Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Scotsnet

Welcome to Scotsnet - discuss all aspects of life in Scotland, including relocating, schools and local areas.

Salmond v Sturgeon Round 2.

996 replies

Cismyfatarse · 28/02/2021 18:29

As the conversation is interesting and the thread is nearly full. Does it matter if Sturgeon is guilty - do you know or care? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/scotsnet/4153007-Does-it-matter-if-Sturgeon-is-guilty-do-you-know-or-care

OP posts:
Thread gallery
25
happygolurkey · 02/03/2021 15:32

I don't necessarily disagree but it's a slightly risky question in this case as its often used as a way to stop discussion - if you can't explain Sturgeon/whoever else's motive then it can't be true.

In what way does the question of motive 'stop discussion'? When I've had various theories put to me on here about the motive for the conspiracy they've not really sounded plausible, to me at least. I've not said 'therefore it can't be true', I've just probed further on what I've thought didn't really add up. So surely it encourages discussion?
or are we back to it's about Salmond/it's not about Salmond, it's about procedure/it's not about procedure/it's about motive....

StatisticallyChallenged · 02/03/2021 15:36

I wasn't specifically meaning here but yes I have seen numerous people use it as a shutdown, along the lines of " I don't believe it because i can't see a motive"

Sometimes you can see the evidence that something is wrong before understanding what or why.

happygolurkey · 02/03/2021 15:51

In matters of politics, it is always key to ask "cui bono"? Who does well out of an action or an omission?

a right, so Lexmitior's theory is sound if used to prove your argument, but 'slightly risky' otherwise.

WouldBeGood · 02/03/2021 15:58

@WaxOnFeckOff I think in the past the system worked better because of the individuals involved and the standards to which professionals and politicians were then held, by themselves as well as others.

It became more difficult with the set up upon devolution.

As a lawyer I cannot believe how the Crown Agent and Lord Advocate have got themselves in this situation. It makes me sad, to be honest.

StatisticallyChallenged · 02/03/2021 16:07

Not even close to what I said.

Dinnafashyersel · 02/03/2021 16:08

Waiting for some of the murk to clear before commenting further but I do think the Rangers debacle is relevant in that it indicates a potential systemic issue.

Re indiscretions on the Edinburgh train. I used to commute frequently. Last time I did it was with the DC going through to the Fringe. Disgusted at the businessman hogging 4 seats on a packed train while I was managing 2 small DC standing in the aisles. Glanced at his laptop and he had correspondence open regarding one of my old clients. Never seen a man move his briefcase and shut up shop so quickly after I happened to remark to my DC I wondered if such and such was still to the fore and how they were getting on with so and so. Very pleasant journey sat next to him with the DC. Cannot remember what nonsense they were on that day but much more entertaining than his I'm sure.

Business types on the Edinburgh/Glasgow line are rarely mindful of discretion ime. Something to do with inflated egos. Liz Lochhead was sitting across the aisle so I must have been more discreet or I'm sure I'd be immortalised in verse by now.

Blurberoo · 02/03/2021 16:20

@Dinnafashyersel Grin

happygolurkey · 02/03/2021 16:24

Business types on the Edinburgh/Glasgow line are rarely mindful of discretion

This always strikes me Dinna. I find it bizarre - I've heard folk who obviously must be bosses talking about staff disciplinary matters and all sorts. makes your ears curl some stuff

Liz Lochead Smile oh my God, I love her - happy memories of seeing her perform with the late great Michael Marra at Ed fest. Imagine if you'd ended up with an ode to you on the the Ed/Glesga line Grin

ATieLikeRichardGere · 02/03/2021 16:27

Maybe this is shaky territory but I’m just curious to see if others have found the same. The name of one of the complainers in the Salmond case seems to be tossed around quite openly in the public domain, though I can’t tell if it’s true obviously. But I didn’t have to look far to find it and without much difficulty I used information in different press articles about the trial as jigsaw pieces to corroborate that this was consistent with the name that’s out there. So, without sharing any identifying details whatsoever or info sources, I’m just interested to know if others also happened upon this and if it’s considered common knowledge, although obviously it is unspeakable. And might be false.

Dinnafashyersel · 02/03/2021 16:33

Yep. I always stuck to sleeping and eating my lunch on the train. Once caused hilarity at the Heathrow security cos I had Cosmo and the Beano in my briefcase for inflight entertainment.

Anyway. Nothing to add to the more serious matters at hand so I'll haud ma wheesht.

TokyoSushi · 02/03/2021 16:38

Paul Hutcheon
@paulhutcheon
·
6m
New: The Tories will push ahead with a no confidence vote in Deputy First Minister John Swinney on Thursday if the legal advice for the Salmond Inquiry has not been published in full by then.

And still it rumbles on, surely they have to publish it before the committee, or delay the committee?

StatisticallyChallenged · 02/03/2021 16:39

@ATieLikeRichardGere

Maybe this is shaky territory but I’m just curious to see if others have found the same. The name of one of the complainers in the Salmond case seems to be tossed around quite openly in the public domain, though I can’t tell if it’s true obviously. But I didn’t have to look far to find it and without much difficulty I used information in different press articles about the trial as jigsaw pieces to corroborate that this was consistent with the name that’s out there. So, without sharing any identifying details whatsoever or info sources, I’m just interested to know if others also happened upon this and if it’s considered common knowledge, although obviously it is unspeakable. And might be false.
Know what you are getting at and it's not hard to figure out so is fairly widely known.
happygolurkey · 02/03/2021 16:45

Yep. I always stuck to sleeping and eating my lunch on the train. Once caused hilarity at the Heathrow security cos I had Cosmo and the Beano in my briefcase for inflight entertainment.

ha, ha, ha - oh my God!! That gave me a laugh. Grin Grin Grin. suppose it could have been worse...

agreed with your post about the separation and why wasn't this sorted out years ago, by the way.
anyway, i'm a bit too befuzzled by it all just now too. Think i'm needing my tea

Selkiesarereal · 02/03/2021 16:56

My magazine was taken off me as it had a free sample of something or other!

Anyway, I will take some time to read the updates on this and the events of today to see if we are any closer to the truth of the matter.

happygolurkey · 02/03/2021 17:01

ATielikerichard

could I respectfully suggest you don't incite others to do this. whatever you think of this these women must be going through hell with all the baying for blood on social media. plus someone just got jailed for tweeting one of their names. why help to spread it about even more and make things even worse for the complainants? just my thoughts

ATieLikeRichardGere · 02/03/2021 17:07

happygolurkey I accept it probably isn’t a constructive thing to do, but in the course of reading about this story it comes up. I’m not going to say anything against this person on social media. I feel sorry for the women. On the other hand I can’t stand not knowing things. A character flaw.

NicholasTurgeon · 02/03/2021 17:13

“Too wee, too poor, too stupid” isn’t a direct quote from any specific unionist. (I don’t think the SNP has ever claimed it is, but I’m prepared to be corrected if anyone has a source.)

It was used to describe SOME arguments which were used prominently in the anti-independence/No campaign in the run-up to September 2014, specifically to deny that an independent Scotland using all its resources (not just the resources of the SNP) could not be successful, and citing false/disputed/misleading/irrelevant claims to do so, e.g.:

  1. GERS proves that independent Scotland would have a serious deficit which it wouldn’t be able to overcome.
  2. Scotland depends on freeloading via the Barnett Formula, which somehow doesn’t simply redistribute taxes raised in Scotland but mysteriously acquires funds from somewhere else that would be inaccessible in the event of independence.
  3. Scotland will not be allowed to join the EU because it is somehow worse off than, say, Bulgaria (and can’t improve).
  4. Scotland will join the EU, and that’s not really independence.
  5. Scotland alone cannot defend itself/offend everyone else militarily in the manner to which the UK has been accustomed.
  6. Scotland’s economy is not diverse and cannot be diversified; it is dependent on oil and little/nothing else.
  7. N0bOdY kNoWs wHaT cUrR€nC¥ sCoT£aNd WoUlD u$e.

The narrative has been kept up since the Refernedum as well. Here’s a perfect example from the Scotland in Union blog via Andrew Skinner, which unironically sums up most of the above points and yes, does make it quite clear that pro-independence Scots must be, well, stupid: www.scotlandinunion.co.uk/fiona_annelsey

You may agree with that, and if so, fine. But it’s not in bad faith for people who defend independence to disagree and counter the arguments, which they have and do. Every claim and counterclaim is going to be scrutinised; that’s how debate works.

daisyfraser · 02/03/2021 17:23

I don't see what possible difference it makes knowing who the women are.
They are being completely used by Sturgeon to make her very feeble case appear altruistic when it was no such thing.
And in fact it would make more sense if the women realised this and went public to neutralise their 'weaponisation'
Just my thoughts.

daisyfraser · 02/03/2021 17:26

Besides we all know from Sturgeon's treatment of Joanna Cherry - total silence after JC made public she had received a death threat and had to have police protection - that she chooses which women to protect

happygolurkey · 02/03/2021 17:27

I don't see what possible difference it makes knowing who the women are.

there is the small matter of a court order daisy, plus just basic human decency?

StatisticallyChallenged · 02/03/2021 17:29

@daisyfraser

Besides we all know from Sturgeon's treatment of Joanna Cherry - total silence after JC made public she had received a death threat and had to have police protection - that she chooses which women to protect
Undoubtedly, but I think to assume the women are all being weaponised against their wishes may be inaccurate

Going public would not be good for them as a whole, especially combined with the text messages. The public may draw conclusions which are or are not correct.

WouldBeGood · 02/03/2021 17:50

I am longing for a person who supports independence to discuss properly the arguments. I might start a thread on it as it’s not the point of this one.

I don’t subscribe to the view that Scotland is a poor relation and a drain on the rest of the UK though.

I like being Scottish and I find these shenanigans really sad. No one involved is coming across well.

daisyfraser · 02/03/2021 18:01

Pretty impressive - not 24 hours ago she was a confused and befuddled contributor unable to grasp the elements of the case, demanding explanations
This evening handing out legal advice with all the aplomb of someone who's been doing it for years.
The power of Mumsnet, eh?

WouldBeGood · 02/03/2021 18:03

It’s pure dead educational @daisyfraser

LexMitior · 02/03/2021 18:16

@TokyoSushi

Paul Hutcheon *@paulhutcheon* · 6m New: The Tories will push ahead with a no confidence vote in Deputy First Minister John Swinney on Thursday if the legal advice for the Salmond Inquiry has not been published in full by then.

And still it rumbles on, surely they have to publish it before the committee, or delay the committee?

May I drop a little bomb into the mix - which is that the flow of information to this committee is so utterly restricted, I suspect certain parties will allow Sturgeon to give her evidence and then it will be released to the press (or the press will release the information you have) after they've got their rival legal advice to undermine the Crown Office.

That would mean she gives her evidence and gets done in afterwards.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.