Jump to content

Alex Salmond.


kevthedee

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, alta-pete said:

I thought this a very well written article on the whole thing:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/insight-alex-salmond-inquiry-heads-final-showdown-3134295#disqus-comment-section

tl;dr? Looks like it'll all end as a fudge with no-one really satisfied at the outcome. No-one outside of those with the keenest interest in politics really cares, NS carries on due to her huge personal approval ratings and AS retires a bitter old man, stymied by his own, earlier and poorly worded, legislation.

Agreed. It's pretty much the only summary I've found which isn't frothing at the mouth in one direction or the other

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, alta-pete said:

I thought this a very well written article on the whole thing:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/insight-alex-salmond-inquiry-heads-final-showdown-3134295#disqus-comment-section

tl;dr? Looks like it'll all end as a fudge with no-one really satisfied at the outcome. No-one outside of those with the keenest interest in politics really cares, NS carries on due to her huge personal approval ratings and AS retires a bitter old man, stymied by his own, earlier and poorly worded, legislation.

 

42 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

Agreed. It's pretty much the only summary I've found which isn't frothing at the mouth in one direction or the other

Ditto.

It goes on a bit, but well worth reading. The Andrew Neil involvement, for me, is disturbing to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bob Mahelp
15 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

Ditto.

It goes on a bit, but well worth reading. The Andrew Neil involvement, for me, is disturbing to say the least.

Every single element of this farce is loaded with bias and malicious intent. From the shabby way that the SG conducted investigations against Salmond, to his ego and thirst for revenge, to the way that The Spectator has become involved with the obvious intent of trying to de-stabilize the Scottish government.

I think that article is close to the truth, in that there will be no real satisfactory end to all this. Salmond's 'bombshell evidence' will turn out to be a litany of accusations based on opinion rather than fact, and Sturgeon will be criticised for poor choices  but cleared of anything underhand. 

And so those that are desperate for a smoking gun will be disappointed, but still the suspicion of ineptitude will hover over the SG. 

And nobody will be happy. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with this too. One thing that comes out of this is that Murdo Fraser is a total arsehole with Jacquie Baillie not far behind. Neither should be anywhere near Twitter with the sort of stuff that's illustrated in this article. The whole thing is split on party lines, has little or nothing to do with improving matters going forward and has everything to do with posturing. Complete waste of time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

Every single element of this farce is loaded with bias and malicious intent. From the shabby way that the SG conducted investigations against Salmond, to his ego and thirst for revenge, to the way that The Spectator has become involved with the obvious intent of trying to de-stabilize the Scottish government.

I think that article is close to the truth, in that there will be no real satisfactory end to all this. Salmond's 'bombshell evidence' will turn out to be a litany of accusations based on opinion rather than fact, and Sturgeon will be criticised for poor choices  but cleared of anything underhand. 

And so those that are desperate for a smoking gun will be disappointed, but still the suspicion of ineptitude will hover over the SG. 

And nobody will be happy. 

 

Probably a fair summary.

Still can’t see what’s wrong with the Spectator becoming involved. Both the Chairman and Editor are Scots and it has a disproportionately high number of Scots readers. A great read and has contributors from all persuasions and backgrounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bob Mahelp
10 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Probably a fair summary.

Still can’t see what’s wrong with the Spectator becoming involved. Both the Chairman and Editor are Scots and it has a disproportionately high number of Scots readers. A great read and has contributors from all persuasions and backgrounds.

I don't necessarily think there's anything wrong with The Spectator being involved, if it's genuinely for journalistic integrity. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

 

I think that article is close to the truth, in that there will be no real satisfactory end to all this. Salmond's 'bombshell evidence' will turn out to be a litany of accusations based on opinion rather than fact

 

The evidence is WhatsApp messages held by the PF. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazed to see that Garavelli article regarded in some quarters as a fair summary...

Alternative TL;DR: ‘I don’t really care whether Salmond or Sturgeon come out of this worse, as long it wrecks the SNP. Tee hee’.

I was astonished she only managed one Weinstein reference in the whole piece; losing her touch...

People are aware, I hope, that she’s done more than other individual to facilitate identification of the complainers? (Even though that doesn’t appear to have been her intention.)

Anyway, it looks as though Dorrian has allowed complainers to be referred to by name, as long as that isn’t done in relation to their status as complainers.

My understanding is that this will allow Salmond and/or Aberdein to refer to individuals involved in the internal investigation... as long as they don’t make any reference to same individuals later becoming complainers. Should open things up a bit, if not entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Detournement said:

The evidence is WhatsApp messages held by the PF. 

Yep. And more.

It’s funny how people who are adamant there wasn’t any conspiracy (you know, the criminal kind, as opposed to ‘theories’) are suddenly keen on a fudged outcome, now that it’s increasingly clear that there was a conspiracy, but it’s failed.

This ‘the whole truth will probably never come out, good and bad on both sides’ line (which is where the likes of Garavelli have gone, now that it’s clear ‘Get Salmond’ has failed) is just as deliberately dishonest as the initial ‘nothing to see here’.

Why do people think it’s basically OK for govts, civil service, procurators to be corrupt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bob Mahelp
45 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Yep. And more.

It’s funny how people who are adamant there wasn’t any conspiracy (you know, the criminal kind, as opposed to ‘theories’) are suddenly keen on a fudged outcome, now that it’s increasingly clear that there was a conspiracy, but it’s failed.

This ‘the whole truth will probably never come out, good and bad on both sides’ line (which is where the likes of Garavelli have gone, now that it’s clear ‘Get Salmond’ has failed) is just as deliberately dishonest as the initial ‘nothing to see here’.

Why do people think it’s basically OK for govts, civil service, procurators to be corrupt?

You criticise other people, then sign off with some mental accusation that betrays your desperation for Nicola Sturgeon to be hung, drawn and quartered. 

Pardon us if we don't take you all that seriously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bob Mahelp
1 hour ago, Detournement said:

The evidence is WhatsApp messages held by the PF. 

Which legally cannot be used. 

That's hardly the fault of Nicola Sturgeon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said:

You criticise other people, then sign off with some mental accusation that betrays your desperation for Nicola Sturgeon to be hung, drawn and quartered. 

Pardon us if we don't take you all that seriously. 

Take me as seriously as you like... but stop making things up, eh?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Ghost of B A R P said:

Yep. And more.

It’s funny how people who are adamant there wasn’t any conspiracy (you know, the criminal kind, as opposed to ‘theories’) are suddenly keen on a fudged outcome, now that it’s increasingly clear that there was a conspiracy, but it’s failed.

This ‘the whole truth will probably never come out, good and bad on both sides’ line (which is where the likes of Garavelli have gone, now that it’s clear ‘Get Salmond’ has failed) is just as deliberately dishonest as the initial ‘nothing to see here’.

Why do people think it’s basically OK for govts, civil service, procurators to be corrupt?

This is the entirely correct opinion (IMO). A wholly unsatisfactory outcome. 

AS is a sleazy fucker, but not criminally so.

Murrell  isn’t to be trusted with the tuck shop money but, as unelected, nothing can be done. 

NS says a big boy did it and ran away, looks at the floor and waits for it to blow over.  

Leslie Evans mutters something that she couldn’t remember yesterday and departs with her full pension intact.

Public purse, including this escapade, is down north of £1M. And no one is left writing the cheque  except us. 

But hey, they’ll deliver Salvation to the Scots so it’s all worth it! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...