Nipper Salmond

[welshbairn]

40 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

Incidentally....whats wi the red dots for saying everyone in the SNP should want independence as soon as possible?

No red dots from me, but there is zero chance of a successful referendum until after the Holyrood election, and Labour will be pure salivating at the prospect of a split in the party with Cherry and Robertson battling for Edinburgh Central and the Bath trans obsessive weirdo rallying his gullible twitter funders against Sturgeon. It's not going to happen though, SNP members aren't on the whole that stupid. The Salmond thing is a distraction, he's not coming back.

Edited March 28, 2020 by welshbairn

[git-intae-thum]

17 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

No red dots from me, but there is zero chance of a successful referendum until after the Holyrood election, and Labour will be pure salivating at the prospect of a split in the party with Cherry and Robertson battling for Edinburgh Central and the Bath trans obsessive weirdo rallying his gullible twitter funders against Sturgeon. It's not going to happen though, SNP members aren't on the whole that stupid. The Salmond thing is a distraction, he's not coming back.

I think Salmond is likely finished in front line politics.....but that doesn't mean what has possibly happened to him should be swept under the carpet.....as many people , whose opinion, I normally respect, seem to be suggesting.

It all leaves a bad taste. We will see what happens.

What worries me, is that there are indications that the SNP leadership are becoming increasingly out of touch with the base.

As I stated a few pages back. One of the real eye openers from the Salmond court case, was that people so high up on the SNP could be ....(to paraphrase)...... lukewarm about independence.

How the hell is that happening? That is like the core policy.....or it should be.

And is it indication that the SNP....now being seen as the party of establishment in Scotland....is attracting exactly the same sort of troughers and careerists that slab was infected with for so long. 

If that is the case, the cause of independence is in serious trouble. These type of folk have no ambition to be radical....and they will not lead a push for an independence that would upset their little nest.

I am worried.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Rejoin the Labour Party?

Considering I left over 25+ years ago that's unlikely.

[git-intae-thum]

6 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Rejoin the Labour Party?

Considering I left over 25+ years ago that's unlikely.

Lol.....

 

[ICTJohnboy]

On 26/03/2020 at 21:07, git-intae-thum said:

Dear oh dear.

The snobbery and condescension drips. It's almost like listening to a bunch of new labour supporters circa 2005 moaning about them f@ckin socialists spoiling the party. 

Funny that

Campbell is hard to stomach at times......but the "yer da" element as you put it are the same folk who stomped the pavements and chapped the doors in 2014. They are also the backbone of the SNP. 

They want independence. The want it soon. So should everyone in the SNP.

 

Someone needs to bang a few heads together and remind them what it was they joined the SNP for.

[Suspect Device]

1 hour ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

Someone needs to bang a few heads together and remind them what it was they joined the SNP for.

Career advancement for some by the looks of it.

 

Much like c***s who had no interest in the Labour movement joined Scottish Labour in the past.

Easy money and a job for life?

[The_Kincardine]

3 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

If that is the case, the cause of independence is in serious trouble. These type of folk have no ambition to be radical....and they will not lead a push for an independence that would upset their little nest.

I am worried.

Damascene moment for our big pal.  Imagine thinking (beforehand) that Natter politicians, somehow, broke the political mould.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Lol..... [emoji226][emoji476]
 

[invergowrie arab]

On 26/03/2020 at 21:07, git-intae-thum said:

Funny but the "yer da" element as you put it are the same folk who stomped the pavements and chapped the doors in 2014. They are also the backbone of the SNP. 

As a branch organiser I can confirm they fucking are not 

[welshbairn]

A letter from Salmond's accusers which will no doubt divide opinion.

Quote

The jury has delivered a majority verdict on the charges brought against the former First Minister.

We are devastated by the verdict. However it is our fervent hope that as a society we can move forward in our understanding of sexual harassment and sexual assault.

In defending Alex Salmond, Gordon Jackson quoted Woman H and said his client should have been a ‘better man’.  

He said behaviour which others described as demeaning, intimidating and humiliating, was ‘trivial’.

The behaviours that Alex Salmond and his defence team admitted to in evidence were not and are not trivial.

Today we want to send a strong and indisputable message that such behaviours should not be tolerated – by any person, in any position, under any circumstances. 

This has been a traumatic process however we thank Police Scotland and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service for taking our experiences seriously and for allowing our voices to be heard.

Many of us did speak up at the time of our incidents but were faced with procedures that could not deal with complaints against such a powerful figure.

Others were silenced by fear of repercussions.

It was our hope, as individuals, that through coming forward at this time we could achieve justice and enact change.

We remain firm in our belief that coming forward to report our experiences and concerns was the right thing to do.

But it is clear we alone cannot achieve the change we seek.  

The outcome of this trial will pose many questions and be cause for much debate.

But as politicians, commentators and society reflect on this case, we would ask you to consider whether behaviour which is so often merely described as ‘inappropriate’ or is tolerated by society, is acceptable towards your daughters, granddaughters, sisters, wives, friends, and colleagues.

Many of them will already have suffered such conduct. Often in silence.

We would also request that as you debate, you conduct it respectfully and stay mindful of the many women in Scotland who may have had traumatic experiences and are considering whether or not Scotland is a country in which they can come forward to seek help and support.

This is more important now than ever before.

All people should feel safe, valued and equal in society and their workplace and it is imperative to ensure robust complaint structures are in place.

We should all take strength in calling out bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault wherever it takes place.

And we should all seek to create an environment in which people can challenge and report these behaviours without hesitation or fear of retribution.

Some say that women’s fight for respect has gone ‘too far’. We argue it has far to go.

For too long, behaviour which should be condemned has been accepted and excused.

For too long perpetrators in positions of power have been shielded by their ability to influence and intimidate.  

For too long women’s complaints have been dismissed or swept under the carpet.  

And for too long, women have been let down by organisational structures which should exist to protect them, not put them in situations which endanger their welfare.

This must end.

To those who have spoken out in support – thank you, we see you.

While we are devastated by the verdict, we will not let it define us.

We hope through shining a light on our experiences, it will serve to protect and empower women in the future.

Be brave, be loud, be heard.

Signed,

Woman A, Woman B, Woman C, Woman D, Woman F, Woman, G, Woman H, Woman J, Woman K

https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/news/while-we-are-devastated-by-the-verdict-we-will-not-let-it-define-us-/

[Honest_Man#1]

I see Gordon Jackson has had an absolute Weston Super. Filmed talking on the Edinburgh-Glasgow train about Salmond being a bully and a sex pest, and also talking about two of the accusers.

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

I see Gordon Jackson has had an absolute Weston Super. Filmed talking on the Edinburgh-Glasgow train about Salmond being a bully and a sex pest, and also talking about two of the accusers.

Think it's the first time I've seen a Times exclusive not behind a firewall. P.S. Most of it is but the video is there..

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/alex-salmond-was-a-bully-and-a-sex-pest-his-own-qc-says-on-train-jfgbkr857

Edited March 29, 2020 by welshbairn

[Bula Bairn]

31 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Think it's the first time I've seen a Times exclusive not behind a firewall. P.S. Most of it is but the video is there..

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/alex-salmond-was-a-bully-and-a-sex-pest-his-own-qc-says-on-train-jfgbkr857

The video  doesn't show him calling Salmond a 'sex pest' hence it's not subtitled.  

The Faculty of Advocates have tweeted about it but that won't be reported...   

 

[Granny Danger]

2 hours ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

I see Gordon Jackson has had an absolute Weston Super. Filmed talking on the Edinburgh-Glasgow train about Salmond being a bully and a sex pest, and also talking about two of the accusers.

Hopefully discrediting both Salmond and the butler himself.

Win, win.

Edited March 29, 2020 by Granny Danger

[Detournement]

Murdoch papers coming out to bat for the Sturgeon clique. 

[strichener]

3 hours ago, welshbairn said:

A letter from Salmond's accusers which will no doubt divide opinion.

https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/news/while-we-are-devastated-by-the-verdict-we-will-not-let-it-define-us-/

Whilst I understand the right to anonimity during the case, if you want to continue to attack innocent people after a not-guilty verdict then you should not be able to do so without revealing who you are.

Quote

It was our hope, as individuals, that through coming forward at this time we could achieve justice and enact change.

Well as indviduals, release your own statements in your own name.

[The DA]

6 minutes ago, strichener said:

Whilst I understand the right to anonimity during the case, if you want to continue to attack innocent people after a not-guilty verdict then you should not be able to do so without revealing who you are.

Well as indviduals, release your own statements in your own name.

I haven't seen the full letter, just excerpts on the BBC site.  Anyone able to post it?

Am I right to assume that what the women are saying is that what Salmond admitted to doing isn't currently considered a crime but should be?  Looking for a change in the law?

[strichener]

2 minutes ago, The DA said:

I haven't seen the full letter, just excerpts on the BBC site.  Anyone able to post it?

Am I right to assume that what the women are saying is that what Salmond admitted to doing isn't currently considered a crime but should be?  Looking for a change in the law?

The link has been provided already but here it is again:   Linky

[The DA]

Thanks, strichener.

This seems to come down to whether the law should be changed to recognise what AS admitted to as being sexual harassment and/or assault.  I don't see it as being an attack on Salmond, per se - he's already admitted to the behaviour in question.

[strichener]

1 minute ago, The DA said:

Thanks, strichener.

This seems to come down to whether the law should be changed to recognise what AS admitted to as being sexual harassment and/or assault.  I don't see it as being an attack on Salmond, per se - he's already admitted to the behaviour in question.

If you are going to use the case as a platform to crusade for changes in the law then you should be open about who you are and not relying on the persona provided to you for anonimity in a court of law. 

Obviously if he was found guilty of any of the charges then I would respect their right to anonimity and a right to comment on the case.  In the circumstances it appears to be another discrepency in the law that seeks to provide protection to accusers regardless of the merits of their accusations whilst ignoring the damage inflicted on the innocent.