This new report is from a friend of impeccable credentials with whom I am collaborating; it reveals stunning new facts on the Alex Salmond affair:
Begins
I am an investigative journalist who has been researching the Alex Salmond case. I am not alone as there are to my knowledge at least three television programmes doing the same thing. I make no claim to be impartial, partially because of my sympathy towards the independence movement and partially because my previous work has dealt substantially with failings in the criminal justice system. As far as the criminal case against Alex Salmond is concerned I will not be able to publish or comment until it is over. However the expenses settlement last week of Alex Salmond’s successful civil action allows me , without any prejudice, to relate just a few the dramatic and deeply troubling things I have already discovered about the civil case.
This same opportunity for comment was taken up with gusto last week by the mainstream media in Scotland. Their coverage centred on the scale of the legal expenses agreed to be paid by the Scottish Government to Alex Salmond. This was followed up by the Sunday Mail and the Sunday Post last weekend with stories suggesting that Salmond’s lawyers might have been overcharging and blaming the Scottish Government for not having them independently audited.
True to form the unionist press have gloriously and entirely missed the point. The reason that the expenses were an eye watering £512,000 and change is that they were awarded by the Court largely on an “agent and client” basis. “Agent and client” is a punitive award used by the courts when the losing party to litigation has been causing the other unnecessary expense. It means that the victorious party (ie Salmond) is entitled to full expenses as opposed to the normal 60 per cent or so which accompanies victory. Having the expenses audited (or “taxed” in the legal parlance) is a complete red herring. No such process could set aside the decision of the court for that element of expenses which were awarded on an “agent and client” basis.
And so to the real story which is why the expenses were awarded by Lord Pentland in the Court of Session in this punitive manner. The likely reason lies in three equally devastating parts.
First Salmond won the action. The court found on the admission of the Government that the process against him was “unlawful” and “unfair” in that it had been “tainted by apparent bias”. Despite the attempted spin of Scottish Government Permanent Secretary, Leslie Evans, that all the mistakes had been an innocent and inadvertent error of process (a “muddle not a fiddle” as someone else famously said in another context) the statements in open court do not point to that nor does the complete collapse of the Government case. We should look rather to Salmond’s senior counsel Ronnie Clancy QC and his comments in open court that the behaviour of the Government’s Investigating Officer, was “bordering on encouragement”. In lay person’s terms it looks like Salmond was being fitted up by officials in the Government he once led with such distinction.
Second, we know that Lord Pentland in mid December 2018 granted a “Commission and Diligence”. This is a relatively unusual legal process for forcing the recovery of key documents in a case. Pentland did this having previously warned the Government from the bench that as a public authority it would be expected that they would freely produce all relevant documents. That such a Commission was necessary to secure key documents should be a clear warning to the upcoming Scottish parliamentary investigative committee, already concerned with suggestions that e mails may have been deleted. We have no way of knowing what came out of these hearings except that top civil servants were compelled to appear under oath and be questioned. I do know that Evans appeared before the Commission as did Investigating Officer Judith Mackinnon. I also know that Nicola Sturgeon’s Chief of Staff, a Ms Elizabeth Lloyd, was due to appear when the Scottish Government suddenly decided to collapse the case on January 3rd 2019. Finally we know that when Ronnie Clancy QC appeared in the Court of Session he had a large folder of killer documents to underline his case. Incidentally all of the expenses for this Commission and all other court hearings are part of the Salmond expenses award.
Thirdly and finally my researches point to a group within the Scottish Government who had been been established to defend the Judicial Review. I know that it either met with, or conferenced called, external legal counsel a minimum of seventeen times between August 2017 and January 2018. It featured key civil servants familiar with the case. It was this group who likely decided to prolong the legal action when they , by definition, must have known that they would lose spectacularly once the compromising information and revealing documents were forced into disclosure through the Commission process. I believe that the aforesaid Elizabeth Lloyd was a member of this group, an absolutely key issue which , when confirmed, will open a range of pointed questions, the most fundamental of which is what on earth a political appointee was doing on a civil service group charged with the defence of a legal action? The further interesting and devastating question will be what exactly did this group, or others taking the key decisions, possibly hope to gain by prolonging a legal action and running up the clock at such gigantic public expense?
Perhaps the full answer to these questions will have to await developments but answers there will have to be. For the moment let us content ourselves with this observation. Regardless of anything else, how on earth can a Permanent Secretary who, by her own admission and a Court of Session judgement , presided over an “unlawful” process still be in her position and who exactly is to be held accountable for the unnecessary loss to the public purse thus far of a minimum of £600,000?
All of my journalistic life I have campaigned for justice and equality including across race class and gender. However, without proper process there can be no justice. And from what I already know, some of which can print, and a lot more I can’t reveal as yet, this entire process against Salmond, already judged unlawful in the highest court in the land, stinks to high heaven.
Ends
The Salmond Affair indeed stinks to high heaven and no aspect of it stinks more than the role in steering the affair, throughout, of Liz Lloyd, Nicola Sturgeon’s Chief of Staff. Lloyd is also known to be personally friendly with David Clegg of the Daily Record who published what were claimed to be leaked details of one of the “allegations” against Salmond.
I am not amongst those who has faith in the fairness of the police and prosecutorial system in Scotland. In my view, the centralisation of Police Scotland made it highly susceptible to political influence. I recall the case of my friend the estimable Michelle Thomson, who was announced by the Police as under investigation for mortgage fraud, which “under investigation” status lasted for over two years, until Thomson was obliged to stand down at the 2017 general election. Yet the facts of the case were extremely simple, and would have taken two days, maximum, to clear up if the investigation had been genuine. After two years of being “under investigation”, in which entire time she was never even interviewed, Police Scotland announced there was no case to answer. By then the job was done and she was out of parliament.
Police Scotland put 22 officers full time into trying to dig up historic dirt on Salmond. I have personally seen a statement from a woman who was astonished to be interviewed by Police Scotland after having been seen, years ago, to have a greeting peck on the cheek from her friend Alex at a public function. This has been the biggest, and most maliciously motivated, fishing expedition in Scottish police history.
The Salmond case aside (phrase inserted on legal advice!), it ought to be a public scandal that the procurator fiscal can arraign and parade a person in public and charge them with grievous offences, then delay matters for months and years while attempting to somehow cobble together the pile of mince they have as “evidence” into some sort of case. Justice delayed is justice denied.
Meantime the parties behind the Salmond case can hide indefinitely from investigation on the pretext that it would prejudice a so-called independent criminal process.
There is one question to the Scottish government which from my own certain knowledge (which I cannot publish pending the never-never trial) would bust the entire Salmond affair wide open:
Could you please detail every contact between Liz Lloyd and Police Scotland anent Alex Salmond?
They will refuse to answer the question so long as the so-called “criminal case” is pending. Expect it to be pending for a very long time.
Meantime, as the above account makes crystal clear, we have a judicial ruling that the Scottish Government engaged in a process that was unlawful and had every appearance of bias. They persisted recklessly in that unlawful course of action and eventually cost the Scottish taxpayer over £600,000. Yet none of those responsible for these unlawful actions – Leslie Evans, Judith Mackinnon and Liz Lloyd – has been sacked. That fact is indicative of monumental arrogance right at the heart of Holyrood.
It’s made me quite chuffed that I came to similar conclusions myself. If I, an interested, yet very amateur observer can come to essentially the same result as Mr Murray. How many more people with a glimmer of interest in the antics, of what appears to be a cabal within the Scottish government are coming to a similar analysis. To pull this stunt requires backing from the top, and it appears that Ms Sturgeon is taking pre-emptive steps to stop the “,Come-back Kid,” from coming back at the request of a disillusioned S.N.P., membership, whose leader is morphing into a Theresa May manque. Referendum? “Now is not the time.” I was intrigued at an article in the National, where the F.M., was bewailing the horrible twitter messages she receives, and very closely also mentioned the complaints, etc., that she receives from S.N.P., supporters. It came very close to conflating valid queries and complaints with abusive tweets. Curious.
Yes, cracking comments and I agree with every word.
However, we should be careful not to pin everything on anyone’s guilt or innocence. This is about an idea, a belief, not any person or party.
And it’s on strategy that I criticise Sturgeon. Her strategy is much more complicated than it appears and I don’t think for a second that she is insincere about wanting independence.
I’m not defending her strategy by explaining it, but the fact that so many on the independence side do doubt her sincerity may well actually be a measure of its success.
In other words, if we think she might put blocking brexit above indyref2, well, we can assume many who previously voted “no” will do so too.
I think the Indy movement need to think about that very carefully. But I disagree with the strategy, even if it seems now to be sort of working.
Bearing in mind that the most damaging attack on sturgeon and the snp was that all they cared about was Indy, that they were using brexit as an excuse for Indy, neverendum, etc. Well, if we are starting to doubt her on that, it’s possible her strategy has worked a treat.
Forgive me, but I have forgotten what part of Brazil Scotland occupies.
It was Panama just north of what is now the Colombian border. It didn’t work out.
Did Trump really think he could buy Greenland?
Do the Unionists really think they can keep Scotland by libelling Salmond ?
Do the neocons really think they can acquire Somalia and Libya through islamist terror?
Do the neocons really think the Taliban will ever stop killing Afghans?
Does anyone believe Russian novichok after Russia defeated the neocon’s Al Qaida and Daesh?
There is a pattern emerging of very extreme lies being peddled by very stupid politicians
in the mistaken idea that the bread and circuses are working.
It’s the post-truth world…
The goal of propaganda today isn’t to trick you into believing one thing or another. That’s so last century.
The goal today is to screw your mind up, so that you don’t know what the hell’s going on.
There is no truth, just stories.
My thoughts too. From what are they trying to distract us? It’s all very stange.
From what are they trying to distract us?
The Truth
Not the unionists attacking Salmond it is his own SNP govt.
Terrific read
No great surprise that a centralised police force means a politicised police force; always has, always will…
Quite. Cressida Dick authorised the insanely brutal murder of a migrant electrician. Instead of being drummed out of the ‘Force’, as should have happened in any civilised society, this psychopath was promoted and promoted until she (‘it’) got the top job!!! And now we have her oppo Neil Basu!!! Wtf?
This has been a stitch up and was entirely obvious to those who knew Alex. Who perpetrated it is the question? was it Westminster or was it much nearer to home?
Definitely a stitch up. They’ll stop at nothing….which is a big worry!
If you attack the snp it’s fair game. If you attack a unionist you’ll suffer- simple ! The union is finished in moral , and all terms !
Graham Patterson
The CIA always tortured its Islamist agents just to let them know who was boss and who was going to be using and who was going to be used. If you accept the terms and conditions of the intelligence services, you not only belong to them but you are them, i.e. arseholes who exploit the resources of other nations.
After the intelligence services give you a hard time, bad cop. they will give you an easy time, good cop.
Alex Salmond is not going to betray Scotland for the good cop , he’s stuck two fingers up to the union and gone with RT. In fact if he once had a reputation for colluding with the union, he has now proved himself to be very squeaky clean.
Another blow for the bonkers plans of the losers of British intelligence and their toffy Tory liar in No 10.
I and my wife are 100% sure that Alex is being set up. I don’t know why, because he is one of the finest Leaders Scotland has ever had. After all he has done for Scotland, he does not deserve this at his time of life. Thave no seen the last oa ma bunnet and me!
I’m utterly 100% convinced too. I’ve met him many times. And his wife. There is no way on this earth that he has done what they accuse him of. It’s a total set up. I worry about him and I hope he watches his back.
@Fiona – Presumably if this case comes to trial you will agree that it’s important that none of the jurors should share your way of thinking about him?
Agree. We must be very careful to base our beliefs on the evidence not on what we think of the man. I have always admired Salmond and worry about what I have read above particularly the stalling regarding bringing the evidence to the court. I am shocked that there seems to be no way to force the main officials linked to this case to release all the evidence and for that evidence to be cross-examined in a court of law.
Well done Craig and thank you to your colleague for the article.
I think we can safely say that the Alex Salmond case will throw up a few more surprises once the dirty tricks departments (MI5 etc) get involved
Salmond is the one they fear and at a time when they are at their weakest they fear his return – ergo the dredged up charges.
That all goes without saying.
But the big question is what part Nicola Sturgeon has played, or not, and why.
She and others appear to have gone soft on independence, and what part Liz Lloyd and others too.
Has the SNP leadership been nobbled?
It doesn’t go without saying. Why fear a guy who lost a referendum five years ago and didn’t have a clue about how to win the middle ground, preferring to whinge like a crybaby that the side advocating the status quo was engaged in “Project Fear”? What does he think the status quo side usually does? Is this former bank executive turned politician Scotland’s answer to King Arthur?
King Arthur was handed a crown on a plate, Salmond had to earn his.
Pulling something from stones appears to be something they both had in common 😉
Because they know that the result of that referendum was fiddled. Project Fear was a reality. What would you call polliticians phoning old age pensioners and warning them that their pension would be lost as soon as there was a Yes vote? This was a downright lie.
Alex is the answer to Edward 1 of England – “The Hammer of the Scots”.
Westminster government is not out to get Alex Salmond. Don’t forget that Salmond was kicked out of his seat by Scots voters and he lost the 2014 Indy ref. He’s a loser. Deal with it. ?
You are, indeed, a huge Arse.
@Hugh
They think they won. In the run-up to the Brexit referendum, Nicola Sturgeon publicly offered advice to David Cameron on how to win a referendum. How the grown-ups must have laughed! And she wasn’t speaking in the same way as a person who has played a major role in a conflict and says there’s nothing that teaches you more about conflict and strategy than getting your butt kicked all over the place. She was speaking as if she were a successful statesman. Imagine trying to get good at chess, say, or an athletic sport, let alone political warfare, with that kind of mindless attitude. it would be impossible. A person wouldn’t stand a chance. Her offer, together with the fact that she wasn’t laughed out of office as soon as she made it, says a lot about the level of disconnect, of cognitive dissonance. It’s similar to Brexitry or Trumpism. “Fake Unionist news!”
Yes – after a great deal of dark money was poured into the campaign and the unionist parties cooperating with each other in a tactical voting scam.
Because the Partei makes no errors, and the only obstacle to its victory is the multi-tentacled foreign evil. That’s what you’re saying.
How can there be tactical voting in a two-option referendum?
That comment was in reply to the post about him losing his Aberdeen seat in an election.
Leslie Evans does not answer to Nicola Sturgeon but to Sir Mark Sedwill, head of the Home Civil Service in London. I think it is there that we should seek explanation of what she did or did not do.
It would also be interesting to know the political leanings of Leslie Evans. I assume not pro-Scottish independence…
Don’t know about her but I believe her husband is a member of the SNP.
“Yet none of those responsible for these unlawful actions – Leslie Evans, Judith Mackinnon and Liz Lloyd – has been sacked.”
So much for more women in politics producing a new type of politics. Of course these three are not representative of all women and there are many women with experience in work, homemaking and child-rearing, whose views we want to hear in politics. However they are representative of a group of women in politics and senior grades in the civil service, the media, quangos and charities, who see making false accusations of sexual assault as a legitimate political weapon. The movement to remove rape and sexual assault cases from jury trials and put them in the hands of judges has as its ultimate goal the ability of the state and other actors to use the threat of being imprisoned and having your reputation destroyed to silence political dissent. as Julian Assange has already found out.
I find it absolutely abhorrent that any woman would use that as a means to attack a political opponent. As a survivor of abuse as a child I find it a further slap in the face to those of us who have endured such atrocities at the hands of our abusers and the cover ups (specifically in my case Jehvoahs witnesses) that have went on in the religious groups around the world. It makes me feel betrayed, I suppose in a sense. People like that making it up normalises it and its something that should never ever be normalised. The truth should always be sought after and those woman, if found to be making up stories should face a hefty penalty. I’m not too sure AS did anything to anyone, I cannot say one way or the other whether he is guilty or not because in my experience, my abuser was lovely, jolly, friendly to everyone else on the outside too. I absolutely agree with having a Jury for cases of sexual harrassment/abuse/assault however it is framed because that would be more democratic. Judge should oversee proceedings but he should not make the final decisions.
Ah yes – the famous “sisterhood”. They are a menace.
Like you Craig there are many who have grave concerns about the centralisation of police in one national force. At a stroke such reorganisation facilitates central political control.
At a time when the police complain of under funding that affects their ability to provide policing, their subsequent ability to deploy at least 22 officers full time officers to investigate historical sexual allegations exposed in a civil case to be seriously flawed this indeed has all the hallmarks of a political police force under malevolent establishment control. Straight out of the state sponsored fit up book so beloved by authoritarian regimes, and one only need look at the single police force, its complexion, and this case to realise what an organisation it has become.
Consider then senior officers deputy and assistant chief constables, their pedigree and their focus and this becomes further apparent –
# Will Kerr – ex PSNI deputy of 27 years experience in that troubled province with last role focussed serious crime, terrorism, and public order. Also worked within the UK’s National Crime Agency
# Fiona Taylor – ex Metropolitan Police Service where she reviewed the handling, or should we say cover up of the historical sexual abuse allegation. And now, a focus on organised crime, counter terrorism and intelligence.
# Bernard Higgins – again two key focusses listed – stop and search and Euro 2020.
# John Hawkins – lead for areas of business which are listed to include firearms and public order.
# Kenny MacDonald – digitally enabled policing ( or should we say surveillance )
# Mark Williams – emergency resilience planning
# Malcolm Graham – counter terrorism and intelligence.
Now I don’t know about what others think but when I look at this selection of officers comprising most of Police Scotland’s management board what I see is a police board with its most senior officers focussed on intelligence, counter terrorism, Euro 2020, public order and firearms and it certainly, tells you much about the police and what is imbedded into it.
Scotland now, as the Salmond investigation shows is a political police force with links straight into the UK secret intelligence security services so infamous for their dark arts.
Soft on crime hard on politics, I think we can now all see why a unitary force was created.
Are Any of these people Masons? As a former Minister in the Presbyterian Church in Canada, I had personal experience of Masonic influence to try to prevent me being called to serve churches after I would not be manipulated into joining.
What is not answered/questioned is why was/is Salmond being ‘fit up’.
The cabal at the top of the SNP have been left aghast at the leftward movement in Scotland that has also affected the SNP. The cabal are determined to become ‘more and more acceptable’ to the British ruling class so as they don’t really pose a problem for British imperialism. Just as the Brexiteers want to be on the side of the US the SNP don’t want to be pushed too far to the left that they are forced to embrace Labour’s nationalisation/’radical’ economic programme. The paradox is that without the support of the Scottish working class, which has/is moving leftwards, the SNP haven’t a hope in hell’s chance of gaining ‘independence’. It appears that the SNP’s top cabal are becoming more and more interested in ‘a wee bit more devolution’ and are getting cold feet for full independence. They have said loud and clear that they will ‘abide by the rules’ of the ‘independence game’. Having a ‘powerful’ Scottish independence voice outside the tent, Salmond, has caused them to panic as their ‘push for independence’ is put on the spot. A ‘fit up’ is a good attempt to neutralise a ‘troublesome’ voice.
All together now, “Snouts in the trough, snouts in the trough, ee aye adio, snouts in the trough”.
Salmond’s return would certainly energise politics.
Endorsing, and maybe standing as a list candidate for a Wings type party would guarantee that Hollywood has an independence majority .
One only need think about how a 38% SNP list vote only delivered 7% of the seat or 4 out of 56.
A Wings party with a similar vote would however deliver around 20 seats – and with Salmond on board probably even more.
Makes you realize why Salmond is being fitted up.
It makes you also realize why police in England tried to fit up Stuart Campbell in trumped up intimidation charges….or Michelle Thompson.
But the establishment and the political police play a dangerous game. If Salmond is exonerated, as most believe, the political impact will be huge.
Salmond was a fantastic First Minister, he ran the establishment close, and his return would transform things at a time when the opportunity to grasp independence is tantalisingly within our reach.
Added to that – why did Nicola Sturgeon immediately adopt the British line regarding the Novochok poisoning case and condemn Russia without a shred of evidence – despite the fact that the Scottish electorate largely opposed this? She also adopted the British stance about RT and condemned Alex for his show. She also recommended Henry Kissinger’s book – again at odds with the Scottish electorate. If she is trying to look as though she is a traitor, she is doing a very good job.
Tarla are you Paul Hutcheon, Kenny Farqharson, Richard Leonard or Kezia Dugdale .
I remember an announcement of awards for the Civil Service Team who were triumphant in preventing Scottish Independence during the 2014 campaign They said that they had great feelings of satisfaction at being part of such a successful team and were very proud of their rewards.
The SNP’s Douglas Chapman comes under attack after discovering a huge group of #BorisBotArmy fake accounts aimed at attacking British citizens who support Scottish independence.
The 77th Brigades Information Activities group and the II group operatives are thought to be behind the undermining of UK democracy, whilst using taxpayers money to do so.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/17858200.vile-abuse-mp-says-uk-bots-attack-scotland/
Seems fishy
Why has sturgeon not sacked those people? What is her role in this? What’s the ultimate aim of this campaign? I
Independence is going to damage SNP nest featherers more than any other group. Expect more ‘unavoidable’ delays and exercises in can kicking and sabotage.
Thanks Craig, I found it very annoying that the press spun the story that Salmond had in fact cost the Scottish taxpayer £500,000 and not those working for the Scottish gov. Also they deliberately gave the impression that the money went straight into his bank account. I don’t see why the women responsible for the case haven’t been sacked already so I do hope that they will get their just desserts when the case against Salmond falls appart through lack of conclusive evidence .
The women who instigated the complaint were employees of the Scottish government, not SNP members. It is odd they took so long to complain, it looks more like a Westminster set up to keep Alex Salmond from influencing the next independence referendum and having the Scottish people pay for it
Well, even if half of this is correct then our judicial system is in a dire mess! This needs to go to the Scottish Government now, even before any Judicial decision is made, for an explanation as to why such a simple case is taking this long to conclude. The people involved are all there, the Police have the resources, and the courts are well able to have had this finalised within a few weeks with a decision one way or another. Whether guilty or not, this is a disgrace and an embarrassment for the Scottish Legal System.
I am sure that every one knows that it is unlawfull, to comment on future investigations, like the case against AS. We would like to see it going in to Court soon or not. SO far as Nicola Sturgeon is concerned, it could be “do and you die / die if you don’t. It is in the hands of an unbelievable, Untrusted System, which I am sure, and hope will collapse eventually.
She has refused to be drawn, ie no comment.
Nicola Sturgeon refuses to be drawn on £512k payment for Alex Salmond’s legal costs
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/1819047/nicola-sturgeon-refuses-to-be-drawn-on-512k-payment-for-alex-salmonds-legal-costs/
That paper is now one of many the DC Thomson group’s productions. It was previously a Daily Mail offshoot – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DC_Thomson
There’s no news in the idea that The British establishment might want to stitch up Salmond and undermine the independence movement. That’s been a default position for about 40 years and a top priority for at least 10 years.
That is not the headline here. That’s not news. And that’s not what’s been said.
As I’ve said before, if the British isles were in Africa or South America and we were looking at it impartially, none of us would be surprised to see that the large dominant country was exerting massive influence on its little neighbours.
Of course, the norm in Africa and South America is to install a puppet government. On the face of it, it would be democratic and more or less free to do what it wants. Behind the scenes, though, all sorts of pressure, bribes, threats, and strings are being used to keep those governments in line.
Direct colonial rule becomes neo-colonial in nature (and much more sinister) when the governments in question are knowingly in league with external forces and are effectively acting as managers on their behalf so that democracy is smothered and the economy is geared towards extracting wealth rather than creating it.
If I had to choose, I’d prefer to live in a direct colony rather than a neo-colony. There’s more honesty and less lies in straight-forward bullying.
Maybe we do need to choose. Maybe we’ve already chosen.
“If I had to choose, I’d prefer to live in a direct colony rather than a neo-colony.”
Also there is more chance of escaping as on the face of it, the constitutional status of Scotland looks legal in the eyes of the UN. If it was a colony, the UN would be much more sympathetic to Scottish independence as it is plainly illegal in this day and age.
Oh, perfidious albion – you have to hand it to them they are bloody crafty. I suppose they have had 300 years to perfect their dark art against their first colony.
Crafty but also highly dependent on others doing their bidding. The British Empire always depended more on collusion than brute force. In just about any example you care to mention, you’ll see politicians and others native to the target country working in cahoots with the British in order to achieve the desired outcome (to fleece).
That part of the story gets neglected but it was integral to the whole thing. The British simply didn’t have the muscle to rule by force alone in their colonies. They didn’t lose India and the US, as examples, because they suddenly found themselves militarily weaker than those who opposed their rule; they were always weaker. They lost because the people they colluded with basically dumped them and changed sides.
There are parallels here, of course. It’s pretty miserable to be amongst it, nasty, turning people against each other, against their neighbours, against their own interests, etc. And for what? A handful of rich guys that nobody will ever meet get to continue with their fleecing. A few under-achievers working in politics and the media get to have aga cookers, drive merc’s, and send their kids to private schools. Big deal.
It offends me because it’s boring more than anything else. Zzzzzzzzzz.
Yes and their foreign colonies soon learned the tricks of the trade too. America would never have won the Iraq war without the collusion of all the other Arab countries with the honourable exception of Yemen along with all the Iraqi traitors, mostly nurtured by Britain or Iran, many of whom were living in those two countries and whose children had become acculturalized as a result, who helpfully provided them with false information. Of course they extracted a heavy price from Yemen for their disobedience.
The UN has never been asked about Scotlands status, it would be the same as any other country. Scotland is in a Treaty with England only nobody else, in UN it would that ant one of the signatories can repeal the Treaty as it wishes.
Sorry. should have read, The UN will say that any one of the signatories can repeal a Treaty.
I have read that only Scotland has the ability to repeal the Treaty.
“I have read that only Scotland has the ability to repeal the Treaty”
That makes sense. The Treaty basically amounts to “Scotland hereby swears to be a complete slave of England” and in that context only Scotland would be expected to want to release itself from those bonds and end the Treaty.
Having been a board member of the Holocaust Memorial grouping, he is then booted off it. He is no longer listed. Why did he join?
‘Salmond risks Holocaust memorial snub
Alex Salmond’s membership of the British Holocaust Memorial Foundation is being reviewed in the wake of charges being laid against him last week, the UK government has confirmed, writes John Boothman.
The advisory group, which exists to advance knowledge and understanding of the Holocaust, is part of the government’s Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. It is co-chaired by former Conservative minister Sir Eric Pickles and former Labour minister Ed Balls.’
Salmond crisis ‘has sunk hopes of new independence vote’
289th January 2019
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/salmond-crisis-has-sunk-hopes-of-new-independence-vote-73mrx75f7
Balls is of course married to Harman. Pickles got a peerage from May and is the current chairman of Conservative Friends of Israel of which May and Tory ministers such as Javid and Patel are fervent members. A holocaust memorial was proposed in Victoria Gardens when Cameron was PM but the project seems to have stalled as there were so many objections.
https://cfoi.co.uk/lord-pickles-sworn-in-as-member-of-house-of-lords-and-announced-as-new-cfi-parliamentary-chairman-lords/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Pickles
Balls is married to Yvette Cooper. Her campaign in 2015 persuaded some of her supporters to nominate Corbyn because they thought that would help her chances.
Didn’t quite work out, did it?
Sorry for that error. Harman’s husband is Dromey.
Quite alright. They are both dreadful.
No it didn’t and Farage is due to stand against her in the next GE. She currently represents one of the biggest Leave-voting constituencies in the country. It will be interesting to see which lobby she goes through when the vote of no confidence is tabled.
The Folletts, Ken and Barbara, both heavily donated to Ed Balls’ unsuccessful leadership election in 2010 and to Yvette Cooper’s in 2015.
“This has been the biggest, and most maliciously motivated, fishing expedition in Scottish police history.”
Reminds me of the Tommy Sheridan fit up. But, yes, it’s dismal stuff. They should all be fired, and I’m afraid there are serious questions around Nicola, also. Never trusted that one. Likely these women have ties to certain state actors, which I assume is routine in these circles, which is why they haven’t been fired.
There is a lesson here, which male politicians must take on board. I’ve had, at a very low level, dealings with similar characters in the public sector, and learned to be somewhat cautious around women in leadership positions. Because a significant number of them – not all of course – are what we now call SJW’s. It’s only relatively recently I understood this, but after being threatened with the sack, for literally no reason whatsoever, I learned my lesson. This is not to say dudes are always to be trusted, but SJW’s are often little public sector bolsheviks, and weirdly condescending with it. To be avoided, where possible.
Good luck to Alex, he comes across a smart, savvy guy, and a fighter. But the world is in a strange flux just now, and good people are being caught up in unpleasant schemes. Very bolshevik.
It was Tommy Sheridan who came closest to being the bolshevik who appears to be a presence in your imagination. It was because of this resemblance to those revolutionaries that he was so effectively persecuted and removed from political life.
(And, by the way, what was Salmond’s attitude to that sordid campaign? Now they appear to be ‘hanging separately’.)
I think you make a fair point. I don’t recall Salmond saying anything in Sheridan’s defence. Personally, I’m not quite sure what to make of Tommy, who appears to keep interesting friends, but his persecution was truly bizarre. For me, it gave a valuable insight into ‘how it all works’. Everything is politicized, and police ‘independence’ is kind of a joke.
I think Tommy’s a rabble-rouser rather than an outright bolshie. The internal, corporate bolsheviks I discussed about are far less interesting characters. They are just nobodies. Power goes to their head, and their weaknesses are revealed. Put them in a communist dictatorship, and they’d be the denouncers, and the acolytes. Happily, they’d probably end up in the gulag with all their enemies! Useful idiots usually do.
I applaud this article. It states what I tend to feel but haven’t the fact/evidence to back up.
I am a believer in the integrity of Alex Salmond. That assertion has implications for some of the other players in the affair.
Personally speaking, it stinks of stitch-up propelled from the very highest levels of Scottish govt and almost certainly the SNP, that much is apparent. Was it dreamed up and instigated by Westminster? Shouldn’t be the least surprised but have seen no compelling evidence beyond circumstantial suitability. The fact is, the people responsible for this are the people in waiting post referendum, self serving with no iota of morality or compassion for fellow human beings. They care about one thing and one thing only, power. That is their drug.
I wish the good people of Scotland well, however their referendum goes, but if it is leave, they need their wits about them in spades for these people in waiting will immediately create another Westminster, an administration that serves not the people beyond expressing the lie that it does, instead serving only to expand itself and the egos of those running it. The founding fathers new this well for it has been so since the hands of time began to turn, they did all they could to prevent it and it worked for a while. Now look.
Many say regarding Mr Salmond, ‘we should wait until the evidence is in’, a very altruistic view, unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way, the vast majority will never learn all the evidence, ever. Even the jury only get a partial view. In cases such as this it is a fact they will spend most of their time in the juror room while the bewigged argue as to what the bedraggled can and cannot see or hear. Best advice, stand apart, read widely, read diversely, release the hold of beliefs then employ the best common sense.
Good advice.
Should read, the very highest levels of Westminster.
Keep strong Alex the truth will come out in the end