Nicola Sturgeon

SEASIDE2020 said:
Moss

Sorry, just reading my reply back and I probably didn't word it well.

I certainly wasn't having a pop at you and I am not doubting what Mr Murray says, I only said what I did for balance as no doubt some who side with Sturgeon might doubt what he said or certainly wouldn't want him to be judge and jury.

I probably just overdid my original response but I certainly thought what Mr Murray said was very interesting.
Click to expand...
Hey, no worries, didn't read it as a pop 👍

What I like about this guy, and I read some of his stuff before he got removed from court during the trial, is that he is listing evidence that was and wasn't given in court. Now Mex may well be right, but according to law, AS was not guilty, some of the evidence was at least encouraged and possibly fabricated. If he was so terrible, given the hunt for evidence going on in Holyrood, he would have been convicted.

I am aware of some of the stuff circulating on social media, I have come across one of the allegations that he debunks.

What concerns me that if the enquiry into whether NS broke the Ministerial Code of Conduct is not conclusive, and maybe even if it is, the SNP will continue to ignore findings, facts and evidence. Then that leaves them no different to Trump, to Boris in the Patel affair, etc, etc, etc.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
Hey, no worries, didn't read it as a pop 👍

What I like about this guy, and I read some of his stuff before he got removed from court during the trial, is that he is listing evidence that was and wasn't given in court. Now Mex may well be right, but according to law, AS was not guilty, some of the evidence was at least encouraged and possibly fabricated. If he was so terrible, given the hunt for evidence going on in Holyrood, he would have been convicted.

I am aware of some of the stuff circulating on social media, I have come across one of the allegations that he debunks.

What concerns me that if the enquiry into whether NS broke the Ministerial Code of Conduct is not conclusive, and maybe even if it is, the SNP will continue to ignore findings, facts and evidence. Then that leaves them no different to Trump, to Boris in the Patel affair, etc, etc, etc.
Click to expand...


Yes, I agree with much of what you suggest.

I didn't word things well - and probably now - but just explained that Murray had been previously accused of sex offences as it is possible some may consider that to be relevant.

I am not making any assumptions and I am not saying it is impossible for there to be grey areas but on the whole I am struggling to see any grey area, did Salmond do anything wrong or was there a job done on him.

Also, as Murray says, were all those involved working on their own and Sturgeon knew nothing about it or was she involved on the job that was done on Salmond ?

All very interesting but if Salmond is not guilty I feel very sorry for him and the people responsible should be punished appropriately, just as he would have been if found guilty.

Once again, I don't think I've worded that well but all very interesting.
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
Yes, I agree with much of what you suggest.

I didn't word things well - and probably now - but just explained that Murray had been previously accused of sex offences as it is possible some may consider that to be relevant.

I am not making any assumptions and I am not saying it is impossible for there to be grey areas but on the whole I am struggling to see any grey area, did Salmond do anything wrong or was there a job done on him.

Also, as Murray says, were all those involved working on their own and Sturgeon knew nothing about it or was she involved on the job that was done on Salmond ?

All very interesting but if Salmond is not guilty I feel very sorry for him and the people responsible should be punished appropriately, just as he would have been if found guilty.

Once again, I don't think I've worded that well but all very interesting.
Click to expand...
It comes from the heart, mate, it is actually difficult to write anything about allegations of sexual assault without appearing to be taking a black and white view. I guess I come back to, AS was tried in court, by a jury of women, and found not guilty.

Edit to add, just had a few minutes to research the allegations against him. The Wiki para was lifted from the Guardian in 2004. he was cleared of all charges. As Ambassador, he was a thorn in the side of the FO and US State department, who wanted to deal with an appallingly corrupt, homophobic, human rights abusing country for strategic reasons, and the charges were as a result of the campaign to get him out. You are 100%, this is where his sensitivity comes from, and why he is prepared to die on this hill.
 
Last edited:
The SNP and NS will be back in with much the same majority as there’s no other party to vote for in Scotland. They’re not ever going to vote Tory, and as was said earlier, Starmer doesn’t inspire.
 
Matesrates said:
The SNP and NS will be back in with much the same majority as there’s no other party to vote for in Scotland. They’re not ever going to vote Tory, and as was said earlier, Starmer doesn’t inspire.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure where this idea comes from that there are no Tories in Scotland? Labour is the party who need to up their act.
 
Rumours circulating that three members of SNP Finance & Audit Committee have resigned.
Claims of Peter Murrell refusing to give access to party books.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Some more on the resignations: https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-invisible-weaving/

It seems that there are two issues:
  1. "massive" bank charges, indicating that the party is running an overdraft;
  2. £600,000 that was ring-fenced for an independence campaign has disappeared.
Interesting.
Click to expand...
Could also be because it shows that all those additional members that the SNP have got because St Nichola performed so well, were actually fabricated.

Can't believe this is getting so little press attention
 
Tangerinemoss said:
Can't believe this is getting so little press attention
Click to expand...

Is seems that WOS broke this at about 4 this afternoon, the mainstream press would want something more than that before reporting it.

If true will the people involved make any kind of official statement about the circumstances of their departure? I would've thought that ethically they have a duty to do exactly that.

Watch this space.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
It comes from the heart, mate, it is actually difficult to write anything about allegations of sexual assault without appearing to be taking a black and white view. I guess I come back to, AS was tried in court, by a jury of women, and found not guilty.

Edit to add, just had a few minutes to research the allegations against him. The Wiki para was lifted from the Guardian in 2004. he was cleared of all charges. As Ambassador, he was a thorn in the side of the FO and US State department, who wanted to deal with an appallingly corrupt, homophobic, human rights abusing country for strategic reasons, and the charges were as a result of the campaign to get him out. You are 100%, this is where his sensitivity comes from, and why he is prepared to die on this hill.
Click to expand...

All good Moss, I get all you say, I just didn't word things well myself.

I'm going round in circles but I think if Sturgeon was willing to see Salmond punished - he could have been incarcerated if found guilty on certain charges - for something that he didn't do then she is not fit for office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top