans or hindered them?
Hatuey
There is always (by definition) a first time for everything. Dame Evelyn Sharp was the first Whitehall Permanent Secretary back in the 1960s. Margaret Thatcher became the first UK PM in 1979.
I am puzzled that, writing in 2018, you should consider the appointment of a woman as Permanent Secretary in the Scottish government to have been “unlikely”.
Hatuey
“Apparently they even got to read witness statements.”
Yes, the Record is not disguising the fact that it’s not just hearing rumours about the nature of the investigation ….it’s shouting from the roof tops that it’s even seen official witness statements!
Leslie Evans therefore is also seeing highly confidential information from her official investigation being leaked to a newspaper. What is SHE doing about that when that is such a serious matter? It implicates her for starters! Why is she not expressing concern?
Why are the authorities not speaking to the Record about prejudicing a case which is sub judice? They are clearly showing contempt for the judicial process. Why is Ms Evans not concerned about that?
I know we know there is no depth to which the Record will not sink but, even so, this is appalling even by their standards.
What routes does the ordinary person have to express their concerns that confidential papers from a formal investigation are being leaked all over the place?
For me, without accusing Ms Evans personally, the buck stops with her and someone should be challenging her on it.
After the Skripal horseshit they think they can get away with anything.
Nothing needs to be proved, it just needs to hang there.
Did Salmond’s swift legal action take them by surprise?
The presumption of innocence should be sufficient defence.
The Tories have mostly preferred the SNP to Labour in Scotland, but the independence question looms larger than it did in the 20th century so does that mean they now prefer Labour to the SNP? I reckon the answer is “no” and that they are weakening both Labour and the SNP, which suggests preparation for a general election.
Tory voteshare in Scotland in British general elections went from 15% in 2015 to 29% in 2017.
If there is another Brexit referendum, the likely result would be that Britain as a whole would vote for “hard Brexit”, or at least for Brexit, and the leading option in Scotland would be Remain. That would give force to the call for another indyref.
The Unionist parties could make the point that only a minority of MSPs were elected on a platform of calling another indyref in the event of something like Brexit, but they may not get a good hearing if the flipping by Green MSPs means there’s a current majority for another indyref. So another indyref could happen.
But calling it isn’t winning it. The SNP would slip over on the trade and customs issue to an even greater extent than they did on the currency issue in 2014.
In 2014 the question “What currency do you want an independent Scotland to have?” received the answer “Er”. And when the No side pushed the point, the answer became “Shut up”.
This time, the question “Are you OK with a hard border between Scotland as an EU member and its southern non-EU neighbour?” would also be “Er”.
An independent Scotland couldn’t be in a free trade area or customs union with two areas that aren’t in those arrangements with each other, any more than Northern Ireland could be. The sunshine brigade declaiming that if you want it enough than 2+2=5 wouldn’t be able to make much headway with the elusive middle 10% of voters. The question will be “Who do you want a hard border with – England or Denmark?” People will say they’d prefer the border with England to stay as it is, if you don’t mind. So the result would be likely to be “No” to independence.
Scot Nats needn’t worry – there will be a Scottish angle in Brexit matters in the near future. I would have thought that immediately Britgov says “it’s hard Brexit” the SNP will call for another indyref, regardless of any allegations against Alex Salmond. Another point is that bringing back Alex Salmond for a Third Coming as party leader would be crap politics even if it weren’t for the allegations against him.
Just about everything you say here is incorrect and sadly I don’t have time to put you right but where did you get this “The Unionist parties could make the point that only a minority of MSPs were elected on a platform of calling another indyref in the event of something like Brexit”?
The SNP has won two elections with a manifesto pledge to a second referendum on independence. Two. One westminster election and one Holyrood election. They also secured parliamentary approval for that referendum.
O/T but ref SNP
A charmer. Luke Skipper who left the SNP in 2015 and now works for Weber Shandwick, the Gummer PR set up. They represent Raytheon who ‘sell Paveway missiles to Saudi Arabia, with guidance systems manufactured in Glenrothes, despite allegations the Middle Eastern theocracy has carried out horrifying bombings of civilians in Yemen’.
Ex-SNP chief turned lobbyist set up meetings between controversial missile firm and Scottish Government
We can reveal the SNP’s former Westminster chief of staff Luke Skipper has been acting as a corporate lobbyist for Raytheon in Scotland since moving into PR after the 2015 general election.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/ex-snp-chief-turned-lobbyist-13140202
Ha! Their website
News
Who we are What We Do #workatweber Talk to us
Search Results for: raytheon
Sorry, No Results.
Q and Qa
http://webershandwick.scot/luke-skipper/
Time to end cheap fights.
Or tax them.
The smell of smouldering horse-shit and wood-shavings has a sentimental attraction to me.
As clearly the US has for a certain friend of Daesh. Not even mentioning the name.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9R_QrbLDiw
You make a number of good points, Craig but none of them goes anywhere near to proving that Mr Salmond is innocent of the charges. What you could usefully have added to your post is the fact that there is a lot of inappropriate sexual behaviour out there. Your own experiences when hosting events are in fact irrelevant to the Mr Salmond case for the simple reason that you are not Mr Salmond.
What part of
Not one of us would be able effectively to clear our names against allegations made years after the event, of an incident which allegedly occurred with no independent witnesses.
Did you not understand?
Wold you apply the same reasoned generosity to former PM Edward Heath, who had to face allegations of paedophilia decades after leaving public office? A fortiori, after his death? And there are others….
he doesn’t have to prove he is innocent. In a normal court of law she has to prove he is guilty. As it is one person’s word against another, it is likely that there will be no proof. But the reputational damage is done. which is the object of the exercise.
Ian – “But the reputational damage is done”
I’m not absolutely sure that will happen in this case.
I notice the latest ‘Get Corbyn’ episode on Zionist’s grasp of irony, a blogger called Richard Millet has been wheeled out. If you look up some of his interviews (I saw one with Press TV) you’ll see he’s a total wassock. Any one viewing these will think – is that the best you’ve got?
In Salmonds case, it’s already clear there has been abuse of process, and when he goes to court I would expect that it will become clearer to Scottish independence supporters that Salmond’s name is being unfairly blackened. Salmond is ‘lucky’ in that he’s got deep pockets to enable him to go to law. A bit like the Telegraph trying to smear Galloway.
You waste your time on replying to CB – he has no understanding of UK law, at all.
Bostick
That incredibly uncomfortable feeling of controlling one’s desires while being tempted by for instance by Tel Aviv beach sisters, moistening one’s underwear and frying the brain in the microwave is accompanied by an equally comfortable sensation of having overcome the calls of lower nature and got on with ones life and marriage.
Sexual desire is absolutely not the subject of interest of outside speculation except where it contravenes the trust of other people, in which case it is a highly subversive type of lying. If you were not married to Salmond at the time I can’t understand it’s relevance.
Giyane
The amount of times you’ve referred to women on the beaches of Tel Aviv makes me wonder who’s “moistening his underware”.
I tried to upload the list of Tory fornicators and ‘handsy with women’ list to your Facebook post but Facebook said No… I guess the perps in government assume that because they abuse their power with SPADs and researchers, that members of other parties can be assumed to do so too….
Damian Green looked at sellers of sex. He wasn’t fornicating with, touching or even talking to anyone. Was his crime that he was not contributing to GDP and income tax? He was using his own joystick, not anyone else’s and it did not cost the government 1p for using its electricity, or his own salary because he was doing it while working on government business. There was a considerable amount of time wasted by surveillance staff and police officers, not to mention the waste of government office space which could have been used for blow-jobs, fornication or anything else.
“He was using his own joystick, ”
That was perhaps an unfortunate noun to use in that context, Giyane. I take it you meant “mouse”. Or do you have personal knowledge of Mr Green which would lead you to think of joysticks rather than mice?
Craig, how can you be so certain? I reckon you’d have got laid loads of times. I speak from experience when I say that being a decent human being is quite a turn on for the ladies…?
Yep Well said
Smells of the Huge mountain of Putrid, Sordid, minds in Westminster.
Also some were asking why now, and not during the Indyreff, that’s an easy one, It’s because they knew indyref 2014 would be Fixed, Stolen with the Help of U.K intelligence service, and the bbc.. remember ( London Calling How the BBc Stole the Scottish Referendum ) They know that the next referendum will be much harder to win. More Scots have realized how we were lied to the last time.
I say stop fucking about, waiting till we are on our knees UDI. and, as Craig said at the Dumfries, March / Rally, Then Call a Confirmatory Referendum
For newer Commenters and readers – Link to London Calling, which features our Host here ( Craig )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXQYuLUAbyw&t=25s
Mighty as well Put up Craig’s Great Speech in Dumfries Again..Why not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GKgRIgyxPk
P.S Next Huge March Will be In Edinburgh.. Lookin forward to that. But before then I’ll be outside Faslane’s North gate for a big Scottish CND event, with speakers comming from all over the world. All Welcome.
Sorry, my mind has been bent by witnessing the Manchester gay pride at work this weekend. What is the significance of rainbow colours and small red balloons. Are they supposed to represent diversity and male genitals respectively? And if so, wouldn’t it be better to contain them inside ones own heads and trousers like everybody else instead of putting on a big parade? I use my backside once or twice a day. Isn’t it rather Freudian to be still rebelling against potty training in public, and over the age of 5?
Genitals yet again. What is it with you, Giyane?
Real, actual and horrible sexual abuse perpetrated on children and minors by nasty men who wear frocks and have lily white hands.
Cultures of Death: Pope Francis, Apology and Child Abuse
https://countercurrents.org/2018/08/23/cultures-of-death-pope-francis-apology-and-child-abuse/
Yes, interesting. Most likely PR and empty words.
It’s time for the very rich Catholic Church to get its cheque book out and cough up
Looking after orphans is a lucrative business. Subtract the amount you actually spend on their upkeep from the amount you claim from the Council and you have a formula for misery and profits (two things that always seem to go hand in hand).
Once they have coughed up enough, it should be carved in stone at the entrance to every chapel that kids must never be allowed to enter without a trusted adult.
And any council in Scotland that let’s the Catholic Church run an orphanage should be kicked out of office.
I’m sick of dancing around this sort of crap, worrying about offending people and bringing the Church into disrepute — the very notions that facilitated the culture of silence and abuse.
The cover up continues. The Pope was told in 2013 about the US Cardinal’s activities but did nothing.
Pope keeps silent on abuse claim letter at end of Irish visit – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45318100
‘Archbishop Vigano says he had told Pope Francis in 2013 that Cardinal Theodore McCarrick had faced extensive accusations of sexually abusing lower-ranking seminarians and priests.
The Pope “knew from at least June 23 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator,” wrote Archbishop Vigano, adding that “he knew that he was a corrupt man, he covered for him to the bitter end.”
“Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them,” the letter says.’
There’s enough there to issue an international arrest warrant.
What chance does a kid have against all that? Basically none which means the Catholic Church effectively legalised child abuse.
By inventing celibacy for priests. This goes back in history to religious theories of self-castigation and the vicarious redemption of sins. Bad theology => bad practise.
The bad theology of Christianity now means child abuse is extremely common.
Let me translate what you’re saying, Giyane, for the benefit of other laymen like myself. You’re basically saying the “bad” doctrine is responsible for child abuse, not the abusers. Thus the individual paedophiles etc., have no personal responsibility as such. Got it.
Just earlier though you refused to accept that alcohol could be used as an excuse by people who make fools of themselves when drunk or act inappropriately towards women — because they knew in advance what the effects of alcohol were likely to be. In this case individual responsibility is irrefutable.
Not very god on this morality stuff, are you?
Another excellent post. It’s unfortunate that what looks like a smear campaign against Mr Salmond, arrives at this time, the lesson of similar stories is that, now that it has been released to the press, it paves the way for all kinds of lowlife scum to peddle harmful allegations that might give credence to the story. We know, from previous experience of this kind of thing, that, even if any other allegations seem trivial, they will be dressed up as more sensational by his enemies in the main stream media. For the story to emerge now is highly suspicious, given that an election and/or a second referendum may be on the cards, given that Mr Salmond is still a force in the political arena.
Pete
“..It’s unfortunate that what looks like a smear campaign against Mr Salmond, arrives at this time, the lesson of similar stories is that, now that it has been released to the press, it paves the way for all kinds of lowlife scum to peddle harmful allegations that might give credence to the story.”
Yes – just what happened to former PM Edward heath, isn’t it? I wonder if there was the same degree of indignation about his case?
Yes, that is correct, I felt indigent at the Heath smear, but as I am aligned to no political party I felt no need to protest, surely it would been up to people who sympathise with the man who would make their feelings felt. The problem is that this kind of scandal sells newspapers and in the dying print world pandering to the lowest common denominator while trying to fix the debate has become the norm.
“, surely it would been up to people who sympathise with the man who would make their feelings felt”
As indeed they did – and got laughed at for their pains on this blog and elsewhere. There was a remarkable absence of the “innocent until proved guilty” meme on here and a lot of shouting about sinister establishment cover-ups
By the way, it was of course not only his “sympathisers” who protested, it was also people who were disgusted with the dirt being flung at someone who was no longer round to defend himself (unlike Mr Alex Salmond).
@ Charles Bostock August 27, 2018 at 08:44
One wonders why you are so keen to equate Heath with Salmond – more than thirty allegations, plus plenty of other indicators like ‘friendship’ with Jimmy Savile (aren’t you going to defend him, too?), against one adult lady making alleagtions five years after the alleged acts (which hardly equals paedophilia, even if true!):
‘Sir Edward Heath WAS a paedophile, says police chief: Astonishing claim is made that the former PM is guilty of vile crimes ‘covered up by the Establishment’: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4238188/Sir-Edward-Heath-paedophile-says-police-chief.html
Still think the cases can be compared?
Know what you mean Craig, i have a couple of much loved friends, who understand i don’t want to be tied down and think similarly. Pick-ups/takeaways don’t appeal to us, we prefer to be at least great friends. Totally agree those dudettes would have told you where to go, Morgan Freeman was a flirt, not abuser, who just needed to be told, maybe slapped when he stepped over the line, it’s women’s right to state limits, i will whoever is involved.
Sent this letter to the Guardian, don’t expect it to be published:
Your propaganda is sickening to us progressives Guardian, you have lost all editorial integrity under Viner, just are a mouthpiece for lies.
You no longer have any understanding, like Rusbridger did, that robust comment made you think and be more honest.
Sink to the pits under Viner, no other paper deserves it more.
From Cesca
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/25/alex-salmond-accused-touching-womans-bottom-breasts-leaked-sexual/
– Labour MSP Rhoda Grant called for Sturgeon to suspend Salmond from the SNP immediately. “Not to do so will send the wrong message to members in her party and the people of Scotland,” she said
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13110673.Campaigners___We_need_more_controls_to_back_up_Scottish_anti-porn_laws_/
– Highlands and Islands MSP Rhoda Grant, who is pursuing a bill on the criminalisation of the purchase of sex, said pornography, as well as other areas of the sex industry, was linked to “abuse and violence against women”.
“We have to ask if more should be done to make the viewing or downloading of porn from the internet more difficult. I think there should be filters in place to help that process”
Two women? Leaked to the press though the accused couldn’t see the evidence? Internet censorship? Does this remind me of the Julian Assange script at all?
It does Clark and is part of the mass weapons of distraction, get us focused on idiotically simplistic stuff, instead of what’s really happening. I see a sea change on it’s way tho bro, ordinary ppl aren’t stupid and are questioning.
Have done a very successful Jewish extremist are terrorists awareness msg on the Indy. i’m IceArtemis there, this is one thread, most of my comments are on this particular page, just scroll down: Labour MP ‘agonising every day’ over whether to quit party amid latest Corbyn antisemitism row https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-antisemitism-jeremy-corbyn-mike-gapes-quit-party-a8507886.html
In the Independent piece you link to about Mike Gapes leaving the Labour party ( good riddance btw) I see no mention of the fact that he is an ardent Zionist and was a vice chair of Labour Friends of Israel in 2004.
‘Mike Gapes, former Vice Chair of LFI (2004)’
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Friends_of_Israel
A long list of them on there, with several omissions. Whenever there is a debate in the HoC about Israel or Palestine, the FoI members speak in turn, usually following the lead by Joan Ryan. An archaic practice now by these people.
You can see how expert he is in embedding himself in the HoC Committees and obtaining influence. He was even on the Defence Committee in BLiar’s time 2003-2005.
Committees on Arms Export Controls (formerly Quadripartite Committee) Oct 2017 –
Foreign Affairs Committee Sep 2017 –
Panel of Chairs Jun 2017 –
https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/Mike-Gapes/184
His signature on this EDM July 2018 Defining Anti Semitism, (the IHRA definition) along with Chuka, Ryan et al.
https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2017-19/1493/
and the gist of his speeches – he is very active.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/search/MemberContributions?memberId=184&type=Spoken
Nothing wrong with being an active politician in the HoC if the good electorate of a constituency sent you there. Unlike, by all accounts, the excellent Mr George Galloway.
@ Charles Bostock August 27, 2018 at 11:01
Sure, if you are looking after the good of your constituents and country, but NOT when your prime cause is furthering the agenda of a foreign regime.
@ Cesca August 26, 2018 at 23:53
Perhaps the Ecuadorean Embassy needs to get bigger quarters, in anticipation of another ‘sanctuary seeker’. And a cook who can cook haggis.
Clark
Hi.
We chucked out the bad theology of the Roman catholic Church back in the days, but the Lutheran Protestantism that replaced it, in which we communicate directly with our Maker, is still bogged down in papist tripe, enabling that tosser Blair to get away with saying that he would take responsibility for the consequences of the illegally invading Iraq. So far he’s taken responsibility for nothing. Politicians can only get away with false reassurances because of the false reassurances contained in the Christian religion.
Shelving personal responsibility by falsely claiming that Jesus will carry all our sins is described in the Qur’an as like a person who sees a mirage in the desert and when they get to it it is just more hot burning sand.
@ giyane August 27, 2018 at 11:18
Christianity is obviously understood differently by different people.
Bliar will pay for his abominable War Crimes, but in the afterlife. To believe that one can commit heinous crimes, never repent (or perhaps wait till the last minute, a ‘Deathbed Confession’) is not very credible – in fact it effectively mocks God.
I believe Bliar has sold his soul, like so many high-flyers in politics, the Churches, business, military, judiciary, whatever.
The ‘Jesus carrying our sins’ is because there is forgiveness, but it requires a genuine total repudiation of the sins in question.
As I see it, Jesus’ life and necessary death were required as a ‘sacrifice’ to snatch powers back from the Devil, and to break with the Old Testament, the ‘Old Time Religion’, except for the Ten Commandments and the sayings of the prophets.