David Posted March 8, 2023 Author Share Posted March 8, 2023 5 minutes ago, MungoChutney said: This is the fundamental issue with Scottish politics. There are many who will defend the SNP no matter what and there are others who will happily form a view based on whatever opposes the SNP because of their dislike for them. That's not just an issue with Scottish politics, that's an issue with politics in general. 6 minutes ago, MungoChutney said: I think if you are prepared to believe Alex Salmond always behaved appropriately around women you are likely to be the latter. I believe Alex Salmond wasn't found guilty of what he was accused of. I also believe that considering the pressures and influence at play to have him convicted, if there was a whiff of guilt he'd have been found guilty. And I don't dislike what the SNP claim to represent. As I mentioned elsewhere, I've bounced from Labour to SNP throughout my voting life. I'm one of those rare oddities who has also switched back and forth on the subject of independence. I don't care for it from a nationalist "I hate Westminster and the Tories" viewpoint. I'm interested in independence if I think it would be a better option for the people of Scotland. I've went from being pro independence, to thinking it's not a great idea, to thinking it's an issue worth revisiting down the road, to thinking it may be viable again. I can't disagree with much else you've said with the exception of your appraisal of Sturgeon, and except that I'm fairly optimistic about Anas Sarwar and Scottish Labour at the moment. Again, they're not perfect by any stretch, but I believe they're the best of the current lot. Funnily enough, I actually think that someone like Kate Forbes would be the biggest threat to the Union in a long time.She potentially has what is needed to appeal to some of the soft "no" voters and help swing that pendulum in the favour of independence. The likes of Yousaf, and even Sturgeon to a degree had hit a wall and were only ever going to appeal to the audience they already have. Interesting times ahead in Scottish politics for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 hour ago, David said: if there was a whiff of guilt he'd have been found guilty. Are you saying the SNP, or more particularly the two at the top, have such power and control over the Scottish judiciary and members of juries? And that the untold stress that the couple MrK mentioned went through was because she made up the assault and the pressure she was put under from the party to continue the lie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRooster Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 2 hours ago, David said: Funnily enough, I actually think that someone like Kate Forbes would be the biggest threat to the Union in a long time.She potentially has what is needed to appeal to some of the soft "no" voters and help swing that pendulum in the favour of independence. But she potentially alienates many others. If you give a shit about equal marriage, abortion rights or trans rights, how could you possibly vote for a party she leads? Younger voters are more likely to vote in favour of independence, but is hazard a guess and say they’re also much less likely to vote for someone who holds the views that Kate Forbes does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted March 8, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted March 8, 2023 23 hours ago, BomberPat said: Probably time for a Labour Party Cunts thread, tbh. I knew Gapes step daughter. Are crowds ran around together and even though she was his stepdaughter, the apple didn't fall far from the cunt tree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted March 8, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said: Are you saying the SNP, or more particularly the two at the top, have such power and control over the Scottish judiciary and members of juries? The argument seems to be that they have enough of that power to force an investigation into Alex Salmond, but not enough of that power to dictate the outcomes of said investigation, and the fact that Salmond was found innocent is somehow evidence of the power and control that they can exert over the judiciary that didn't find Alex Salmond guilty, even though that's the result they wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironic Indie Lad Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 The Alex Salmond is an innocent man thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 2 minutes ago, BomberPat said: The argument seems to be that they have enough of that power to force an investigation into Alex Salmond, but not enough of that power to dictate the outcomes of said investigation, and the fact that Salmond was found innocent is somehow evidence of the power and control that they can exert over the judiciary that didn't find Alex Salmond guilty, even though that's the result they wanted. I do understand what David means about how allegations are enough for a conviction in the court of public opinion, we only have to look south of the border to see swathes of the electorate believe the opposition were run by a racist antisemitic terrorist despite there being no evidence of this. Like you, I suspect, my contention is that all these women made it up at the instruction of his political opponents. I hope none of the candidates win the leadership as I’ve gotten used to the SNP being run by someone with a fish based surname for too long for me to change my ways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 I’m interested in how you square this circle. Salmond was found not guilty on all charges in a court of law. Doesn’t that strongly imply that the charges weren’t true? Shouldn’t we accept those findings? Otherwise how the hell does an innocent person ever prove their innocence? It seems to me that the stars aligned for the enemies of Salmond within the SNP and they used the accusations to force him out - not incompatible with also believing the allegations, but it was something that could be used politically. It all ended up in an actual court which is exactly where these things should be judged. The number of sexual misconduct allegations that make it to court is shockingly low. But then you need to accept the outcome of the trial don’t you? If he’d been found guilty I think most people would have simply accepted that as the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 6 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said: I hope none of the candidates win the leadership as I’ve gotten used to the SNP being run by someone with a fish based surname for too long for me to change my ways. I'm sorry but Captain Haddock's getting on a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 minute ago, Loki said: I’m interested in how you square this circle. Salmond was found not guilty on all charges in a court of law. Doesn’t that strongly imply that the charges weren’t true? It implies that the evidence wasn’t strong enough, which ties in with what David said about political motivation behind the case and pressure to prosecute from on high. I’ve no issue with that belief as I can believe it myself. I can believe the initial reaction from his opponents would’ve been “Yes! Let’s nail the fucker with this” and not “Those poor women, we must support them through this horrible time” My issue is the assertion that if there was a tiny scintilla of truth, he’d had been found guilty, ergo they were false allegations. Personally I believe the women. I also believe there wasn’t enough evidence for a conviction therefore there shouldn’t have been a conviction. I could also believe his opponents knew this and used the assaults as political capital and cared more about using it against Salmond than getting justice for the assaulted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted March 8, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted March 8, 2023 (edited) Also, from what I understand (from what David said), on one of the counts of sexual assault, the verdict was "not proven", not "not guilty". Edited March 8, 2023 by Carbomb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 19 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said: It implies that the evidence wasn’t strong enough, which ties in with what David said about political motivation behind the case and pressure to prosecute from on high. I’ve no issue with that belief as I can believe it myself. I can believe the initial reaction from his opponents would’ve been “Yes! Let’s nail the fucker with this” and not “Those poor women, we must support them through this horrible time” My issue is the assertion that if there was a tiny scintilla of truth, he’d had been found guilty, ergo they were false allegations. Personally I believe the women. I also believe there wasn’t enough evidence for a conviction therefore there shouldn’t have been a conviction. I could also believe his opponents knew this and used the assaults as political capital and cared more about using it against Salmond than getting justice for the assaulted. I don't disagree with any of this. It does leave me with a lingering question though - how DO you prove your innocence? Let's say for the sake of argument that Salmond HAD been stitched up and these were false allegations. What step beyond a court of law is necessary for people to say "fair enough, he didn't do it"? How do you ever recover a political career once accusations of this type have been levelled? However I'm straying from the "SNP Are Cunts" topic of the thread. 😜 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 33 minutes ago, Loki said: How do you ever recover a political career once accusations of this type have been levelled? Easy, you become a Tory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butch2000 Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) Now Iron Mike GAPES is back, how soon before Chukka returns and Anna Soubry joins? Funny Tinge Smith is already back isn’t she? Of course, GAPESY left because of anti semitism in the party, as the party is currently purging left wing Jewish fans of Palestine. Super duper. Plaid have gone shit too as of late. God knows who I’ll be voting. Edited March 9, 2023 by Butch2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Tommy! Posted March 9, 2023 Paid Members Share Posted March 9, 2023 5 hours ago, Butch2000 said: God knows who I’ll be voting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.