Salmond v Sturgeon Round 3 — Comment along with Sturgeon

[PolkadotsAndMoonbeams]

Previous thread here.

Kurt - No. It is 'policed'

@Dinnafashyersel

I see a group of women having their language policed.

Don't be ridiculous. I pointed out the word bitch was inappropriate. I was then accused of being a plant sent here to derail the thread.

The adult way to behave is not use misogynistic language or if you do, accept what you've done and move on.

@Dinnafashyersel

A "conversation" where one side gets to arbitrate on who can say what when about whom?

But one side doesn't get to arbitrate. You can say what you like about who you like whenever you like.

Some people might comment on it but they certainly can't police you or stop you posting. I'm stunned that you would think they could tbh. How do you fancy that would work?

@happygolurkey

so what action could she have taken?

Followed up with journalists, would they give her more information.

Followed up with her staff, what had they heard?

Followed up with her party, her inner circle, what did they know?

Issued an internal communication asking anyone who had a complaint to raise to submit it to the formal process they had just spent 18 months developing.

Are you saying she should have gone to the police or put procedure into action even before a complaint had even been made?

Nowhere did I suggest that. Her own people had advice they should never do that, but they did it anyway.

Should action be taken against everyone over any press enquiry that doesn't even make it to a story

Any question? Not at all. A question about a serious, potentially criminal matter, the nature of which was very high profile so much so they had decided to review their own policy on it? Absolutely. More especially as she is allegedly a "for women" politician who has been outspoken about such issues.

@Orcadianrythyms

I don't think this has made things much clearer. I still think Salmond is a odious misogynist and Sturgeon not clear on events. I find this forum weird, particularly the hatred of Sturgeon who although I've raged at some decisions has provided leadership and compassion during the pandemic beyond any other government figure. I don't post often now cause it's all a bit 'Us for Them' and I don't see voices that reflect my experience.

Can't believe the vitriol against Sturgeon here whilst Salmond gets a much easier ride. He was patronising, awful on Friday with his disdain of women all over his answers. Not even prepared to apologise when offered, taking the chairs 'guidance' and showing his true feelings of woman getting above their station and not rolling over.

Spot on. I feel like I'm watching something different to the folks on this thread...

I am not an SNP member, and am on the fence re the economic visbility of independence but have respect for Nicola's conduct and leadership throughout covid. Am watching the proceedings and have never seen anyone so uncomfortable and talk so much to say so little. I am in the same camp as Orcadianrythyms on this, and do not believe Alex Salmond is an entirely innocent party in his behaviour or has the moral high ground in his legal pursuits but sadly neither do I believe for a second that the Scottish government is being in the least transparent. Its all very House of Cards, with so many agents desperate to unseat the SNP adding to the fray. It is all totally inedifying, sad, and disappointing. The political capital and crowing will be unbearable, whatever. I am staying off Twitter for sure. ☹️

Margaret Mitchell has been quite strong today IMO. She's asking good questions (and she's clearly not reading them out, certainly not what I'm currently listening to)

Why is she endlessly equating minimum-pricing of alcohol with a man fighting for his life who was trying to avoid being jailed ???

@Graffitiqueen

Ah so any criticism on sturgeon is misogyny. Got it. 🙄

Of course not.

However, comments like:
Bitch
Shag me shoes
She might make better decisions if her personal circumstances were different

All of which I've seen recently on here are pretty misogynistic.

See also the PP who phrased it far better than me the contrast between the descriptions of her and AS.

'do not believe Alex Salmond is an entirely innocent party' I'm afraid you will have to believe it because that's what the jury decided.

Yes I agree. So many words but yet so little said that I can really get to grips with

He is innocent in the eyes of the law. He himself has admitted to morally dubious and unacceptable behaviour.

She sounds exhausted.

@daisyfraser

Why is she endlessly equating minimum-pricing of alcohol with a man fighting for his life who was trying to avoid being jailed ???

Because the original research said the policy would likely fail. It hasn't. Her point is that governments have to weigh up advice with how important a policy is, even though on balance it might fail.

It's MN who is the arbiter on language used, not anyone here.

This is about the fifth thread I've been on where those who oppose the SNP cry about being silenced, when actually they have mostly got the run of this board.

TL:DR don't call women bitches and you'll probably not get deleted.

Because the original research said the policy would likely fail. It hasn't. Her point is that governments have to weigh up advice with how important a policy is, even though on balance it might fail.

But this wasn't about a policy, it was about a court proceeding. It's like comparing lemons and giraffes.

'Because the original research said the policy would likely fail. It hasn't. Her point is that governments have to weigh up advice with how important a policy is, even though on balance it might fail.'

As was pointed out by one of the questioners it's not the same thing at all. She's being insensitive at the very least.

@daisyfraser

Why is she endlessly equating minimum-pricing of alcohol with a man fighting for his life who was trying to avoid being jailed ???

Who was fighting for his life?

Oh my that look to Jackie remark 👀

@daisyfraser

'do not believe Alex Salmond is an entirely innocent party' I'm afraid you will have to believe it because that's what the jury decided.

I accept that, legally.

I was referring to 'innocence' in the broader context of his general conduct, on his own admission, not in reference to any specific legal charges.

I am getting hung up on the pronunciation of Dunlop as din-LOP

I've never heard it said like that until today!

I can't see her going but I think this enquiry loses a lot of the moral highground that NS has always said the SG hold themselves to!

I would say it will make a difference in the polls but also know a lot of die hard SNP supporters who won't give two hoots and the only reason they vote is based on independence referendums regardless of past govt performance or policies!

@WaxOnFeckOff

Because the original research said the policy would likely fail. It hasn't. Her point is that governments have to weigh up advice with how important a policy is, even though on balance it might fail.

But this wasn't about a policy, it was about a court proceeding. It's like comparing lemons and giraffes.

I thought it was originally brought up when they were discussing the designing of the procedure that investigated accusations. But I was chatting to someone at the time so maybe I've conflated this with questions on the JR.

How long does it go on for? Surely there comes a point where it's in everyone's interests to halt and re group?? They must all be exhausted

Awh bless her her memory fails her on certain recollections.

Margaret Mitchell sharp as a tack though. refers to Alex Salmond as The First Minister