Nipper Salmond

[strichener]

3 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Peter Murrell and Sturgeon by the looks of it. And the UK establishment obviously don't like him and want to hurt the Indy campaign.

The fact that you watched the state broadcaster make a documentary where they ommited the key evidence that led to a not guilty verdict on the charge of attempted rape and you still think it's above board is astounding.

It was the BBC, the BBC bias thread is a good indication on Welshbairns position regarding "Auntie"

Edited November 9, 2020 by strichener

[Detournement]

4 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Why do you think he made an official apology to the woman concerned? This isn't lads being lads. And the charge of attempted rape was found not proven, not not guilty.

There were two attempted rape charges. The June 2014 one was not guilty.

That's the one with the variable cast of dinner guests and TAS's Da dying.

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Peter Murrell and Sturgeon by the looks of it. And the UK establishment obviously don't like him and want to hurt the Indy campaign.

The fact that you watched the state broadcaster make a documentary where they ommited the key evidence that led to a not guilty verdict on the charge of attempted rape and you still think it's above board is astounding.

You think the SNP tell the BBC what to do? That's a first.

[welshbairn]

14 minutes ago, strichener said:

It was the BBC, the BBC bias thread is a good indication on Welshbairns position regarding "Auntie"

I might get annoyed by the automatic BBCbad comments when their coverage is much the same as everyone else, but that programme was inexcusable and I said so at the time. Not sure how it helped the UK or Edinburgh Establishment crush the non-existent threat of Alex Salmond though. 

Edited November 9, 2020 by welshbairn

[NotThePars]

13 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Peter Murrell and Sturgeon by the looks of it. And the UK establishment obviously don't like him and want to hurt the Indy campaign.

The fact that you watched the state broadcaster make a documentary where they ommited the key evidence that led to a not guilty verdict on the charge of attempted rape and you still think it's above board is astounding.

Not sure why the UK establishment want to focus on Salmond if they want to crush the independence movement and it's clearly had zero effect so aye maybe it was then actually okay.

[Detournement]

7 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

Not sure why the UK establishment want to focus on Salmond if they want to crush the independence movement and it's clearly had zero effect so aye maybe it was then actually okay.

Salmond led the protests against the war on Serbia, has done more than anyone to break up the UK and then went to work for the Russian government. These are not trivial matters and the UK establishment are vindictive people.

The claim that Salmond wouldn't be targeted by the UK state is reminiscnt  of all the braying that Assange being in the embasssay had nothing to do with America..... 

Edited November 9, 2020 by Detournement

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

So the SNP were terrified that Alex Salmond was going to come back into politics and steal their voters, and they entered into a pact with their natural ally, the British establishment, who were angry that Salmond failed to prevent a war 20 years ago and fronted the RT version of the One Show? 

[D Angelo Barksdale]

Glad I posted that picture of him.

[Detournement]

1 minute ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

So the SNP were terrified that Alex Salmond was going to come back into politics and steal their voters, and they entered into a pact with their natural ally, the British establishment, who were angry that Salmond failed to prevent a war 20 years ago and fronted the RT version of the One Show? 

I don't think that when the ball started rolling on this it was intended to end up in criminal charges. If Evans, Lloyd and MacKinnon hadn't fucked up the processes the Scottish government action would have forced him to withdraw from public life. Salmond winning the civil trial led to the criminal cases. 

If you think the three things I've mentioned are insignificant I think you are very naive.  Corbyn has had similar treatment for similar political actions.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

6 minutes ago, Detournement said:

I don't think that when the ball started rolling on this it was intended to end up in criminal charges. If Evans, Lloyd and MacKinnon hadn't fucked up the processes the Scottish government action would have forced him to withdraw from public life. Salmond winning the civil trial led to the criminal cases. 

If you think the three things I've mentioned are insignificant I think you are very naive.  Corbyn has had similar treatment for similar political actions.

Why did they wait until he was a political irrelevance then? Would this conspiracy not have made a little more sense when he was leading a party building to declare an independence referendum? What effect does smearing him now have on anyone? And again, why would the SNP work with the establishment on this? How could a conspiracy that's so incompetently managed keep itself secret?

Corbyn was heavily smeared when he was a threat to power in this country. It would be very strange to target a minor nuisance who's becoming a joke figure. I wouldn't say I'm naive but I'd say you've never seen a conspiracy you didn't like.

Edited November 9, 2020 by Genuine Hibs Fan

[Detournement]

1 minute ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

Why did they wait until he was a political irrelevance then? Would this conspiracy not have made a little more sense when he was leading a party building to declare an independence referendum? What effect does smearing him now have on anyone? And again, why would the SNP work with the establishment on this? 

Corbyn was heavily smeared when he was a threat to power in this country. It would be very strange to target a minor nuisance who's becoming a joke figure. I wouldn't say I'm naive but I'd say you've never seen a conspiracy you didn't like.

He wasn't a political irrelevance.

The UK establishment are comfortable with Sturgeon and her belief that Westminster has complete control over future referendums. That position will be challenged if Indyref2 doesn't happen within the next five years. Salmond will naturally be one of the people challenging it. 

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

1 minute ago, Detournement said:

He wasn't a political irrelevance.

The UK establishment are comfortable with Sturgeon and her belief that Westminster has complete control over future referendums. That position will be challenged if Indyref2 doesn't happen within the next five years. Salmond will naturally be one of the people challenging it. 

He didn't hold an elected position did he? And he wasn't the head of any particularly important faction of the SNP. I still don't understand why the SNP work with the establishment, but I think to square that one you have to believe that they are secretly run by people who don't want independence. Nor do I understand how a conspiracy that is so incompetent it accidentally ends up prosecuting someone remains under wraps. I've no doubts about the rat fucking that goes on but this one doesn't make sense to me.

[Boo Khaki]

Swinney confirming today what I've long suspected is one of the main drivers behind the SG's recalcitrance in cooperating fully with the enquiry. They know damn fine it's impossible for them to be completely transparent without totally giving away the identities of at least one or two of the complainants.

For those who haven't yet worked it out, trust me. Once you know who they are, the whole thing takes on a totally different perspective. It's still doesn't excuse the tardiness, and it goes without saying this has become an exercise in spin and damage limitation, but it's clearly a factor given that there are already people facing court actions for allegedly facilitating 'jigsaw identification'.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Swinney confirming today what I've long suspected is one of the main drivers behind the SG's recalcitrance in cooperating fully with the enquiry. They know damn fine it's impossible for them to be completely transparent without totally giving away the identities of at least one or two of the complainants.
For those who haven't yet worked it out, trust me. Once you know who they are, the whole thing takes on a totally different perspective. It's still doesn't excuse the tardiness, and it goes without saying this has become an exercise in spin and damage limitation, but it's clearly a factor given that there are already people facing court actions for allegedly facilitating 'jigsaw identification'.

I know some are more than happy to see them named but, personally, I think it would set a very dangerous precedent.

[Boo Khaki]

Oh of course they shouldn't be named, but this is the crux of the issue. It's impossible for the relevant SNP figures to be entirely transparent without making it blindingly obvious exactly who one of the complainants is at the very least. 

The thing is, I believe it would actually suit the SNP and FM, in a purely political sense, to throw that complainant under the bus, because doing so would enable them to make it absolutely clear that it wasn't Sturgeon and the SNP driving any supposed 'plot' to nobble Salmond, but they simply can not and should not, and rightly so, so they have no option but to continue to look obstinate and out to deliberately obfuscate the enquiry.

This shambles is, in itself, one of the consequences of what I'm referring to when I say that understanding the identity puts a wholly different slant on things.

Edited November 21, 2020 by Boo Khaki

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Oh of course they shouldn't be named, but this is the crux of the issue. It's impossible for the relevant SNP figures to be entirely transparent without making it blindingly obvious exactly who one of the complainants is at the very least.  The thing is, I believe it would actually suit the SNP and FM to throw that complainant under the bus, because doing so would enable them to make it absolutely clear that it wasn't Sturgeon and the SNP driving any supposed 'plot' to nobble Salmond, but they simply can't, and rightly so, so they have no option but to continue to look obstinate and out to deliberately obfuscate the enquiry.

This shambles is, in itself, one of the consequences of what I'm referring to when I say that understanding the identity puts a wholly different slant on things.

 

The politicians investigating this know it as well. 

 

 

It's just a fucking game to these opportunists.

 

Irrespective of anyone's views on the Salmond case it is vital that the anonymity of the complainants is maintained - as it should in any case like this - it would be a shocking betrayal to do anything else.

 

 

 

[Boo Khaki]

I think it's only a matter of time before Salmond, somehow, attempts to get this knowledge into public domain anyway. I don't think he was just issuing idle threats when he said in the aftermath of his acquittal that this was far from over, and that once things had gotten back on an even keel he fully intended to pursue the matter further. 

How far he'll get I do not know. I can't see any court somehow ignoring the established precedent of protecting the anonymity of complainants, but for what it's worth, I'm no great fan of Salmond, but I do believe he has a point about the nature exact chain of events that led to the internal inquiry requiring further scrutiny. It's clear to me that there is more in play than simple incompetence on the part of a couple of senior civil servants, and I say that with no intent to assert that I believe in plots or conspiracies. Given what I believe I know, if I was in Salmond's shoes I'd also want the full facts in public domain, but I doubt he's likely to be able to achieve that and stay within the bounds of the law.

[welshbairn]

28 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Given what I believe I know, if I was in Salmond's shoes I'd also want the full facts in public domain

Not sure what I would want in Salmond's shoes. Revenge? Exoneration from allegations that he behaved badly but not so badly that his behaviour met the criminal threshold, despite that being admitted to by his lawyer, and him personally apologising for it? Resurrection of his political career? New RT contract now he's back in the news and being disruptive? Whatever's best to further the cause of Scottish Independence? 

P.S. I haven't got a clue who made the allegations, and I've made no efforts to find out. This is the way.

Edited November 21, 2020 by welshbairn

[Boo Khaki]

I think Salmond is egotistical enough not to just drop this and accept that he's had a lucky escape, and I also think that what might drive him is not, strictly speaking, revenge, but a genuine belief that there's enough to suggest that at least one of the complainants was acting maliciously.

I think that it might irk him enough that rather than being scared off by the fact he'll essentially be emphasising for effect the fact he's admitted to being a lecherous git, he wont be able to reconcile that with the fact he feels unfairly impugned by someone he believes was acting maliciously. "Yes, I'm a sleaze, but I'm not that particular sleaze" if you will. Obviously civil actions are out, I don't think he's that daft, but I'd genuinely be surprised if the March 23rd speech is his last word on this whole matter.

FWIW, I never made any deliberate effort to discover the identity of any of the complainants either. It was the simple act of reading two separate articles printed in mainstream newspapers that gave it away for me. This is why I find the Craig Murray action utterly laughable. I'd never heard of his blog until months after I'd sussed the identity, yet he's up in court, and the people who actually did give it away are not. 

Edit - Actually, if I'm totally honest, I suspected I knew one of the identities months before the trial, thanks to the aforementioned articles, but it was the reporting from the trial that convinced me that I'm 100% certain I'm correct, and not Craig Murray's reporting, but something I read in an update on the main BBC news webpage. So unless the BBC are also being dragged up in front of the beak for contempt...

Edited November 21, 2020 by Boo Khaki

[welshbairn]

9 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

I think Salmond is egotistical enough not to just drop this and accept that he's had a lucky escape, and I also think that what might drive him is not, strictly speaking, revenge, but a genuine belief that there's enough to suggest that at least one of the complainants was acting maliciously.

I think that it might irk him enough that rather than being scared off by the fact he'll essentially be emphasising for effect the fact he's admitted to being a lecherous git, he wont be able to reconcile that with the fact he feels unfairly impugned by someone he believes was acting maliciously. "Yes, I'm a sleaze, but I'm not that particular sleaze" if you will. Obviously civil actions are out, I don't think he's that daft, but I'd genuinely be surprised if the March 23rd speech is his last word on this whole matter.

FWIW, I never made any deliberate effort to discover the identity of any of the complainants either. It was the simple act of reading two separate articles printed in mainstream newspapers that gave it away for me. This is why I find the Craig Murray action utterly laughable. I'd never heard of his blog until months after I'd sussed the identity, yet he's up in court, and the people who actually did give it away are not. 

Edit - Actually, if I'm totally honest, I suspected I knew one of the identities months before the trial, thanks to the aforementioned articles, but it was the reporting from the trial that convinced me that I'm 100% certain I'm correct, and not Craig Murray's reporting, but something I read in an update on the main BBC news webpage. So unless the BBC are also being dragged up in front of the beak for contempt...

There's probably a different legal liability between an accidental jigsaw identification revealed to an astute observer of the BBC, who, however horrible, probably had no motive in revealing the identity of an accuser, and a blogger who tried with all his might to reveal the identities without breaching legal liability. Judgement will be served.